Ok, I know I’m going to get grilled on this one, and that’s fine. I am at an absolute impasse here and need a jolt in the right direction. Here’s the situation in a nutshell:
If you knew that a person you were considering hiring had a chronic health condition that would with all certainty cause your company’s insurance premiums to become unaffordable for all employees (doubling or tripling premiums) potentially causing an insurer not to renew - would you hire that person? Under current rules (pre-ACA) the increased premium would either have to be absorbed by the employer or employees would flee because of the cost. The extra cost of the insurance would with 100% certainty cause the company severe financial difficulties.
What would you do if you were the person hiring? Assume there are no other qualified candidates to select from.
Just to clarify - I know it's illegal to refuse a hire because of a medical condition. You can't even ask in the interview. I just happen to have 3rd party knowlege here. That is what is making this so difficult! I know the person did nothing to develop their condition, and I think of my own child who is also disabled and him being on the receiving end a decision someday. It SUCKS that I even have to think about this in this way. The assumptions about the premium increases are based upon working in that industry for 20 years and seeing many cases like this.
For those of you who posted concerns about this post becoming discoverable evidence, thank you. But I can with 110% certainty that this is not a 'tied to me' situation. (If you re-read my post, that might become a little more evident.)
Frankly, at the end of the day, taking into consideration all the opinions here and the changes coming with the ACA, there may not be a reason to pass on the person. Just like with my son, anyone of us could develop a chronic condition at any time. What's to say that I don't wake up tomorrow with breast cancer?
You don't have to give a reason for not hiring someone. Illegal or not, it happens. That's life. And that's business.
When I have to make a tough ethical choice I think "What is best for ALL?".
With the health of the company and stability of the staff in question, I find it difficult to make a case for hiring this person.
Don't be too hard on yourself for posting. I hate it when people get all judgemental on boards like this. We are all human and none of us are perfect. Enough said!
As for my advice. I would leave that situation alone and not disclose or keep from hiring someone based on this alone. Use your heart on this one. Everything else will fall into place as it should.
And if your company is less than 50 employees, they won't have to offer coverage as of 2014 and won't have a penalty. Also, it is illegal for a carrier to non-renew your group based on health conditions. They can rate up, but not non-renew. (I speak from experience. I'm an insurance agent).
You cannot base a decision to hire or not to hire on their health history, assuming that the health condition does not interfere with them being able to do their job. That would be discrimination. I'm sure it is done frequently, but it may be difficult to prove.....
If you find someone that is better qualified, or is a better fit for your company, then that is completely justified.
I sure hope your almost-hired's attorney doesn't subpoena this posting, your computer or depose you.
You just admitted to discrimination.
__________________________
Sorry, but even if you aren't the HR person, your post could still be subpoened. Nothing has 100% certainty - even those things that 110% certain. Be careful out there.
I think it comes down to the fact that you can hire who you want. If this person has skills that would make your company a better place then what's to say that you wouldn't be able to find some other insurance they could use. They'd have to wait to qualify for any pre-diagnosed illnesses anyway. She/he may not be eligible for your insurance any way.
I have passed on hiring a person or two because it just didn't feel right or there was just something I didn't like about them. If you have reservations then please don't feel bad for not hiring this person.
But, for a moment, consider how you'd feel about this person if you didn't know about the health issues. Would you hire her/him then? Would you be excited to be adding them to your staff?
Having worked in HR, personally I would not even put this type of question on a board like this. You never know who is reading this, where they live, or who they know. All you need is for one person to see this who knows the candidate and you have a lot more than an ethical dilema on your hands. Be careful when you go down such a slippery slope.
you have to follow the current law-everything is going to sky rocket-how do you think we are going to pay $4 trillion (about 1/6th of our economy) to provide healthcare for 300 million people? If their illness is so bad-how will they be able to do their job?
Like someone said below- is it a chronic health condition or a disability as defined by the ADA? That would make a difference. Also, if its a health condition and not a disability, if you did hire this person, they would be covered under FMLA for 12 weeks per year. If they exceed those 12 weeks, legally, you could fire them because of it.
If the only reason you're not hiring someone is because they have a disability, that's illegal. Depending on the disability, how do you know you're even informed enough to know how their specific disability would affect the company and the company's health insurance to such an extent? How large is the company? Is the company an equal opportunity employer?
If the candidate catches wind at all that s/he isn't hired due to her disability, the company could have a pretty bad lawsuit on their hands and a huge hit to their reputation. So you need to be very careful on how you approach this.
If the position can wait to be filled and isn't a necessity, and/or the duties can be performed by distributing them to other employees, you could probably tell the candidate,
"I'm sorry but the hiring manager and supervisors have decided not to fill this position at this time. I'm sorry for the inconvenience."
Make no promises to contact her back in the future.
EDIT: If you're not familiar with it, look up The Americans With Disabilities Act, as well as Section 508 laws of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Re your SWH: Even so, remove your post when you are done thinking about it.
I must live in a totally different world in California!! Maybe it's by industry but i must pass a lot of hoops.I started a new job with a new laboratory on November 4th. I was given a written offer contingent on the following:
- Drug test. ( must not have had a migraine 72 hours prior)
- credit history
-background check
- checking medical history
- investigate if I have had any prior workers compensations claims (yep, three of them for my spine injuries from being hit by an air conditioning truck.) Technically I am 37% permanently disabled. Nobody else knows.
They still wanted be because I do a kick butt job. They will never be burdened by my spinal future medical...that's the previous company.
I don't know what kind of insurance you have, but as an insurance agent in California, also working in HR and the medical field, I don't understand how you can predict with 100% certainty that hiring someone with a chronic health condition will automatically double or triple your group health insurance premiums or cause your company severe financial difficulties.
I have dealt with just about every single situation you can imagine, including illnesses that led to death. The carrier did not drop the company, nor did they raise their premiums in an out of the ordinary fashion.
Carriers use Risk Adjustment Factors to determine a group's rates.
A small company with only a few office employees will have a low RAF.
A company that deals with toxic chemicals, etc, for instance, will have a higher RAF based on the danger involved with their jobs. Worker's comp rates work much the same way.
What do you consider a chronic health condition?
Frankly, there are too many to mention.
Diabetes, Post Herpatic Neuralgia, Severe Allergies, Irritable Bowel Syndrome........
As long as the health conditions don't interfere with the person's ability to do the course of their daily job duties, it shouldn't interfere with their ability to be employed.
You could have a current employee who gets pregnant and she and her baby are high risk.
Your insurance carrier isn't going to drop you over it and your premiums shouldn't be doubled or tripled over one claim.
Like I said, I don't know what kind of insurance you have, but in my experience, I've never heard of such a thing.
Group insurance is different than "Individual" insurance. Individual insurance can deny you based on your health history. "Group" insurance can't do that.
In California, we have Assembly Bill 1672. I would check to see if your state has an equivelent.
The ACA isn't supposed to take effect until 2014 and I imagine some kinks will be worked out in the meantime and afterwards.
It seems to me that you are assuming things that may never even happen, should you hire this person.
I, myself, have a chronic health condition. It's never prevented me from being covered and it's never harmed anyone else on our group plan.
It's typical for rates to be raised once per year during focal renewals. For some companies, rates go down a bit.
I have NEVER witnessed one person's claims tripling premiums or getting the group completely refused for coverage. Ever.
Just my opinion from that side of the fence.
Debra:
If the person's health condition prohibited them from doing the job, no, I would not hire them.
If you are not 100% certain of this candidate, continue looking. There will be other qualified candidates...it might not be right now...but the right one is worth waiting for.
Isn't there a saying "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one."??
As I understand it, a disability or condition that does not prevent the person actually being able to perform the duties for he job is not grounds to refuse to hire.
If you just really don't want to hire this person, seek more applicants.
OK, first...there needs to be clarity. "Chronic health condition" does not always mean a disability. Is this person ACTUALLY disabled, or do they just have health issues all the time? The distinction is VERY important. You can't discriminate for a disability. BUT, it the person is disabled...I would not never not hire them just because of that. You know, because it's illegal.
I wouldn't even be concerned about the money, I would be concerned with them not being able to do their job. So, I would not hire them. Be careful, if this person is disabled. You really need to make sure you're following the law, if they have a disability. If their condition wouldn't effect their job, you're getting into really murky territory. It's best to be on the up and up, if you find yourself there.
Really, though...it's not OK (legally) to deny someone, because of health issues. It doesn't matter HOW you found out, you are still considering not hiring her only because of health.
