Insulin dependent and driving

[Littlebit]

does anyone allow an insulin dependent member driving privileges? My own thoughts are they can do patient care but should not be allowed to drive especially since many of our transfers can be up to 4 hours. An occ health nurse is trying to tell me that if they have a valid drivers license they cannot disclose that the potential new member is insulin dependent. That obviously is putting everyone else at risk but she says due to legality reasons she cannot disclose.. maybe writing under accommadations she could write "should be allowed to take snack breaks as needed"
If she cannot disclose what is the point of paying for a post-offer assessment?
Thanks

 

[dstevens58]

If they can legally drive a regular vehicle, they should be legally able to drive anything. They have proven at this point they can manage their diabetes enough to endure four hour patient transfers, shouldn't make any difference behind the wheel.

IMHO

 

[STXmedic]

I know several diabetics that perform the entire job just fine. As long as they keep their sugar in check (they've had a lifetime of practice), then there should be no problems. Should someone with hypertension not be allowed to drive because they might stroke out? How about an asthmatic because he might have an asthma attack? We better record everyone's sleep hours, too. Wouldn't want somebody falling asleep...

 

[BEorP]

I know several diabetics that perform the entire job just fine. As long as they keep their sugar in check (they've had a lifetime of practice), then there should be no problems. Should someone with hypertension not be allowed to drive because they might stroke out? How about an asthmatic because he might have an asthma attack? We better record everyone's sleep hours, too. Wouldn't want somebody falling asleep...

While I may not disagree with your argument that someone with controlled diabetes should be able to drive, the comparisons you offer to hypertension and asthma are completely unfair.

 

[STXmedic]

While I may not disagree with your argument that someone with controlled diabetes should be able to drive, the comparisons you offer to hypertension and asthma are completely unfair.

While they were intended to be a little bit far fetched, I really don't see it being a ridiculously far out comparison.

 

[Aidey]

I don't think the comparison is unfair, someone with uncontrolled HTN, asthma, or many other medical conditions could definitely pose a risk.

My personal view is that it should be based on a case by case basis depending on how well controlled the medical condition is. If someone has a history of poor control that interferes with their job that is definitely an issue.

 

[Littlebit]

insulin dependent

Do you think the supervisor/director should be aware or not be told

 

[Anjel]

Our supervisor is an insulin dependent diabetic.

He has a pump he carries in his pocket that continuously adjusts to his insulin levels.

He even has a tattoo of a medical alert bracelet on his wrist. I don't see a problem with it.

And your work will find out because almost always they do a pre-hire physical.

 

[ArcticKat]

Our employment application asks if the applicant has any medical conditions that may preclude him from the regular performance of his duties. Not will, but may.

Being a diabetic would qualify as such a medical condition, so if you are asked, then answer honestly. If you do not provide a truthful answer then you can be dismissed. You are not, however, required to divulge medical information if it has not been asked for.

 

[JPINFV]

While I may not disagree with your argument that someone with controlled diabetes should be able to drive, the comparisons you offer to hypertension and asthma are completely unfair.

In California, the health standards for the ambulance driver certification is the same for commercial vehicles. As such, insulin dependent diabetes AND uncontrolled hypertension are both disqualifying conditions. I'm unsure of if asthma is or isn't.

 

[Littlebit]

insulin dependent

I need to argue my case a bit more... this person had a pre-employment assessment and I found out by accident that she wrote on her assessment form that she is a insulin dependent diabetic. The occ health nurse is telling me she could not disclose that information.
So what is the point of paying to have a pre-employment physical completed.
There are comparisons in the threads between hypertension and diabetic- I don't have data in front of me but compare the number of calls you have for a CVA vs low blood sugar...
How well is it controlled? I guess I have no idea.. neither does the Occ Health nurse..she does not know how often this person requires insulin, what type of insulin they take, or if they have an insulin pump. She only knows from the paperwork the potential new member wrote it down.
Correct me if I am wrong but people with CDL's (over the road truck drivers) are taken off the road if requiring insulin. We have had members with asthma and the accommadation on thier form stated "needs to keep thier prescribed inhaler on board"
I'm also thinking the NFPA has accommadations for insulin dependent diabetics and I would bet not able to drive the fire truck to a fire.
So anyway private owned or public owned EMS what would be the liability if an insulin dependent diabetic had a reaction while going down the highway at 65mph and people on board are killed due to the crash? Anyone out there ever have that kind of scenario?

 

[Aidey]

I want to make sure I am understanding this right.

You found out by accident a co-worker has a medical condition. You don't think this person should be working with said condition, so you went to the occupational health nurse and asked why the person was allowed to work. The nurse told you she couldn't discuss it, so you're asking us what our opinions are. Does that sum it up pretty well?

 

[Anjel]

I want to make sure I am understanding this right.

You found out by accident a co-worker has a medical condition. You don't think this person should be working with said condition, so you went to the occupational health nurse and asked why the person was allowed to work. The nurse told you she couldn't discuss it, so you're asking us what our opinions are. Does that sum it up pretty well?

I think that pretty much sums it up.

The nurse cant disclose it to you. You are nobody.

The OP needs to mind his own damn business.

 

[Handsome Robb]

Dude mind your own business. All the other conditions noted in this thread are plausible comparisons. You don't know the stipulations behind her employment involving her condition and you have no right too. Last time I checked you don't have to have a CDL to drive an ambulance. I took a DOT physical but never tested or received a CDL...

Your presenting an extreme scenario. If it's well controlled and she has shown herself responsible about controlling it who are you to judge her and her ability?

NFPA presents recommended guidelines, they are not a governing body, similar to the NREMT.

I'm also thinking the NFPA has accommadations for insulin dependent diabetics and I would bet not able to drive the fire truck to a fire.

You would bet? Show the clause that says this then we can talk about it.

Sorry to come off angry but it irks me to see someone trying to put their nose where it doesn't belong. There are people A LOT smarter and with A LOT more education than you that set the guidelines and/or laws, let them do their job, and worry about doing your own job.

 

[ArcticKat]

Anyone out there ever have that kind of scenario?

No, so why do you have a problem with it? If you can find a documented case of a paramedic causing an accident because of hypoglycemia...please, share.

It would seem to me that you have a personality issue with this individual and you are looking for loopholes to get rid of her.

 

[Littlebit]

insulin dependent

Clarification: I am minding my business. I am the director. I am not attempting to get "rid of anyone" I want to make sure everyone is safe. My only concern is driving. Plus I am a bit frustrated that the nurse did not offer any recommendations for accommadations.

 

[Aidey]

I'm going to stick with still none of your business. If the occupational health nurse didn't feel it would affect the person's job performance then you don't have any business making it your business, director or not. If the person isn't having any problems why would any accomidations need to be made?

 

[mcdonl]

Here is what the ADA says...

Q. One of my employees is a diabetic, but takes insulin daily to control his diabetes. As a result, the diabetes has no significant impact on his employment. Is he protected by the ADA?

A. Yes. The determination as to whether a person has a disability under the ADA is made without regard to mitigating measures, such as medications, auxiliary aids and reasonable accommodations. If an individual has an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, she is protected under the ADA, regardless of the fact that the disease or condition or its effects may be corrected or controlled.

The ADA makes it unlawful to discriminate in all employment practices such as:

recruitment
pay
hiring
firing
promotion
job assignments
training
leave
lay-off
benefits
all other employment related activities.

 

[AlphaButch]

This is a conditional question.

This employee would be protected under the ADA. If reasonable accomodations can be met (such as snack breaks), and the employee is able to safely carry out the job with these accomodations - they will be protected. A few years ago, UPS underwent a lawsuit regarding this - it involved 2 employees. One who was able to still safely do his/her job with snack breaks - deemed protected (UPS rehired and made compensation for loss), the other employee was unable to safely do the job with snack breaks (documented safety concerns, employee was not rehired). The accomodation agreement was made in writing and signed by the employees. Protip - Always have things in writing.

That's only the ADA side of things. If there is a state or city regulation regarding certification (such as the earlier posting regarding CA ambulance permitting - if valid), then that is a seperate issue. If the job requires a permit or license that the employee is unable to obtain or maintain due to the condition, they are unemployable on the basis that they do not have the permit or license (not because of the reasons why).

As an employer, I'm protected from this with the simple question on the application similiar to Kat's regarding any condition that may affect them safely doing the job. If they have a condition requiring reasonable accomodation, it is the employee's responsibility to disclose such information - since much of this information is confidential unless they personally disclose it to me. If they do not, and something occurs, they have "lied" on their application (unless it's a sudden onset or unknown condition). Once they disclose it to me, then it's my responsibility as an employer to investigate reasonable accomodations to allow them to safely do the job (normally a simple meeting with the employee on how they handle their condition, anything I can do to assist, etc). If they do not comply with the accomodation (such as not taking snack breaks when I've made them available), then it's back on them.

(I'm not a lawyer, just have many years in HR)