CourtCases2010

Evidence presented by car dealership in hearing on

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: lerk. J.A. at 142 (Store Manager Mike Rodes Dep.). Furthermore, Sharp was not seeking to return to work after suffering illness or injury, nor was he claiming to have become injured on the job. Moreover, at no time did Sharp ever seek an accommodation. n6 Finally, [*1104] neither Prevo's nor the majority cite to any other law that would require a medical examination in this case. Accordingly, Prevo's had no legitimate business purpose for requiring a medical examination of Sharp. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n6 It is undisputed that Sharp informed his employer of his HIV+ status only in order to give Prevo's advance notice that he would be speaking about HIV at the local high school. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The majority holds that the legitimate business [**49] purpose of Prevo's was to protect the health of Sharp and others because of the frequency of bleeding in the produce area. This holding perpetuates discrimination by allowing Prevo's to single out Sharp. Why single out Sharp in this setting? If everyone cutting produce suffers from cuts, scrapes, and bleeding, and if everyone shares equipment and fails to follow sanitary policies, then everyone is at risk for all blood-borne pathogens. Sharp is just as much at risk of getting a blood-borne infection such as hepatitis from one of his co-workers who has hepatitis as his co-workers are of getting infected by him. In fact, Dr. Baumgartner, the infectious disease expert of Prevo's, explained that 232 If it was a common practice in this work setting for tools to become bloodied by employees and then if there was a risk that the tool would subsequently be used by another employee with a regular probability that the second employee would cut them self [sic] with the bloody tool, there was a risk of transmission of blood borne pathogens (including HIV). This issue transcended HIV however and placed any employee at risk for transmission of agents such as Hepatitis [**50] B and C or other agents. I believe that that practice should have been stopped on general infection control grounds rather than due to anything unique to HIV. J.A. at 195 (Letter from Dr. Baumgartner to attorney Lubben of 5/9/96, at 2) (emphasis added...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online