Dive Brief:

• A Wisconsin police department did not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when it required a police officer with post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD) to take a fitness-for-duty test after he implied a threat of violence against a co-worker, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled (Kurtzhals v. County of Dunn, No. 19-3111 (7th Cir. Aug. 10, 2020)).
• Todd Kurtzhals sued the county, alleging it discriminated against him by placing him on temporary paid administrative leave and requiring him to take a fitness-for-duty evaluation. Kurtzhals believed the evaluation was ordered because of his PTSD and not because he had violated policy by threatening a co-worker, the court said. The officer whom Kurtzhals allegedly threatened reportedly instigated the altercation and was not disciplined.
• The district court granted the employer summary judgment, and the appeals court affirmed. The 7th Circuit opined that Kurtzhals had not proven a genuine dispute over whether unlawful discrimination on the basis of PTSD was the cause of his adverse employment action — his being placed on leave which resulted in lost overtime pay. There was no evidence that his supervisors knew about his PTSD; rather, the court said, the focus was on "Kurtzhal's unprofessional conduct." The court also explained that the fitness-for-duty evaluation was reasonable and consistent with business necessity because, being responsible for public safety, the police department had a "particularly compelling interest" in assuring Kurtzhals was fit to perform his duties. "There was no dispute that Kurtzhals had threatened the co-worker and in so doing violated ... policy," the court said, adding that "a reasonable person could see this as evidence that Kurtzhals had a short fuse and might lash out again at a colleague or a member of the public."

Dive Insight:

When it comes to medical exams, the ADA places "strict limits" on employers, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). All disability-related inquiries and medical examinations "must be job-related and consistent with business necessity," the agency has said. 

Employer guidelines on medical exams have become even more important as the country grapples with the novel coronavirus pandemic. Notably, the EEOC approved on-site testing of employees for COVID-19 as a condition of entering the workplace as long as the test is "job related and consistent with business necessity."

In addition, employers covered by the ADA also are allowed to take employees' temperatures as they enter the workplace, the commission said, even though such a test is a medical exam; because a worker's refusal to comply can negatively impact the safety of others, workers who refuse to undergo required disease-prevention measures may be barred from entering the workplace.