Bridgeport Fire Sued For Disability Discrimination Over Hypertension
A candidate who was denied admission to the Bridgeport Fire Department training academy due to high blood pressure, is suing the city in federal court for disability discrimination.
Antonio Dias filed suit last week in US District Court claiming that he can perform the essential functions of being a firefighter and that his conditional offer of employment with withdrawn on account of a perceived disability.
According to the complaint, last July Dias was offered a spot in an academy that was scheduled to begin in August. He satisfied all the various requirements, but prior to a mandatory stress test his blood pressure was deemed too high. The stress test requirement was implemented after two Bridgeport firefighters died in 2011, and “the BFD would not make an exception to their requirement that their physicians confirm that the candidate passed the stress test.”
Dias appealed the decision to the Bridgeport Civil Service Commission and in the interim was cleared by his own physician as well as the city’s doctor. However, civil service commission refused to return Dias to the list of eligible candidates.
Quoting from the complaint:
- At all relevant times, Dias was able to perform the essential functions of the position of an Entry Level Firefighter, with or without a reasonable accommodation.
- Both the Plaintiff’s physician, Dr. Pun, and the Defendant’s physician, Dr. Wagner, concluded that Dias could perform the essential functions of the firefighter position without any restrictions.
- Under both Section 504 and the ADA, an employer can only withdraw an offer of employment due to a medical condition if, as a result of the effects of the medical condition, the individual poses a “direct threat,” which is defined as a “significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of themselves or others which cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation.”
- Determining whether the individual poses a “direct threat” depends on an “individualized assessment of the individual’s present ability to safely perform the essential functions of the job.”
- As long as he takes the prescribed blood pressure medication, Dias does not pose a significant risk of substantial harm to himself or others.
- The Defendant did not conduct an individualized assessment to determine whether Dias posed a significant risk to himself or others.
- The Defendant perceived Dias as being disabled as a result of his initial inability to pass a stress test. Therefore, the Plaintiff was “regarded as” disabled by the Defendant.
- Dias’ perceived disability was a substantial factor which led the Defendant to disqualify him from the hiring process and to deny his request to be returned to the list of eligible entry level firefighters.
- As a result, the Defendant’s actions violated Section 504.
Here is a copy of the complaint: Dias v Bridgeport
To a certain extent, I can see the city’s point. Connecticut had (and probably still has) a state statute that sets a rebuttable presumption that heart and hypertension issues are caused by working in emergency services. This law pretty much guarantees that if a cop, firefighter, or medic is forced to retire due to heart or HTN issues, he/she will receive full disability benefits for life. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that that is still the case, I can understand the city being suspicious… what if the guy works a year or two (or even less), then decides he wants to retire under the H/HTN law? The city and the taxpayers are stuck. If the city knows he has HTN issues and hires him anyway, the guy’s lawyer could make the argument that the city was aware of the risk, knowingly chose to ignore it, and now owes his client the benefits.
Since having hypertension does not affect his day to day life, can it still be used in as a disability? The fire department and city are trying to protect their interests because of the liability that they would have taking on an employee with uncontrolled hypertension (uncontrolled is the real issue to my way of thinking).
You obviously don’t suffer from HTN. It does, indeed, affect your life, from your diet to exercises you can and cant do, to even whether you can take Viagra (see “Something’s Gotta Give” FMI).
On the other hand, I agree wholeheartedly about the liability issue, although, as noted, Connecticut had — and probably still has — the rebuttable presumption that heart and HTN issues are a direct result of working in police, fire, or EMS. Controlled or uncontrolled doesn’t enter into the pension equation. Only two questions: 1. does he/she has HTN? 2. Does or did he/she work in police, fire, or EMS? If the answer to both is “yes,” case closed, pension awarded.