On 22 Feb 2001, 7:43, Cherie wrote:
> >The ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) has been used to
> >successfully seek redress against employers who fire employees simply
> >because of HIV status.
>
> Right..we have all the ADA stuff..we have to have a statute (a FLORIDA
> statute) to back this up
> We just spent about an hour last night on that site..we found NOTHING
> specific about AIDS or HIV..we did, however find something about sickle
> cell.. this is a hypothetical question given on an exam for a business
> law class <--something *I'll* never take:::shudder::::
cite:
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/97jun/burr.htm
<quote>
As for discrimination, the federal Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), passed in 1990, a decade after the beginning of the AIDS
epidemic, prohibits discrimination based on HIV status. In addition,
the federal Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, state
discrimination laws, and state constitutions have all been
interpreted by courts as protecting people from exactly the sort of
discrimination that AIDS exceptionalists claim is inevitable. And
courts have in most cases ruled that being infected with HIV
constitutes a disability according to the legal definition of the
term, even when the infected person is asymptomatic. "We've done more
or less everything that can be done on the legislative front to
protect people from discrimination on the basis of HIV status," says
Chai Feldblum, an associate professor at Georgetown University Law
School and one of the principal architects of the ADA. "The laws are
there."
<endquote>
As has been ascertained by other members of our list, those who have
been discriminated due to their AIDS/HIV status could file an EEOC
suit based on the ADA and other federal discrimination laws with some
expectation of success.
Now let's look at Florida law:
Title XLIV
CIVIL RIGHTS Chapter 760
Discrimination In The Treatment Of Persons; Minority Representation
View Entire Chapter
760.10 Unlawful employment practices.--
(1) It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer:
(a) To discharge or to fail or refuse to hire any individual, or
otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to
compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because
of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin,
age, handicap, or marital status.
(b) To limit, segregate, or classify employees or applicants for
employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any
individual of employment opportunities, or adversely affect any
individual's status as an employee, because of such individual's
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, handicap, or
marital status.
(2) It is an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency
to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise to
discriminate against, any individual because of race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, handicap, or marital status or
to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis of
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, handicap, or
marital status.
[...]
It would be my opinion that most any Florida court would consider
Aids/HIV status as a "handicap" as listed in the above statute and
thus apply that statute to the case before the court. One would not
expect such a law to list every single case of possible "handicap(s)"
as no law could be expected to address every such case. This is the
job of the courts to interpret what constitutes a handicap. As the
Atlantic article reports, most courts hearing AIDS/HIV discrimination
cases have ruled that as a "handicap" and applicable to job
discrimination laws such as the ADA.
Beyond this point, it will require on your part some considered
research into state courts' decisions to see if you can find a
supporting ruling to your query. In that regard I would suggest you
begin at the State Resources/Florida page at "FindLaw":
http://guide.lp.findlaw.com/11stategov/fl/laws.html
That page also has a link for Attorney General opinions and other
resources to research your query.
One must realize that the Federal laws are dominate in cases of
discrimination and most suits brought forth by plaintiffs probably
give weight to using the Federal Courts in these matters.
Alan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
