10th Circuit upholds hospital's rejection of applicant under ADA

The rules surrounding medical examinations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) can be tricky. The U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming employers) recently analyzed the rules in a case involving an employer's decision to rescind a job offer based on a postoffer, preemployment medical examination. The lessons learned are helpful for all employers that use or consider medical examinations for applicants or employees.

Facts

Elena Sumler applied for a job as a sonographer with the University of Colorado Hospital Authority. Sonographers use their technical skills to obtain and analyze ultrasound images.

The hospital offered Sumler the position, contingent on a medical examination. As part of the medical exam process, she disclosed that she suffers from fibromyalgia and was taking medications, including two narcotic pain medications. She asserted, however, that she wasn't disabled and had no restrictions preventing her from performing the essential job functions.

The hospital referred Sumler to occupational health physician Henry Roth for further review. According to her personal physician, who shared information with Roth, she could function normally and had worked as a sonographer at a different facility, despite the pain medications. Roth, however, disagreed. He concluded her narcotic use would interfere with her mental acuity, which both parties agreed was an essential job function. As a result, the hospital rescinded its job offer.

ADA's restrictions on medical examinations and discrimination