Job went downhill after diabetes required more maintenance throughout the day

[Smokebomb]

I was working a (supposedly) secure position for almost 5 years. My coworkers and supervisors were aware of my "uncontrolled/brittle" diabetes and that at times it would require more attention or quick breaks of monitoring my blood sugars (30 seconds), eating a quick snack (2-3 minutes), doing work where I was not moving around as much to allow body to recover from highs, etc.

As my eyesight worsened (I have gone through rounds and rounds of laser treatments for the advanced aggressive retinopathy), a lot of the work I was involved in became harder to perform, as it required visual acuity (I worked in biological research lab), and at times, after the laser treatments I would try to be very careful physically and it would take longer for me to complete some tasks, or I would have to ask someone else to help me... (breathe)

Eventually, my job responsibilities changed because (I feel) it was more difficult for me to sufficiently perform the work. My supervisors would make comments when I would need to eat a snack or something, as though suggesting it bothered them and that they thought I was just trying to get out of doing my job (which became work that work-study students would typically perform).

Although my actual workplan did not change, my daily tasks assigned by the supervisor was at a much lower level than the workplan described. When our department decided to abolish a few of the research positions, mine was one of them and I believe that the reason they would use is that my position was one that was not as critical to the department as other research positions at the same (workplan) level.

DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR TO ANYBODY? IS THAT FAIR? I had been at this position longer than a lot of the others in the same department with the same job.
I have been out of a job for over 6 months now. Luckily, I have continued benefits where my employer covers the health insurance for 12 months after my last day of work.

I would say who they are are because there are so many things that they did while I was there that has affected me physically, emotionally, intellectually, socially, mentally...
But I don't think I am allowed to on here.

[jer.lawrence]

I'm sorry to hear that, it sounds like a tough place.

How are your A1c's typically?

[Josselyn]

Sorry to hear of your troubles at work. Some people have difficulty with others who are "different." I hope you'll be able to work something out to where you'll again find suitable employment.

It's good that you found this site. At least you'll have people to talk to about these things. It's a not a cure for problems, but it sure helps to be among others in a similar boat.

Welcome.

[Smokebomb]

Thanks. I had to get that off my chest, although I've been talking about it all along.
My A1c has been slowly getting better, I think the last was around 8.4.

[strack350]

In the business world it is very common to layoff the least important positions on the thinking that the workload can be absorbed by others. As far as using your diabetes against you, that would be criminal and I feel that a company would not put themselves in that position. I test upwards of 6-7 times during my twelve hour shift and nobody says a word. I feel that had you been in control, or contacted your HR dept. you would have gotten a different outcome. It's just my thoughts, and I hope you get yourself under good control as thats the most important thing;)

[dbaratta]

I would say who they are are because there are so many things that they did while I was there that has affected me physically, emotionally, intellectually, socially, mentally...
But I don't think I am allowed to on here.[/QUOTE]



Some would say people with diabetes have a disability. You can go to your HR and ask the questions. My supervisor advised me to let HR know about my diabetes because of things like you are discribing in this post. I sat with my supervisor and explained my situation and what he may or may not have to deal with. He is okay with it so far, but so far I have only taken time off for being sick, three days in a row, which is a lot for me....he doesn't see when I am having problems and just sit for 20 minutes before I feel better, we don't work in the same building, but he also thinks people are diabetic because they are fat. ONLY because they are fat, so he is pretty ignorant.:eek:

......but, many things have changed for me because of diabetes including how late I can stay out because I have to take my lantus at 10pm daily. I try to load a shot before I leave but sometimes forget. Or I have been at work and forgot my novolog,,,,,ok, can't eat without it, can't not eat without it so I have to travel back home and get my meds.....many many things change. I am sure you are not alone.....

[art]

Call your State's Department of Labor.
Tell them what happened and provide any documents you have.

I've seen this before.

Art

[foxl]

I used to work in biomed research. Not with problems of D however ... but.

This is not a group of people famous for their social skills set, for one thing. For another, they do not have a great grasp of employment law, as a rule.

But ... this is also a field notorious for employment instability. Some grants are only one year long. I know times have changed, today, grants are generally fewer and longer. But ...

To be honest with you, the visual demands, time demands, etc. of that work seem highly undesirable to me now. It would be all the more difficult when complicated by the demands of D on one's attention and time.

I hope you can find something equally interesting but less demanding to do.

[Joeprep4820]

None of my coworkers or supervisors know I have Diabetes, and they don't need to know. For the most part, I travel mainly around the EU on a schedule that is somewhat irregular (I am home in Washington now but there is a possibility I could get a call tomorrow sending me to Rome for a month). I don't have a choice but to be in fantastic control, and it honestly has not affected my social life. If I test, I do so in my office in the Washington HQ or I do so in the restroom or wherever I am assigned in that embassy or consulate. I've had T1 for 21 years (I'm 23) and I often feel fortunate I've never experienced any complications from it.
Employers can basically fire you or not hire you for any reason almost. I did not disclose my T1 because my current employers might consider it a "liability" of sorts, an tell me they wouldn't hire me due to my skills not matching the current position's needs. I also would not consider Diabetes a disability AT ALL, and was always told to never, ever view it in this manner. It doesn't disable me to do anything, with the exception of not allowing me to attend the US Naval Academy (I would have been 3rd generation) and become a Naval pilot. I am never prohibited from doing anything in my current occupation and life, nor was I when at college. In fact, I am more able than most of my non-Diabetic friends! Use your Diabetes as a source of strength, use it as something that makes you want to work harder to prove to others that you are not disabled.

[strack350]

I feel the same way that Joeprep4820 does about this diesese, and have always led a very, very active life even with testing/injecting. BUT as far as not letting anyone know you have diabetes is foolhardy. If something would happen, not one person would know what was going on, and it may make a simple situation far more complicated than it needs to be.;)

[Joeprep4820]

That is one point where fellow Diabetics always disagree with me, but I still have the feeling that supervisors and those who have the ability to promote me may see me as a liability in positions that require more responsibility, so I prefer to keep private about it.

[Smokebomb]

[QUOTE=foxl;512891]I used to work in biomed research. Not with problems of D however ... but.

This is not a group of people famous for their social skills set, for one thing. For another, they do not have a great grasp of employment law, as a rule.




AMEN -one of the many reasons I really don't care to get back into that field.

[foxl]

[QUOTE=foxl;512891]I used to work in biomed research. Not with problems of D however ... but.

This is not a group of people famous for their social skills set, for one thing. For another, they do not have a great grasp of employment law, as a rule.




AMEN -one of the many reasons I really don't care to get back into that field.

GOOD! :D Me, too ...

[DanG]

That is one point where fellow Diabetics always disagree with me, but I still have the feeling that supervisors and those who have the ability to promote me may see me as a liability in positions that require more responsibility, so I prefer to keep private about it.

No disagreement from me - you wrote exactly what I would have written - thanks.

[DeusXM]

At the risk of sounding like the miserable party pooper...

...firstly, let me say I totally sympathise with you and understand how heartbreaking it is to either be refused or lose a job because of having diabetes. You're talking to someone here who all his life wanted to do one of the very few jobs where there can be no ifs or buts when it comes to health, until I was dxed I was on the path to being a jet pilot.

With that in mind....


....I can't speak fully for US legislation but I know in the UK, for the purposes of employment law, diabetes is considered as a disability, and so with a few critical exceptions you cannot be fired or refused a job purely for having diabetes.

However the law does also make it clear that the onus is on the individual to ensure their disability does not impair their ability to do their job. The employer must make reasonable accommodations for your condition but they are not obliged to meet every requirement you could possibly have. I now have to say that if you are having A1Cs of 8.4 and are suffering from frequent highs and lows that require you to take time out of your working day, you are/were not really controlling your condition.

Given that your employer assigned you different duties purposefully to accommodate those needs (which arguably go beyond the scope of the employers responsibility), it sounds to me like they were trying to work around your condition - the downside being that you had to be moved into a more 'disposable' position.

Now, if more than one of you were doing the same job, you may have grounds for legal redress if they cannot demonstrate that those kept on were doing a better job than you. However, you've said that you were doing a job that work-study students were doing, presumably for a lower wage than you.

I agree, it sucks. But I would also suggest that now's a great time to take a closer look at your diabetes management to avoid the need for employers to make accommodations for you, so when you do get that great new job soon, they won't ever be able to fire you for health reasons.

[owlyn]

This sounds perfectly legit to me. Your condition has prevented you from doing a certain type of work. In fact, you admit that your original work plan has not changed, but you can't do those tasks now.

We just had layoffs at my place. The guy next to me, who is younger, healthier, and not paid as much as I am got laid off, whereas I did not. I don't know the reasoning, but I know that while our job titles were similar, I have more experience, knowledge, and skills and can perform a wider range of tasks.

In you situation, you cannot perform the tasks needed as well as someone else. It is unfortunate, but I don't see where the employer did anything wrong.

[Smokebomb]

Given that your employer assigned you different duties purposefully to accommodate those needs (which arguably go beyond the scope of the employers responsibility), it sounds to me like they were trying to work around your condition - the downside being that you had to be moved into a more 'disposable' position.

Now, if more than one of you were doing the same job, you may have grounds for legal redress if they cannot demonstrate that those kept on were doing a better job than you. However, you've said that you were doing a job that work-study students were doing, presumably for a lower wage than you.


Thanks. I was never actually moved to another "position," and others with the same position in the department works under other supervisors. I was expected to perform the type of work that was at the work-study student level (I did not share the same tasks with any others), even though the written summary of my actual responsibilities called for work that I was in fact able to perform (which uses my intellectual skills). However, I eventually wasn't allowed to take part in ANY of the scientific work (which was no.1 on my priority list), and because I was forbidden the opportunity to do ANY of it (even that which didn't require visual acuity) I received very low scores on my performance reviews. :mad: I should not have been scored according to something I was not given to do. What I was allowed to do at that job was actually determined by the bitter supervisors who became very abrasive once I decided I had to do what I had to do during the work day to manage my diabetes. Just because I had to take more time (and I certainly made up for it, or did it during a time I could "multi-task") to maintain my blood sugar levels and be more cautious of what I did, seemed to come across as being a liability, I wonder? Or seen as a disability? That's how I felt.
I could, most certainly, perform most of the tasks, except the one that looking inside a petri dish for some time after laser surgeries due to color contrast), but there were so many things on the workplan that I was able to do, so many experiments that were being done that I could have done as sufficiently, as I was doing it. I worked for tyrrants anyway, it was like being in a concentration camp, and they watched every move I made... It was the happiest day of my life, to be honest, when I found out that I would only be suffering there one more month. hahahahah...HAHAHAHAHAH! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH !!!!

I don't care anyway now. I will do what I have to do, whether its at home or at work or wherever, to keep my health up. In the beginning of my employment there, I would not test as often, wait for my sugars to get really high and feel dehydrated and sick, or low, but decided that the work to help make them idiots famous (famous to who? All the other anti-social nerds, apparently) is not worth my health. So, yeah, I decided to make my health first priority. I'm ready to do something where what I do, regardless of the number of times I stop for 1-3 minutes to keep myself healthy, will be for a good cause, and not for some superficial, to make someone rich and famous, cause. Unfortunately, there is not much of those types of jobs these days.

[Smokebomb]

In you situation, you cannot perform the tasks needed as well as someone else. It is unfortunate, but I don't see where the employer did anything wrong.

I understand that, given the only information that I did. But there is a lot more they have done, and not to myself, but to every other member in the lab, and nobody besides myself actually was there for more than 2 years. Everybody else (students and staff) was terrorized by these people, everybody was unhappy. Everybody had problems they discussed amongst one another, and nothing could be done because nobody had the balls to report to HR, and besides it did no good, because (I will not go into that). It's really a bad environment to be in, but what's so good now is that I have somehow had better blood sugar levels since leaving them. (less torture and less emotional abuse = better diabetes)

[Smokebomb]

As my eyesight worsened (I have gone through rounds and rounds of laser treatments for the advanced aggressive retinopathy), a lot of the work I was involved in became harder to perform, as it required visual acuity (I worked in biological research lab), and at times, after the laser treatments I would try to be very careful physically and it would take longer for me to complete some tasks, or I would have to ask someone else to help me... (breathe)

Eventually, my job responsibilities changed because (I feel) it was more difficult for me to sufficiently perform the work.

The work I was origonally expected to perform was not limited to the particular tasks that I wasn't able to do -there was so much more that I could do, and DID do sufficiently, but I think they were discriminating against me. And because of a few minor problems, they gave treated me as incompetent.

IF I PISS ANYBODY OFF......
SORRY! :T

[genie86333]

The work I was origonally expected to perform was not limited to the particular tasks that I wasn't able to do -there was so much more that I could do, and DID do sufficiently

Unfortunately however, you've said you were not able to perform the entire job which you were hired to perform, which meant they had 3 options while you were still working there:

#1 hire someone else (which costs them extra money) to do part of the work you were hired to do

#2 ask someone else to do their work plus part of yours (which probably meant more hours on each paycheck for them, again costing the company more money)

#3 not do anything & the work doesn't get completed. (which obviously isn't a real option for any business)

I do feel for you that the job didn't continue for you, but that's business - unfortunately, we don't live in a time anymore where it's small family run companies that will keep on an employee that can't do the job anymore just because they're like "part of the family." (Admittedly, there are still a few places like that, but it's the exception these days.)

I'm not saying you weren't discriminated against in how they treated you, like your taking time to test/treat was bothersome, but if you can't do the job...the entire job for which you were hired...well, that's what disability is for.

[Smokebomb]

Yeah, without the adequate accomodations they should've provided, it made it quite difficult, I agree! (The work was completed in a timely manner, however)

BTW- after my eye treatments, I would be ordered by the doc to take it easy (no bending, straining, etc) for 3 weeks. Therefore, I would accomodate myself, meaning find alternative ways to do things that required certain motions. For example, sitting in the chair instead of bending over (with my head exploding due to pressure) to rearrange items under a counter...
Or, requesting someone who walks by to quickly grab a 30 lb tray from a shelf (takes 3 seconds, and for the ones I would ask, no problem, no big deal)

And, I happened to be the only American in that group. Hmm, Americans are "lazy..."
Actually, I was an American who used their right to a lunch break.
Our lunch breaks were to be flexible, yet we were glared at as though we were criminal, or just lazy, when we took a 10 minute LUNCH break (at our desk) during the 10-12 hours they had us working. Then another 5 minute break 3 hours later.... (I mean, is that too much to ask for???)

F*CK that S#*T

[Luke]

I have run into this problem. While you have people tell you "they can not discriminate", and while that is true, they will always find a reason to CTA.

I have had this problem in job interviews as well. Things going well, then I tell them up front I'm diabetic, and my regiment of having to check my sugar every two hours due to being a brittle diabetic, and then it turns into "we will give you a call", and of course, they never call.

I was put out of the US Army shortly after being diagnosed as well. Medical Discharge.

[genie86333]

Yeah, without the adequate accomodations they should've provided, it made it quite difficult, I agree! (The work was completed in a timely manner, however)

Ok, then that's a whole new ballgame - you said before you couldn't do the work, not that you couldn't do it without reasonable accomodations...In that case, I see your point totally.