ADA, FMLA, Mental Disability, Florida

My question involves labor and employment law for the state of: Florida

For 2 years I was one of the top rated people in my job. Then memory loss occurred, cognitive functions decreased, and my work changed their goals/incentives and made them stricter.

During this time while all this was going on I was approved for FMLA leave for my memory loss (to see drs as needed). Now, after seeing 2 neurologist and a psychotherapist I have been diagnosed as having Borderline Personality Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Dysthemic Disorder. These three combined are believed to have caused my memory loss. My IQ is extremely high according to my psychotherapist who did a three day intensive test session with me.

My psychotherapist feels that I would benefit from letting my work know I have Borderline Personality Disorder because I need less distractions, written and verbal instructions, and positive criticism. Negative criticism may cause me to act on impulse.

I know Florida is an at will work state and the ADA does have protections outlined for mental disabilities. Although the best treatment is time and therapy, it is currently affecting my performance. I have a hard time making friends or maybe even appear quiet to a lot of people. I have always had a difficult time associating with people.

If I come forward and tell work why I am having such a hard time in the position now, will they fire me for performance or will they move me to another vacant position that has less public interaction? I work in a very large call center and we have so many different positions there.

I am extremely smart with computers/electronics/typing/writing. My disability affects me in social interaction. I have close similarities to someone that has asperger's disease (autism.)

Any advice and help is appreciated.
Edit/Delete Message

Borderline personality disorder is NOT a finding that you should publish to your workplace. It generally indicates that YOU display little in the way of empathy or feeling for others. Yes, that sounds similar to Autism, but it is nothing like Autism. It is much like allowing yourself to cross the line with negative behavior in interpersonal situations because it pleases you and the heck with the consequences. It gives them both reason and impetus to remove you from their workplace. The only thing that will make this any better is for you to get psychotherapy and be medicated... at their expense... for as long as they will put up with it.

Smart folks don't need to put up with people whose actions are inappropriate to the workplace... work situations require people who can interact effectively. While there might be some hole in the wall programming task they could assign you, they are under no requirement to make that kind of place available for you. You can only ask to have a position where your touchy interpersonal reactivity will not damage you and your colleagues.

You should recognize as a very bright person that it is up to YOU to fix your own problems that cause you to be a less than cooperative person. So tone it down, ask for less interpersonal functions and hope that you can be employed there long enough to get some major psychotherapy.

Your situation reminds me of one of the technical reps from a major computer manufacturer that worked on our programming. He was happiest when he could crawl into a corner and just do a function. But he had lots of outbursts when he was stressed.... and then he became even more stressed from lack of practice in social interaction and they let him go. Nobody missed him. Most remarked at how much lighter the atmosphere was when he was gone. He did some above average work for us, but often did what HE wanted to do rather than what we specified we wanted. Not a good situation as a customer.

The only thing worse (and perhaps more dangerous) than a lay person playing attorney is a lay person playing DOCTOR. You know that the best way for this poster to treat his BPD is psychotherapy and to be medicated? I am very certain that he was not asking for your opinion of what course of action he should take in treating his disorder. In any regard you advised him to seek treatment he already has sought and then you suggested he do exactly the OPPOSITE of what his doctor suggested: My psychotherapist feels that I would benefit from letting my work know I have Borderline Personality Disorder .

vs.

Borderline personality disorder is NOT a finding that you should publish to your workplace.

So, it is your 'capable' advice that the poster SHOULD seek psychotherapy, but disregard the advice of his doctor?

Well, that is certainly par for your course.

Just curious---does it EVER occur to you to actually research an answer from a LEGAL standpoint before spewing hatred, ignorance and disrespect-- to a disabled person, no less?

The ADA protects people who put themselves under its banner. To tell the poster to hush, and "tone it down" (why you'd say that to a poster who admits he is perceived as being quiet is beyond me) is taking him away from his legal protection under the law ( ADA ). Also, assuming he has no "empathy for others" is ignorance at its best. While some people with this disorder exhibit this behavior, the poster said nothing at all to suggest it was indicative of HIS performance at work.



I find both the demeaning tone and ignorant attitude of these words disgusting. Please provide for me the law which states "They are under no requirement to make that kind of place available for you".

While you are looking for it (and good luck finding it, BTW) , allow me to explain the law, since this IS a legal forum.

ADA mandates employers to accommodate mental disabilities. | Society, Social Assistance & Lifestyle > Disability & Society fr...

The ADA is important because it protects the rights of workers with mental and emotional problems just as much as it does those who have physical disabilities.

Other than the obvious physical disabilities, the ADA covers people with mental and emotional impairments which are serious enough to considerably limit one or more major life activities such as talking, thinking, speaking, perceiving, handling emotions, or working. Although determination of discrimination is decided on a case by case basis, some examples of conditions that might be protected are dyslexia and other reading disabilities, anorexia nervosa, bulimia, learning disabilities, and complications resulting from treatment for these conditions, such as dry mouth, the need to eat frequently, diminished concentration and short-term memory loss. People who have recovered from mental illness, but experience discrimination because of their past incapacity are shielded under the ADA.

Invisible accommodations:

While the accommodations for people with physical disabilities are largely mechanical and visible, the workplace adjustments for workers with mental and emotional disabilities are mostly invisible. They consist primarily of policies, practices, attitudes, and language.

ADA compliant policies allow workers time off for necessary mental health appointments and leaves with or without pay for severe relapses of mental illness. ADA consistent practices consider only whether workers can do the job, and not any erratic behavior or "differentness" they may regularly or occasionally manifest.

Here again, perceptions -- in this case of people who have mental illness -- create the greatest problem. Why are people in the workplace potentially uncomfortable around and afraid of employees who have emotional problems? One answer is that, here, as in other aspects of life, what can be perceived as erratic behavior creates an atmosphere where, as Meehan says, "The biggest fear of mental illness is that of mindless violence. But violence-prone individuals comprise the smallest percentage of people with mental illness."

The ADA requires companies to provide reasonable and necessary accommodations in order to facilitate employment of people with disabilities.

There are reasonable accommodations that can easily be made for people with mental disabilities," Levy says, Examples are allowing phone calls during work to Twelve Step Program sponsors, providing health insurance with adequate mental health benefits, allowing a flexible work schedule to enable visits to psychotherapists for therapy or psychiatrists for medication consultation, and instituting in-house education aimed at sensitizing co-workers to people who have mental health disabilities."

Wow, that doesn't sound anything like "tone it down for your co workers", does it?

Although you stated, "While there might be some hole in the wall programming task they could assign you, they are under no requirement to make that kind of place available for you. " the ADA, not surprisingly says the opposite:

For instance, in dealing with a constantly tearful, emotionally disturbed secretary. On the surface, to banish the secretary to a back office so the boss and others won't have to deal with his emotional problems would be discrimination. However, if, in discussing the matter with the employee, the secretary requests or agrees that such a temporary transfer would help him (perhaps he is embarrassed by his own tears), then the transfer would comply with the ADA. Each situation must be evaluated individually. "

So, the supposition that "Smart folks don't need to put up with people whose actions are inappropriate to the workplace... " is incorrect and the ADA says OTHERWISE.


I invite you to read more in depth the information I have provided. You will clearly see that the poster is not only to be commended for being proactive in his own personal well being as well as the well being of his employer and co workers by realizing he needs help, he is also in an *excellent* position to place himself squarely under the banner of the ADA and find protection there, all rampant prejudice and ignorance exhibited here notwithstanding.

To the poster, as a mother with a completely non-verbal autistic child who struggles in a world he does not understand, I am livid at the discrimination and ignorance portrayed against you in this thread. Hold your head high, and know you do so with the best wishes and full protection of the law behind you as you do. Please let me know if I can assist you further.

Good luck to you.

Having been in management for a company similar to the one he works for is simple enough answer for your level of incompetence in understanding problems you have never encountered and resort to defining by dictionary.

My experience is that two levels above me were folks who wanted to immediately manage this kind of person out of the company. Putting them on a performance plan and doing demeaning IQ tests and company paid mandatory psychoanalysis are but a few of the methods of pushing toward the door. The issue is not that they are ALWAYS or will always BE that way, it is that the company took charge of the medical/psychoanalytical process in a way that was not helpful but made it easier to move him out. Some people really don't have anyone at home to confide in and to help them make decisions... perhaps that person would find having the company attempt to run your life and have a manager who was required to get involved in situations that were difficult at best to be the most advantageous use of the company resources. I just felt it was a total BIG BROTHER overseer job and felt I could not have handled it if I were him. Just too much invasion of privacy. And he lost his job within a year. THAT is where they wanted it to go.

Maybe this analyst thinks all companies, especially those that publish their big medical plans and psychoanalytical programs are benign entities. Don't be fooled. They probably also talk big about how big the opportunities are too. NOT. (Better to do it on your own.) Maybe if you have someone who is less trouble and more an advantage because of his skill set the answer is different, but generally I'd say borderline personality disorder is something that harms the workforce interaction more than any skillset could overcome. But who knows, Grace, Maybe he's not all that into yelling at his fellow employees when they do something he thinks is wrong or incorrect. But that is what MY employee was doing. But I felt the COMPANY was more wrong than he was when they put me on his case. The COMPANY generally CREATES the kind of stress that sets these folks off... high quotas, changing goals midstream, etc.

But then you've given us dictionary definitions with no real concept of what role each person or medical assistance plays. And probably less concept of what it is like to work in a situation where you have to do things that are distasteful. I'd vote for him NOT to tell the company the full truth, and never the actual diagnosis. Stress disorder covers a lot of ground and is totally acceptable in that kind of company. From his discussion, I felt like I was hearing about my old employer. Everybody thought the world of the plan they could use for help... but the minute they used it for something serious, they were put on a different kind of plan. Do you remember a Plant site years back in NC where a disgruntled employee drove a truck into the entrance, got out and sprayed the place with bullets? That was a borderline personality disorder that was put on a performance plan and then fired.

This is real. Don't ever discuss personal diagnoses with your company. They can put you out of work and beyond any help in a blink.

Dictionary definitions? That isn't a dictionary, pumpkin. It is the LAW.

Because you worked for a company that was prejudiced against disabled people in no way dismisses the fact that this man is PROTECTED under the ADA. PERIOD. And, the fact that he has already been granted some time off under FMLA indicates that perhaps his employer is more progressive and informed than you or your past employers. Citing instances where people did NOT follow the law is not helpful in determining what HE should do. The poster should not guide his actions by the failures of OTHER companies to comply with the ADA. That is YOUR opinion based on the substandard employers for which you worked. Nothing in your posting has anything to do with the LAW. Why you would tell the poster an "answer" based on your failure and the failure of your company to comply with the law, and consider it a legitimate answer is beyond me.

And, this should go without saying, but this isn't an opinion forum. It is a LEGAL forum. This means that primarily, the responses given should come from, well, yanno, respected researched documented sources---at times, a dictionary, if necessary, but most often from the LAW.

Demeaning the actual quotation of the law in a legal forum once again displays your bias against and ignorance toward the law. I don't know how it is in YOUR country, but in MY country the scenario you offer as a "competent" answer is ILLEGAL and is NOT in keeping with the ADA. Perhaps if you actually studied law or even lived in this country would keep this repeated misnformation and rampant prejudice from being disseminated as legal fact.

Nothing you have said changes the fact that EVERYTHING you told this poster to do is incorrect---says the ADA, not a "dictionary definition".