Merged Arday life and death

[d4m10n]

You asked specifically about parking stalls, remember.

As one possible counterexample to a much broader claim, remember.

Here's that claim once again:

Let me add Australia to the other countries where it is illegal to have staff medical conditions on personnel files.

 

[d4m10n]

While workplace injuries are usually recorded, medical conditions are not.

Okay, so when an Aussie employee asks for a specific accommodation, the employer does not get to know what medical condition actually needs to be accommodated? That seems fairly unworkable. Maybe we could have a look at the law you are talking about? I imagine it allows for employers to know when employees are expecting to start taking maternity leave.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'd have to look up UK law on point, but it's difficult to imagine how an employer could tailor reasonable accommodations to an unspecified condition.

Because the condition isn't what they accommodate, the limitation is. For example, "I can't walk" isn't a medical condition. Multiple medical conditions can lead one to need a wheelchair. Your employer doesn't need to know which one you have in order to put in a wheelchair ramp to accommodate you.

 

[d4m10n]

"I can't walk" isn't a medical condition.

It is not a specific diagnosis, to be sure, but I'm not sure why we would not call it a condition.

That said, sure, let's slice the salami more thinly. How does someone ask for an accommodation for photosensitive epilepsy without giving away their actual condition? How does an employer document that accommodation without implicitly documenting the condition itself?

 

[d4m10n]

Interesting take at the intersection of Jason Arday and educational accommodations:

Trust but Verify: What K-12 Schools Can Teach Universities in the Wake of Jason Arday - The Educators Room

The piece argues that universities should independently verify personal claims they publicly promote to protect both individuals and institutions.

theeducatorsroom.com

 

[smartcooky]

As an employer, the only information I held on my employees was

Full name
IRD number (like a US Social Security no.)
Home address
Phone number
Bank account number
Leave days accrued
Sick leave days used
Driver's license (yes/no)

Nothing else.

 

[Ziggurat]

It is not a specific diagnosis, to be sure, but I'm not sure why we would not call it a condition.

It's not a medical condition. Having nerve damage is a medical condition. Having no legs is a medical condition. Not being able to walk is a symptom, not the condition.

That said, sure, let's slice the salami more thinly. How does someone ask for an accommodation for photosensitive epilepsy without giving away their actual condition? How does an employer document that accommodation without implicitly documenting the condition itself?

Some accomodations will have an obvious cause. Some will not. But implicit isn't explicit, and a lot of the accommodations one might get for autism are not unique to autism. Remember where this started: Vixen claimed that Afzal knows Arday was autistic because that diagnosis is in his personnel file. Afzal never made this claim, Vixen invented it. And there's zero reason to believe she is correct.

 

[d4m10n]

Vixen claimed that Afzal knows Arday was autistic because that diagnosis is in his personnel file.

If it wasn't in his personnel file, why did his employer publicly claim to know it to be true?

Jason Arday appointed Professor of Sociology of Education at University of Cambridge | Faculty of Education

news.educ.cam.ac.uk

 

[Ziggurat]

If it wasn't in his personnel file, why did his employer publicly claim to know it to be true?

The obvious possibility is because Arday said so, and Afzal and Cambridge believed him. I don’t know that with certainty, but likewise neither you nor Vixen know any other basis for his claim. And even if that’s in his file, we don’t know if it’s in there because Cambridge HR believed Arday or because they got their hands on a formal diagnosis.

But given both Arday’s history of lying and Cambridge’s history of believing his lies, there is no reason for any of us to simply take Afzal’s statement about Arday having autism as true. Either that traces back to a formal diagnosis, or it doesn’t. If it does, that’s what we need to see, not Afzal’s word for it and not even HR’s word for it. If it doesn’t, the claim is worthless.

 

[Rolfe]

The obvious possibility is because Arday said so, and Afzal and Cambridge believed him. I don’t know that with certainty, but likewise neither you nor Vixen know any other basis for his claim. And even if that’s in his file, we don’t know if it’s in there because Cambridge HR believed Arday or because they got their hands on a formal diagnosis.

But given both Arday’s history of lying and Cambridge’s history of believing his lies, there is no reason for any of us to simply take Afzal’s statement about Arday having autism as true. Either that traces back to a formal diagnosis, or it doesn’t. If it does, that’s what we need to see, not Afzal’s word for it and not even HR’s word for it. If it doesn’t, the claim is worthless.

Well, that saved me a bit of typing.

 

[Darat]

Here you go: Are Aussie employers allowed to document work-impacting medical conditions? If legally required to provide reasonable accommodation, it seems like the particulars would have to matter.

In the UK you do not have to disclose a medical condition or disability to have an employer make reasonable accomodations for you. You can if you want to, but GDPR would probably mean an employer would not keep a record of that unless it was directly required to mitigate risk to the employee.

 

[Darat]

Bit of a rock and a hard place for Cambridge or any other employer. Whilst there are circumstances in which an employer can require proof of a disability it's fraught with risk of an accusation of illegal discrimination. Also an employee does not have to mention a disability during recruitment even if to do the job they will require reasonable accommodation from day one.

Arday could have mentioned his autism during his recruitment, but practically Cambridge couldn't have asked for proof of that during or after recruitment.

 

[smartcooky]

Either that traces back to a formal diagnosis, or it doesn’t. If it does, that’s what we need to see, not Afzal’s word for it and not even HR’s word for it. If it doesn’t, the claim is worthless.

Yup. It doesn't matter what you believe, it only matters what you can prove.

 

[d4m10n]

The obvious possibility is because Arday said so, and Afzal and Cambridge believed him.

Cambridge believed his affirmation of a specific diagnosis, but they did not document that claim in their own files during the job search and onboarding process? Pull the other one.

And even if that’s in his file, we don’t know if it’s in there because Cambridge HR believed Arday or because they got their hands on a formal diagnosis.

Either way, I'm challenging the notion (from post #1,542) that it would somehow be illegal for Cambridge to have that diagnosis documented in university files. If the GDPR somehow applies to autobiographical claims made in published papers, I've no idea how that is supposed to work.

 

[dirtywick]

In the UK you do not have to disclose a medical condition or disability to have an employer make reasonable accomodations for you. You can if you want to, but GDPR would probably mean an employer would not keep a record of that unless it was directly required to mitigate risk to the employee.

you don’t have to in the us either. basically your doctor provides a list of medical restrictions and your employer has the info they need to accommodate those restrictions without disclosing the specific medical conditions that are causing the need. it doesn’t matter why you can only lift 20 pounds or need a chair to sit in every 15 minutes or whatever it is.

there’s also a program called fmla where you can take a certain amount of unpaid days off a year for medical reasons. your doctor will specify a time period it’s valid and you can call in to work without having to disclose the reason.

it’s the same with parking. you bring a form to your doctor and he fills it out and you go to the dmv and get the tag. no specific diagnosis is needed in that exchange either

i know some people can be a little selective about when medical conditions are between and doctor and patient and when the public needs to be involved, but most of the time there’s a way to accommodate medical conditions and still allow people to have privacy

 

[Ziggurat]

Cambridge believed his affirmation of a specific diagnosis, but they did not document that claim in their own files during the job search and onboarding process? Pull the other one.

What evidence is there that they believed him? A press release. Their PR guy talked to Arday, and wrote what he said. There's nothing at all remarkable about that.

Either way, I'm challenging the notion (from post #1,542) that it would somehow be illegal for Cambridge to have that diagnosis documented in university files.

It would be illegal for them to require him to provide them with a diagnosis.

Do you not understand how medical privacy works?

 

[d4m10n]

It would be illegal for them to require him to provide them with a diagnosis.

Is that the claim from #1,542 in your understanding?

Do you not understand how medical privacy works?

Under the GDPR framework? Not really.

Their PR guy talked to Arday, and wrote what he said.

The PR guy probably wasn't part of the hiring process, right? My hypothesis here is that Arday talked about overcoming ASD during that process, just as he did when interviewed in public.

 

[Ziggurat]

The PR guy probably wasn't part of the hiring process, right?

He probably wasn't. But we don't have hiring process documents. We have a press release. Vixen made her claim on the basis of a press release.

My hypothesis here is that Arday talked about overcoming ASD during that process, just as he did when interviewed in public.

Quite possibly. And quite possibly he provided zero documentation to support that claim.

 

[Vixen]

He probably wasn't. But we don't have hiring process documents. We have a press release. Vixen made her claim on the basis of a press release.

Quite possibly. And quite possibly he provided zero documentation to support that claim.

As Professor Arday, himself, said to the GUARDIAN hack,

"Why don't you just believe me?'

 

[d4m10n]

I don't think that's an awful question in this case. Someone that age having an ASD diagnosis isn't exactly an extraordinary claim, unlike, say, reversible mutism.