Law part of Julia’s dilemma

Americans with disabilities act is a very serious organization working for the disable people with the motto that there should be no discrimination in work places for disabled people until and unless needs be. There are various diseases and disabilities that come under the disabilities act. However, it is astonishing that Multiple sclerosis is not considered a disability according to the Americans with disabilities act. But, disabilities act provides cover for Multiple sclerosis. Multiple sclerosis is a disease that affects the central nervous system of the human body. Central nervous system consists of brain, spinal cord and cranial nerves.

Moreover, multiple sclerosis is disease with remitting and relapsing pattern which means there are completely disease free periods between the periods of disease relapse. In addition, it is not a mental or psychological condition. Also, it is not an anti social disease. Only anti social diseases are the ones which do not come under the Americans with disabilities act. (S, 2015)

In Julia’s case, she was suffering from multiple sclerosis but she did not want to disclose her disease to his employees and boss. Therefore, she did not tell them which is completely normal according to disabilities act. Becaause disclosing you diagnosis during job process, interview or selection is not necessary if that diagnosis doesn’t affect personality or work of person.

2)  Reasonable accommodation means all the changes or modifications that employer, company or organization makes for easing the work life of their employee in case he suffering from some disability. These changes are made so that no work discrimination is done between employees and they can enjoy same opportunities in their work place and to make sure that he gets equal privileges of all kinds. Employer also provides reasonable modifications during the application process for the qualified applicants.

An employer is bound to make adjustments and modifications in the work place for his disable employee until and unless these modifications are out of the range and resources of the employer, costs him more than should be, are a burden on the employer, create negative air between other employees, are some safety havoc or are of unreasonable kind. All these situations come under the undue hardship on employer.

 Undue hardships on the employer means the adjustments which cost employer too much and this cost may be in the form of money, productivity, timing, environment, safety or any other form. The expenses of the undue hardships are compared to the nature, structure and size of the disability of the employee and then pros and cons of accommodations are considered thoroughly.

In the case of Julia, she did not even disclose her diagnosis and disability to her organization. She kept it a secret at the interview and at the time employer asked her afterwards. She made very light accommodations at her workplace, like leave timings, breaks and temperature settings of the air conditioner of her room. She did not demand anything from the company as she made all the changes in her lifestyle according to the needs of her disease process. (Edwords, 2018)

So, all this will not come under the undue hardship on employer because employer was not effected at all from the adjustments Julia made to make her work life easy.

Ethics Part Julia’s dilemma

3) It is not necessary for employee to disclose his disease to his employer as long as it does not affect his work. People applying for jobs are also protected by law that it is not necessary to disclose your disease at the time of job process. However, it is up to the employee whether he wants to disclose it or not, there is no fixed time for disclosure, he can disclose it at the time of interview, after the probationary period passes, sometimes after that or whenever he feels the need to disclose it.

In case of Julia, she wants to disclose it because she thinks it’s the time she should tell her management about her disease due to two reasons. Firstly, she needs coverage on medical grounds, from her company which is her right. Secondly, she wants self improvement by being able to accept her disease and she is ready to be called a working lady suffering from Multiple sclerosis.

Only mistake she made was that she was not honest when the management asked her personally about her fitness. She should have told them right then and there that she is suffering from multiple sclerosis and they can make adjustments according to her .Moreover, she did not tell them the actual reasons of her leave and other minor modifications she made in her work routine life. This is some dishonesty she committed. However, it is up to company now how they want to react.

Employer can give her reasonable adjustments if they ignore the fact that’s he lied to them and provide him with modifications and coverage for her medicine and disease. Or they can even terminate an employee if they feel undue burden on themselves.

The final stakeholders of her ultimate decisions will be Julia herself and her employer.

4) Julia could have analyzed her situation differently keeping in mind different frameworks. She should have told the employer at the time of job and asked for help and adjustments. In this case, she might have benefited more and she did not have to lie or hide something from her employers.

In addition, she could have told her employer about her multiple sclerosis at the time they gave him the Performa to fill. But she did not want to tell them because at that time she was in remission phase of her disease .If she had told them at that time ; her diagnosis may still be kept a secret as employer do not breech the privacy of employee without employees permission.

Moreover, Julia could have thought of disclosure of her diagnosis before coming in contact with that lady suffering from brain injury.

All these frameworks lead to different end points .But one thing which is common in all these is that disclosure was always a better option for Julia because it could have saved Julia’s energy and she could have benefited from adjustments of employers without getting discrimination's.