Terminated on grounds of amputation

[manni-yunk]

Actually, this is not a reasonable statement. What is being brought up in the thread appears to be a personnel matter, and responsible businesses generally refrain from public discussion of personnel matters.

I am a bit surprised that you are willing take the position, 'I will not spend a nickel at this place....ever....based on this', exclusively on the basis of what has been posted in the thread. It is certainly your right to do so, no doubt about it. But, perhaps you have unique access to a lot more detail about this specific situation, or this particular resort, than what has been posted here.

I do not, but in this competitive market, and other options not having this issue...its an easy decision. And - business is changing. Check out the success of places like DRIS, due in part to their online management of their reputation (as well as their service , etc). In this electronic age, the days of refraining from refrain from public discussion, except when yuo know there is pending litigation or under advice of counsel...is long gone. With the internet being the biggest advertising opportunity for vacation dive spots....you better bet their online reputation is important.

 

[manni-yunk]

Do you really think the employer cares how many hands he has if he can do the job? He was dismissed because he couldn't do the job.

Or...they just didnt like him and that became a convenient excuse. The fact that they clearly pointed out that he disclosed his disability....."but not until the last sentence"....is fishy enough for me. It doesnt matter when he pointed it out. It matters THAT he pointed it out. When people focus on irrelevant details while trying to manufacture a point.....they are generally not disclosing their true motives and trying to find justification beyond that which is their real reason...

Maybe its coincidence....but its enough for me until more info comes out....or...Ill just go elsewhere - its not that hard!

 

[Caveeagle]

Agreed. Just because the OP works for the "handicap scuba association" doesn't mean he can automatically file a lawsuit...

^^Is this true? I also find it odd that the OP does not mention what the job was, and wording of the initial statement seems kind of odd. " worked at previous employer".. not sure if OP meant this place? or a previous place.

I was a hiring manager for several years (in the US) and had several situations where disabled applicants seemed to be trolling for a lawsuit. Lets be honest for a second, a physical limitation (such as the OP's) can cause serious productivity or safety issues with many jobs. Employers are required to make reasonable accommodations, but you cannot always re-tool an entire shop floor to allow for wheel-chair access.

In any case, I hope it works out for the OP. Just seems kind of fishy to me.

 

[luscioman]

I think we should wait to see what the OP answers are to the questions already asked before we get too far. There there have been posts in the past were people passed judgment that changed after all the facts came out (Hawaii, Laihana Divers)

 

[muzzon]

I hope he does provide more info, just because I'm curious, but as of right now I do side with the resort. It looks like he said he could do a job, despite having a disability, which it turns out he could not (at least according to the resort).

I'm not lawyer, but if I were representing the OP I would look into whether there was some other reasoning for the resort to release him and whether they were merely using his disability as an excuse. For example, if they were losing money as a business and were trying to cut back on expenses by firing someone or if someone had a personal vendetta against him and used his disability as grounds for release.

In any case, there's not much point on speculating.

 

[guruboy]

^^Is this true? I also find it odd that the OP does not mention what the job was, and wording of the initial statement seems kind of odd. " worked at previous employer".. not sure if OP meant this place? or a previous place.

I was a hiring manager for several years (in the US) and had several situations where disabled applicants seemed to be trolling for a lawsuit. Lets be honest for a second, a physical limitation (such as the OP's) can cause serious productivity or safety issues with many jobs. Employers are required to make reasonable accommodations, but you cannot always re-tool an entire shop floor to allow for wheel-chair access.

In any case, I hope it works out for the OP. Just seems kind of fishy to me.

Someone linked a page from HSA where someone with his name is listed as a Course Director.

 

[clownfishsydney]

The letter clearly states that he said he could do the job, but it turns out he could NOT. Being disabled doesn't mean you are immune to having to be able to do the job you were hired for.

If the case was that he could not do the job because he was simply not a good instructor (or whatever he was doing), then why mention the disability?

Certainly in Australia, he would be able to sue their pants off for sacking him on the basis that he did not have a hand. I really cannot think of any dive related job that could not be done satisfactorily by someone without a hand as good as someone else. I worked with a number of people with missing hands or deformed hands and they were able to do things such as remote area bushfire (wildfire) fighting.

However, I agree more information is required from OP about all that went on before judging the company.

 

[muzzon]

If the case was that he could not do the job because he was simply not a good instructor (or whatever he was doing), then why mention the disability?

I'm not sure, but maybe they were just being honest?

Or, maybe his firing was a direct result of a specific incident, that was just so obvious that there was no point in denying it. For example, maybe he was an instructor and a diver was struggling to get on the boat and he was unable to help them with only one hand so they suffered injuries as a consequence.

Again, it's purely speculation.

 

[BRT]

It is certainly not difficult to imagine a diving situation where a one armed person would not be capable of rendering the kind of assistance a 2 armed person could. On the other hand (so to speak) some amputees are so good that they seem to be able to do anything anybody else can do. If one of my employees was in the second group why would I care if they were an amputee? If they were in the first group it might well affect my business and the safety of my customers.

 

[Caveeagle]

If the case was that he could not do the job because he was simply not a good instructor (or whatever he was doing), then why mention the disability?

Certainly in Australia, he would be able to sue their pants off for sacking him on the basis that he did not have a hand. I really cannot think of any dive related job that could not be done satisfactorily by someone without a hand as good as someone else. I worked with a number of people with missing hands or deformed hands and they were able to do things such as remote area bushfire (wildfire) fighting.

However, I agree more information is required from OP about all that went on before judging the company.

I had to assist an instructor/friend when a student freaked out and tried to bolt to the surface when she got her mask tangled In her hair. It took both of us to get a reg back in her mouth and calmly get her to the surface. I can see how this might be a challenge with a physical restriction.

Is is it possible for an amputee to be an instructor, or DM? Sure! But they will have to overcome the physical issue and although you might say the employer has a moral obligation to make accommodations, a customer may not feel that way. In the US, the ADA might pressure an employer to "figure it out", but in countries where there is no equivalent to the ADA, I can certainly understand where an operator might have a hard time dealing with an employee who is having issue making customers feel safe and happy.

Obviously just speculation,