Seems like a lose-lose.
As a general rule of thumb (barring some edge case exceptions), it is impossible for anyone but a health care provider to violate HIPAA. For examples, reporters reporting on someone's health conditions, sharing health information that was intended to be kept secret, or demanding proof of vaccination are not violating HIPAA.
Plenty of industries demand vaccination (healthcare, childcare, etc.) as a prerequisite for employment; this is not a new model being implemented.
I'm not confident anyone could successfully win a lawsuit claiming refusing a vaccine is a disability worth protecting there.
ADA does for some things, but not all things. Vaccination status is apparently not among them, though many of the things that would be involved in a medical reason not to vaccinate are.
Right - this is my point that I poorly presented. If you say you cannot be vaccinated for medical issues, obviously they must be presented proof otherwise any anti-vaxxer would say that.
However if said proof would be constitute information under ADA then you wouldn't have to share it no? However since there's no way to know if that's actually true without knowing it seems we're in a dilemma.
Most workplace privacy/anti-discrimination rules have exceptions for sufficient safety or other necessity, very few (despite popular general portrayals) are completely unconditional bars; not sure exactly how this applies to ADA here.
The first is a note from your doctor. My kids' school requires vaccination unless you bring in a note from your doctor claiming that you have an underlying condition preventing you from being vaccinated. It doesn't have to say what the condition is. Of course there are some doctors that will write up these notes from anyone, and some parents who will seek those out. But the work involved in finding one cuts down on the number of people who will do it.
The second is that the vaccination requirement is only for people who work in the office. You don't need to be vaccinated to work remotely, so allow people who don't want to disclose information to work remotely. Again, this can be gamed by people who don't want to return. But I think that over time the remote crowd will see fewer interesting projects which means fewer opportunities for promotion, making that option less desirable.
No, HIPAA prohibits, say, your insurer or medical provider (even if it is employer-funded) from disclosing info without your consent, including to your employer.
It does not prohibit the employer asking and you disclosing it. Nor does it prohibit adverse consequences by the employer for your failure to disclose, or for the facts thereby disclosed (though, for some medical information, the ADA or other law might do that.)
I don't understand why so many people are obsessed how the company can find out whether you got the vaccine. I mean, as an employee you could lie or otherwise misrepresent your status and probably get away with it, at least for a short time, before they terminated your employment.
It's not about the vaccine - it's about the normalization of employers knowing your medical history. Personally I wouldn't care if I was asked as I've taken the vaccine and would say so.
However I can understand why people might be concerned about employers demanding proof.
But you do not have to give your records and they aren’t allowed to obtain them without your consent. They’re also not allowed to “punish” you for failing to provide your health records. In this context, someone in the office may get promoted and someone WFH may think they deserved it. So they’ll sue on grounds that vaccinated people in the office are receiving advantage. Not saying it’s right or wrong but prior to covid this type of thing was an HR/legal nightmare any company would steer clear of.
It's not waiving your right to HIPAA protections, because HIPAA protections literally do not apply in this scenario.
> 3028 - If my employer requires proof of my COVID-19 vaccination status, does that violate my rights under HIPAA?
> In general, the HIPAA Rules do not apply to employers or employment records. HIPAA only applies to HIPAA covered entities – health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses – and, to some extent, to their business associates. If an employer asks an employee to provide proof that they have been vaccinated, that is not a HIPAA violation, and employees may decide whether to provide that information to their employer.
https://www.hhs.gov/answers/if-my-employer-requires-proof-of...
I've never heard of any employer asking for any health information of their employee unless it's like a doctor's note saying they were fit to work or something similarly vague.
Prior to COVID, if you asked an employee for, say, proof of HIV negative. And they actually gave you proof of HIV positive. Anything that happens afterwards (termination, promoting another employee, denial of PTO, etc) the employee can sue you because they believe you are discriminating on their HIV status. IANAL and don't care to research it myself but I've heard this sentiment repeated countless times in meetings with senior HR and Legal executives, so I believe it true.
All said, I do work in the healthcare industry. So maybe the HIPPA laws for our patients have been applied to our employees and there is some mixup around that. Either way, after 20 years in the industry this is news to me, appreciate the discourse.
Where are you getting this belief from? We literally have had vaccine requirements for various places for decades...
No, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is not a workplace anti-discrimination act. You are, while also probably misunderstanding the lower-level details, confusing its basic purpose and function with something else, probably the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Of course, unless your job involves something unusual like having sex with your coworkers or the public, that's not all that likely.
And how many instances of person-to-person HIV transmissions have been caused by that kind of occupational exposure?
(It happens to carve out some reasons why sharing without consent might also be allowed, such as public health purposes, but that wouldn't even be necessary here.)