Air Evac EMS, an emergency air medical transportation services company headquartered in O'Fallon, Missouri, agreed to pay $59,000 and provide other relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The lawsuit contains allegations that Air Evac EMS violated federal law when it rescinded a job offer for a position in Cullman, Alabama, after a pre-employment medical screening disclosed the applicant's prescription medications. The company acted on concerns about potential side effects rather than on an individualized assessment of the applicant's ability to perform the job.

Air Evac EMS operates more than 150 helicopter air ambulance bases across 15 states.

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama after the EEOC's conciliation efforts did not resolve the matter.

Under a two-year consent decree, Air Evac EMS will provide monetary relief to the applicant; conduct training for personnel involved in hiring; review and revise its handbook to clarify procedures for disability accommodation requests and discrimination complaints; and submit periodic reports to the EEOC regarding its compliance with the decree.

Source: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/air-evac-ems-pay-59000-eeoc-discrimination-lawsuit

Commentary

In the above matter, the EEOC alleged the defendant rescinded a job offer because of prescription medications the applicant took and its concerns over "side effects". More than likely, the concerns revolved around safety.

Healthcare employers are increasingly confronting safety questions when applicants or employees use prescription medications with potential side effects.

Recent enforcement actions show that ending employment or withdrawing offers based only on theoretical risks, generalized warnings, or a medication's label language can create significant liability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires decisions to rest on an individualized assessment of the person, the job, and the actual risk.

An individualized assessment focuses on the specific position's essential functions, the worker's present ability to perform those functions safely, and the likelihood and seriousness of potential harm, using current medical knowledge or objective evidence rather than assumptions.

This analysis typically involves clarifying job duties and safety-sensitive tasks, obtaining job-related medical input from qualified professionals, considering the duration and nature of the risk, and examining whether reasonable accommodations could reduce any risk to an acceptable level.

Safety remains a legitimate priority in clinical and transport settings, but fear of side effects alone is not enough; the law expects employers to engage in a fact-specific, interactive process with the applicant or employee before making adverse decisions.

Employers who document this assessment, apply it consistently, and revisit conclusions when circumstances or treatment change can better protect patients and staff while reducing the risk of costly disability discrimination claims.

Additional Sources: https://www.eeoc.gov/publications/ada-your-employment-rights-individual-disability