Paul Cronan

Legal Case Study

The Facts

The New England Telephone Company hired Paul Cronan as a file clerk and in 1983 advancing to a service technician. He was based out of the company's Needham, Massachusetts unit for a year and a half later being relocated to the South Boston unit. In 1985 Paul begins to suffer from a medical complication that was caused from him having being diagnosed with the AIDS-related complex (ARC). His medical problems caused him to miss several days of work during a span of 6 months. In the same year Paul request a third leave of absence in order to make an appointment with his doctor. Charles O'Brian, who was Paul's manager at the time, insisted that Paul reveal that what was the reasoning behind his frequently missed days of work. Paul did reveal that he had been diagnosed with ARC and was later granted the requested days off. O'Brian also spoke of the situation with his boss Paul Cloran, who eventually told his director. O'Brian told Cronan that in accordance with the company's guidelines, he would have to visit with the company's medical doctor. Only after visiting with the doctor for 10 minutes, Paul was sent home since he was feeling nauseated and tired.

Two days had passed before Paul received a phone call telling him that everyone at the local site had heard about his illness and that threats had been made against him if he decided to return to work. Being scared of what was to come if he returned, he filed for a medical leave of absence in which he did receive. Around June, 1985, he started receiving sickness benefits and after it concluded he was entitled to get his company-paid benefits. For a continuation of 9 months, Paul's benefits were extended. Around August of the same year, Paul felt well enough to return to work and contacted his new supervisor. Richard Griffin. And again a reference was made to the company guidelines that stated that Paul must have a medical release from his doctor clearing him to work was needed. Paul also requested from Mr. Griffin a transfer out of the South Boston Facility seen that he had not received any guarantee that his co-workers would not bring harm to him.

By the time September came, AIDS had fully taken over Paul's body. While in the hospital, Paul had received a letter from his employer that informed him that he would be allow to return to work in the same standing and that "reasonable accommodations" would be granted because of his disability. Although Paul was admitted to the hospital several more time during a six month time period, by the next spring his physical condition had started to get better. At the same time, NET had informed Paul that his benefits had ended and that he was no longer a NET colleague. Sizable medical bills quickly depleted his savings and he was only receiving $575 from Social Security insurance. By late December, Paul along with the help of the Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts filed a lawsuit in the amount of $1.45 million. The suit claimed that NET had violated Paul's privacy by disclosing his sickness and that he had been discriminated against, based on him being disabled.

Critical Issues

1. Disability: Paul's diagnosis of AIDS may have been regarded as a hindrance possibly causing law to have been broken.

2. Discrimination: Discrimination becomes apparent because of the way Paul was treated by his employer and fellow colleagues because of him being identified as having AIDS.

3. Privacy: Once the supervisors and other colleagues were told of Paul's condition, his privacy could have possibly been infringed upon.

Legal Principles

1. Disability: Sadly for Paul Cronan, changes to the American with Disabilities Act were not changed until around 1990. Before this, there was no law in place to protect against the discrimination of the disabled. It states as follows:

"information obtained regarding the medical condition or history of the applicant is collected and maintained on separate forms and in separate medical files and is treated as a confidential medical record...."

(http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/ada.html)

2. Discrimination: Under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act:

It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -

(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or

(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

(b) It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, or to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. (http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html)

3. Privacy: Massachusetts law states:

Chapter 214: Section 1B. Right of privacy

Section 1B. A person shall have a right against unreasonable, substantial or serious interference with his privacy. The superior court shall have jurisdiction in equity to enforce such right and in connection therewith to award damages. (http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/214-1b.htm)

Student Observations

Paul undoubtedly had the good reason to expect that his personal issues would remain confidential. He clearly didn't want anyone to know of his illness but yielding a request from his manager, Paul made his illness known. Massachusetts law provides individuals the right against unreasonable, substantial or serious interference with their privacy. Although some of NET policies allowed for Paul's information to be passed on to members of upper management, there was a serious interference into his privacy by his medical condition being leaked to his fellow colleagues.

Conclusion

The