Attorneys - Thoughts on Mandatory Temperature Checks To Enter Business (2 Viewers)

[Meddler2]

is this a violation of an individuals right to medical privacy?

Not an attorney but posed your question to an associate VP for a major University of higher ed who's background is RN MBA blablahblah....and the answer to your question is no.

 

[Anthony Martino]

I suspect (but I’m not an attorney) that some organizations are doing this to insulate themselves somewhat from litigation from employees that do eventually get sick and suspect they picked up COVID in an office - specifically, trying to demonstrate that they are taking some measures to protect employees that have been asked to return to work.

Thank you for the excellent responses!

 

[BGinGA]

Fwiw, our business has been allowed to remain open during the state-wide stay-at-home order "to maintain minimum business operations" provided that we met the requirements set forth in th Governor's executive order (a list of 20 or so items). No customers are allowed inside the facility, but we are required to monitor employee health, including a mandatory temperature check upon arrival each shift. We supply personal protection and sanitation items for the staff, who are masked/gloved when interacting with customers during curbside drop-off/pick-up, and when unable to maintain a 6-foot distance of separation from other workers inside the facility.

 

[MattyMatt]

In this example HIPAA doesn’t prevent them from being able to stop you and deny you entry unless you fill out the paperwork and have your temperature checked, but since they now have personally identifiable information and PHI (personal health information) about you they may be subject to needing to control that data securely via HIPAA-compliant controls (for example, if the data resides in a a database, forcing multi-factor authentication for access to the database, protecting it with a properly configured firewall, establishing clear logs that identify who accessed information, when, and what they accessed, controls and alerts around unauthorized access, etc).

I would think there should be a fairly easy way around this for some companies.

First you simply identify if you have any options to workers working on-site. If they can work at home then you make it clear that it's preferred that they come in to work (if that's what you want). Then when they are checked at the door and the present with fever rather than note that they're being denied entry because they have a fever just mark it as "Preferred to work at home" instead. The outcome is the same in that they're staying away from the workplace, but with the difference that you're not entering specifically that they had fever. So if anyone checks a database it'll just say "worked from home", not "had a fever".

 

[Jake14mw]

I hope to god it's legal for a business to take reasonable measures to try and protect their employees and protect the public from a spreading pandemic.

 

[Meddler2]

Employers (unless you're a hospital or healthcare provider whom sends medical information for purposes of payment) are not HIPAA covered entities.

The EEOC clarified this a few weeks ago:
https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-...and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeo-laws

 

[WedgeRock]

 

[Eloe2000]

View attachment 462073

Haha, I saw this on reddit and thought of this thread too