In New Jersey, an employer has the right to order an examination for an employee they reasonably believe may not be healthy enough to perform their job properly and safely. This examination, called a “fitness-for-duty” test, is allowed if the employer has a reason to believe the employee, for reasons of health, may not be able to perform their job, or may constitute a direct threat to the safety of self or others in the workplace.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) allows employers with reasonable cause to mandate a fitness-for-duty test, though the statute limits the circumstances under which it is permissible. In In the Matter of Paul Williams, Township of Lakewood (NJ App. Div. 2016), an anonymous caller, presumably a co-employee, voiced concerns about Williams’s alleged “erratic behavior” and said the other employees were concerned for their safety.  The employer then waited eight months before ordering a psychological fitness-for-duty test, at which time Williams refused to undergo the examination.

When Williams refused the test, his employer terminated him from employment. Originally, the Hearing Examiner found the employer justified in firing Williams, but the Superior Court Appellate Division overturned that decision.  The panel found the employer did not directly observe the questionable behavior. The ADA’s guidelines state that, for an employer to legally require an employee to undergo a fitness-for-duty test, the employer must have reliable information, based either on direct observation or information from a credible source. This information must then lead the employer to investigate the allegations and conclude that the employee is not capable of doing the job or is a direct threat to the safety of the workplace.

The Williams case involved a public employer.  Making this claim against a private employer is possible, yet more difficult, because public sector employers are held to a stricter standard in these cases than private ones.

When an employer fires a worker for illegal reasons, it’s called wrongful termination. In this case, the judgment that the termination was illegal was based upon a violation of public policy. There are a number of other types of claims, including discrimination, breach of good faith, and retaliation, any of which may become the basis of a wrongful termination lawsuit. A worker who is the victim of wrongful termination has legal rights and may be eligible to collect lost wages, benefits, damages, punitive damages, plus counsel fees/costs.

If you suspect you have been fired from your job illegally, consult an experienced employment attorney for workers. At Hanan M. Isaacs, P.C., we offer compassionate counsel and tough advocacy. Contact us today to schedule a low-cost and near-term consultation. You will be glad you did.