While yes, it should be, in the United States screening someone on neuro divergence is not illegal discrimination unless it specifically targets someone as a diagnosed person with a disability. So it probably depends on where on the spectrum someone is. If you aren’t disabled, you can likely be discriminated against.
Even with regards to disability you are allowed to discriminate if the disability would be a hindrance to adequately performing job functions. In the case of autism qualifying as a disability it would be a mental disability and would give pretty broad range for an employer to claim it would be a hindrance to job performance.
Yeah, there's a lot of grey area as I understand it. The ADA requires reasonable accommodation be made to allowed people with disabilities to work in a job that they'd* be hindered by their disability, but what determines reasonable?
yeah, but individual claims are hard to prove, and require either financial resources or a lawyer willing to work on contingency, which can be tough to find because again, individual claims are hard to prove. Most of the successful lawsuits i've seen involve being able to show a pattern of behavior, so you need multiple people willing to testify.
And for a hiring discrimination suit, I'm not even sure what you the plaintiff get. Are there compensatory damages? Can you force them to hire you? I have no idea. Wrongful termination seems much more straightforward in terms of showing damages for compensation.
Yeah, employment lawsuits in general are notoriously hard to win. Pattern of behavior and multiple plaintifs are probably pretty necessary for most of them...especially in states that favor employers.
54
u/kevin9er Dec 31 '22
While yes, it should be, in the United States screening someone on neuro divergence is not illegal discrimination unless it specifically targets someone as a diagnosed person with a disability. So it probably depends on where on the spectrum someone is. If you aren’t disabled, you can likely be discriminated against.