It’s reasonable to expect that employers check properly whether job applicants are suitable candidates for the position. It’s also reasonable to expect job applications to not be too intrusive on a personal level.
Should an employer be able to find out whether an applicant is suffering from mental illness, being treated for mental illness or taking medication to treat mental illness?
RNZ: Job applicants face mental health discrimination – Greens
A Green Party investigation has concluded that there appears to be widespread discrimination against job applicants with mental health issues.
The investigation was launched after Green Party spokesperson for mental health Chloe Swarbrick held hui at eight universities across the country to better understand the mental health challenges facing young people.
It was during these hui that Ms Swarbrick said she was surprised to find out from people that they were being expected to disclose their mental health history on job applications so she launched an investigation.
“[We] heard some pretty harrowing and stressful stories – a number of people who were being required to offer up an entire shopping list of the medication that they’re on, other people who believe that they had been prejudiced from the job application process and denied the opportunity to prove their skill set.”
A number of the 59 submitters expressed concerns about what their mental health or medication information would be used for.
“What was highlighted was the number of people who weren’t given clarity around what that information was going to be used for but also, I think what people have to realise is that in a job application process there is a massive power imbalance.
“So when somebody is put in a position where they are being expected to disclose things and may not actually know their rights, that’s a really problematic situation for them to be put in.”
Perhaps that could be addressed by notifying applications of their rights in advance.
The investigation also highlighted that a number of large companies including Wishbone, Coca-Cola, Air New Zealand, New World, Countdown and PWC appeared to be avoiding hiring people with anxiety and depression.
“Rather than reinforcing a culture of stigma and fear around mental health, employers should be providing supportive workplaces and promotion well-being.”
Of course employers should provide supportive workplaces. The well-being of employees has an impact on the well-being of a business.
But employers should be able to consider whether a degree of anxiety or depression was a potential problem in someone being capable of doing a reasonable job.
Mental ‘illness’ can range from minor (and inconsequential in employment) to severe and a major risk.
We all probably suffer from some sort of mental problems at some stage of our lives – degrees of depression can vary a lot, relationship issues, stress (from work or home) can all affect just about anyone.
We already have a situation where discrimination in job applications is not allowed legally – for example on gender, age, race, religion.
But what this means in practice is that employers just have to be careful in what reasons they give for not choosing an applicant – bland ‘someone else was more suitable’ explanations are safe. Saying ‘your age of seventy five, and wanting six months off to go to China for a sex change, skin lightening and hair transplant operations as soon as your probation office and your psychiatrist allows’ risks a complaint of discrimination.
It is difficult to say how much an employer has a right to know about job applicants.
It could also be difficult in differentiating between discrimination and prudence in checking out the suitability of job applicants.