When Job Applications Ask Too Much: What California Workers Need to Know About Pre-Employment Medical Questions

Applying for a new job can be stressful. You want to make a good impression, provide the necessary information and move through the process smoothly. But what happens when a pre-employment form asks for personal medical details that don’t seem relevant to the job? For California workers, this is more than just an annoyance. It can be a potential violation of state law and a barrier to fair hiring practices.

In a recent class-action lawsuit against U.S. Healthworks Medical Group, job applicants alleged they were unlawfully required to complete a pre-employment screening of 150 medical questions. The occupational health screening company administered the questionnaires on behalf of employers.

The questions went beyond what was necessary for the positions applied for, covering topics like personal and family medical history that had little connection to job duties. For example, one applicant for a food service role at a retirement facility was asked about the date of her last menstrual period. The exam was stopped when she declined to answer, and the employer reportedly withdrew the job offer.

The plaintiff filed the lawsuit after being required to provide a detailed personal medical history when applying for a job with U.S. Healthworks Medical Group. The form also asked questions about his parents and other family members. Although he initially complied with the request, he later disputed whether it was lawful.

The job applicants in the lawsuit claimed many of the questions violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). FEHA is California’s main law protecting workers and job seekers from discrimination in hiring, promotion and other workplace decisions. Under FEHA, pre-placement medical questions must be directly related to the job and necessary for business purposes. Employers can’t use medical questions to screen applicants unfairly or to gather personal information unrelated to work.

Initially, lower courts dismissed the claims in the lawsuit, Raines v. U.S. Healthworks, ruling that FEHA didn’t explicitly allow applicants to sue for pre-employment medical questions. The case eventually reached the California Supreme Court, which carefully reviewed the law and considered whether job seekers could bring civil claims for allegedly illegal medical questions during the application process.

The Supreme Court concluded that medical inquiries before a conditional employment offer that aren’t job-related qualify as unlawful under FEHA. The court confirmed that workers have a direct way to challenge employers who try to collect unnecessary or intrusive health information. This ruling reinforces the protections FEHA provides against discrimination and invasions of privacy during hiring.

Federal law provides similar guidance. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers are limited in the medical inquiries and exams they can require before making a job offer. Like FEHA, federal law generally requires that medical questions or tests be “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” As a result, workers have protections under both state and federal laws when it comes to pre-employment requirements.

The case eventually resolved with a settlement in which U.S. Healthworks Medical Group agreed to stop using the extensive 150-question health questionnaire for future job applicants. As part of the settlement, the company also paid $1 in nominal damages for each class member, totaling $172,070. While the settlement didn’t include an admission of liability, it makes clear that pre-employment medical questions must be relevant to the job and comply with California law.

Job seekers or workers who face similar issues should know what steps they can take. It’s important to keep records of requests for medical information, save copies of applications and forms, and note any communications with the employer. This documentation can help show a pattern of unlawful practices if a legal claim becomes necessary. An experienced employment lawyer can determine whether you have a case and guide you through the next steps.

If you believe an employer has unlawfully asked you for medical information unrelated to your job or has taken adverse action because you refused to provide it, you are not without options. McCormack Law Firm helps workers resolve employment disputes and hold employers accountable. Our San Francisco employment lawyers can review your situation and advise you. Contact us today for a free initial consultation.

Disclaimer: This article is for information purposes only. McCormack Law Firm is not involved in this case.