Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Reasonable Accommodations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sarpy County tables reasonable-accommodations policy after privacy and HIPAA concerns raised
Summary
Board members asked HR to revise language clarifying when HIPAA authorizations may be requested and how medical information will be stored; the item was tabled for re-review.
At its May 21 meeting the Sarpy County Personnel Policy Board tabled a proposed reasonable-accommodations policy after members raised concerns about medical privacy, HIPAA authorization language and consistency with the county’s FMLA procedures.
Board members and HR staff discussed how much medical documentation the county should request when reviewing accommodation requests. A board member who identified herself as an occupational therapist said she was concerned that the draft asked for a breadth of medical information that could discourage employees from pursuing accommodations. She recommended the policy more closely mirror the county’s FMLA documentation practices and clarify when additional information would be requested.
Jodi Riddell, Sarpy County’s HR director, said the county uses a standardized form similar to the FMLA form and does not seek full medical records. "It's very similar to our FMLA ... we have a form that we have employees fill out. We send it with them to have their medical provider fill it out," Riddell said, adding the county accepts a provider letter or a completed form and keeps the documentation in a confidential medical file rather than a personnel file.
Board members sought clearer language in three areas: (1) clarify that the physician’s accommodation recommendation (the letter or form) is generally sufficient; (2) explain that a HIPAA authorization would be requested only when the initial documentation is insufficient and further information is necessary to evaluate the accommodation; and (3) state how any medical information obtained will be stored and who will have access, consistent with the county’s FMLA policy.
After discussion the board voted to table the reasonable-accommodations policy and asked HR to return a revised draft. The motion to table carried (motion by Jonathan Davidson; second by Donald Gifford). Riddell said staff would revise the policy and either bring the updated draft back to the board or move it forward after incorporating the requested language.
Why it matters: Reasonable-accommodation procedures determine how employees with disabilities request workplace changes and how the county balances accommodation needs with undue hardship defenses. Clear, consistent documentation and storage rules can affect employees’ willingness to request accommodations and the county’s compliance with disability-discrimination laws.
Meeting context: The item drew the meeting’s most substantive discussion about privacy and process. No public commenters appeared for this item.
Ending: HR will revise the draft to clarify the role of the accommodation letter/form, the limited circumstances under which a HIPAA authorization would be requested, and the storage/handling of medical documentation; the item will return to the board for further consideration.
