Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com
  • I-Radar Link 
  • Current Conditions v2 
    Current Conditions in Scranton:
    45° WIND CHILL: 40°
    WIND HUMIDITY
    10 NNE 74%
    3 Day
    Forecast

    Sun
    54°

    Mon
    48°

    Tue
    52°
    Sponsored by
  • JobDig 180x150 
  • Employment Links 
    nexstar_180x502008-07-15-1216132870.jpg

    PHP2008-04-07-1207595029.jpg

    wbre2008-04-07-1207595037.jpg

    wyou2008-04-07-1207595045.jpg

  • Commerce Widget 
    Jobs
    Autos
    Truck Driver
    Drivers Job Source
    Owner / Operator
    A. Duie Pyle Companies
    Store Opportunities
    Gander Mountain
    Truck Driver
    Drivers Job Source
    Classifieds
    Real Estate

AdviceLibrary

Award-winning content covering key jobseeking issues

Personal Rights Versus The Organizations' Standards

by Joan Lloyd

Dear Joan:

We have several staff members that wear very strong perfume, which is causing others in the office to have headaches, nausea and sneezing. Our executive director suffers from severe allergies and asthma and she is also affected.

Our director put up signs all over the office stating “Scent Free Zoneâ€. She advised staff not to wear perfume because others are allergic. This posting has not been enforced by some managers because it is not a policy.

Our management staff is now attempting to draft a policy stating that staff can not wear perfume or perfumed lotions. However, a couple members of our management team say this is taking away their civil liberties. I say that someone’s health is more important than wearing perfume. I then stated that those staff members could start going home sick and then obtain a doctor’s note that the perfume is causing them to be ill in the work place, which could open another can of worms.

Could you please send me some examples of policies that you know are solid and will work for our office? I would really like to present them at our managers’ meeting.

Answer:

This stinky situation is stinky; however, I side with you. I sympathize with your colleagues who feel as though this is just one more nick in their civil liberties, but in the case of an organization, where people are forced into close quarters, there may be little choice.

The issue of personal rights versus the organizations’ standards is always a little sticky. Employees want to wear wacky hair, pierce body parts, dress the way they want—but the organization is paying them to perform and conform to the needs of the organization. The organization needs employees to present a consistent, professional image to customers, as well as to behave safely and respectfully.

This situation is not entirely unlike banning smoking, since it is offensive and unhealthy to others. Since some people are allergic to scents, their health can be affected, so an employer should make a reasonable accommodation.

I’m not a fan of creating a policy for every possible misstep, but since the poster campaign failed to get a responsible response, a policy may be necessary. The individuals on the management team, who feel this is a violation of civil liberties, are probably the ones who failed to comply with the request. Now, unfortunately, they will be forced to comply, which is not the ideal situation. If they enforce it with a chip on their shoulders, or say, “I don’t agree with this policy but senior management is making me do it…†poor morale and negative feelings toward the company are the result.

I can only speculate that if all managers had spoken with their staff and explained the fact that some of their coworkers are having severe allergic reactions to something so easily fixed, the issue would have gone away.

Daniel Finerty, attorney with Krukowski & Costello, S.C. agrees that a conversation may be better than a policy in this case. “While no legal precedent dictates that such a “fragrance free†policy is required, an employer is required under the Americans with Disabilities Act to engage in the interactive process with an employee to determine the appropriate accommodation for a disability. The question in any “fragrance sensitivity†case is whether the employee’s condition arises to the standard of a “disability†under federal or applicable state law, if the employee has requested accommodation for the problem or if the employer has responded reasonably. In most cases, the employee’s disability will likely not rise to that level.â€

Perhaps there is still an opportunity to reach consensus among the leaders, so that a policy isn’t necessary. If not, a simple policy statement should be written and then talking points created so every manager can take the policy to their staff and have a consistent message.

The policy can be added to the dress code portion of your handbook and simply state, “Since perfumes and perfumed creams can cause serious allergic reactions in others, please refrain from their use during work hours.â€

Joan Lloyd is an executive coach, management consultant, facilitator and professional trainer. Email your question to Joan at info@joanlloyd.com. Visit www.JoanLloyd.com to search an archive of more than 1200 of Joan’s articles. (800) 348-1944

  • JobDig 160x600