4. Q: But to limit the police department’s liability, I need to get a medical approval that it’s o.k. for a job
applicantto take the physical fitness test. Doesn’t the ADA create a catch-22 for police departments?
A: No, the ADA’s prohibition on medical exams does not make it illegal for a police department to ask an
applicant to provide a certification from a doctor that he or she can safely perform the physical fitness test.
The ADA allows an employer to require a limited medical certification in these circumstances. The medical
certification should only indicate whether or not the individual can safely perform the test and should not
contain any medical information or explanation. The police department may also ask the applicant to sign a
waiver releasing the employer from liability for injuries during the test resulting from any physical or mental
disorders.
5. Q: Recently a job applicant for a police officer’s job came into the police department with fingers that were
visibly impaired. The police department required that he demonstrate that he could pull the trigger on the
police issue firearm and reload it before a conditional job offer was made. Did this violate the ADA?
A: No. If an individual has a “known” disability that would reasonably appear to interfere with or prevent
performance of job functions, that person may be asked to demonstrate how these functions will be performed,
even if other applicants are not asked to do so.
6. Q: Can I refuse to consider an applicant because of his current use of illegal drugs?
A: Yes, individuals who currently engage in the illegal use of drugs are specifically excluded from the definition
of an “individual with a disability” when an employer takes action on the basis of their current use.
7. Q: What about applicants with a history of illegal drug use? Do they have rights under the ADA?
A: It depends. Casual drug use is not a disability under the ADA. Only individuals who are addicted to drugs,
have a history of addiction, or who are regarded as being addicted have an impairment under the law. In
order for an individual’s drug addiction to be considered a disability under the ADA, it would have to pose a
substantial limitation on one or more major life activities. In addition, the individual could not currently be
using illegal drugs. Denying employment to job applicants solely because of a history of casual drug use would
not raise ADA concerns. On the other hand, policies that screen out applicants because of a history of addiction
or treatment for addiction must be carefully scrutinized to ensure that the policies are job-related and consistent
with business necessity. If safety is asserted as a justification for such a policy, then the employer must be able
to show that individuals excluded because of a history of drug addiction or treatment would pose a direct threat
-- i.e., a significant risk of substantial harm -- to the health or safety of the individual or others that cannot be
eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation. Again, individuals who currently use illegal drugs, even
users who are addicted, may be denied employment because of their current use.
8. Q: May an applicant be asked prior to a conditional job offer whether he or she has ever used illegal drugs
or been arrested for any reason?
A: Yes. It does not violate the ADA to ask whether the applicant has ever used illegal drugs or been arrested
for such use. However, a law enforcement agency may not ask at the pre-offer stage about the frequency of
past illegal drug use or whether the applicant has ever been addicted to drugs or undergone treatment for
addiction.