Know Your Rights: HIV/AIDS Rights

Lakay » Know Your Rights: HIV/AIDS Rights

Diskriminasyon

Tès ak Konfidansyalite (ale nan seksyon an)

Lòt lwa ki gen rapò ak VIH (ale nan seksyon an)

HIV/AIDS | Discrimination | Vermont

Does Vermont have laws protecting people with HIV from discrimination?

Yes. Vermont has enacted anti-discrimination laws protecting people with HIV from discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations.

Who is protected under the anti-discrimination laws?

Moun ki gen SIDA oubyen ki VIH pozitif, menm si yo pa gen okenn sentòm epi yo pa gen okenn siy maladi oubyen siy aparan.
People who have a record of or who are regarded or perceived as having HIV.
Under federal law, but not Vermont law, a person who does not have HIV, but who “associates” with a person with HIV—such as friends, lovers, spouses, roommates, business associates, advocates, and caregivers of a person with HIV.

Ki lwa ki pwoteje moun ki gen VIH kont diskriminasyon nan travay?

There are two general sources of law that protect people with HIV and AIDS from discrimination in employment. First, Vermont has a specific law prohibiting an employer from discriminating on the basis of a person’s HIV-positive test result (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 495 (a) (6)-(7)). This law also prohibits any employer from requiring an HIV test as a condition of employment.

More generally, people with HIV are protected under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Vermont Fair Employment Practices law, both of which prohibit discrimination on the basis of a person’s disability. For purposes of these laws, the word “disability” refers to a wide range of health conditions. The ADA covers employers with 15 or more employees. The Vermont law covers employers with one or more persons performing services in the state (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 495d (1)).

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by federal agencies, in programs receiving federal financial assistance, in federal employment, and in the employment practices of federal contractors.

For more information about employment discrimination in Vermont, visit Discrimination | Employment | Vermont

Kisa lwa anti-diskriminasyon sa yo entèdi?

Yon anplwayè pa ka pran aksyon negatif kont yon kandida oswa yon anplwaye tou senpleman paske moun nan gen yon andikap tankou VIH oswa SIDA. Sa vle di yon anplwayè pa ka revoke, refize anboche, reanboche, ankouraje, oswa fè diskriminasyon nan tèm oswa kondisyon travay, paske moun nan gen VIH oswa li gen SIDA.

Fòk nou konsantre isit la se si yon moun ki gen SIDA oswa VIH te trete yon fason diferan pase lòt kandida oswa anplwaye ki nan menm sitiyasyon.
Men kèk egzanp diskriminasyon ilegal:

Yon patwon pa ka refize anboche yon moun ki gen VIH paske li pè ke VIH la ka transmèt bay lòt anplwaye oswa bay kliyan.
Yon patwon pa ka refize anboche oswa pran yon desizyon sou anplwa ki baze sou posibilite, oswa menm pwobabilite, pou yon moun vin malad epi li pa pral kapab fè travay la nan lavni.
Yon anplwayè pa ka refize anboche yon moun paske sa ap ogmante prim asirans sante oswa konpansasyon travayè.

What may an employer ask about an employee’s health?

Under the ADA, prior to employment, an employer cannot ask questions that are aimed at determining whether an employee has a disability. Examples of prohibited pre-employment questions are:

Èske ou janm te entène lopital oubyen anba swen yon doktè?
Èske ou janm te resevwa benefis pou aksidan travay oswa andikap?
Ki medikaman ou pran?

After a conditional offer of employment, an employer may require a physical examination or medical history. The job offer, however, may not be withdrawn unless the results demonstrate that the person cannot perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation. The same medical inquiries must be made of each person in the same job category. In addition, these physical examination and medical history records must be segregated from personnel records, and there are strict confidentiality protections.

After employment has begun, an employer may only require a physical examination if it is job-related and consistent with business necessity.

How have the courts addressed fears that healthcare employees who perform invasive procedures, such as surgeons, will transmit HIV to patients?

The risk of HIV transmission from a healthcare worker to a patient is considered so small that it approaches zero. Nevertheless, in cases where hospitals have sought to restrict or terminate the privileges of HIV-positive healthcare workers who perform invasive procedures, courts have reacted with tremendous fear and have insisted on an impossible “zero risk” standard. As a result, the small number of courts that have addressed this issue under the ADA have upheld such terminations.

The employment provisions in the ADA provide that an employee is not qualified to perform the job if he or she poses a “direct threat to the health or safety of others.” To determine whether an employee poses a “direct threat,” a court analyzes:

The nature, duration, and severity of the risk;
Pwobabilite risk la; epi
Si wi ou non risk la ka elimine pa akomodasyon rezonab.

However, in the case of HIV-positive healthcare workers, courts have ignored the extremely remote probability of the risk and focused on the nature, duration, and severity of the risk. The following excerpt from a recent case is typical of the courts’ approach:

“We hold that Dr. Doe does pose a significant risk to the health and safety of his patients that cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation. Although there may presently be no documented case of surgeon-to-patient transmission, such transmission clearly is possible. And, the risk of percutaneous injury can never be eliminated through reasonable accommodation… Thus, even if Dr. Doe takes extra precautions… some measure of risk will always exist…” (Doe v. University of Maryland Medical System Corporation, 50 F.3d 1261 (4yèm Circ. 1995)).

It is important to note that only a small number of courts have addressed the rights of HIV-positive healthcare workers. The AIDS Law Project believes that these cases have been incorrectly decided and are inconsistent with the intent of Congress in passing the ADA. Because of the unsettled nature of the law in this area, a healthcare worker who is confronted with potential employment discrimination should consult a lawyer or public health advocate.

Evalye Diskriminasyon pa yon Anplwayè

Malgre ke li ka itil pou konsilte ak yon avoka, etap sa yo ka itil pou kòmanse konsidere ak evalye yon pwoblèm diskriminasyon nan travay potansyèl.

Konsidere diferans ki genyen ant enjistis ak diskriminasyon ilegal. An rezime, lalwa travay la se ke yo ka revoke yon anplwaye pou yon bon rezon, yon move rezon, oswa pa gen okenn rezon ditou. Yo ka revoke yon moun legalman pou anpil rezon, tankou yon move "konpatibilite pèsonalite". Sa yo pa ka revoke l pou yon... diskriminatwa rezon espesyalman entèdi pa yon lwa.
Pou w ka pwouve yon plent pou diskriminasyon (sa vle di, ke yo te revoke w, degrade w, elatriye akoz diskriminasyon epi non pa akoz yon rezon lejitim), ou dwe kapab montre bagay sa yo:

Patwon-an te konnen oswa te dekouvri ke ou VIH pozitif oswa ou gen SIDA;
Ou te kalifye pou fè fonksyon esansyèl travay la avèk oswa san aranjman rezonab; epi
Adverse action was taken against you because of your HIV or AIDS status and the pretextual reason given by
the employer for the adverse action is false.

Si patwon ou konnen ou gen VIH oswa SIDA, idantifye egzakteman ki moun ki konnen, kijan yo konnen, ak ki lè yo te dekouvri sa. Si ou pa di patwon ou, èske gen nenpòt lòt fason patwon an ta ka konnen oswa sispèk estati VIH ou a?
Konsidere rezon ki fè ou kwè ke yo ap trete w yon fason diferan akòz estati VIH ou a, tankou domèn sa yo:

Èske lòt anplwaye ki nan menm sitiyasyon yo te trete menm jan an oswa yon lòt jan?
Èske patwon ou an te swiv règleman pèsonèl li yo?
Èske tretman negatif la te kòmanse yon ti tan apre anplwayè a te aprann estati VIH ou a?
Èske ou te pèdi travay ou akòz maladi pandan nenpòt peryòd tan epi èske tretman negatif la te kòmanse lè ou te retounen nan travay?
Ki vèsyon patwon ou a pral bay sou evènman yo? Kijan ou pral pwouve ke vèsyon patwon an se fo?

Do you have any difficulty fulfilling the duties of your job because of any HIV-related health or medical issue? Does your condition prevent full-time work, or require time off for medical appointments, lighter duties, or a less stressful position? You might want to try brainstorming to create a reasonable accommodation that you can propose to your
Here are some points to consider:

Ki jan konpayi an fonksyone e kijan akomodasyon an ta mache an pratik?
Mete tèt ou nan plas sipèvizè w la. Ki objeksyon yo ta ka soulve kont aranjman rezonab yo mande a? Pa egzanp, si ou bezwen kite nan yon sèten lè pou randevou medikal, ki moun ki ta ranplase devwa w yo?

What Vermont laws prohibit discrimination in housing?

It is illegal under both Vermont law (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 9, § 4503), and the National Fair Housing Amendments of 1989, to discriminate in the sale or rental of housing on the basis of HIV status.

A person cannot be evicted from an apartment because of his or her HIV or AIDS status, or because he or she is regarded as having HIV or AIDS.

For more information about housing discrimination in Vermont, see: Discrimination | Housing | Vermont

Èske gen eksepsyon pou lwa sa yo?

An exception exists under Vermont law for rentals in buildings that consist of three or fewer units, where the owner or a member of the owner’s immediate family resides in one of the units (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 9, § 4504). In addition, the Fair Housing Act exempts, in some circumstances, ownership-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members.

Do Vermont laws protect against discrimination by health care providers, businesses, and other public places?

Yes. Under Vermont law (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 9, § 4502) and the ADA, it is unlawful to exclude a person with HIV from a public place (what the law refers to as a “public accommodation”) or to provide unequal or restricted services to a person with HIV in a public place. Under both statutes, the term “public accommodation” includes any establishment or business that offers services to the public.

Se poutèt sa, moun ki gen VIH yo pwoteje kont diskriminasyon nan prèske tout kote piblik oswa biznis, tankou ba, restoran, otèl, magazen, lekòl, pwogram pwofesyonèl oswa lòt pwogram edikasyonèl, taksi, otobis, avyon ak lòt mwayen transpò, klib sante, lopital ak kabinè medikal ak dantis, depi etablisman sa yo jeneralman ouvè pou piblik la.

For more information about public accommodations discrimination in Vermont, see Discrimination | Public Accommodations | Vermont

Does Vermont have public accommodation laws that specifically pertain to schools?

Yes. In addition to the general prohibition against discrimination in places of public accommodation, Vermont has a specific law that prohibits a school district or educational institution from discriminating against any applicant or student based on HIV status (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 1127). In addition, school districts and educational institutions may not request or require that an applicant or student take an HIV test. A student or applicant who is harmed by a violation of this statute may bring a lawsuit in Superior Court for injunctive relief and damages.

Does Vermont have public accommodations laws that specifically pertain to health care?

Yes. Vermont also has a specific law prohibiting discrimination by healthcare providers or facilities against people with HIV. In addition, healthcare providers and facilities may not require an HIV test as a “condition for receiving unrelated treatment or service” (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 1128). An individual may bring a lawsuit in Superior Court for injunctive relief and damages based on violations of this statute.

Is discrimination by healthcare professionals against people with HIV still a problem?

Kwè li ou pa, moun ki gen VIH toujou ap fè fas ak diskriminasyon nan men lopital, doktè, dantis ak lòt founisè swen sante. Diskriminasyon sa a ka pran fòm yon refi kareman pou bay sèvis medikal oswa yon referans ilegal akòz estati VIH yon pasyan.

What types of arguments are made by doctors who discriminate against people with HIV and are they legitimate?

Doktè yo tipikman eseye jistifye diskriminasyon kont moun ki gen VIH ak youn nan de agiman sa yo:

“Trete Moun ki gen VIH se Danjere” (Gen kèk doktè ki refize trete moun ki gen VIH paske yo pè pou yo pa transmèt VIH); epi
"Tretman Moun ki gen VIH Mande Ekspètiz Espesyal" (Gen kèk doktè ki refere pasyan yo bay lòt founisè swen medikal ki baze sou yon kwayans ki pa kòrèk ke doktè jeneralis yo pa kalifye pou bay swen pasyan ki gen VIH).

Both an outright refusal to provide medical treatment and unnecessary referrals on the basis of a person’s disability are unlawful under the ADA and Vermont law.

Ki jan tribinal yo ak ekspè medikal yo te reyaji a agiman sa yo?

"Trete moun ki gen VIH se danjere"

Doctors and dentists may claim that a refusal to treat a patient with HIV is legitimate because they fear they might contract HIV themselves through needle sticks or other exposures to blood. However, studies of healthcare workers have concluded that the risk of contracting HIV from occupational exposure is minuscule, especially with the use of universal precautions.

Se poutèt sa, an 1998, Lakou Siprèm Etazini an te pran yon desizyon nan ka a Bragdon kont Abbott that healthcare providers cannot refuse to treat people with HIV based on concerns or fears about HIV transmission (524 U.S. 624 (1998)).

In addition to the legal perspective, both the American Medical Association and the American Dental Association, and many other professional healthcare organizations, have issued policies that it is unethical to refuse treatment to a person with HIV.

"Pou trete moun ki gen VIH, sa mande yon ekspètiz espesyal"

Nan ka sa yo, merit yon plent pou diskriminasyon depann de si, ki baze sou prèv medikal objektif, sèvis oswa tretman pasyan an bezwen an mande yon rekòmandasyon bay yon espesyalis oswa si li nan kad sèvis ak konpetans founisè a.

Nan Etazini kont Morvant, yon tribinal federal te rejte reklamasyon yon dantis ki te di pasyan ki gen VIH bezwen yon espesyalis pou swen dantè routin (898 F. Supp. 1157 (ED La 1995)). Tribinal la te dakò ak temwayaj ekspè yo ki te di ke pa gen okenn fòmasyon espesyal oswa ekspètiz, apa de sa yon dantis jeneral genyen, ki nesesè pou bay tretman dantè bay moun ki gen VIH. Tribinal la te rejte espesyalman agiman dantis la ki te di ke li pa t kalifye paske li pa t rete okouran de literati ak fòmasyon ki nesesè pou trete pasyan ki gen VIH. Pandan ke ka sa a te leve nan kontèks swen dantè, li aplikab nan lòt anviwònman medikal tou.

What are the specific provisions of the ADA that prohibit discrimination by healthcare providers?

Under Title III of the ADA (42 U.S.C. §§12181-12188), it is illegal for a healthcare provider to:

Deny an HIV-positive patient the “full and equal enjoyment” of medical services or deny an HIV-positive patient the “opportunity to benefit” from medical services in the same manner as other patients.
Etabli "kritè kalifikasyon" pou privilèj pou resevwa sèvis medikal yo, ki gen tandans pou elimine pasyan ki teste pozitif pou VIH.
Bay pasyan ki VIH pozitif oswa ki pa bay pasyan sèvis "diferan oswa separe" nan "anviwònman ki pi entegre a".
Refize sèvis medikal egal a yon moun ke yo konnen ki gen yon "relasyon" oswa "asosyasyon" ak yon moun ki gen VIH, tankou yon mari oswa yon madanm, yon patnè, yon pitit, oswa yon zanmi.

What specific healthcare practices constitute illegal discrimination against people with HIV?

Lè nou aplike dispozisyon espesifik ADA ki anwo yo nan pratik swen sante, pratik sa yo ilegal:

A healthcare provider cannot decline to treat a person with HIV based on a perceived risk of HIV transmission or because the physician simply does not feel comfortable treating a person with HIV.
A healthcare provider cannot agree to treat a patient only in a treatment setting outside the physician’s regular office, such as a special hospital clinic, simply because the person is HIV-positive.
A healthcare provider cannot refer an HIV-positive patient to another clinic or specialist unless the required treatment is outside the scope of the physician’s usual practice or specialty. The ADA requires that referrals of HIV-positive patients be made on the same basis as referrals of other patients. It is, however, permissible to refer a patient to specialized care if the patient has HIV-related medical conditions which are outside the realm of competence or scope of services of the provider.
A healthcare provider cannot increase the cost of services to an HIV-positive patient in order to use additional precautions beyond the mandated OSHA and CDC infection control procedures. Under certain circumstances, it may even be an ADA violation to use unnecessary additional precautions that tend to stigmatize a patient simply on the basis of HIV status.
A healthcare provider cannot limit the scheduled times for treating HIV-positive patients, such as insisting that an HIV-positive patient come in at the end of the day.

Ki kèk remèd potansyèl ki genyen pou diskriminasyon anba lalwa federal la?

To pursue a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act for employment discrimination, the employer must have at least 15 employees. A person must file a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 180 days of the date of the discriminatory act. A person may remove an ADA claim from the EEOC and file a lawsuit in state or federal court.

To pursue a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act for discrimination in a place of public accommodation, a person may, without first going to an administrative agency, file a claim in state or federal court for injunctive relief only (i.e., seeking a court order that the discriminatory conduct cease). Money damages are not available for violation of Title III of the ADA unless they are sought by the United States Department of Justice. However, a person may recover money damages under the Federal Rehabilitation Act in cases against entities that receive federal funding.

Pou pouswiv yon reklamasyon anba Lwa Reyabilitasyon an, yon moun ka depoze yon plent administratif nan biwo rejyonal Depatman Sante ak Sèvis Sosyal federal la epi/oswa depoze yon pwosè dirèkteman nan tribinal la.

Pou pouswiv yon plent anba Lwa Nasyonal sou Jistis nan Lojman pou diskriminasyon nan lojman, yon moun ka depoze yon plent nan Biwo Lojman ak Devlopman Iben Etazini nan yon ane apre vyolasyon an. Yon moun ka depoze yon pwosè tou nan dezan apre vyolasyon an. Yo ka depoze yon pwosè kit yon moun te depoze yon plent nan HUD kit li pa te depoze yon plent.

Resous

For more information about the employment complaint process visit:

For information about filing a discrimination complaint under the ADA, visit ADA.gov: Depoze yon plent

Ka ak Defans

To see HIV/AIDS cases or advocacy which GLAD has been directly involved with in Vermont, go to: Ka ak Defans – GLAD and under “By Issue” select “HIV/AIDS” and under “By Location” select “Vermont.”

Nouvèl ak Kominike pou laprès

To see news and press releases about HIV/AIDS in Vermont, go to Nouvèl ak Kominike pou laprès – GLAD and under “By Issue” select “HIV/AIDS” and under “By Location” select “Vermont.”

HIV/AIDS | Testing & Privacy | Vermont

What laws in Vermont govern informed consent for HIV testing?

Vermont does not have a statute mandating specific and written informed consent for an HIV test. An HIV test may therefore be taken based on general medical consent. Vermont, however, does have a specific law requiring that insurers who test applicants for HIV follow specific procedures, including obtaining HIV-specific written consent.

What procedures must an insurer follow when testing an applicant for HIV?

An insurer in Vermont cannot require that a person reveal having taken HIV tests in the past. The insurer, however, can request that an applicant or insured take an HIV test. In addition to obtaining HIV-specific written informed consent for an HIV test, the insurer must provide specific information to every applicant. This information includes:

An explanation of the HIV test, and its relationship to AIDS;
The limitations on the accuracy and meaning of the test results, and the importance of seeking counseling about the test results;
The insurer’s purpose in seeking the test;
An explanation that the individual is free to consult with a personal physician or counselor about HIV testing and may obtain an anonymous test before being tested by the insurer;
An explanation that the person has the choice to receive the test results directly or through another person designated in writing; and
A statement that the insurer may disclose the test results to others— such as its medical personnel— in order to make underwriting decisions.

An insurer may disclose to the Medical Information Bureau, a centralized insurance industry database, that an individual who tested HIV-positive received an abnormal blood test result, but may not specify HIV-positivity. In addition, an insurer may not disclose HIV-related information to any insurance broker or agent.

The information required to be provided to the applicant or insured must be read aloud to the insured as well as provided in writing (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 8, § 4724 (20) (B) (i)).

Are there circumstances under which Vermont law permits HIV testing, even against a person’s wishes?

Yes. Vermont law provides for HIV testing under one unique circumstance. A court may order that a person convicted of an offense involving a sexual act be tested for HIV and that the result be disclosed to the victim (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3256. The term sexual act, defined in Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3251, means: 1) contact between penis and vulva, mouth and penis, mouth and vulva, or any intrusion of a body part or object into the genital or anal opening of another; and 2) which creates a risk of transmission of HIV as determined by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control). Records of any court proceedings are sealed.

In addition, the law provides that a defendant who has been charged with a sexual act offense but has not yet been convicted may offer to be tested for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. The test result may not be used as evidence at the defendant’s criminal trial, but if the defendant is ultimately convicted, the court may consider the offer for testing as a mitigating factor (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3256 (f)).

What laws in Vermont protect the privacy of medical information, such as HIV?

Under general common law principles, physicians, health care providers, and institutions cannot disclose private medical information to others without the patient’s consent.

Èske yon moun ki gen VIH gen dwa sou vi prive li dapre Konstitisyon an?

Anpil tribinal jwenn ke yon moun gen yon dwa konstitisyonèl pou l pa divilge estati VIH li. Tribinal yo baze dwa sa a sou Kloz Pwosesis Jis Konstitisyon Etazini an, ki kreye yon enterè nan vi prive pou evite divilgasyon sèten kalite enfòmasyon pèsonèl.

The constitutional right to privacy can only be asserted when the person disclosing the information is a state or government actor— e.g. police, prison officials, or doctors at a state hospital.

Pou detèmine si te gen yon vyolasyon dwa sa a pou vi prive, tribinal yo ap balanse nati entrizyon nan vi prive yon moun ak pwa yo dwe bay rezon lejitim gouvènman an pou yon politik oswa yon pratik ki lakòz divilgasyon.

Are there circumstances under which Vermont law permits the disclosure of HIV status, even against a person’s wishes?

Yes. Vermont law provides for disclosure of HIV status under specifically prescribed circumstances.

Court Ordered Disclosure

Under Vermont law, a court may order that an individual disclose HIV-related testing or counseling information if it finds that the person seeking the information has “demonstrated a compelling need for it that cannot be accommodated by other means” (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 12, § 1705 (a)). In making such a determination, the court weighs the need for the disclosure of a person’s HIV status against the privacy interest at stake. In recognition of the importance of maintaining the privacy of HIV status, the Vermont Legislature has also directed courts in such cases to consider whether the public interest may be disserved by disclosure of HIV status that deters future testing and may lead to discrimination.

The law contains numerous procedural safeguards, including a requirement that the name of the test subject not be disclosed, the right of the test subject to participate in the court hearing, and a requirement that any court order specify who may have access to the HIV-related information and prohibitions on future disclosure.

HIV and AIDS Reporting for Epidemiological Tracking

All states require that numerous health conditions be reported to state health officials in order to assess trends in the epidemiology of diseases and develop effective prevention strategies. Vermont law requires that a broad range of health care providers, hospitals, and managed care organizations report a diagnosis of HIV infection or AIDS to the Department of Health (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, §1001 (a)). The patient’s name is included in the report. Vermont law specifies that:

An individual must be informed prior to an HIV test that a positive test will require reporting of the individual’s name to the Department of Health and that there are testing sites that provide anonymous testing that are not required to report positive results.
The Department of Health is prohibited from disclosing a public health record identifying a person as having HIV or AIDS without the individual’s voluntary written authorization, including to other states, the federal government, or other Vermont state agencies.
Department of Health records identifying a person as having HIV or AIDS may not be used in a civil, criminal, or administrative legal proceeding, or for employment or insurance purposes.

Ka ak Defans

To see HIV/AIDS cases or advocacy which GLAD has been directly involved with in Vermont, go to: Ka ak Defans – GLAD and under “By Issue” click on “HIV/AIDS” and under “By Location” click on “Vermont”

Nouvèl ak Kominike pou laprès

To see news and press releases about HIV/AIDS in Vermont, go to: Nouvèl ak Kominike pou laprès – GLAD and under “By Issue” click on “HIV/AIDS” and under “By Location” click on “Vermont.”

HIV/AIDS | Other HIV-Related Laws | Vermont

Kisa sa vle di lè yon anplwayè ka oblije bay yon "akomodasyon rezonab" pou yon anplwaye ki andikape?

People with disabilities, such as those living with HIV/AIDS, may experience health-related problems that make it difficult to meet some job requirements or duties. For example, a person may be exhausted or fatigued and find it difficult to work a full-time schedule.

In certain circumstances, the employer has an obligation to modify or adjust job requirements or workplace policies in order to enable a person with a disability, such as HIV or AIDS, to perform the job duties. This is known as “reasonable accommodation.”

Men kèk egzanp aranjman rezonab:

Modifye oswa chanje tach oswa responsablite travay;

Etabli yon orè travay a tan pasyèl oswa modifye;
Pèmèt konje pandan lè travay regilye yo pou randevou medikal;

Reasignasyon yon anplwaye nan yon travay ki vid; oubyen
Fè modifikasyon nan plan fizik yon sit travay oubyen achte aparèy tankou yon anplifikatè telefòn pou pèmèt, pa egzanp, yon moun ki gen pwoblèm tande fè travay la.

Kijan yon moun ka jwenn yon aranjman rezonab?

Se responsablite anplwaye a, sof si gen kèk eksepsyon, pou l inisye demann pou yon aranjman. Anplis de sa, yon anplwayè ka mande yon anplwaye pou bay kèk enfòmasyon sou nati andikap la. Anplwaye ki gen enkyetid sou divilgasyon estati VIH/SIDA yo bay yon sipèvizè ta dwe kontakte Liy Enfòmasyon Legal AIDS Law Project la pou yo ka fè estrateji sou fason pou yo adrese nenpòt demann sa yo.

Pa gen yon seri aranjman fiks yon anplwaye ka mande. Kalite aranjman yon anplwaye ap depann de bezwen patikilye sitiyasyon chak anplwaye.

Èske yon anplwayè oblije aksepte yon demann pou yon aranjman rezonab?

Yon patwon pa oblije akòde chak demann pou yon aranjman. Yon patwon pa oblije akòde yon aranjman rezonab ki pral kreye yon "chay ki pa nesesè" (sa vle di, difikilte oswa depans enpòtan pou operasyon patwon an). Anplis de sa, patwon an pa oblije bay yon aranjman rezonab si anplwaye a pa ka fè fonksyon travay la menm avèk aranjman rezonab la.

Kilè yon "akomodasyon rezonab" pou yon anplwaye se yon "chay ki pa nesesè" pou yon anplwayè?

Lè tribinal yo ap detèmine si yon aranjman yo mande kreye yon chay oswa yon difikilte san nesesite pou yon anplwayè, yo egzamine yon kantite faktè, tankou:

The employer’s size, budget, and financial constraints;
Pri pou aplike aranjman yo mande a; epi
Kijan akomodasyon an afekte oswa deranje biznis patwon-an.

Ankò, yo egzamine chak sitiyasyon ka pa ka.

An employer only has an obligation to grant reasonable accommodation if, as a result of the accommodation, the employee is then qualified to perform the essential job duties. An employer does not have to hire or retain an employee who cannot perform the essential functions of the job, even with a reasonable accommodation.

Èske lalwa Vermont yo pèmèt moun ki sèvi ak dwòg pou enjeksyon gen aksè a zegwi pwòp pou anpeche transmisyon VIH?

Wi. A la limyè prèv syantifik klè ki montre pwogram ki ofri aksè a zegwi pwòp: (1) diminye nouvo enfeksyon VIH ak epatit B ak C; epi (2) ogmante kantite moun ki itilize dwòg enjektab ki refere pou tretman abi sibstans, Lejislati Vermont la te vote yon lwa an 1999 ki pèmèt pwogram echanj zegwi nan kominote a (Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, §§ 4475, 4476 & 4478).

Under this law, an AIDS service organization, substance abuse provider, or licensed health care provider or facility may apply to the department of health to operate a needle exchange program. Importantly, a person who possesses needles obtained through such a program is not in violation of the laws making it a crime to possess drug paraphernalia.

Ki jan yon moun ka montre ke li te jwenn zegwi legalman atravè yon pwogram echanj otorize?

Needle exchange programs provide identification cards for consumers who are enrolled in the program. Regulations of the department of health mandate that the cards shall not identify the consumer by name, but rather use a confidential identifier system (see Depatman Sante Vermont, Gid Operasyonèl pou Pwogram Echanj Zegwi ki Òganize nan Kominote a, Jiyè 2010).

Am I able to purchase a syringe over the counter at a pharmacy?

Wi. Vermont pa gen okenn baryè legal pou achte yon sereng nan yon famasi.

Resous

For a list of HIV/AIDS organizations in Vermont where you can get support and information, visit AIDS and HIV Service Organizations in Vermont.

For information about Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) treatment, visit Planned Parenthood of Northern New England’s PrEP/PEP page.

Ka ak Defans

To see HIV/AIDS cases or advocacy in which GLAD has been directly involved in Vermont, go to Ka ak Defans – GLAD and under “By Issue” select “HIV/AIDS” and under “By Location” select “Vermont.”