As a result of a lawsuit, a Kentucky employer must pay $450,000 to a former employee after throwing him a surprise birthday party. The man, who suffers from panic attacks, had apparently asked his employer not to throw him a surprise birthday party. It was evidently their normal practice for employees. It appears the company, Gravity Diagnostics, did not correctly diagnose the gravity of the request, as they went ahead and had the party. According to news reports, the man had a panic attack, was counseled the next day which caused another panic attack, and he was then terminated from the company for his behavior.
I’m going out on a limb here, but I’m guessing it wasn’t the bestest birthday he had ever had. But then again, it was no picnic for his employer, either.
It is said when his coworkers threw him a party despite his request they do not do so, it triggered the panic attack. He was called in for a meeting the following day, “where his superiors “criticized” him for how he had handled the party, resulting in another panic attack.” He was sent home for the remainder of the week. He then received a letter informing him that he had been fired. He sued the company for disability discrimination and retaliation.
His attorney told news sources, “At this point, he starts employing other coping techniques that he’s worked on for years with his therapist. The way he described it is he started hugging himself and asked them to please stop.” For their part, the employer claimed they believed he represented a potential threat to coworkers. The man’s lawyer not surprisingly rejects that, saying, “They made assumptions that he was dangerous based off of his disability and not off of any evidence that he was violent.”
I’ll probably get in some trouble here, as I do not suffer panic attacks, and am not afraid of surprise birthday parties. I do hug myself quite a bit, but that is only because I am adorable. Well, that, and I’ve never actually had a surprise birthday party, so hugging myself might be a subliminal consolation. Regardless, I have a tremendous amount of sympathy for the employer in this case.
We do not know who the man told regarding his desire not to have a surprise birthday party. Did the message get to superiors? Was it viewed as a lighthearted request based more on humility or shyness? And honestly, how can it be a surprise if everybody gets one and you know it is coming?
I suppose they could have surprised him on a break in a men’s room stall. That could certainly trigger a panic attack.
The employer argued that he represented a potential threat to his coworkers during the incident. It reported that other employees had to calm him down and escort him from the building after the party. A spokesperson said the employees did exactly what they were supposed to do, getting him “out of the building as quickly as possible while removing his access to the building… and sending out security reminders to ensure he could not access the building.”
Talk about a bummer of a birthday party. We are assuming they didn’t even let him cut the cake.
While we weren’t there and cannot judge (oh, who am I kidding? Of course, we can judge!), this doesn’t sound unreasonable. Workplace violence has increased dramatically in recent years, and employers have a responsibility to act if they even suspect someone represents a potential threat to the workplace. To fail to do so exposes them to tremendous liability and can cost innocent lives. The man’s lawyer maintained that they “made assumptions he was dangerous based off of his disability,” when the reality may have been they made those assumptions based off of his behavior.
And those can represent two entirely different possibilities. Once down that path, it was a no-win scenario for the employer.
I suppose the biggest surprise here is no surprise at all. The threat of litigation now hangs over virtually any ancillary actions an employer might take, even those designed to show appreciation and enhance the office environment. Office birthday bashes, like so many other functions once considered normal, may be going the way of carbon paper and the fax machine.
And if someone tells you they do not wish to partake in a company tradition, it may be in your best interest to listen to them.