What if the disability you're disclosing is related to the job you're applying for? For instance if you're interviewing to work with autistic kids, is it OK to mention you're autistic yourself and can understand autistic kids better than neurotypical or allistic kids? Or you're applying to work at a mental health clinic, is it OK to share you struggled with mental health issues that many of the clients struggle with?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times have changed. I do some interviewing of recent college grads for our org and a significant percentage of them mention being in therapy.

I'd be glad that they were upfront about this, so I'd know not to hire them. I don't want mentally unstable people working for me! Also, I would not want to deal with them missing work for therapy.

Major ADA violation. The OP is right that potential employees should not be discussing their need for accommodations before they are hired, because people like you will discriminate against them. But if you denied an employee time off to take care of a medical problem (which is what therapy is) you would 100% lose any resulting lawsuit.

NP and while I agree with this, the sheer amount of therapy appointments have exploded in the past few years. I’m a high school teacher in a core advanced subject. Several kids, different kids, miss class every week for their therapy appointments. They say they try to vary the time to miss different classes. On any given day 2-3 might miss part of a class and say it’s for therapy. I could take not take that much leave for work if I saw a therapist. I don’t know anyone my age working full time who goes to therapy as much as these teens.

Anonymous wrote:For many kids, their mental health issues (usually self-diagnosed) are their whole identity.

I think there is sadly some truth to this.

Mental health status sharing these days is almost like stating name, pronouns, gender, etc.

I think it’s ridiculous. It’s one thing to discuss accommodations with HR. As a hiring manager, hard pass on someone talking about mental health in an interview. That’s a flag for high maintenance/high drama (not that they have issues… that they feel need to share).

And very hard pass on having my own kids have these types of teenagers as their role models. It’s not de stigmatizing, it’s attention seeking and obnoxious.

I work at a law firm and upon meeting an employee for the first time (she'd already been hired) she told me how her sister is institutionalized for schizophrenia and how she has borderline personality disorder and how she speaks to partners (F-bombs, demanding they do things, etc.) and I remember thinking "I don't know how she got in here, but she definitely won't last" and just this week I noticed we have someone else in her role so she's gone.

Her FIRST time meeting a partner and she's telling me super personal stuff about her life and family?! No.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My children went two sleep away camps in NC both are well known and have been mentioned on DCUM as "great camps"

I wish the hiring process did weed out these kids. At least they are being upfront.

Because the camps sure were not.

One told us "oh yes we dropped the ball on this one", "would you like to put your check in for next year now".

My response "Hell no"

What was your issue with the camps?

NP. Presumably a mentally ill teen being in charge of their kid

Eh. Majority of teens are concivnced via YouTube/tiktok that they have depression, anxiety, adhd etc. Diagnosis is based on your narrative of yourself. These things are way over diagnosed in teens

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My children went two sleep away camps in NC both are well known and have been mentioned on DCUM as "great camps"

I wish the hiring process did weed out these kids. At least they are being upfront.

Because the camps sure were not.

One told us "oh yes we dropped the ball on this one", "would you like to put your check in for next year now".

My response "Hell no"

What was your issue with the camps?

NP. Presumably a mentally ill teen being in charge of their kid

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sit on a lot of hiring panels and stuff like this is rampant. I’ve had interviews where instead of answering our questions, they just want to know about work life balance. Asking about whether they can end work at 2pm and work again at 9pm. Another wanted to travel the world while working remotely from hotel rooms. But yes, please don’t tell me about mental health issues in an interview. I work at a flexible place but people really push the boundaries

So much of this lately.
1.Demanding top level c-suite compensation at entry level.
2. Discussing diagnostic information in a field where descression with information is key.
3. Showing up to interview looking absurd, dirty sweatpants, cartoonish piercing and hairstyles which I could overlook if they weren't in a crop top too.
4. Expecting summers off or drastically reduced hours fully remote. We are not a remote business.
5. The hiring committee jokes that dx and activist message of choice is the new he/she/they label.

This is so fake, which is good, because you'd be speed running for a lawsuit if it were real.

I'd rather hire someone in treatment than hire someone who refuses to get evaluation or diagnosis.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who are trying to get jobs basically taking care of younger kids at a sleep-away camp are telling you their mental health limitations and need of accommodations? No way would I hire someone who needs to be taken care of to take care of other kids.

Then it's a good thing you aren't in charge of hiring. If someone has a disability but can perform the core functions of the job if given reasonable accommodations, it's against the law to refuse to hire them because of that disability.

Nothing the OP said suggested that these teens couldn't do the job or that the requested accommodations were unreasonable.

It’s not against the law to refuse to hire them because you sense they have an inability to keep private information private until it needs to be disclosed. I wouldn’t hire anyone telling me their personal problems in a first interview either. Especially if the potential job requires them to be entrusted with private information of others.

You would be risking an ADA case. As well you should. The only private info they e disclosed is their own.

Good luck proving and winning your case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sit on a lot of hiring panels and stuff like this is rampant. I’ve had interviews where instead of answering our questions, they just want to know about work life balance. Asking about whether they can end work at 2pm and work again at 9pm. Another wanted to travel the world while working remotely from hotel rooms. But yes, please don’t tell me about mental health issues in an interview. I work at a flexible place but people really push the boundaries

So much of this lately.
1.Demanding top level c-suite compensation at entry level.
2. Discussing diagnostic information in a field where descression with information is key.
3. Showing up to interview looking absurd, dirty sweatpants, cartoonish piercing and hairstyles which I could overlook if they weren't in a crop top too.
4. Expecting summers off or drastically reduced hours fully remote. We are not a remote business.
5. The hiring committee jokes that dx and activist message of choice is the new he/she/they label.

Do you mean discretion?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sit on a lot of hiring panels and stuff like this is rampant. I’ve had interviews where instead of answering our questions, they just want to know about work life balance. Asking about whether they can end work at 2pm and work again at 9pm. Another wanted to travel the world while working remotely from hotel rooms. But yes, please don’t tell me about mental health issues in an interview. I work at a flexible place but people really push the boundaries

So much of this lately.
1.Demanding top level c-suite compensation at entry level.
2. Discussing diagnostic information in a field where descression with information is key.
3. Showing up to interview looking absurd, dirty sweatpants, cartoonish piercing and hairstyles which I could overlook if they weren't in a crop top too.
4. Expecting summers off or drastically reduced hours fully remote. We are not a remote business.
5. The hiring committee jokes that dx and activist message of choice is the new he/she/they label.

Discretion?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who are trying to get jobs basically taking care of younger kids at a sleep-away camp are telling you their mental health limitations and need of accommodations? No way would I hire someone who needs to be taken care of to take care of other kids.

Then it's a good thing you aren't in charge of hiring. If someone has a disability but can perform the core functions of the job if given reasonable accommodations, it's against the law to refuse to hire them because of that disability.

Nothing the OP said suggested that these teens couldn't do the job or that the requested accommodations were unreasonable.

It’s not against the law to refuse to hire them because you sense they have an inability to keep private information private until it needs to be disclosed. I wouldn’t hire anyone telling me their personal problems in a first interview either. Especially if the potential job requires them to be entrusted with private information of others.

You would be risking an ADA case. As well you should. The only private info they e disclosed is their own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times have changed. I do some interviewing of recent college grads for our org and a significant percentage of them mention being in therapy.

I'd be glad that they were upfront about this, so I'd know not to hire them. I don't want mentally unstable people working for me! Also, I would not want to deal with them missing work for therapy.

Major ADA violation. The OP is right that potential employees should not be discussing their need for accommodations before they are hired, because people like you will discriminate against them. But if you denied an employee time off to take care of a medical problem (which is what therapy is) you would 100% lose any resulting lawsuit.

Which is why it’s better to avoid hiring them in the first place- for whatever reason you want to call it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times have changed. I do some interviewing of recent college grads for our org and a significant percentage of them mention being in therapy.

I'd be glad that they were upfront about this, so I'd know not to hire them. I don't want mentally unstable people working for me! Also, I would not want to deal with them missing work for therapy.

Major ADA violation. The OP is right that potential employees should not be discussing their need for accommodations before they are hired, because people like you will discriminate against them. But if you denied an employee time off to take care of a medical problem (which is what therapy is) you would 100% lose any resulting lawsuit.

Tangential question. How does sick leave work then, if an employer needs to allow an employee time off for any medical matter at any time? (I agree time off for mental health matters is no different than time off for physical health matters.)

Depending on the nature of the job, it could be unpaid (but job protected) time off or it could be allowing that employee to flex their hours or something else that works for everyone. FMLA can also be taken intermittently, if there is significant time away from work (and the employee is eligible, which a new employee wouldn't be). Not all health concerns would necessarily meet the ADA definition of disability.