How much to disclose to supervisor?

My boss and I are having a friendly disagreement on this topic. We have an employee who is not FMLA eligible, but is eligible for our company's medical leave of absence. Her doctor completed the FMLA HCP cert (we use that for medical leaves as well). The doctor did not state the diagnosis (which we don't need to know anyway). However, the employee has personally told us (HR) that she may have cancer, which is why she needs off for further testing.

Here's the disagreement: my boss feels we should let her supervisor know what she has told us (she may have cancer) or we would be withholding important info. I think all the supervisor needs to know is that she has a condition which qualifies her for a leave of absence. Chances are that she will tell her boss the diagnosis herself and we will be off the hook. But if she doesn't, or if we run into a situation like this again...

Regardless of HOW we know the diagnosis (written on form or told verbally) do we disclose to the supervisor or don't we?

Comments

  • 21 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I think you need to keep it confidential. It is the EEs confidential information to share or not, not yours.

    This reminds me of an old saw: "I can keep a secret, it is all of the people I tell that cannot."

    Do not disclose.
  • I agree with marc. If there is not a significant business need for a supervisor to know, such as emergency care or potential transmittable virus etc., the privacy/confidentiality should be maintained.
  • I agree with the above posters as well. If the employee wants to tell the supervisor then so be it. It is not up to you to divulge medical information to others at work. There is not a need to know.
  • Count me in with the others. Don't disclose.
  • Agree with others. Ask your boss WHY the supervisor needs to know. Sure the information is important to the employees individual health, but why is it important to the supervisor?
  • Thanks for all the replies! He says that it is important information and it would be wrong for us to withhold info we have from her supervisor. He thinks the supervisor is entitled to that info in order to run his department as best he can. My boss does not agree to divulging it to anyone else besides the supervisor though.
  • How would knowing she has cancer would enable him to run the department better?
  • Popeye,
    I must disagree with one thing you said in : "I agree with marc. If there is not a significant business need for a supervisor to know, such as emergency care or potential transmittable virus etc., the privacy/confidentiality should be maintained"
    It does not matter if they have a potentially transmittable virus. You still cannot tell. You must train 1st responders on universal precautions, and bloodborne pathogens but you cannot violate their privacy letting people know say that they have AIDS.
    My $0.02 worth.
    DJ The Balloonman
  • Touche' Balloonman!! You are 100% correct. Guess I was thinking with the wrong side of my brain when I wrote that. I have just dealt with a "contagious" problem here and had that on my mind and how we handled it and used transmittable
    instead of contagious. Thanks for setting me straight.
  • Unless your organization is radically different than mine, telling a supervisor something like this is equal to putting it on the Internet.

    There is no reason for a supervisor to know about this employee's personal medical issues. This will only cause the employee to have to keep reliving the diagnosis over and over again as other people start asking questions.

    Please respect this person's privacy and feelings.
  • Thanks everyone for the informative replies. I showed them to my boss and I think he got the point. The employee in question did share the situation with her supervisor on her own, and the supervisor has been very supportive. Again, thank you to all who responded - this forum is great!
  • This reminds me of a CFO who insisted on asking the female accountants in his department whether they intended to become pregnant in the near future, because if so, he wouldn't be giving them a raise. After all, it's work related - if they take three months off to have a baby, they're not at work!

    I agree with the others - if the employee wishes to share the details with her supervisor, so be it. But it's not the place of HR or other management people to be disclosing an employee's personal medical situation to others for any reason. All the supervisor needs to know is that the employee will be off, and then kept up to speed on an anticipated date of return to work.
  • Please tell me your experience with that CFO was back in the 50's! I'd have to shoot him. (figuratively not literally of course)
  • Nope - this was in the early 1990's. Same guy who told me that my "Workers' Comp 101" training for managers was about as credible as a pretty girl trying to sell Ford pickup trucks. That message takes a "real man in a flannel shirt & blue jeans - unless, of course, the pretty girl is wearing a bikini."
  • I hope my frankness won't offend anyone. There is absolutely NO reason, none, for a supervisor to know of a diagnosis. Knowing a diagnosis, whether it's a hangnail, a hernia or a hysterectomy; none of that will enable one to better operate their department. I also wonder 'who' your boss is. If it's an HR professional who has been to at least one seminar, he/she should know better. If not, why does even THAT person know the reported diagnosis?
  • No offense taken, Don. I really appreciate all the candid opinions I have received. My boss and I agreed that I would post this question here and let the feedback fall where it may. In answer to your question (and in defense of my boss), he is honestly quite the consummate HR professional. Very "up" on laws, regs, ee relations, and so on. This is why it really threw me for a loop when we discussed the situation and he told me his point of view. Most other times when we disagree, I can at least understand his reasoning - but this time I just can't.
  • I agree with all others & can't think of a business reason for divulging the information. It would be nice for the supervisor to know, as it clears up any mystery (whenever there's mystery I think people immediately thing the worst about the situation or the person), but it's not for you guys to tell - it's up to the employee. Hopefully, you can talk your boss out of their position. Good luck!
  • One more professional opinion probably doesn't matter at this point, but I agree that keeping the diagnosis quiet is part of HR's responsibility. If the employee chooses to share, that's the employee's business. Do you have a company policy that supports an employee's right to keep medical information private? We do--sort of like the don't ask, don't tell philosophy. FMLA criteria is a good guide for medical LOA circumstances where employee eligibility for FMLA is not met. Nothing in the criteria supports that employers need to know a diagnosis. From a business perspective, all the supervisor needs to know is that an employee is on approved LOA, will be out for a certain amount of time, and may return at a given date in the future. Our business happens to be primarily healthcare. We have a similar situation going on right now. Because of the nature of our business, we have a lot of nurses on our staff. At the risk of offending any potential nurses who may read this, my experience has been that our nursing staff seems to have a natural curiosity about employee medical diagnoses. I've decided that some of it may come from their having access to patient records, and maybe they forget to draw the line between patients and employees. All I know is that I refuse 100% of the time to divulge employee diagnoses and, when necessary, will go one step further to insist that a supervisor, who really wants to discuss an employee's diagnosis, not do so with me or anyone else.


  • There is absolutely no reason to divulge someone's personal medical information to a supervisor or anyone else except strictly on a "need to know" basis in order to properly put them on leave.

    Putting myself in the employee's place, I'd not tell anyone unless I absolutely had to. When someone has a serious medical condition, the last thing they want is for everyone to know..have a million questions asked of them...etc. and so on. We have had several employees with cancer diagnosis and the last thing they want is to be the topic of conversation in the workplace. Let the employee tell who they want to know themselves and leave it at that. The only thing the supervisor needs to know is that this employee qualifies for a medical leave and it has been approved.
  • >he is honestly quite the consummate HR professional. Very "up" on laws, regs, ee relations, and so on>

    I have to think, however, if he is all of those things, he would be the last person in the building to suggest a supervisor has a need or a right to know of someone's personal medical information. Perhaps he missed that seminar.
  • This is HR 101. I don't get your boss's perspective at all. Something seems amiss. But I am glad to hear that you have a healthy respect for him (her?), and that it sounds as though he doesn't mind having his judgement questioned.
    Hopefully he will change his mind.
    Cristina
Sign In or Register to comment.