Resources: Blogs

All PEMs should be specifically tailored, as different jobs have different requirements

Blogs
|

The value of pre-employment medical examinations

Organisations have obligations to ensure the health and safety of their employees. One way for organisations to manage the risks is by making use of pre-employment medicals (PEMs).

Organisations have obligations to ensure the health and safety of their employees. One way for organisations to manage the risks is by making use of pre-employment medicals (PEMs).

For an organisation to utilise PEMs effectively it is important they understand:

  • The purpose for the assessment – why do you need to perform the PEM?
  • What is to be achieved from the PEM?
  • Is the correct PEM test being utilised to determine the information required?
  • Is the medical assessment/s in breach of anti discrimination laws?

The primary reason PEMs are conducted is to help an organisation ensure the person selected to perform the role is able to meet the inherent requirements of the role. In Duncan v Kembla Watertech Pty Ltd [2011] NSWADT 176, Ms Duncan was offered a position on the condition she satisfactorily completed a pre-employment medical. At the pre-employment medical Ms Duncan was found to have suffered from a number of medical conditions that would make it difficult for her to cope with the physical demands of the role. Relying on the medical practitioner’s opinion, Kembla Watertech advised Ms Duncan she was disqualified on the basis that she was unable to perform the essential parts of the job safely.

Ms Duncan lodged a complaint to the NSW Anti Discrimination Board which she alleged that Kembla Watertech had unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of disability, under the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW). In this case, it was determined that there was no unlawful discrimination because Ms Duncan’s disabilities rendered her unfit to perform the inherent requirements of the role and Ms Duncan’s complaint was dismissed.

Employers need to ensure that the candidate is able to perform the inherent requirements of the job role without risk of injury to themselves or their potential co-workers.

For a candidate, a PEM should be seen as an opportunity to fully and honestly inform their potential employer about any relevant medical conditions/injuries.

It also demonstrates that their potential employer places a value on their safety and the safety of others and that there is no risk of injury when the duties are performed. Further a PEM may detect a relevant medical condition that was not previously detected.

All PEMs should be specifically tailored, as different jobs have different requirements. For example, some employers may opt to utilise pre employment psychological screening to assess intelligence, personality, aptitude and skills – this type of medical can be used to determine whether or not the particular candidate exhibits behaviours or characteristics that are inconsistent with the culture of the organisation or the role requirements.

It is important that organisations comply with relevant legislation when adopting PEMs, particularly, anti-discrimination legislation. If your organisation is conducting PEMs make sure they do not expose your organisation to possible legal action by way of a discrimination complaint or a workers compensation claim.

In a future blog post we will discuss how your organisation should best manage the information it receives as part of a PEM.

 

Similar articles

How pre-employment checks minimise the risk of post-recruitment discoveries

Skeletons in the closet

You have hired an employee who appears to be perfect on paper, only to later discover that they have misrepresented or deliberately withheld information about their qualifications, employment history or problematic past. A simple and often overlooked way of mitigating unfortunate surprises like these is conducting pre-employment checks to verify whether a candidate is as suitable, qualified and impressive as their resume or interview has portrayed them to be.

Read more...

Sole trader convicted and fined for WHS breach resulting in death of worker

In a recent decision of the NSW District Court, a sole trader has been convicted and fined $100,000 for breaching his health and safety duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Cth), which resulted in workers being exposed to a risk of death or serious injury.

Read more...

Industrial manslaughter offence introduced in New South Wales

On 20 June 2024, the New South Wales Parliament passed legislation to include a new criminal offence of industrial manslaughter under work health and safety legislation.

Read more...

FWC finds that employer dismissed employee who refused to sign new employment contract

Black space

In its simplest form, an employment contract is a legally enforceable document between two parties where there is an offer and acceptance to be bound by its terms and conditions. Where an employment contract has been signed, it cannot be unilaterally changed by one of the parties – there must be agreement by both parties.

Read more...

Account Manager ordered to pay $500,000 to former employer

Find My Phone

A decision of the Federal Court of Australia early last year has provided support to employers who find themselves in the unfortunate position of suffering loss and damage as a result of an employee’s breach of their post-employment restraints.

Read more...

FWC finds safety critical employee’s drug use amounted to a valid reason for dismissal

Bad track record

In safety-critical workplaces, it is essential that employers not only have in place robust safety standards and policies but also that they regularly enforce them and penalise infractions appropriately.

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in workplace law and sports law.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.