Do you know how to navigate the risks surrounding fitness-for-duty evaluations? Learn how they can be a valuable tool without bringing risk.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, mental illness has the potential if untreated or unrecognized to disrupt lives at home and also in our workplaces. The intersection of stress, other changes in the work force, aging, and the prevalence of substance abuse may raise fitness questions. Businesses in the public and private sector are often unaware of how to set both the parameters or when to seek fitness-for-duty evaluations. The pitfalls and benefits of using fitness-for-duty evaluations will be discussed. The credentials of individuals who should be conducting these evaluations for an organization will also be examined. The separations between medical and mental health issues will be explored. Further, sensitivity to ADA accommodations is appropriately included in this material. Failing to do a fitness-for-duty evaluation properly has the potential to lead to liability and problems within the workplace. A fitness-for-duty evaluation that clears an individual to return to their position lessens risk to both the employee and the organization. If an employee is a valuable asset that might be returned to their previous level of functioning, the fitness-for-duty evaluation has the capacity to assist in arriving at that determination. An unbiased determination if a problem an employee is suffering from is remedial and transient or a condition that has become chronic and irreparable is necessary in order to determine if they should return to work. Further we need to determine if it is personality, workplace issues or mental illness fueling these concerns. How these conclusions are reached and documented is a central feature of this topic.