Dealing With The Eeoc

[desiderata310]

Folks, I'm tired. I really am.
For almost a year my therapist has been trying to convince me to get a service dog to help mitigate my PTSD. It's been a shitty road to try to navigate in my own head that this is bad enough to warrent this accomodation.

I'm trying to remove the emotion from this post. I'll save that for my diary.

Today, I made an appointment and went to speak to the EEOC person at the university.

I explained (with Char in tow) why I was there very briefly and that I was asking for the best way to approach the university for accomodation. I never said what Char was for or what my disability was. I did not use the term "therapist" but rather used the term 'doctor".

She took down specifics of my position: did I have an office?; share an office space? what were the essential functions of my position? (I'm upper management. I have my own office that I don't share. I manage 5 full time and 60 or so part time employees and I do a lot of paper work and budget work)

She immediately began calling him an Emotional Service Animal, pulled out a worksheet that I'd seen before and explained that there were no provisions made for ESA's by the state and that they would not allow him- especially as this was a dog free campus.

She referenced this site:
Link Removed

Honestly, I was a taken aback and had trouble following but I had seen this site before. It took me a while to find it again. I could NOT, for the life of me, follow what she was trying to say. I am pretty sure I was dissociating at this point and was struggling, even with Char there.

She smiled and said, 'you understand, we just can't accomdate you because he's an Emotional Support Animal.

I explained that he is in the process (as he is in training) of learning a task and that my understanding was that this makes him a service dog.

She asked me at this point what that task was:. I explained that he was being trained to learn when I was having a flashback and to lick me to bring me back to present.

She then said "you understand I'm not allowed to ask what your disability is.." blah blah blah.
I was a bit irritated at this point but smiled politely and said " yes, I do know, I'm sure you can guess at this point what my disability is."

She made one more pass at calling him an ESA and I broke down and called him a PSYCHIATRIC service dog. Not a term I was wanting to use- especially not in this meeting which had obviously turned south.

A bit of an aside here: making it legal to ask what task the dog performs but not what the disability is, is KIND of pointless. Most ANYONE can put two and two together.

I reiterated that my understanding of the law through my research, the person helping to train and my DOCTOR all had agreed that this was a service dog.

She made the standard promise of anonimity and said she would consult with legal for the university.

I smiled, thanked her and left. I was nothing but curtious but inside I was kind of dying.

The trainer was a bit miffed when I told her of my experience today and sent me this link:
Link Removed

my therapist's response was a bit more visceral and even in my very despondent place very much appreciated:
"they're just being huge dicks"

The question I really have to ask myself is how much more can I fight? Do I really want to wind up suing my employer?(NO!)

I wasn't in this to become a trailblazer. I just wanted a little relief.

Thoughts? anyone? Am I out of line?

 

[Friday]

You're not out of line, you're kicking ass & taking names... Although you might be jumping the gun, a little.

Once Char has his certification as a SD? Or SDiT so you can thunk that (& the ADA) on the table? Seems like that will cut through about a mile of red tape (leap emotional quagmires in a single bound ;)). I can't say that there won't be rodents of unusual size on the other side of that quagmire to have to contend with, but I'm rather fond of peace through superior fire power. And boy oh boy do stacks of official paperwork (the SD / SDiT/ ADA) qualify as big guns.

 

[desiderata310]

@FridayJones
That's the fun part: there are not "certifications" not legal ones anyway. The ADA recognizes that many handlers self train their own dogs so there is not certification.

We never got as far as that anyway.

 

[Kailani]

I agree with the above post! Ha . You already know and I would just reiterate know your rights and only reveal what is absolutely required by law.

 

[Hope4Now]

I'm clueless about this. But I'm responding because I had a visceral reaction to your post. F them. Come on, people! Let's let people have whatever they need to make life work. REALLY? This kind of bureaucracy makes my skin crawl. Fair does NOT mean equal. Fair means leveling the playing field. How f-ing long will it take this stupid country to make the translation from ADA law into practice. Blah! Makes me so mad on behalf of you and so many others.

Just angrily standing with you. Sorry if too much.

 

[Fadeaway]

Seriously, I would talk to her again, take and take a tape recorder. She said things that clearly she wasn't allowed to say or ask. The minute she said Psychiatric, I would have to say that she put her job on the line.

 

[joeylittle]

OK. That's just one bad hire in the EEOC office.

any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability.”..Explicitly does not apply to emotional support animals.

I think you want to get your therapist to collaborate with you on writing up what the work and tasks are - that is the key element here. That sheet is clear that in CA there is no 'official' certification that can be required for a service animal - it's all about the work and tasks.

I don't know what the tasks are for a PTSD dog, but some things that come to mind are:

• stand between you and strangers, to mitigate stress which could lead to a medical crisis.
• alert you to your symptoms in order to avoid disruption of work
• ensure your safe travel to and from work by alerting to symptoms and/or getting you to help in case of a medical crisis

I do know that you should never need to describe the work in more detail than the above. Basically, they cannot ask you "what kind of medical crisis?", nor can they ask "what are your symptoms"?. You only need to describe the action that the service animal does, that's it.

Have it in writing, don't deviate from your script, and if possible, get another EEOC rep (though I can see where she might be the only one).

 

[Kefira]

Legally speaking in some states she won't have protections until she's finished with training. It does depend- only service dogs are federally protected and some states do have a specific portion of their own laws addressing dogs who are in training. Once she knows tasks and (recommended) can pass a PAT you have federal protections.

It is my understanding from the organization I'm being placed through that they fall under the medical alert category and can be referred to as such rather than psychiatric specifically.

I use broader categories of tasks for the "two task" question to avoid outing myself unless further pressed - biometric alert/feedback and environmental assessment. Most people just want to know that it's NOT an ESA with a handler who thinks they have access rights.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

[delete]

 

[desiderata310]

@Kefira I've been thinking of calling him an "alert dog" but I like yours better. My trainer, assures me that in CA my SDiT has the same rights as a full SD. As long as I have control and he's not being a disturbance he's legal.

@itsKismet I am not sure I am ready to take on the State of California over this but yes, I'm sure I could take them to court. Again, I wasn't up for trailblazing.

The whole thing was demoralizing to say the least.

 

[joeylittle]

But because you're an educator/administrator.....I guess you don't have those same rights. Quite interesting. (I'm sure you DO have those rights, rather they're harder to get in some places of higher education.)

No, she has them, same as anyone. It's spelled out on this link:

She referenced this site:
Link Removed

And @Kefira, it seems that in her state there is no definition of 'training', nor can any agency in the state mandate it. The only thing they are quite clear on is that emotional service animals are not allowed, and I'm guessing that the distinction is training for tasks vs no training for tasks.

@desiderata310, I really don't think you'll need to get into a lawsuit. Get the vest, @Kefira states this really well, you can use it:

I use broader categories of tasks for the "two task" question to avoid outing myself unless further pressed - biometric alert/feedback and environmental assessment.

Those are the tasks, that is the work, the end. it just sucks that the EEOC woman didn't actually help you make this work for you, she seemed to think her job was to be a stumbling block. Blech.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

[edit]