 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Nachiem v. State6/27/2005
, and Nachiem declares that in May 2001 two supervisors told her that Anderson had said he would like 'to break my neck'. In June 2001 Nachiem turned in a report to Dr. Singh, alleging several nursing errors by Anderson and that he had called her a 'f '. Nachiem made two more complaints about Anderson through the Department hotline on January 18 and February 4, 2002. The hotline is an anonymous complaint process. About this same time, Nachiem herself was the subject of a complaint, and on February 12, 2002, her supervisor issued her a 'Counseling Memo'.
In September 2002, Dr. Singh demoted Nachiem from an RN2 to an RN1 nursing position for misconduct in violation of several agency policies and standards of nursing care. Dr. Singh concluded that Nachiem should no longer work as a charge nurse. The demotion resulted in a salary cut of approximately $7,000 per year. Dr. Singh based this demotion on alleged misconduct that occurred on June 18, 2002, while Nachiem was the charge nurse. The allegations included giving a supervisee nurse instructions on patient care that were inconsistent with the resident's hospice care plan (that the nurse should only make a perfunctory attempt at 'bagging' a patient); making an inappropriate comment suggesting the imminent death of the resident ('maybe {PB} would wing her way away also'); eating a portion of a resident's meal and then falsely reporting that he ate the entire meal; and sending a resident to bed early despite earlier caution from other nurses that going to bed early could further injure a stoma site and cause increased bleeding (the resident returned to the hospital two days later for assessment of increased bleeding at the stoma site).
Nachiem denies only the allegation of inappropriate comments, and contends that the other allegations must be looked at in context. For example, Nachiem asserts that she merely said that 'bagging' the patient was ineffective when there was no pulse, but that they should still do it (the patient's hospice plan did not include CPR). She says that it is routine to chart patients as having eaten an entire meal even when they don't eat certain items of the meal. As to the resident with the stoma site, she says she had sent him to bed after dinner as she had done on previous occasions when he seemed tired and uncomfortable, and that when she left, the resident was asleep on his back, with no sign of injury or bleeding.
REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
Nachiem bases her reasonable accommodation claim on the Department's refusal to hire her permanently for the same position in which she served on a temporary basis for approximately two years.
To prove a failure to accommodate, Nachiem must demonstrate that she had a disability; that she was qualified to fill available positions; that she gave notice to the employer of her disability and its accompanying limitations; and the employer failed to take affirmative measures to make those positions available to the employee. Hill v. BCTI Income Fund - I, 144 Wn.2d 172, 193, 23 P.3d 440 (2001). At issue here is the last requirement.
Nachiem's request was that she be 'be considered for work at a different shift other than nights'. Nachiem did not work night shifts after Fircrest first accommodated her request in February 1999. Nachiem's desire to have the permanent position when it became open is irrelevant, because an employer need not grant an employee's specific request for accommodation. Rather, the employer need only reasonably accommodate the disability. Pulcino v. Federal Express, 141 Wn.2d 629, 643, 9 P.3d 787 (2000). Because Nachiem is no longer working nights, as requested, Fircrest did not fail in reasonably accommodating her cla
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|