Page URL:

GINA guidelines to prevent job discrimination in the US

22 November 2010
Appeared in BioNews 585

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), responsible for enforcing federal anti-discrimination laws in the US, has issued its 'final rule' guidelines clarifying how federal laws should operate to prevent job discrimination on the basis of genetic information.

The EEOC's rules carve out narrow exceptions where employers may lawfully acquire genetic information including situations where information is taken from commercially and publicly available sources, such as newspapers.

Employers are prohibited from intentionally seeking genetic health information through snooping, searching the Internet or intentionally checking an employee's social network site without consent. But it may be lawful if family genetic health information is inadvertently learned from social networking sites, such as Facebook, where an employee has consented to their employer having routine access.

Congress enacted the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act 2008 (GINA), the world's first national genetics anti-discrimination civil rights law, to address concerns that individuals may avoid undergoing genetic testing for fear that it might be used to jeopardise their health insurance or employment.

Title II of GINA prohibits the use of genetic information in employment - including decisions relating to promotions, job assignments, training, and benefits. But GINA's employment provisions raised many questions, including the liability of employers upon learning of an employee's family medical history through Internet sources, informal discussions in the workplace and other non-intended means.

The EEOC rules clarify that an unintentional discovery of genetic health information will generally not be considered a breach of GINA. Other exceptions include obtaining information inadvertently through voluntary health services such as occupational wellness programmes offered to employees achieve healthy lifestyles. An employer may also lawfully ask general health questions, including how an employee feels or if doctors have detected a cancer early, where the employee has already volunteered disclosure.

GINA, which came into effect on 21 November 2009, applies to employers with at least 15 employees and other 'covered' bodies including employment agencies. The EEOC, established under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, enforces Title II of GINA which deals with genetic discrimination in employment. Title I of GINA covers the use of genetic data in health insurance, for which responsibility lies with the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and the Treasury.

The EEOC rules were issued on 9 November 2010 and will become effective from 10 January 2011.

Federal Register/ EEOC Regulations Under GINA
EEOC, US Government |  9 November 2010
GINA 2008
National Human Genome Research Institute, USA |  21 May 2008
Law bans using genetics to make employment decisions
9 News, Colorado |  17 November 2010
Questions and Answers for Small Businesses: EEOC Final Rule on Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008
United States EEOC |  9 November 2010
8 June 2015 - by Chee Hoe Low 
A company that conducted genetic tests on its employees for a disciplinary investigation violated US genetic anti-discrimination law, an Atlanta judge has ruled...
27 August 2013 - by Simon Hazelwood-Smith 
For the first time, a major health insurance company in the USA will require its customers to receive genetic counselling before it will pay for certain genetic tests...
12 September 2011 - by Julianna Photopoulos 
A new report published by the Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Pathologists and British Society for Human Genetics has encouraged the sharing of genetic information between family members and healthcare professionals as part of good clinical practice....
8 August 2011 - by Dr Rebecca Hill 
'The age of personalised medicine: genes, privacy and discrimination?' was the last in BioCentre's 2010/2011 symposium series 'Revolution, Regulation and Responsibilities', and promised to 'appraise current developments and consider the current legal and regulatory position for their use before taking time to reflect and assess the future impact on society'...
2 July 2010 - by Catherine Casserley 
People with a genetic predisposition to health problems may experience prejudice from employers, prospective employers or insurers due to a perception that they will develop a condition that could seriously affect their work and life. But can present UK legislation protect them against this potentially discriminatory treatment given that it is based on perceived - not actual - disability?
1 March 2010 - by MacKenna Roberts 
Canadians need better protection from genetic discrimination by insurers and employers, according to Winnipeg North MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis...
23 November 2009 - by Ben Jones 
The US Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act 2008 (GINA) has come into force introducing new protection against discrimination on the basis of genetic predisposition to disease. The act, signed into law in March of last year by President Bush, outlaws the usage of 'genetic information' to discriminate in the provision of health insurance and prohibits the usage of such information in the making of employment-related decisions such as hiring, firing or promoting....
15 June 2009 - by Dr Sarah Spain 
A study by researchers at the University of British Columbia in Canada and published in the British Medical Journal has shown that individuals at risk of Huntington's disease (HD) are often discriminated against by insurance companies, and also by their own relatives and friends. They also found that this discrimination was based on family history of the disease rather than any genetic test results....
23 March 2009 - by MacKenna Roberts 
Researchers at the University of Tasmania, Australia, have conducted the world's first study to have verified incidents of genetic discrimination and warn that such incidents are likely to increase without better safeguards. The five-year study surveyed 1,000 individuals who have had genetic testing during the past ten...
to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions

Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.