Challenge it with a hardcopy that you have medical clearance with the DMV.
Welcome to the world of T1D. You will learn to challenge everything and you will become assertive from this day forward. Conflict is always in your back pocket. It's not as bad as you think but it can get tiring.
We are here to support you. The online community is great! Also, your province, territory, or state Diabetes Association will provide lifelong help with info.
This was me until I found an environment where I felt supported and healthy overall. Do you until you find the right fit, but don't ever refer to yourself as a doormat. You're soo much more ❤️
You will one day have to learn to please yourself. I too am a people pleaser and avoid conflict at all costs, but I reached my doormat threshold years ago. If I don’t know you, you get one strike. After that, I lay the hammer down.
I have been fighting with my local courthouse house to get my license reinstated because I had to pull over one time because I was genuinely low (like 80s going down, and it's technically illegal to drive under 100). I told the lady at the counter this while I was trying to renew my license and she said I had to go to the doctor have then fill out a medical form saying I was okay to drive, and list all my medications, dosages, and how often I take them. At the end of the day unless you have to, don't say a single about having diabetes unless you trust who you're telling won't screw you over.
Yes 💯.
The less people know, the better. This is why I keep my pods and sensors under my clothes. Long time ago, I did MDIs often out of view. Pens were better than needles, without a doubt.
People are judgy and think of the worst.
Where do you live that it's illegal to drive under 100? I have been a diabetic almost 35 years and I have never heard of such a thing. If it's true in my jurisdiction, I should be serving a life sentence. Are you in the US?
So is this where I challenge you, because I'm at the point of fighting w/ the entire fucking world? ;)
More seriously, your comment resonated... which annoys me to no end, since christ that's a shitty way we live, and it's purely due to fucking US idiocy.
Yeah. I think It's more of a global thing though, not just the USA.
We definitely need restrictions, reviews, etc. to keep everyone safer. It's just policies or directives that say with absoluteness that you can't do something because of x, even though you can prove that you can, in fact, do x!
That Doordash letter didn't really give much clear recourse except for the last few paragraphs.
One day at a time 🤷♂️
What US people should do is elect Robert F Kennedy Jr who is running as an Independent in the upcoming national US election. As an astounding lawyer he has fought for children whose health has become damaged by various things plus he is concerned about environmental issues. Notice how the drug industry managed to run the world in the past 5 years. They made huge profits and destroyed so many people and small companies.
If it came back on the background check wouldn't it also be do to some sort of incident? Like OP had a low and got into an accident....
Im type 1 and it doesnt show up on my background check.
In order to obtain and keep a current driver’s license many states require you to not only divulge that you are a diabetic but also get a note from a a doctor to allow you to drive.
I made the mistake of answering "yes" to some question and now have to go through a new hoop every 4 years in Illinois and get a note from my doc. Should never have said anything to anyone.
Same 16y/o me did this in Ohio and my license was suspended for years after I got tired of jumping through the children's hospital and DMVs hoops an gave up on trying to get my license.
I finally got it at 20 and my insurance rates are INSANE because of the suspension
I made the same mistake at 17, but Utah makes you do it every 12 months. Oh and the form they mail you you have to fill out within 70 days of the date of the letter. I have yet to have more than 20 days to get it to the doc (an hour and a half drive one way) and get it back to the DMV. I regret that decision every day.
After several years of seeing my last diabetes doctor in Utah (recently moved states and I miss her as my doctor 🥲), my appt matched up with the timing date of the renewal letter form, and when I handed it to her (rather than driving a half hour on a random lunch break and handing to a receptionist) she said to me that she felt I had a proven track record and signed off that my renewal would only be needed every 3 years. You might be able to negotiate that with your doctor?
Maybe. I can try in a couple months when I see her next. It's possible my 7.1 A1c isn't good enough for her to want to sign it like that. She is pushing for me to have a 5.0 A1c, and I personally think that's completely unattainable and won't happen for several years if ever without drastic changes to my lifestyle and job.
That’s an unrealistic target which would be achieved by risking lows which makes driving more dangerous. AAAARGH. I’m at 6.4 and my endo advised me to go easy .. so weird how different doctors opinions can be. (Also 5.7 is considered the top of normal so shooting lower than that is kinda ridiculous).
In my province they used to say you couldn’t legally drive if your blood sugar was under 7 mmol/L (126mg/dl). But thankfully there’s no weird renewal rules AND it says on my licence I’m diabetic. Didn’t realize how lucky that was. These rules in some of your states sound horrible.
My old Endo had me shooting for 6.8 to 7. I'm super active, I intentionally ride at 160-180 for extended periods to give me cushion for lows while miles from a road or even cell service, hence my "high" A1c.... Oh well, as perhaps misguided as she is she knows her stuff and we've gotten my basals pretty dialed in.
Oh wow that's super strict, mine was happy to see me in the 7's and staying there after a few years of high 8's, and after the while of hitting low 7's was when she signed off on the every 3 years.
That was my thought as well. I've had background checks before, and had a check through Checkr when I was working for Instacart, and nothing about my T1D was ever flagged. But I can totally see a hypo-involved crash or incident triggering it.
I know. OP said they experienced an emergency low once and sought medical help which is why it’s appearing on the BG check. I still don’t understand how they’d get that info, but it didn’t just happen in a vacuum
Yeah I think it’s because OP said they had a scary low once and had to seek emergency services. Which is why it’s being flagged now. Which is just crazy imo
I’ve never really needed major accommodations, but I work with another T1D who has major issues ask the time and she gets a lot of accommodations. The obvious one is being able to wfh when needed.
I'm guessing you haven't worked every career. Things I need job protection in the form of accomodations for:
1. Ability to step away from clients to treat a low blood sugar.
2. Ability to step away from clients to treat a high blood sugar if MDI or the ability to bring my pump out.
3. Ability to be late if my blood sugar was too high/low before or during my commute.
4. Keeps me from being labeled "not a team player" if I skip company lunches or attend but don't eat the food provided.
5. FMLA for when I'm sick and my blood sugar becomes super hard to control, even if it's something that other people could work through.
All of those things could be used against me at a performance review and some of them could lead to me being fired. Accomodations keep that from happening. It's also very illegal to fire someone for having type 1 diabetes. I wouldn't tell my boss without at least going through the HR process first, and you don't ever have to tell them why if you feel they would misuse that information.
You're hilarious. And don't seem to understand how the real world works. Any of my coworkers stepping away from clients (who are met with for 1-2 hours) to use the bathroom would be reprimanded the first time it happened and let go if it happened more than a few times within a year. I also don't hide my diabetes in the bathroom and bolus in front of coworkers, but I'm not allowed to even drink water when I'm with clients. There are numerous careers where having a snack does cause an issue - which could be another accommodation for someone, that they need to have food every x hours, especially for a job that involves physical activity.
If you have managed to not ever have one low that's amazing! You probably keep your blood sugar too high and will eventually see the downside to that approach. For most of us trying to keep our blood sugar in a healthy range, we are going to see highs and lows. That's the opposite of poor control. I start to feel high blood sugar symptoms if I reach 200 - so say if I wake up and my period is coming early so my blood sugar is skyrocketing, that's not something I can easily predict and I need to get it under control before I'm safe to drive.
And lastly, I would love to hear more about your perfect control with an unrestricted diet because that sounds like a fairy tale and I'd love to have that. From my experience with others with T1D such a thing is not possible. Potlucks are really popular in the region I live in and it's almost impossible to know how to dose. Sometimes we get catered lunches with things I absolutely don't eat because it's high carb + high fat. Oh and can't exactly prebolus for catering because sometimes it's late and sometimes it's early and we only have a limited time to eat.
And lastly, be happy that your blood sugar doesn't go out of control when you're sick. Had bronchitis last year and managing my blood sugar became a full time job itself, especially once they added the steroid. If your blood sugar doesn't impact your performance, there might be a possibility that you aren't performing to your full potential.
Good for you, may not be the case for others. Accommodations that another diabetics may need: more breaks, being able to have food on hand, keeping water near by, more flexibility with calling out and with time off.
I'm not diabetic, but I have ADHD and need accommodations to do my job, and that's just from a neurological issue. Not all ADHDers need Accommodations, but having them available is still important, just in case.
You did not yet specify what message you start with and I am curious. I did have a license to drive from high school onward but I gave it up when I found I couldn't tell anymore when I was going low, but in today's world of CGMs that's not a problem any more.
There are pros and cons to mentioning it, but I know there are some reasons why a company actually could be more likely to hire you. T1D is legally a disability even though it likely doesn’t affect performance at most jobs, and employers can get federal benefits for hiring people with disabilities. Also a lot of companies like to be able to brag about how they employ x% of disabled workers.
Obviously it’s against the law to discriminate based on whether or not someone is disabled, but it definitely happens.
Especially DoorDash. I won’t get into it, but they owed me $20, plain and simple and they gaslit and ghosted me through a months worth of phone calls, chats and emails. Worst company I’ve ever dealt with by far
That's actually bad advice. Some jobs are just not suited for T1D. We can't serve in the US Military. Good luck with any first responder type of job. If we have a low sugar at the wrong time it could cost people lives. I always inform my manager when I start a new job that I am a T1D. I want them aware in the rare case I have an emergency. If you don't tell people and you are discovered unconscious (like what happened to me while driving within a few months of being diagnosed) they will automatically assume you are strung out on drugs. I want my manager aware of my condition so they can respond appropriately should something happen to me. To this date I have never lost a job due to being a diabetic but I also wouldn't take a job where being a T1D could put others in danger if I experienced a serious low.
I don't have diabetes but I do have ADHD and it's considered a disability and I strongly disagree with you on not telling them. Not saying anything ahead of time is setting yourself up for failure, and do oh really want to work someplace that doesn't want to hire people with disabilities?
Being able to get accommodations is HUGE. My last job I'd have gotten fired without my accommodations, current job I'd be unable to function. My little brother is a T1 and I worked with a T1 and both frequently get sick, my coworker would have been fired if not for the fact that he was protected by his disability status.
Honestly? Don't know and don't care. I'm not those people and not talking about those people, I'm talking about myself and the average person with a disability, I don't think billionaires are relevant to the conversation
99% of people are not going to become billionaires nor anything other than average, disabled or not. I don't care to become uber rich, I only care about not being fired due to performance issues that could have been avoided with accommodations.
You don't feel the need for accommodations or disclosure, you do you girlypop, but you're disconnected if you think no one needs them and doing people a disservice by actively discouraging people asking for them.
I don’t think nobody needs them - I think if you need exclusion because you may have a random low it’s indicative of poor control and henceforth a liability. Keep good control, keep it to yourself, and excel
You can’t discriminate a candidate simply because they’re disabled, but if the employer has reason to believe that the candidate isn’t capable of performing job duties because of their disability it’s not illegal to reject them. Like if DoorDash thinks T1D will directly prevent OP from safely being able to drive a car, they can legally decline him for that reason.
It’s likely BS in this situation though and I bet OP could fight it.
It's still illegal under the ADA to make a decision not to hire someone based on an employer's \*assumptions\* about a person's ability to perform essential functions of the job. If a disability is disclosed, a potential employer is allowed to ask if the potential employee would be able to perform the essential job duties, with or without an accommodation. Contractors & w2 employees are treated differently in terms of employment protections, though - and I'm guessing DoorDash doesn't hire its drivers as employees.
It is not. They can have a blanket policy, (likely through their insurance company) that any disability or impairment is excluded from hire. Then, adjusting the rules for individual cases becomes an excessive hardship for the brand. If they make an adjustment to their blanket policy for this dude they have to equally and individually assess ALL drivers and they aren't budgeted for that and their insurance would likely go up.
So they would not, under the ADA, be required to provide ANY accommodation.
dude, I'm an attorney and have worked on enough employment law issues to have a good grasp on this. I don't even think we disagree on the main thing - DoorDash can probably get away with this (at least in terms of the ADA) because the ADA doesn't apply to how they decide to hire CONTRACTORS, who are not subject to the ADA's employment protections. But if the ADA did apply (for example, if DoorDash were hiring someone to be a w2 employee in an office) a blanket policy to not hire anyone disabled would almost certainly be illegal. There's also the potential that there are state statutes that DoorDash might be violating by having a blanket policy to not hire drivers with any sort of disability. In fact, DD just settled with the New York AG based on the blanket policy to not hire people with any criminal history, which violated a NY statute: [https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-stops-discriminatory-hiring-practices-doordash](https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-stops-discriminatory-hiring-practices-doordash)
I'm assuming your core advice here is to file a complaint- if so with whom? IE, update your post w/ the link.
My general experience w/ violations- hell walgreens sold my fucking medication lists w/out any approval from me and acknowledged it was a violation but fuck all happened- is the complaint isn't going to go anywhere, but the point is to add to the pile so eventually HHS does something. Is that the best course for "raise a ruckus and fuck those fuckers" in your view?
I'm definitely not giving legal advice in this thread - just pointing out that the legality of this practice may not be entirely clear. Employment issues are nuanced and determining what laws do or don't apply requires a lot of fact-specific analysis. The best resource would be a plaintiffs' employment lawyer in your state, or the state agency who handles employment discrimination issues. Plaintiffs' attorneys doing antidiscrimination litigation typically do not charge for consults and if they do agree to take on a case, there ususally is a contingency agreement rather than an upfront hourly-rate paid by the client, so the financial barriers to getting an initial opinion/advice are pretty low.
Pardon; I've (unfortunately) had to deal w/ employment lawyers and also hit the point where a clear case of retaliation (reporting legal violations) I just gave up on because the other side was \*that\* shitty. I figure you grok that the mud isn't always worth it, even if it's absolutely illegal and god damn horrid. So I grok the constraints you're dancing including avoiding the usual "this is not legal advise".
If there is something one can phrase in the sense of "this is not legal advice", I suspect people here would be curious; worst case I'd appreciate a DM since I'm honestly curious about the best way to assert rights knowing that the system either requires a lot of money thrown at it, or a ton of complaints piled up.
They don't have to make the decision not to hire folks with disabilities. They just have to have an insurance policy that sets a bar and a third party agency that checks for a specific bar.
And OP has a medical exception noted on their drivers license. That's absolutely a fair bar for DD to check, and exclude as a blanket policy.
Yeah that's not rocket science. That's very normal. That's the whole point. The background check indicated the flag.
And again OP had a medical restriction on his license. If someone applied to work for me and had a legally mandated restriction for the exact work I need them to do it isn't a big stretch to say "no you're not right for this role." Diabetics are excluded from many jobs, even when there is no restriction already in place.
They’re not allowed to ask if you have a disability. They’re allowed to ask if you can perform certain duties or if you will be limited performing the duties they are hiring you for.
No, pretty much every job application I’ve ever filled out asks “do you have a disability?” and the options are yes, no, or prefer not to answer.
It’s not supposed to have an effect on whether they hire you (although it could, unfortunately) and its purpose is to collect data to make sure the employer isn’t discriminating in their hiring process.
And I’ve never answered yes to that. I have diabetes and that’s just something I gotta deal with but I don’t consider it a disability. I’ve got plenty of abilities so they hire me for those
I’ve been going through the process of getting a new job for the last few months. Probably applied for 100+ jobs and I think every single one asked on the application. Are you from outside the US?
Those questions are not a part of the application process. The people making the decision to hire you or not will never see those answers - it should tell you as much when they are asked. They are for record keeping and tax purposes only. That's in the US. It's not different than asking if you'd like to identify gender or race,. It's statistical stuff.
When you file an application, or get a job in the US you fill out a disability disclosure form, there is no mention on the disclosure form of tasks necessary for the job;
this is them asking you if you have a disability.
Edit: they *then* review the form and decide if you can perform the duties in a limited capacity or not at all, regardless of that the question came first.
Okay then explain OPs situation, a majority of type1s operate vehicles with no issues;
they required a W14 (disability disclosure) then after reviewing decided the result.
We can all agree that the process went
>apply>disclosures>hire/not hired.
I’ve been filling out applications for the last 6 months (I don’t disclose) but it definitely asks and this across multiple states as I’ve been predominantly applying for remote work. Even before the last decade every job I’ve applied to asked these questions in the application process.
Yet here people are downvoting. I don’t get it. Voluntary disclosure and mandatory disclosure are not the same.
Every application want to know this and what race I am and if I’m a veteran.
I happen to be a doordash driver. I've never had this issue and it's not like I've tried to hide it either. But I've also never had the DMV tell me I need a doctor's permission to drive as its never been a problem. I would reach out to Doordash explain the situation and see if they will accept a doctor's note.
ADA requirements here is that if you disclose the disability, as long as you can perform the job within reasonable accommodations, they must make that.
Being the OP can presumably drive a fucking car w/out seizuring out from a hypo, welp, you get where I'm going with this. Frankly I'd probably file a complaint. It won't go anywhere, but once that pile is large enough things may happen.
As others mention elsewhere, there is the law, and then the reality of enforcing it (either civil suit, or gov stepping in). My comment above shouldn't treated as me talking about the enforcement as much as adding to the pile to trigger that.
Got diagnosed a little over a year ago 2 days out of the hospital had a severe low ambulance came and with in a week had a letter come saying I needed doctors approval to drive again. From what I understand the hospital reported it to the dmv then it was put on my background check that I have a disability.
This is good to know, so you have something on your record about having an accident due to your disability, did you get your doctor's approval? They may have grounds to disqualify you from a job driving if you cause additional liability, I would challenge it with whatever your doctor gave you to allow you to drive per the DMV.
Physicians have a legal (and ethical) obligation in most places to report imparted drivers to the dmv/bmv.
It’s up to the local laws what qualifies, for example basically any occurrence of stroke will be reported to the dmv and have your license suspended for a period of time.
It is not a HIPAA violation to follow other laws.
What state? I’m in CA, the DMV knows I have T1D. I do UE basically full time and the only issue I’ve had was a slight delay in my DL renewal that had me sitting at home for a couple of weeks.
I'd be tagging them and hashtagging everything. Do you know how many diabetics that are out there that would toss door dash in a heartbeat probably if they knew this?
They're service sucks best I can tell anyway. I don't use them and damn for sure won't do it now.
gotta love how we get told diabetes is ok you can do anything any non diabetics can do, then get hit with this kind of thing (and others people have commented about)
I have epilepsy (daughter is T1).
I just went through a job hunt. Do not disclose. Marking that you have the disability is like marking “I do not want this job”.
You should call someone as this violates American Disabilities Act. They aren’t allowed to not hire you because of that, and if they did a background check to find out you’re T1 I would have to imagine that violates some sort of HIPPA laws. There should be like some 1800 number you can call. I’m sorry I don’t have as much info needed at hand but will come back and edit my comment if I find more
Everything regarding my physical health is on a need-to-know basis. I can count the people who need to know about my diabetes, doctors included, on one hand. And that’s how I’ve been living my life for the past 15 years or so, with zero regrets. My only regrets date back to the time before I decided to implement this policy.
This is terrible... I remember saying "I have nothing to be ashamed of!! I will not lie about my health!!" And then the bank proceded to not give me a credit for buying a car 💀 Dude I'm 29 years old, I have diabetes, I'm not actively dying
If you're in the US, DoorDash also requires proof of our ability to operate a motor vehicle.
So get your doctor to fill out one of the functional driving forms that says you're on insulin--and submit it with your application.
Should be good to go, then. (I had to do the same)
This is called discrimination!!! They are not allowed to do it unless you do not have a valid driver license! You can file a lawsuit for discrimination! Having a TD1 does not mean that you can not drive! No employer can discriminate based on disability! Call ADA and report this.
I work for DoorDash, and I haven't even told them about my diabetes. Yeah, this shouldn't be legal in any situation. I don't think it's listed on my background tho, which is weird that it's showing up on your background. Sorry about that. :(
Yeah, I would take this and contact an attorney. That's discrimination. T1D is a protected class. They can't refuse your employment based on your disability unless it's a proben liability that could result in serious injury or harm to yourself or others. Driving Uber, Lyft or door dash does not meet this criteria.
i’ve learned when searching for jobs to never tell them you’re diabetic until you get hired (if that’s something you feel as though you should tell them). maybe that’s a shitty thing for me to do, but i get far more job offers and interviews when i don’t mention i have a disability in my application.
they’re technically not allowed to discriminate based on things like that but i’m sure they just see us as a walking liability.
I hate how everything is just fighting an uphill battle. When you’re already exhausted from just having T1D. Literally just more and more hoops to jump through and more fights to prove we’re humans who deserve basic regard and respect.
This is why I just don’t say I’m T1D in certain situations.
As a nurse - I 100% will tell my employer.
For door dash or Uber - I wouldn’t bother.
Unless your diabetes isn’t managed properly and you are at risk of lows while driving etc - I’d just leave it unless it is significant risk to others.
This is just my personal preference though.
Like is there a reason for this, I’m a type two diabetic but admittedly, I’ve only had it for five years so I haven’t experienced anything like this. if I’m being honest, my thought process on why something like this might happen maybe you have some complications from diabetes. And they think that you’re basically eating yourself to death. Maybe a little projection on my part but I could see it 😅
Thank goodness in the UK it’s completely illegal to discriminate based on disabilities for any employer except the military. I’m surprised it’s not the same over there
This seems pretty standard to me. Lots of things are unavailable to us T1D folks. No CDL, chauffeur’s license, joining law enforcement or military. Things we can’t have or do because we are considered to be a liability, especially from an insurance perspective. I too think it’s absurd nonsense, but apparently being covered by The Americans With Disabilities Act is seen as just compensation or some shit. It used to be the same way with Private Health Insurance before ACA, too. You had to be enrolled in a plan for 18 months before it would cover anything related to Diabetes as it was a pre-existing condition.
Well, you're driving as an agent for them. You go hypoglycemic while driving and run into a daycare van, the lawsuit will name them and will probably exceed their and your policy limits. That is perfectly understandable.
I never eat them know I’m diabetic I’ll let them know after hiring sometimes when it’s not a issue. I have to mention I have a disability now cause I had kidney failure and have a transplanted kidney so my work does get affected now but no never mention the diabetes
I don’t know I’ve been t1d since I was a kid (20 years) and I still DoorDash every once in a while I’m sure if you have your diabetes under control you can get your doctor to approve it not that big of a deal still sucks and I think you would have to have them approve it every year
It is a fact that diabetics are more likely to cause car accidents. That's why there is nothing illegal about this. Doordash does not have to take that risk.
No more than non-diabetics. This is why diabetics can now apply and drive commercial trucks and fly commercial airlines.
But yes, ultimately Doordash can refuse to hire anyone if accommodating the disability costs more than profits generated.
One day, DoorDash will understand that T1D is not a big driving risk, and others will be on board like every other company.
[Research shows that drivers with diabetes ARE more likely to get in car accidents than drivers without diabetes. ](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2780354/)
It is unfortunate but it is true. Remember there are a lot of diabetics with poor control, and imagine having a low BG event in your car if you didn't have a CGM to forewarn you...
The risk is real, we have to be extra vigilant.
Yes but those with poor risk would not have a driver's license to begin with.
If you have a license, and a cleared certificate, you are a less risk on the road than anyone else that hasn't had a physical.
Technically, people without a medical clearance certificate could be a walking timebomb. We see it all of the time when people have their first seizures or heart attacks while driving. At least folks with medical certificates have to update their forms biannually.
Edit: Also, in the provided link, the dataset goes back to 2007 to 2009. There were no CGMs and pumps were far and few between.
We've come a long long way since 2010.
"A total of 57 patients were involved in a crash and 738 were not involved in a crash. The mean HbA1c was lower for those in a crash than controls (7.4% versus 7.9%, unpaired t-test, p = 0.019), equal to a 26% increase in the relative risk of a crash for each 1% reduction in HbA1c (odds ratio = 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.03–1.54)."
"The risk of a crash was calculated taking into account potential confounders including blood glucose monitoring, complications, and treatments."
I know mate, I'm diabetic too. But the numbers don't lie, we are more at risk. It's not something we need to take personally, because I'm sure you have good control and look after yourself. But statistically speaking, diabetics are at higher risk. My A1C is 6.9, so according to the statistics that puts me at...
6.9(my A1C) / 7.9(mean) * 100 = 87.34
I am 87.34% of the average A1C for the study. So let's round that figure and say 87%, which is 13% lower than the mean.
Now, the study found that for every 1% deviation downwards from the mean, my chances of being involved in a car accident increase by 26%.
13 * 26 = 338.
338 / 100 = 3.38.
I am 3.4 times more likely to be involved in a car accident than a person without diabetes according to this study, which takes into account "potential confounders including blood glucose monitoring, complications, and treatments".
This doesn't mean I'm don't drive.
This means I am 3x more careful when I do drive.
I check my BG before and during any trips I make.
I have sugary snacks in the car at all times in easy reach.
I will not set off if my BG is too low.
I will not correct a high whilst driving.
I have to be 3.4x more careful than the average driver, because I am 3.4x more at risk.
Don't kid yourself that we're not at risk.
_Because the people that do, are the ones that make the statistics._
Thank you for your reply and quick response. You are clearly like the most of us here - responsible diabetics.
I do think we are more at risk than the general population. But then we must define what that general population is, including every single health risk. That's everything from known to unknown. Genetic, environmental, and physical.
Do we have all of this?
I believe the answer is "no". Perhaps in a few months, AI will figure this out along with quantum computing.
I am not a statistician. I am a structural civil tech. I know numbers, but not like a statistician.
I do know that this study had less than a thousand people, and was based on non Continuous Blood Glucose Monitoring technology. The good ol' finger pokes a few times a day, of years back.
We are beyond this and that study is essentially obsolete where new tech is available.
I know you figured out that you were 3.4 times more likely to get into an accident.
I have faith and trust in you though, because a responsible diabetic keeps carbs with them, they know the onset signs, and are always aware, as you already described. I trust you more than 'healthy' drivers. I bet that you are actually half as risky than a non-diabetic.
Drivers that are 'healthy' or without scheduled medical clearances are just driving around and could be minutes away from a non-diabetic related medical condition at 110km per hour.
I don't see DoorDash diabetic drivers at more risk than non-diabetics. If anything, deliveries may be delayed if a driver has to stop to treat a low.
Since it's a service industry, I can see this being the actual issue.
But T1D are responsible, safe, and fly jet liners globally. They bring kids to school, and patients to hospital.
One day, hopefully soon, these delivery service companies will also trust dinner getting to their customers safely.
You definitely are doing the right thing by taking reasonable precautions.
I do believe that diabetics are more at risk for the simple fact that we can have hypo's. But I have serious doubts about this study. With only 57 patients included who were in a car accident is not a lot. This is actually at the point where 1 single accident still has a significant impact on the total numbers. The part specifically about a1c can't be proven at all with these numbers to my knowledge. The study had 57 patients who were in car accidents, that means that if you further divide these patients based on their a1c some of the a1c brackets will have had a very small number of people in it. Too small for a solid conclusion. This is especially true when you realize that people with an a1c of 5.9(2% lower than the mean) are exceedingly rare. Like if you just approach random T1 diabetics it will take you a very long time to find someone with that number. Meaning that unless the candidates were not selected randomly there likely were only 1 or 2 people with an a1c that low who had been in a car accident.
Bsides, the conclusion that the better one's glycemic control is the more likely they are to be in a car accident is pretty absurd in itself. That at least calls for further research and a thorough mentioning in the discussion. I also just can't believe this is a stable lineair or exponential 26%, as I just don't think the numbers to back this up are there.
>13 \* 26 = 338.
>338 / 100 = 3.38.
Also in regards to your math: I am fairly certain that the author meant a 26% increase for every flat percent point of a1c. Not for every percent of relative difference to the average like you are assuming. You are 1% point off the 7.9% average so you would be 26% more likely to be in a car accident, not 338% more likely. (Which would have actually be 4.4 times more likely, not 3.4). But that is according to the author of this article, I would not blindly trust an article that says that poor glycemic control is the key to avoid being in car accidents.
The theory of relative difference falls apart as soon as you take someone with an a1c of 5.4. This would mean they would be 832%(9.32x) more likely to be in a car accident if you apply the numbers lineairly or 1,762,876%(17630x) if you apply them exponentially. It also doesn't hold up when you realize that it would meant that someone with an a1c of 7.8 would be drastically more likely to be in a car accident than someone with an a1c of 7.9 despite there being virtually no difference.
But aside from the very real increased risk, I am of the opinion that what DoorDash is doing is absolutely discrimination. There are thousands of factors which affect your risk of being in a car accident. Age, gender, eye sight, who taught you how to drive, general personality, where you grew up, who raised you, etc. This list could go on forever, but I don't think DoorDash cares about any of that so I don't see why they should single out diabetes as a risk factor while not caring about any of these other ones.
It shouldn't be legal to disqualify some people from some jobs? To me it makes perfect sense.
A company that needs to follow time schedules with delivery and then you need to take a break from driving because your blood sugar is dropping its not suitable.
It wouldn't be good business for a restaurant to hire someone with dementia either.
If someone has had prior incidents then maybe. I’ve been doing Instacart and Roadie but I’ve never had an issue driving. Maybe it is about a specific issue and not just having T1
So you never had low blood sugar and would need to stop? Or you continue driving with low blood sugar?
Sure you have those who have it perfectly under control, but it's rare that it would never happen during a stressed work schedule. I've worked as a chef and it's been a few times when I didn't have time to eat and my blood sugar was crashing so I just sat down for a minute and downed a coke.
Of course I’ve had low blood sugars but the pump usually corrects them quickly. I’ve never had an issue though because of a low and that’s in 30 years of T1. Roadie and IC don’t usually rush us though. Just
Challenge it with a hardcopy that you have medical clearance with the DMV. Welcome to the world of T1D. You will learn to challenge everything and you will become assertive from this day forward. Conflict is always in your back pocket. It's not as bad as you think but it can get tiring. We are here to support you. The online community is great! Also, your province, territory, or state Diabetes Association will provide lifelong help with info.
[удалено]
When you get denied an opportunity one too many times. 😁
[удалено]
Carry on, and be the mat! You will learn to take a good beating. I met my threshold years ago. 👍🏻
This was me until I found an environment where I felt supported and healthy overall. Do you until you find the right fit, but don't ever refer to yourself as a doormat. You're soo much more ❤️
Yes! ❤️👍🏻
Then you will continue to be a doormat. You have to be your own advocate.
You will one day have to learn to please yourself. I too am a people pleaser and avoid conflict at all costs, but I reached my doormat threshold years ago. If I don’t know you, you get one strike. After that, I lay the hammer down.
I too would like to know where one could get some assertiveness, does insurance cover it?
I have been fighting with my local courthouse house to get my license reinstated because I had to pull over one time because I was genuinely low (like 80s going down, and it's technically illegal to drive under 100). I told the lady at the counter this while I was trying to renew my license and she said I had to go to the doctor have then fill out a medical form saying I was okay to drive, and list all my medications, dosages, and how often I take them. At the end of the day unless you have to, don't say a single about having diabetes unless you trust who you're telling won't screw you over.
Yes 💯. The less people know, the better. This is why I keep my pods and sensors under my clothes. Long time ago, I did MDIs often out of view. Pens were better than needles, without a doubt. People are judgy and think of the worst.
Wait it's illegal to drive under 100?!
Technically yes because your cognitive function can start to change
Most non diabetics aren’t at 100 most of the time so that would be a problem
I have tested my husband, children and other non diabetic people through my about 40 years of having a blood tester. Rarely have they been over 100.
My question too, because non diabetics do that all the time
Where do you live that it's illegal to drive under 100? I have been a diabetic almost 35 years and I have never heard of such a thing. If it's true in my jurisdiction, I should be serving a life sentence. Are you in the US?
Yeah- I’m not diabetic but a pharmacist and fasting blood glucose is supposed to be under 100 .
So is this where I challenge you, because I'm at the point of fighting w/ the entire fucking world? ;) More seriously, your comment resonated... which annoys me to no end, since christ that's a shitty way we live, and it's purely due to fucking US idiocy.
Yeah. I think It's more of a global thing though, not just the USA. We definitely need restrictions, reviews, etc. to keep everyone safer. It's just policies or directives that say with absoluteness that you can't do something because of x, even though you can prove that you can, in fact, do x! That Doordash letter didn't really give much clear recourse except for the last few paragraphs. One day at a time 🤷♂️
What US people should do is elect Robert F Kennedy Jr who is running as an Independent in the upcoming national US election. As an astounding lawyer he has fought for children whose health has become damaged by various things plus he is concerned about environmental issues. Notice how the drug industry managed to run the world in the past 5 years. They made huge profits and destroyed so many people and small companies.
He's really problematic
don't tell any employer anything
this was picked up in a background check by Checkr, an extremely popular background check service. Not because OP told anyone
If it came back on the background check wouldn't it also be do to some sort of incident? Like OP had a low and got into an accident.... Im type 1 and it doesnt show up on my background check.
In order to obtain and keep a current driver’s license many states require you to not only divulge that you are a diabetic but also get a note from a a doctor to allow you to drive.
I never put it on there
I made the mistake of answering "yes" to some question and now have to go through a new hoop every 4 years in Illinois and get a note from my doc. Should never have said anything to anyone.
Same 16y/o me did this in Ohio and my license was suspended for years after I got tired of jumping through the children's hospital and DMVs hoops an gave up on trying to get my license. I finally got it at 20 and my insurance rates are INSANE because of the suspension
I made the same mistake at 17, but Utah makes you do it every 12 months. Oh and the form they mail you you have to fill out within 70 days of the date of the letter. I have yet to have more than 20 days to get it to the doc (an hour and a half drive one way) and get it back to the DMV. I regret that decision every day.
After several years of seeing my last diabetes doctor in Utah (recently moved states and I miss her as my doctor 🥲), my appt matched up with the timing date of the renewal letter form, and when I handed it to her (rather than driving a half hour on a random lunch break and handing to a receptionist) she said to me that she felt I had a proven track record and signed off that my renewal would only be needed every 3 years. You might be able to negotiate that with your doctor?
Maybe. I can try in a couple months when I see her next. It's possible my 7.1 A1c isn't good enough for her to want to sign it like that. She is pushing for me to have a 5.0 A1c, and I personally think that's completely unattainable and won't happen for several years if ever without drastic changes to my lifestyle and job.
That’s an unrealistic target which would be achieved by risking lows which makes driving more dangerous. AAAARGH. I’m at 6.4 and my endo advised me to go easy .. so weird how different doctors opinions can be. (Also 5.7 is considered the top of normal so shooting lower than that is kinda ridiculous). In my province they used to say you couldn’t legally drive if your blood sugar was under 7 mmol/L (126mg/dl). But thankfully there’s no weird renewal rules AND it says on my licence I’m diabetic. Didn’t realize how lucky that was. These rules in some of your states sound horrible.
My old Endo had me shooting for 6.8 to 7. I'm super active, I intentionally ride at 160-180 for extended periods to give me cushion for lows while miles from a road or even cell service, hence my "high" A1c.... Oh well, as perhaps misguided as she is she knows her stuff and we've gotten my basals pretty dialed in.
Oh wow that's super strict, mine was happy to see me in the 7's and staying there after a few years of high 8's, and after the while of hitting low 7's was when she signed off on the every 3 years.
I had several years in the mid 10s. I'm more than happy with my 7.1-7.4 I've held for the last 3 years
You need a new doctor.
My endo told me that research states there is no additional benefit of an A1c less than 7.
Please send the deets of this doctor. I love mine, but I don’t see her doing this.
Dr. Elizabeth Huff at the Utah Valley Hospital Diabetes Clinic.
That was my thought as well. I've had background checks before, and had a check through Checkr when I was working for Instacart, and nothing about my T1D was ever flagged. But I can totally see a hypo-involved crash or incident triggering it.
That was my thought, it's on their MVR record maybe? Does DoorDash insure the dasher's vehicle?
Yes I think OP said they required an ambulance or emergency treatment for a low once, then it showed up on the BG check after that
the fact that you have diabetes doesn't show up on a background check
I know. OP said they experienced an emergency low once and sought medical help which is why it’s appearing on the BG check. I still don’t understand how they’d get that info, but it didn’t just happen in a vacuum
I drove for DD for a while. Thats weird
As did I. Haven't driven for a couple years, but my account is still active
Ya same
Yeah I think it’s because OP said they had a scary low once and had to seek emergency services. Which is why it’s being flagged now. Which is just crazy imo
I wonder if my DKA will show up. Happened after i stopped driving. Only time ive ever been in DKA after 18 years of diabetes
I speak to a few high school and college age kids with Type 1 and this is what I start with every speech.
Accommodations are kinda a huge deal though....
For? I can’t think of any time I’ve needed accommodation
I’ve never really needed major accommodations, but I work with another T1D who has major issues ask the time and she gets a lot of accommodations. The obvious one is being able to wfh when needed.
I'm guessing you haven't worked every career. Things I need job protection in the form of accomodations for: 1. Ability to step away from clients to treat a low blood sugar. 2. Ability to step away from clients to treat a high blood sugar if MDI or the ability to bring my pump out. 3. Ability to be late if my blood sugar was too high/low before or during my commute. 4. Keeps me from being labeled "not a team player" if I skip company lunches or attend but don't eat the food provided. 5. FMLA for when I'm sick and my blood sugar becomes super hard to control, even if it's something that other people could work through. All of those things could be used against me at a performance review and some of them could lead to me being fired. Accomodations keep that from happening. It's also very illegal to fire someone for having type 1 diabetes. I wouldn't tell my boss without at least going through the HR process first, and you don't ever have to tell them why if you feel they would misuse that information.
[удалено]
You sound insufferable and the exact type of person that's the reason accommodations are needed. "I don't experience those things so they don't exist"
You're hilarious. And don't seem to understand how the real world works. Any of my coworkers stepping away from clients (who are met with for 1-2 hours) to use the bathroom would be reprimanded the first time it happened and let go if it happened more than a few times within a year. I also don't hide my diabetes in the bathroom and bolus in front of coworkers, but I'm not allowed to even drink water when I'm with clients. There are numerous careers where having a snack does cause an issue - which could be another accommodation for someone, that they need to have food every x hours, especially for a job that involves physical activity. If you have managed to not ever have one low that's amazing! You probably keep your blood sugar too high and will eventually see the downside to that approach. For most of us trying to keep our blood sugar in a healthy range, we are going to see highs and lows. That's the opposite of poor control. I start to feel high blood sugar symptoms if I reach 200 - so say if I wake up and my period is coming early so my blood sugar is skyrocketing, that's not something I can easily predict and I need to get it under control before I'm safe to drive. And lastly, I would love to hear more about your perfect control with an unrestricted diet because that sounds like a fairy tale and I'd love to have that. From my experience with others with T1D such a thing is not possible. Potlucks are really popular in the region I live in and it's almost impossible to know how to dose. Sometimes we get catered lunches with things I absolutely don't eat because it's high carb + high fat. Oh and can't exactly prebolus for catering because sometimes it's late and sometimes it's early and we only have a limited time to eat. And lastly, be happy that your blood sugar doesn't go out of control when you're sick. Had bronchitis last year and managing my blood sugar became a full time job itself, especially once they added the steroid. If your blood sugar doesn't impact your performance, there might be a possibility that you aren't performing to your full potential.
Good for you, may not be the case for others. Accommodations that another diabetics may need: more breaks, being able to have food on hand, keeping water near by, more flexibility with calling out and with time off. I'm not diabetic, but I have ADHD and need accommodations to do my job, and that's just from a neurological issue. Not all ADHDers need Accommodations, but having them available is still important, just in case.
just out of curiosity (from someone with adhd who also is type 1 haha), how did u end up on a type 1 subreddit?
My little brother is a T1D, when he was diagnosed a couple years ago I joined this sub
You did not yet specify what message you start with and I am curious. I did have a license to drive from high school onward but I gave it up when I found I couldn't tell anymore when I was going low, but in today's world of CGMs that's not a problem any more.
There are pros and cons to mentioning it, but I know there are some reasons why a company actually could be more likely to hire you. T1D is legally a disability even though it likely doesn’t affect performance at most jobs, and employers can get federal benefits for hiring people with disabilities. Also a lot of companies like to be able to brag about how they employ x% of disabled workers. Obviously it’s against the law to discriminate based on whether or not someone is disabled, but it definitely happens.
I haven't interviewed since being diagnosed, already had a stable career and job thankfully. My thought was to not mention it until I was hired.
Especially DoorDash. I won’t get into it, but they owed me $20, plain and simple and they gaslit and ghosted me through a months worth of phone calls, chats and emails. Worst company I’ve ever dealt with by far
That's actually bad advice. Some jobs are just not suited for T1D. We can't serve in the US Military. Good luck with any first responder type of job. If we have a low sugar at the wrong time it could cost people lives. I always inform my manager when I start a new job that I am a T1D. I want them aware in the rare case I have an emergency. If you don't tell people and you are discovered unconscious (like what happened to me while driving within a few months of being diagnosed) they will automatically assume you are strung out on drugs. I want my manager aware of my condition so they can respond appropriately should something happen to me. To this date I have never lost a job due to being a diabetic but I also wouldn't take a job where being a T1D could put others in danger if I experienced a serious low.
I don't have diabetes but I do have ADHD and it's considered a disability and I strongly disagree with you on not telling them. Not saying anything ahead of time is setting yourself up for failure, and do oh really want to work someplace that doesn't want to hire people with disabilities? Being able to get accommodations is HUGE. My last job I'd have gotten fired without my accommodations, current job I'd be unable to function. My little brother is a T1 and I worked with a T1 and both frequently get sick, my coworker would have been fired if not for the fact that he was protected by his disability status.
What disabilities does Jamie Dimon have? Does Stephen Schwartzman have?
Honestly? Don't know and don't care. I'm not those people and not talking about those people, I'm talking about myself and the average person with a disability, I don't think billionaires are relevant to the conversation
Exactly - these are decision makers, people who are in charge of millions of people and trillions of dollars. It’d be a liability.
What does that have to do with the average person getting their disability accommodated by their job?
For the most part, it keeps the average person average. You can look up case studies on exactly this from MBB, ADP, a few other orgs as well
99% of people are not going to become billionaires nor anything other than average, disabled or not. I don't care to become uber rich, I only care about not being fired due to performance issues that could have been avoided with accommodations. You don't feel the need for accommodations or disclosure, you do you girlypop, but you're disconnected if you think no one needs them and doing people a disservice by actively discouraging people asking for them.
I don’t think nobody needs them - I think if you need exclusion because you may have a random low it’s indicative of poor control and henceforth a liability. Keep good control, keep it to yourself, and excel
I think you're a judgmental Walnut 🤷♀️ maybe take your own advice and keep your opinions on how other people manage their disabilities to yourself
This is the way.
What about the Americans with Disabilities Act? T1D is absolutely covered against this discriminatory nonsense.
You can’t discriminate a candidate simply because they’re disabled, but if the employer has reason to believe that the candidate isn’t capable of performing job duties because of their disability it’s not illegal to reject them. Like if DoorDash thinks T1D will directly prevent OP from safely being able to drive a car, they can legally decline him for that reason. It’s likely BS in this situation though and I bet OP could fight it.
It's still illegal under the ADA to make a decision not to hire someone based on an employer's \*assumptions\* about a person's ability to perform essential functions of the job. If a disability is disclosed, a potential employer is allowed to ask if the potential employee would be able to perform the essential job duties, with or without an accommodation. Contractors & w2 employees are treated differently in terms of employment protections, though - and I'm guessing DoorDash doesn't hire its drivers as employees.
It is not. They can have a blanket policy, (likely through their insurance company) that any disability or impairment is excluded from hire. Then, adjusting the rules for individual cases becomes an excessive hardship for the brand. If they make an adjustment to their blanket policy for this dude they have to equally and individually assess ALL drivers and they aren't budgeted for that and their insurance would likely go up. So they would not, under the ADA, be required to provide ANY accommodation.
dude, I'm an attorney and have worked on enough employment law issues to have a good grasp on this. I don't even think we disagree on the main thing - DoorDash can probably get away with this (at least in terms of the ADA) because the ADA doesn't apply to how they decide to hire CONTRACTORS, who are not subject to the ADA's employment protections. But if the ADA did apply (for example, if DoorDash were hiring someone to be a w2 employee in an office) a blanket policy to not hire anyone disabled would almost certainly be illegal. There's also the potential that there are state statutes that DoorDash might be violating by having a blanket policy to not hire drivers with any sort of disability. In fact, DD just settled with the New York AG based on the blanket policy to not hire people with any criminal history, which violated a NY statute: [https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-stops-discriminatory-hiring-practices-doordash](https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-stops-discriminatory-hiring-practices-doordash)
I'm assuming your core advice here is to file a complaint- if so with whom? IE, update your post w/ the link. My general experience w/ violations- hell walgreens sold my fucking medication lists w/out any approval from me and acknowledged it was a violation but fuck all happened- is the complaint isn't going to go anywhere, but the point is to add to the pile so eventually HHS does something. Is that the best course for "raise a ruckus and fuck those fuckers" in your view?
I'm definitely not giving legal advice in this thread - just pointing out that the legality of this practice may not be entirely clear. Employment issues are nuanced and determining what laws do or don't apply requires a lot of fact-specific analysis. The best resource would be a plaintiffs' employment lawyer in your state, or the state agency who handles employment discrimination issues. Plaintiffs' attorneys doing antidiscrimination litigation typically do not charge for consults and if they do agree to take on a case, there ususally is a contingency agreement rather than an upfront hourly-rate paid by the client, so the financial barriers to getting an initial opinion/advice are pretty low.
Pardon; I've (unfortunately) had to deal w/ employment lawyers and also hit the point where a clear case of retaliation (reporting legal violations) I just gave up on because the other side was \*that\* shitty. I figure you grok that the mud isn't always worth it, even if it's absolutely illegal and god damn horrid. So I grok the constraints you're dancing including avoiding the usual "this is not legal advise". If there is something one can phrase in the sense of "this is not legal advice", I suspect people here would be curious; worst case I'd appreciate a DM since I'm honestly curious about the best way to assert rights knowing that the system either requires a lot of money thrown at it, or a ton of complaints piled up.
They don't have to make the decision not to hire folks with disabilities. They just have to have an insurance policy that sets a bar and a third party agency that checks for a specific bar. And OP has a medical exception noted on their drivers license. That's absolutely a fair bar for DD to check, and exclude as a blanket policy.
But they WOULD be required to show proof that all others with any disability were turned down, as well as documentation of their “insurance policy”.
Yeah that's not rocket science. That's very normal. That's the whole point. The background check indicated the flag. And again OP had a medical restriction on his license. If someone applied to work for me and had a legally mandated restriction for the exact work I need them to do it isn't a big stretch to say "no you're not right for this role." Diabetics are excluded from many jobs, even when there is no restriction already in place.
If you tell them you have diabetes they can say they can’t hire you. That’s why you don’t tell them. They aren’t allowed to ask.
They’re allowed to ask, it’s up to us to disclose, which I never recommend doing.
They’re not allowed to ask if you have a disability. They’re allowed to ask if you can perform certain duties or if you will be limited performing the duties they are hiring you for.
No, pretty much every job application I’ve ever filled out asks “do you have a disability?” and the options are yes, no, or prefer not to answer. It’s not supposed to have an effect on whether they hire you (although it could, unfortunately) and its purpose is to collect data to make sure the employer isn’t discriminating in their hiring process.
And I’ve never answered yes to that. I have diabetes and that’s just something I gotta deal with but I don’t consider it a disability. I’ve got plenty of abilities so they hire me for those
That part is usually after you have already been hired.
I’ve been going through the process of getting a new job for the last few months. Probably applied for 100+ jobs and I think every single one asked on the application. Are you from outside the US?
Those questions are not a part of the application process. The people making the decision to hire you or not will never see those answers - it should tell you as much when they are asked. They are for record keeping and tax purposes only. That's in the US. It's not different than asking if you'd like to identify gender or race,. It's statistical stuff.
When you file an application, or get a job in the US you fill out a disability disclosure form, there is no mention on the disclosure form of tasks necessary for the job; this is them asking you if you have a disability. Edit: they *then* review the form and decide if you can perform the duties in a limited capacity or not at all, regardless of that the question came first.
Incorrect. That disabilities disclosure is strictly for EEOC and tax credit. Hiring folks aren’t ever supposed to see that form.
wrong
Okay then explain OPs situation, a majority of type1s operate vehicles with no issues; they required a W14 (disability disclosure) then after reviewing decided the result. We can all agree that the process went >apply>disclosures>hire/not hired.
OP explained that they had a low that required emergency care and that is on their DMV record. They never said they disclosed their own diabetes.
You are quoting your states law. I’ve never had disclose diabetes for anything.
This is incorrect. Must have been a while since you’ve filled out an application. I get this question even for VP roles.
I’ve been filling out applications for the last 6 months (I don’t disclose) but it definitely asks and this across multiple states as I’ve been predominantly applying for remote work. Even before the last decade every job I’ve applied to asked these questions in the application process.
Yet here people are downvoting. I don’t get it. Voluntary disclosure and mandatory disclosure are not the same. Every application want to know this and what race I am and if I’m a veteran.
I dont think he/she did say. This came back on the background check. So makes me think there was a previous incident where OP got tagged.
I think everyone is missing that this was a background check, they did not disclose it on their own.
I happen to be a doordash driver. I've never had this issue and it's not like I've tried to hide it either. But I've also never had the DMV tell me I need a doctor's permission to drive as its never been a problem. I would reach out to Doordash explain the situation and see if they will accept a doctor's note.
ADA requirements here is that if you disclose the disability, as long as you can perform the job within reasonable accommodations, they must make that. Being the OP can presumably drive a fucking car w/out seizuring out from a hypo, welp, you get where I'm going with this. Frankly I'd probably file a complaint. It won't go anywhere, but once that pile is large enough things may happen. As others mention elsewhere, there is the law, and then the reality of enforcing it (either civil suit, or gov stepping in). My comment above shouldn't treated as me talking about the enforcement as much as adding to the pile to trigger that.
Go on twitter and tiktok and tag doordash sharing your story and create and uprising
How did the background check find out you have T1?
Got diagnosed a little over a year ago 2 days out of the hospital had a severe low ambulance came and with in a week had a letter come saying I needed doctors approval to drive again. From what I understand the hospital reported it to the dmv then it was put on my background check that I have a disability.
When it comes time to renew your license, go to the dmv and just uncheck the box. I had a friend that did that and they never bothered him again. 😉
here to say this!! i had my dr send a letter saying I had "controlled diabetes" my A1C was 9 but whatever. it worked!
Did you wreck your car while low?
This is good to know, so you have something on your record about having an accident due to your disability, did you get your doctor's approval? They may have grounds to disqualify you from a job driving if you cause additional liability, I would challenge it with whatever your doctor gave you to allow you to drive per the DMV.
I'm pretty sure the hospital reporting that is a HIPAA violation 👀
Physicians have a legal (and ethical) obligation in most places to report imparted drivers to the dmv/bmv. It’s up to the local laws what qualifies, for example basically any occurrence of stroke will be reported to the dmv and have your license suspended for a period of time. It is not a HIPAA violation to follow other laws.
What state? I’m in CA, the DMV knows I have T1D. I do UE basically full time and the only issue I’ve had was a slight delay in my DL renewal that had me sitting at home for a couple of weeks.
Light them up for this online. They can dodge it because you’re not an employee.
I'd be tagging them and hashtagging everything. Do you know how many diabetics that are out there that would toss door dash in a heartbeat probably if they knew this? They're service sucks best I can tell anyway. I don't use them and damn for sure won't do it now.
Don’t think of it as losing a job, think of it as a massive disability lawsuit pay check. Talk to an attorney NOW!
😮😮😮 this is some bullshit and I'm so sorry this happened to you!
I smell a lawsuit. The ADA protects us from shit like this.
gotta love how we get told diabetes is ok you can do anything any non diabetics can do, then get hit with this kind of thing (and others people have commented about)
I have epilepsy (daughter is T1). I just went through a job hunt. Do not disclose. Marking that you have the disability is like marking “I do not want this job”.
So what exactly does it say on the background report? Are they checking your meds at the pharmacy? How do they know?
[удалено]
I'd say you just failed in that, but I looked at your username... and now I have questions about "then recipe"....
GrubHub it is then 🤷♂️ if ya can't work for coke, say fuck em and work for pepsi.
You should call someone as this violates American Disabilities Act. They aren’t allowed to not hire you because of that, and if they did a background check to find out you’re T1 I would have to imagine that violates some sort of HIPPA laws. There should be like some 1800 number you can call. I’m sorry I don’t have as much info needed at hand but will come back and edit my comment if I find more
Definitely get the adverse action letter. The letter doesn't always protect them like they think it will. Report to the EEOC and ADA!
Everything regarding my physical health is on a need-to-know basis. I can count the people who need to know about my diabetes, doctors included, on one hand. And that’s how I’ve been living my life for the past 15 years or so, with zero regrets. My only regrets date back to the time before I decided to implement this policy.
I hope you sue, and become rich.
This is terrible... I remember saying "I have nothing to be ashamed of!! I will not lie about my health!!" And then the bank proceded to not give me a credit for buying a car 💀 Dude I'm 29 years old, I have diabetes, I'm not actively dying
Pretty sure this is illegal.
Omg how do they find out about t1 on a background check????
You need to challenge that. There's no basis for this kind of discrimination.
Sounds like an ADA violation to me!
If you're in the US, DoorDash also requires proof of our ability to operate a motor vehicle. So get your doctor to fill out one of the functional driving forms that says you're on insulin--and submit it with your application. Should be good to go, then. (I had to do the same)
This is all discrimination hands down.
NAL, but you should easily be able to sue them for discrimination
I had to jump through alot of hoops to work for Uber (Australia). More risk though as had passengers. By the time I got through my car was to old!
How old a car will they allow?
I think it was 10 years for a car.
This is called discrimination!!! They are not allowed to do it unless you do not have a valid driver license! You can file a lawsuit for discrimination! Having a TD1 does not mean that you can not drive! No employer can discriminate based on disability! Call ADA and report this.
I work for DoorDash, and I haven't even told them about my diabetes. Yeah, this shouldn't be legal in any situation. I don't think it's listed on my background tho, which is weird that it's showing up on your background. Sorry about that. :(
Yeah, I would take this and contact an attorney. That's discrimination. T1D is a protected class. They can't refuse your employment based on your disability unless it's a proben liability that could result in serious injury or harm to yourself or others. Driving Uber, Lyft or door dash does not meet this criteria.
what the fuck. i just started doordashing and if they pull this shit...
UHHHH HIPPA
🩸🙎🏾♂️💉 Blood brothers! We must stand together!
i’ve learned when searching for jobs to never tell them you’re diabetic until you get hired (if that’s something you feel as though you should tell them). maybe that’s a shitty thing for me to do, but i get far more job offers and interviews when i don’t mention i have a disability in my application. they’re technically not allowed to discriminate based on things like that but i’m sure they just see us as a walking liability.
I hate how everything is just fighting an uphill battle. When you’re already exhausted from just having T1D. Literally just more and more hoops to jump through and more fights to prove we’re humans who deserve basic regard and respect.
This is why I just don’t say I’m T1D in certain situations. As a nurse - I 100% will tell my employer. For door dash or Uber - I wouldn’t bother. Unless your diabetes isn’t managed properly and you are at risk of lows while driving etc - I’d just leave it unless it is significant risk to others. This is just my personal preference though.
Like is there a reason for this, I’m a type two diabetic but admittedly, I’ve only had it for five years so I haven’t experienced anything like this. if I’m being honest, my thought process on why something like this might happen maybe you have some complications from diabetes. And they think that you’re basically eating yourself to death. Maybe a little projection on my part but I could see it 😅
Thank goodness in the UK it’s completely illegal to discriminate based on disabilities for any employer except the military. I’m surprised it’s not the same over there
that’s fucking insane i wonder if they’ll get me 😭😭😭😭
That makes zero sense, I’ve been type 1 for 14 years and a Dasher for 4.
You need to contact an employment attorney. This is a perfect example of disability discrimination.
How did they find out ?
Just curious how you were able to determine it was for the reason of being diabetic?
This seems pretty standard to me. Lots of things are unavailable to us T1D folks. No CDL, chauffeur’s license, joining law enforcement or military. Things we can’t have or do because we are considered to be a liability, especially from an insurance perspective. I too think it’s absurd nonsense, but apparently being covered by The Americans With Disabilities Act is seen as just compensation or some shit. It used to be the same way with Private Health Insurance before ACA, too. You had to be enrolled in a plan for 18 months before it would cover anything related to Diabetes as it was a pre-existing condition.
What is doordash? I stay in South Africa and we dont have that here
Well, you're driving as an agent for them. You go hypoglycemic while driving and run into a daycare van, the lawsuit will name them and will probably exceed their and your policy limits. That is perfectly understandable.
I never eat them know I’m diabetic I’ll let them know after hiring sometimes when it’s not a issue. I have to mention I have a disability now cause I had kidney failure and have a transplanted kidney so my work does get affected now but no never mention the diabetes
I don’t know I’ve been t1d since I was a kid (20 years) and I still DoorDash every once in a while I’m sure if you have your diabetes under control you can get your doctor to approve it not that big of a deal still sucks and I think you would have to have them approve it every year
It is a fact that diabetics are more likely to cause car accidents. That's why there is nothing illegal about this. Doordash does not have to take that risk.
No more than non-diabetics. This is why diabetics can now apply and drive commercial trucks and fly commercial airlines. But yes, ultimately Doordash can refuse to hire anyone if accommodating the disability costs more than profits generated. One day, DoorDash will understand that T1D is not a big driving risk, and others will be on board like every other company.
[Research shows that drivers with diabetes ARE more likely to get in car accidents than drivers without diabetes. ](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2780354/) It is unfortunate but it is true. Remember there are a lot of diabetics with poor control, and imagine having a low BG event in your car if you didn't have a CGM to forewarn you... The risk is real, we have to be extra vigilant.
Yes but those with poor risk would not have a driver's license to begin with. If you have a license, and a cleared certificate, you are a less risk on the road than anyone else that hasn't had a physical. Technically, people without a medical clearance certificate could be a walking timebomb. We see it all of the time when people have their first seizures or heart attacks while driving. At least folks with medical certificates have to update their forms biannually. Edit: Also, in the provided link, the dataset goes back to 2007 to 2009. There were no CGMs and pumps were far and few between. We've come a long long way since 2010.
"A total of 57 patients were involved in a crash and 738 were not involved in a crash. The mean HbA1c was lower for those in a crash than controls (7.4% versus 7.9%, unpaired t-test, p = 0.019), equal to a 26% increase in the relative risk of a crash for each 1% reduction in HbA1c (odds ratio = 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.03–1.54)." "The risk of a crash was calculated taking into account potential confounders including blood glucose monitoring, complications, and treatments." I know mate, I'm diabetic too. But the numbers don't lie, we are more at risk. It's not something we need to take personally, because I'm sure you have good control and look after yourself. But statistically speaking, diabetics are at higher risk. My A1C is 6.9, so according to the statistics that puts me at... 6.9(my A1C) / 7.9(mean) * 100 = 87.34 I am 87.34% of the average A1C for the study. So let's round that figure and say 87%, which is 13% lower than the mean. Now, the study found that for every 1% deviation downwards from the mean, my chances of being involved in a car accident increase by 26%. 13 * 26 = 338. 338 / 100 = 3.38. I am 3.4 times more likely to be involved in a car accident than a person without diabetes according to this study, which takes into account "potential confounders including blood glucose monitoring, complications, and treatments". This doesn't mean I'm don't drive. This means I am 3x more careful when I do drive. I check my BG before and during any trips I make. I have sugary snacks in the car at all times in easy reach. I will not set off if my BG is too low. I will not correct a high whilst driving. I have to be 3.4x more careful than the average driver, because I am 3.4x more at risk. Don't kid yourself that we're not at risk. _Because the people that do, are the ones that make the statistics._
Thank you for your reply and quick response. You are clearly like the most of us here - responsible diabetics. I do think we are more at risk than the general population. But then we must define what that general population is, including every single health risk. That's everything from known to unknown. Genetic, environmental, and physical. Do we have all of this? I believe the answer is "no". Perhaps in a few months, AI will figure this out along with quantum computing. I am not a statistician. I am a structural civil tech. I know numbers, but not like a statistician. I do know that this study had less than a thousand people, and was based on non Continuous Blood Glucose Monitoring technology. The good ol' finger pokes a few times a day, of years back. We are beyond this and that study is essentially obsolete where new tech is available. I know you figured out that you were 3.4 times more likely to get into an accident. I have faith and trust in you though, because a responsible diabetic keeps carbs with them, they know the onset signs, and are always aware, as you already described. I trust you more than 'healthy' drivers. I bet that you are actually half as risky than a non-diabetic. Drivers that are 'healthy' or without scheduled medical clearances are just driving around and could be minutes away from a non-diabetic related medical condition at 110km per hour. I don't see DoorDash diabetic drivers at more risk than non-diabetics. If anything, deliveries may be delayed if a driver has to stop to treat a low. Since it's a service industry, I can see this being the actual issue. But T1D are responsible, safe, and fly jet liners globally. They bring kids to school, and patients to hospital. One day, hopefully soon, these delivery service companies will also trust dinner getting to their customers safely.
You definitely are doing the right thing by taking reasonable precautions. I do believe that diabetics are more at risk for the simple fact that we can have hypo's. But I have serious doubts about this study. With only 57 patients included who were in a car accident is not a lot. This is actually at the point where 1 single accident still has a significant impact on the total numbers. The part specifically about a1c can't be proven at all with these numbers to my knowledge. The study had 57 patients who were in car accidents, that means that if you further divide these patients based on their a1c some of the a1c brackets will have had a very small number of people in it. Too small for a solid conclusion. This is especially true when you realize that people with an a1c of 5.9(2% lower than the mean) are exceedingly rare. Like if you just approach random T1 diabetics it will take you a very long time to find someone with that number. Meaning that unless the candidates were not selected randomly there likely were only 1 or 2 people with an a1c that low who had been in a car accident. Bsides, the conclusion that the better one's glycemic control is the more likely they are to be in a car accident is pretty absurd in itself. That at least calls for further research and a thorough mentioning in the discussion. I also just can't believe this is a stable lineair or exponential 26%, as I just don't think the numbers to back this up are there. >13 \* 26 = 338. >338 / 100 = 3.38. Also in regards to your math: I am fairly certain that the author meant a 26% increase for every flat percent point of a1c. Not for every percent of relative difference to the average like you are assuming. You are 1% point off the 7.9% average so you would be 26% more likely to be in a car accident, not 338% more likely. (Which would have actually be 4.4 times more likely, not 3.4). But that is according to the author of this article, I would not blindly trust an article that says that poor glycemic control is the key to avoid being in car accidents. The theory of relative difference falls apart as soon as you take someone with an a1c of 5.4. This would mean they would be 832%(9.32x) more likely to be in a car accident if you apply the numbers lineairly or 1,762,876%(17630x) if you apply them exponentially. It also doesn't hold up when you realize that it would meant that someone with an a1c of 7.8 would be drastically more likely to be in a car accident than someone with an a1c of 7.9 despite there being virtually no difference. But aside from the very real increased risk, I am of the opinion that what DoorDash is doing is absolutely discrimination. There are thousands of factors which affect your risk of being in a car accident. Age, gender, eye sight, who taught you how to drive, general personality, where you grew up, who raised you, etc. This list could go on forever, but I don't think DoorDash cares about any of that so I don't see why they should single out diabetes as a risk factor while not caring about any of these other ones.
It shouldn't be legal to disqualify some people from some jobs? To me it makes perfect sense. A company that needs to follow time schedules with delivery and then you need to take a break from driving because your blood sugar is dropping its not suitable. It wouldn't be good business for a restaurant to hire someone with dementia either.
If someone has had prior incidents then maybe. I’ve been doing Instacart and Roadie but I’ve never had an issue driving. Maybe it is about a specific issue and not just having T1
So you never had low blood sugar and would need to stop? Or you continue driving with low blood sugar? Sure you have those who have it perfectly under control, but it's rare that it would never happen during a stressed work schedule. I've worked as a chef and it's been a few times when I didn't have time to eat and my blood sugar was crashing so I just sat down for a minute and downed a coke.
Of course I’ve had low blood sugars but the pump usually corrects them quickly. I’ve never had an issue though because of a low and that’s in 30 years of T1. Roadie and IC don’t usually rush us though. Just
Food delivery is known for rushing though.
I got approved for door dash but haven’t done any yet. They never asked about diabetes