Danville Airline Case Analysis

Adeyinka Abegunde.

BUAD 625:185 Organizational Leadership and Ethics

Danville Airline Case Analysis.

Ethical Issues.

This case is between David Reiger, a pilot at Danville Airline and the Management of Airline. The Board of Directors at Danville carried out a test on David Reiger without his consent to know if he’s having the Huntington Disease that killed his father. Reiger was angry because test was carried out on him without his consent which he was positive, he threatened legal action if the company tries to get rid of him and requested that he be allowed to keep flying and to be reassigned to a position in the company that did not involve flying if he developed Huntington (Mead Jenny 2004).

Julie Taylor, Director of Human Resources is saddled with the recommendation request by the Board of Directors. Taylor faced difficult situation as she “investigated and found there was no established protocol for dealing with this type of situation within Danville Airlines or the Airline industry in general” (Mead Jenny, 2004, Page 151).

Pertinent Facts.

Huntington Disease (HD), discovered by George Huntington in 1872 is diseases that cause the brain nerve cells to steadily deteriorate, leaving the victims to be both physically and mentally incapacitated. Huntington in most case beginning is slow and gradual, symptoms includes mild, muscle twitches, jerky movement and slight loss of memory. The disease cannot be prevented or avoided through early detection.

This disease killed David Reiger’s father. David Reiger possessed gene of this disease. Danville is faced with responsibility of managing the situation around this case.

Stakeholders.

Julie Taylor, the Director of Human Resources is the major stakeholder in this case, she’s faced with the recommendation to resolve the case.

David Reiger is also another major stake holder, he’s the pilot pushing against been removed from flying as a result of the Huntington disease discovered in his gene.

Danville Board of directors will be expecting the recommendation from Julie Taylor.

Case Evaluation.

To put safeguards in place the constitution offered a modicum of protection under 1974 Privacy Act. Americans with Disabilities Act barred adverse employment decisions based on an individual’s actual physical or mental disabilities and was designed to protect with mental or physical impairments from discrimination (ADA 1990).  Under the ADA 1990, if someone has history of disease, disability or gene, dismissal from job shall not come into play against such disabled person or means of alternative job offer if they performed with reasonable accommodation. The act stated that the concerns for the health and safety of others must be balanced against the goal of protecting disabled individuals from discrimination. First thing first, Danville will have the right to carry out the test without Reiger’s consent If genetic testing and screening is technically legal, because both Reiger’s co-worker and passengers is at risk as a result of his uncertain medical condition. If genetic testing and screening is illegal, Danville still has a right to do so as it is the matter of safeguard of human lives travelling with Reiger in flight. If Danville grounded Reiger before any symptoms appear, he also have right to take a legal action. Even though Reiger have the knowledge of Huntington’s disease the decision of not allowing Reiger to keep flying would not change because the flying with a pilot with a neurological disorder might made public panic as well as it would have an impact on business too.