When Your DNA Becomes a Workplace Issue

Federal law wasn’t written for today’s genetic testing technology. Here’s where the gaps are.

Genetic testing has moved well beyond diagnosing known conditions. A growing technology called polygenic risk scoring now estimates a person’s likelihood of developing diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, or certain cancers based on DNA. As these tests become more accessible, a serious question follows: What happens at work if your employer learns what your genes predict?

Under current federal law, the answer may surprise you.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) prohibits employers from making employment decisions, including hiring, firing, pay, promotion, based on genetic information.. But GINA has two important limits. It does not require employers to provide workplace accommodations, and its protections fall away once a condition actually manifests as a disease. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires employers to accommodate employees for a condition that substantially limits a major life activity, and a genetic predisposition alone is not a disability under that law. The ADA protects you once a condition becomes substantially limiting. Workers who are beginning to show early or mild symptoms may have limited federal recourse.

California workers have more to work with. Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) , the definition of disability is broader than the ADA’s: a condition need only “limit” a major life activity, not “substantially limit” it, and FEHA also protects workers who are perceived as disabled. That alone reaches situations that federal law misses.

But FEHA goes further still. It separately protects “medical condition,” which California law defines to include genetic characteristics that indicate a predisposition to disease. And under CalGINA, California’s own genetic nondiscrimination law, in effect since 2012, genetic information is its own protected category under FEHA. Critically, the medical-condition pathway does not require that any major life activity be limited at all. In other words, the very gap that leaves workers exposed under federal law is one that California law is designed to close,

These are not hypotheticals. As polygenic risk scoring moves into mainstream medicine, employment law has not kept pace; however, California’s framework offers more room to work with than federal law alone.

If you believe your employer has taken adverse action based on your genetic information, or if you are concerned that a recent test result could affect your standing at work, it may be worth speaking with an employment attorney. California workers have more legal tools available than federal law provides, and understanding where you stand is a reasonable first step.