Written Job Guarantees for AIDS Victims Rare : Few Firms Spell Out Policies on Dealing With the Problem, Survey Finds

Some of the nation’s biggest corporations say they do not discriminate against workers with AIDS or related conditions, but only a few actually have written policies on how to deal with the disease.

Those were the major findings of a report released Thursday that is based on 164 replies to a survey mailed last October to the nation’s 1,000 largest public corporations. The survey on corporate policies on acquired immune deficiency syndrome was conducted by the National Gay Rights Advocates, a nonprofit law firm specializing in gay rights issues.

Despite the presence of anti-discrimination policies at large firms, the San Francisco-based group believes that discrimination against AIDS victims continues to be a serious problem.

“The survey does not say that discrimination does not exist (or) that all employers are behaving marvelously,” said Benjamin Schatz, who directs the group’s legal fight against AIDS discrimination. “It is still a major problem.”

Of the 164 companies that answered the survey, the report said that 110 firms reported that they prohibit discrimination against people with AIDS. Many of the corporations, Schatz said, adopted such policies before federal and state courts ruled earlier this year that AIDS victims are protected under statutes prohibiting discrimination against handicapped persons.

Jean O’Leary, executive director of the organization, said: “These (corporations) are the leaders. We hope others will follow the leaders’ suit.”

The existence of major companies--such as Citicorp, General Dynamics and General Foods--that have taken a stand against AIDS discrimination may end the perception that only “radical and avant-garde” firms have developed such policies, said Schatz. “These firms are very much part of the corporate mainstream,” he said.

But the report’s authors were disappointed by the lack of written AIDS policies--only 30 respondents said they had put their policy in writing, and eight were in the process of doing so. “Unless corporations put the policies in writing,” O’Leary said, “it will be difficult to implement them consistently.”

The report also showed that all but one of the firms said their company medical plans covered AIDS-related medical expenses. Also, only one firm--Abbott Laboratories--required employees or job applicants to take medical tests for the presence of the disease. (The pharmaceutical company explained that it screens only those employees who work directly with the AIDS virus as part of the company’s laboratory work on AIDS-related drugs.)

Among the 15 Southern California companies that responded,

none test employees for AIDS, and all say that their company health plans cover AIDS. Ten of the 15 say they prohibit discrimination against employees with the disease.

O’Leary and Schatz warn that the survey may not be representative of corporate America’s practices and policies regarding AIDS and people with AIDS. Those companies with policies that forbid AIDS discrimination may have been far more likely to reply to the survey, they said.

The large number of firms that did not respond may be telling in itself, said Schatz.

“There are many employers who are afraid to take a public stand on what they believe is a controversial issue.”

CORPORATE POLICIES ON AIDS

Fifteen companies in Southern California were among 164 firms nationally that responded to a survey on corporate policies on acquired immune deficiency syndrome.

In its survey of 1,000 large companies, National Gay Rights Advocates, a public interest law firm, asked four questions: Does the company have a policy that forbids discrimination against employees with AIDS? Does the company’s medical plan cover AIDS-related expenses? Does the company require an AIDS-antibody test as a condition of employment? Does the company have a written policy on AIDS?

Companies that did not respond to the survey are not listed below.

Non- discri- mination Medical AIDS Policies Company, Headquarters policy expenses testing? written? Avery International No Yes No No Pasadena Carter Hawley Hale Stores Yes Yes No No Los Angeles Computer Sciences Corp. Yes Yes No No El Segundo First City Properties Inc. No Yes No No Beverly Hills Fluor Corp. No Yes No No Irvine Gilbralter Financial Group Yes* Yes No No North Hollywood Great Western Savings No Yes No Beverly Hills Kaufman & Broad No Yes No No Los Angeles National Medical Enterprises Yes Yes No Yes Los Angeles Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Yes Yes No Newport Beach Rohr Industries Yes Yes No Yes Chula Vista Santa Barbara Savings & Loan Yes** Yes No No Santa Barbara Security Pacific National Bank Yes Yes No No Los Angeles Transamerica Life Cos. Yes Yes No Yes Los Angeles Transamerica Occidental Life Yes Yes No Yes Los Angeles

In the process of developing policy.

* Company’s general non-discrimination policy prohibits AIDS bias.

** No specific AIDS policy, but company forbids discrimination on basis of handicap-related criteria.

Source: National Gay Rights Advocates