Judge allows civil suit over co-worker's perfume

DenverPost.com ^ | 11/27/08

[Oyarsa]

DETROIT—A federal judge says a Detroit city employee can proceed with a civil suit claiming she couldn't work because of a co-worker's strong perfume. The Detroit News says U.S. District Judge Lawrence Zatkoff determined Susan McBride has a potential claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The city is asking to have the suit dismissed.

McBride says she's severely sensitive to perfumes and other cosmetics. She says the perfume worn by a co-worker in the city's Planning Department made it difficult for her to breathe.

She says the co-worker also used a plugged in room deodorizer.

The suit says the co-worker later agreed to stop using the room deodorizer but kept using perfume.

[libertarian27]

This is a re-post of comment #98
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081127/METRO/811270375

Longer article in the Detroit Paper:

“”He dismissed McBride’s claims that her chemical sensitivity also impairs her ability to shop for detergents, speak, interact with others, and reproduce.””

Yowsa!!

[Ditter]

Folks like FP think that because they are not affected that it must not affect anyone. Whether the offending substance is peanuts, scented candles, smoke or perfume, if they are not affected it is simply a lie to force other people to change their actions. Control donch know!

[Netizen]

I get migraines as well as cluster headaches.These headaches actually drive people to suicide. Perfume triggers them in me the same as they trigger migraines in others. The treatment is the same $20+ pill (if I can catch it fast enough) or a $75+ injection if I don’t. This isn’t just something unpleasant, it is something that actually causes medical issues with people.

Yep. I used to get migrains from "Lilly of the Valley' perfume. My mom couldn't be in a room with someone wearing 'Musk'. It made her throat close up and she couldn't breath.

[metmom]

Shop for detergents and interact with others I’ll buy.

Speak and reproduce? Not so much. Unless she’s implying that it will kill her.

She’d have been better off keeping it reasonable.

[Aurorales]

Yes, all of us EVIIIIL perfume wearers should pay your salary.

Or what did you say, you would “happily” throw up on my desk?

You do know this is FREEREPUBLIC you are posting on, Right?

[Eric Blair 2084]

So what is the end game?

Government regulation against every odor that might offend, annoy or harm someone?

No end in sight is there.

[JenB]

None of us called for regulation. We just want people to acknowledge it’s actually an issue that is making us ill.

[Eric Blair 2084]

OK. That’s what I wanted to hear.

Tell them nicely and politely to please stop....use words like please, sir, madam, excuse me.

If that doesn’t work than annoy them right back by singing show tunes off key until they can’t take any more and agree to stop.

[metmom]

It’s not a matter of offense. It’s a matter of making people physically sick.

If I put some substance in someone’s food, if I hit them, if I poured some chemical in an office that made the whole office sick, would I not be charged with assault?

Then why is it OK when it’s only one or two people because it’s perfume and it’s supposed to smell nice. Deliberately doing something that you know is going to harm them is assault, no matter what the weapon.

As far as politely asking them to stop, that’s useless as evidenced by some of the responses on this thread. We’re just as likely to get a *If you don’t like it, stay home* from them as not.

BTW, can you explain why those who wear the perfume have the right to live as they please and not have anyone tell them what to do but feel free to tell everyone else how to live and what they should do (stay home)? Why to the ones harming others have all the rights and those being harmed just have to suck it up?

[metmom]

Tell them nicely and politely to please stop....use words like please, sir, madam, excuse me.

Try it sometime. Pretend that you're sensitive to some substance and ask the offending person to change and see what kind of response you get.

Most take it as a personal insult. Instead of *Oh, I didn't realize that it was harming you.* all you get is, *You can't tell me what to do. I have my rights.*

The courteous are few and very far between, and likely to have reactions themselves.

Only someone who has similar problems can understand the hell someone else's actions can make a life.

[factoryrat]

It boils down to one of two things:

Either the person who suffers from allergies is kept away from the source of irritation, or the person who wears the perfume is told to tone it down a bit with the perfume.
If neither party will comply, both should be fired.

[metmom]

Sometimes it’s not possible to be kept away from the source of irritation.

So why should they be punished with the loss of their job over something they have no control over?

Do you fire a person with diabetes? Or who’s in a wheelchair? Someone who needs glasses or a hearing aid? Only perfect people can work?

[ru4liberty]

Yes, all of us EVIIIIL perfume wearers should pay your salary.

What would you have us do if you and others insist on creating a workplace that is a hostile environment for us? How can I support myself if I can't stay healthy?

Or what did you say, you would “happily” throw up on my desk?

Well sure. Don't you remember saying this?

Now if there is a very serious medical issue that is proven, I might stop, but otherwise no.

You want it, you got it. It would be my way of proving that exposure to fragrance evokes a medical issue for me. Since I would be throwing up anyway, and since you didn't care that your choice to wear fragrance had a negative effect on me, I wouldn't care that my choice to use your desk as a barf bag had a negative effect on you.

You're full of arguments about personal rights, but you don't have enough character to extend a common courtesy to a co-worker Frankly, I wish employers would make policies that would ensure that people could work in a healthy environment. Too many of them don't and, for that reason, people suffer.

You do know this is FREEREPUBLIC you are posting on, Right?

I've got a couple of years on you, noob. I know exactly where I'm posting and have run up against your type before on this board. None of your unclever little insults are going to shut me up. It's only because of clymers with selfish, me-first attitude that these kinds of situations necessitate lawsuits. As long as you and others like you think your rights trump others' rights, there will be lawsuits.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Well metmom, I have good news and bad news for you:

That's why we found this post so fascinating.

Good News: We thought that the whole world was just angry at stinky smelly smokers. Call it Schadenfreude. I'm not proud of myself but I can't help but see other citizens be discriminated against because of their odor. I'm right behind you. Nothing worse than BO and cologne.

Bad News: Nobody gives a crap whether people are annoyed by odors. The only reason they cared when it came to cigarette smoke was because they found that kicking smokers out of bars and restaurants was a good way to coerce people to quit and the sheeple went along with it.

Don't hold your breath waiting for anyone in Gubmint to help you out. There is no money to be made and no social engineering experiment to be accomplished going after big perfume.

Have a nice day. :-)

[ru4liberty]

Bad News: Nobody gives a crap whether people are annoyed by odors.

Let me do a bit of a re-write on the above: Nobody gives a crap whether people become sick from exposure to fragrances. (Just wanted to clear that up because we don't oppose the perfume because we're annoyed by it.)

That said, I agree. Almost nobody gives a crap that fragrances carry health threats for some people. If they did, they'd extend common courtesy to them as one human being to another. There would never be need for a lawsuit. But as you've seen on this thread, many people aren't willing to extend that courtesy.

[Twink]

Once they get done with the smokers and fat people (and maybe again with the drinkers) they may focus on the *chemically sensitive*

[Eric Blair 2084]

Follow the money.

My daughter is allergic to peanuts. I’d love to see it banned.

Nostrildamus Waxman won’t drag Big Nut manufacturers to testify in front of Congress.

No money and no opportunity to grandstand on TV.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Than we’ll get the women whose Dad’s said their eyes twinkle. The glare is blinding people.

[Twink]

LMAO! Well, they deserve their due since they’re a minority after all. We have to accommodate all these victims.

Can’t smoke, can’t drink, can’t eat, can’t wear leather or fur, can’t wear perfume or any scents...

“Than we’ll get the women whose Dad’s said their eyes twinkle” Hey, lol. I’m sure you don’t know this but that sorta hits home, lol.

[Twink]

My husband is allergic to peanuts and has managed to survive all these years before the “peanut free” areas. He can still make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich for his daughters and not die.

He does draw the line at kissing me after I’ve eaten a PB&J, though.