• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

HRMorning

  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
  • HR DEEP DIVES
  • PODCASTS
    • VOICES OF HR
    • WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP TODAY
  • LOGIN
  • GET STARTED
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • HR Technology
  • Payroll
  • Management
  • Women’s Leadership
  • More
    • Talent Management
    • Performance Management
    • Leadership & Strategy
    • Compensation
    • Policy & Procedures
    • Wellness
    • Staff Departure
    • HR Career & Self-Care
    • Health Care
    • Retirement Plans
  • Employment Law

Walking the GINA/COVID tightrope: EEOC settlement highlights issues

Tom D'Agostino
By: Tom D'Agostino
Read it on Beacon
  • Share on

About the Author

Tom D’Agostino is an attorney and legal editor who has more than 30 years of experience writing about employment law, disability law and education law trends. He earned his B.A. degree from Ramapo College of New Jersey and his J.D. from the Duquesne University School of Law. D’Agostino, who is a member of the Pennsylvania bar, is a past member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities and the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Legal Services to Persons with Disabilities Committee. He has provided technical assistance in the production of segments for television’s ABC World News and 20/20, and he has been quoted in periodicals including USA Today. He is also a past contributing author of Legal Rights of Persons with Disabilities: An Analysis of Federal Law, which is a comprehensive two-volume treatise addressing the legal rights of people with disabilities. Tom is passionate about baseball and authentic Italian food. When not writing, he enjoys spending time with family.

Show Less
Last Updated: July 28, 2022
3 minute engagement
New settlement shows fine line
You read HRMorning's newsletter. Beacon's Daily Brief is the version tuned to you: it skips what you've already read and leads with what you've asked Beacon about. Get your Daily Brief →

A recent EEOC settlement demonstrates the GINA/COVID tightrope employers must walk when it comes to complying with the requirements of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) and doing all it can to keep COVID-19 out of the workplace.

Earlier this month, the agency entered into a conciliation agreement with a Florida medical practice that collected the COVID-19 testing results of employees’ family members. The agency determined that the practice violated GINA, which generally bans employers from acquiring genetic information about applicants, employees, and their family members.

What does GINA say?

Signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2008, GINA protects individuals from discrimination in employment on the basis of genetic information. The law covers employers with at least 15 employees as well as employment agencies, labor organizations, joint labor-management training and apprenticeship programs, and the federal government.

Included within the law’s definition of genetic information is information about family medical history. Covered employers generally cannot acquire genetic information about applicants or employees — or use such information to make employment decisions.

With respect to the acquisition of genetic information, there are exceptions. Genetic information acquired accidentally or provided voluntarily is excluded from the prohibition, as is information obtained to comply with FMLA certification requirements. So is information that is publicly available or required by law. In addition, there is an exception for employers who conduct DNA testing in the setting of a law enforcement forensic lab or for human remains identification.

GINA/COVID tightrope: What’s ‘genetic info’?

The EEOC has specifically advised that genetic information includes information about the manifestation of disease of disorder in an individual’s family members. Why? Because family medical history is used to determine whether an individual is at increased risk of getting a disease, disorder or condition, the agency explains. This means that a request for medical information about an employee’s family member is a request for genetic information under GINA.

As compared to other laws enforced by the EEOC, GINA has mostly flown under the radar. In fact, for each fiscal year since 2011, GINA-related charges have accounted for less than 1 percent of all charges received by the agency.

But as this new agreement shows, that does not mean employers should be lax about complying with its requirements.

To resolve the agency’s finding that Brandon Dermatology violated GINA by collecting the COVID-19 testing results of the family members of employees, the medical practice will pay compensatory damages to affected employees. In addition, it will restore leave time and back pay.

The practice further agreed to post a notice, review its COVID-19 policies, and conduct COVID-19-related training on EEO laws.

Do’s and don’ts

While obviously committed to ensuring compliance with GINA’s requirements, the EEOC has also recognized the obvious interest that employers have in minimizing COVID-19 in the workplace.

To this end, the agency has issued relatively expansive guidance explaining how COVID-19 intersects with GINA and other federal EEO laws, such as the ADA and Rehabilitation Act.

In the guidance, the agency advises that employers are free to incentivize employees to encourage them or their family members to get a COVID-19 vaccine or to provide confirmation of vaccination. In fact, it says GINA does not limit the incentives that may be offered.

In addition, a request for information relating to whether a family member has been vaccinated is not a problem under GINA because it is not a request for genetic information. The fact that someone is vaccinated is not information about family medical history, the agency advises.

But a line gets crossed when employers ask whether family members have COVID-19 or symptoms associated with the disease, the agency adds. At that point, employers are violating GINA’s ban on asking medical questions about family members. And as this settlement shows, collecting information about family members’ test results also falls on the wrong side of the line.

The simple workaround for employers: It is permissible to ask employees whether they have been in contact with anyone who has COVID-19 or symptoms associated with it.

Read it on Beacon
Open this article in Beacon, from HRMorning, and ask how it applies to your company. Every answer names its source.
Read it on Beacon
Get HRMorning's newsletter tuned to you every morning: your Daily Brief on Beacon →
Filed under
  • Employment Law
  • Share on

Get the HRMorning Newsletter

With HRMorning arriving in your inbox, you will never miss critical stories on labor laws, benefits, retention and onboarding strategies.

Get it free with a Beacon account. Beacon keeps your company's HR context at hand, and every answer names its source.
Create my free account

Free Training & Resources

White Papers

The Hidden Cost of Untreated Menopause: Keep Your Most Experienced Talent at Their Best

Provided by Maven Clinic

White Papers

Investing in HR Software

White Papers

Healthcare Affordability Pulse

Provided by HealthEquity

White Papers

Managing Your Salary Structure and Pay Ranges with Confidence

Provided by Marsh

SPONSORED CONTENT

Performance Management

Talent Management

sponsored content
Employee Recognition Program: What the First 6 Months Reveal About Whether It Will Last

Courtesy of INSPIRUS

Compensation

Recruiting

sponsored content
Salary Benchmarking: 6 Choices That Decide Whether Your Pay Data Holds Up

Courtesy of MARSH

Employment Law

Policy & Procedures

sponsored content
Policy Rollout: 4 Checkpoints That Show Employees Got the Message

Courtesy of NAVEX

Further Reading

  • Employment Law
  • Policy & Procedures
Is Remote Work a Reasonable Accommodation? 3 Best Practices

This case shows just how tricky things can get when the ADA and FMLA overlap. Here, an employee exhausted her FMLA leave and then sought an...

  • Employment Law
ADA 35th Anniversary: Building Access and Inclusion at Work

On July 26, 2025, the ADA 35th anniversary marks a milestone for disability rights.  To this day, the Americans with Disabilit...

  • Employment Law
Black workers weren’t recalled after pandemic layoff: Hooters pays $650K

Hooters of Louisiana, LLC has agreed to pay $650,000 to settle a race discrimination and retaliation suit, the Equal Opportunity Employment...

  • Employment Law
Background Checks: A $600K FCRA Compliance Mistake

Background checks are essential to hiring – but even small compliance missteps can lead to significant legal risk and costly settlements....

  • Employment Law
Blake Lively Case Shows Why Worker Classification Can Kill a Lawsuit Fast

When a harassment or retaliation complaint surfaces, most HR professionals immediately focus on the facts. What happened? Who knew? Did any...

  • Employment Law
Court Warns: Lax TPA Oversight Can Trigger FMLA Liability

When employers outsource Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) administration to a third-party administrator (TPA), compliance responsibility...

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS Beacon, free. Check it before you say it.

GET STARTED FREE
HR Morning Logo
  • Facebook
  • Linked In
  • ABOUT HRMORNING
  • ADVERTISE WITH US
  • WRITE FOR US
  • CONTACT
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • Performance Management
  • HR Technology
  • Leadership & Strategy
  • Compensation
  • Policy & Procedures
  • Wellness
  • Staff Departure
  • HR Career & Self-Care
  • Health Care
  • Retirement Plans
  • DEI

HRMorning provides the latest HR and employment law news for HR professionals in the trenches of small-to-medium-sized businesses. Rather than simply regurgitating the day's headlines, HRMorning delivers actionable insights, helping HR execs understand what HR trends mean to their business.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Copyright© 2026 HRMorning
HRMorning Logo

WELCOME BACK!

Enter your username and password below to log in

Forget Your Username or Password?

Reset Password

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Log In

Why do we need your credit card for a free trial?

We ask for your credit card to allow your subscription to continue should you decide to keep your membership beyond the free trial period.  This prevents any interruption of content access.

Your card will not be charged at any point during your 21 day free trial
and you may cancel at any time during your free trial.

During your free trial, you can cancel at any time with a single click on your “Account” page.  It’s that easy.