Two years after the city enacted policy restricting its employees from wearing perfumes, colognes and other scented products to work, it’s facing a lawsuit alleging it has refused to enforce the rule.
On Friday, Bureau of Transportation employee Julee Reynolds filed suit [PDF] in US District Court under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reynolds alleges she’s complained for years about the lotions and perfumes borne by her coworkers, but that superiors have refused to remedy the situation.
The city received notice of the suit today, and would not comment on pending litigation, according to PBOT spokesman Dylan Rivera.
Reynolds, a utility locator in PBOT’s Maintenance Bureau, says she suffers from a condition known as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, and that exposure to scented products has sent her to the hospital in recent years.
“The condition causes her to experience symptoms ranging from respiratory distress, dizziness, headaches and nausea to anaphylaxis,” the suit says. “This condition has been recognized by Ms. Reynolds’ physician as potentially ‘life threatening’ and, on at least one occasion, has resulted in Ms. Reynolds’ hospitalization after a work-place exposure.”
The suit seeks damages “estimated at $50,000.”
Reynolds’ alleged difficulties in the bureau began in 2010, when a coworker’s lotion gave her system offense. She says she complained to a supervisor, and provided a doctor’s note, but the situation continued. Most seriously, Reynolds allegedly landed in intensive care when a June 2011 “exposure” gave her a serious allergic reaction.
The suit details a litany of efforts Reynolds made to correct the problem— from meeting safety and human resources officials to securing a letter of support from Disabilities Rights Oregon.
“In response on April 4,2012 city representatives met with Ms. Reynolds and told her that she was suffering from nothing more than allergic symptoms and that, in the City’s view, she did not have a disability,” the suit says. Still, a supervisor offered to move Reynolds’ desk to another area, the suit says. It didn’t help.
“Ms. Reynolds has continued to report the chemical exposures, but all of her reports have fallen on deaf ears.”
But city leaders have been willing to listen to similar claims in the past. In 2011, city council unanimously supported a policy change prohibiting scented products like perfumes in the workplace.
According to the policy revision: “Employees who have asthma and those who experience sensitivity to perfumes, colognes and other chemicals may suffer potentially serious health consequences due to exposure to airborne irritants.”
While he almost certainly doesn’t want to pay out $50,000 in city funds, Reynolds’ claims may strike a chord with City Commissioner Nick Fish. During the 2011 fragrance hearing, he described how certain types of perfumes and make-up cause him to break out.
By the way: The condition Reynolds claims, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, is highly controversial. According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “chemical sensitivity is generally accepted as a reaction to chemicals but debate continues as to whether MCS is classifiable as an illness.”
A call to Reynolds’ attorney was not returned this afternoon.
I normally don’t agree with this type of lawsuit, but I hope Reynolds wins. I have terrible allergies, but the real perfumes you will find at The Perfume House do not set me off at all. But the cheap synthetic body sprays will send me into a nasty migraine than can last for hours.
I used to have an ability to spot people who bath in cheap synthetic scents, they put on makeup with a putty knife. Now days, you never know who’s going to wearing this offensive crap.
Andy doesn’t normally don’t agree with this type of lawsuit, but since this affects him personally, he supports it.
What a load of smelly crap lawsuit. Sure, overly smelly people, whether it be BO or perfume, can be a pain to work with, but c’mon! “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity” ?? Gimme a break! Disability my ass.
I wouldn’t believe it if it didn’t happen to me. I initially thought I had MS. It sucks. Have a headache right now because of a student’s cologne. Dizzy. Can’t see. Nauseous.
@frankieb/Andy, I don’t know why I’m wasting my time with this but: consider how boring it is to go through life as one of those people who dismisses everything outside of their personal experience until that fact changes.
Instead, try to actually talk to some people with first-hand knowledge before convincing yourself what makes sense to you is automatically correct. If you’re still convinced it’s BS, great. If not, you’ve learned something and become a bit less of an empathy-free butthole in the bargain.
When you talk to people with counter-intuitive issues, you usually walk away thinking, “Wow, they’re really thoughtful about that/they felt the same way I did before it happened to them/I’m nowhere near as confident dismissing this as I was before.”
It’s easy (and boring) to caricature people and issues. It’s harder to accept that most people are just like you – feeling their way through the world honestly and non-hysterically, the best way they know how.
Some people, through no choice of their own, have extreme reactivity that can lead to symptoms that are occasionally deadly (i.e. extreme asthma). Those people shouldn’t be forced to find a job that lets them work from home just so others can artificially smell some particular way.
Do you really want to live in a world where only healthy, “normal” people with no health problems are accommodated? Aren’t more-vulnerable people first-class citizens as well? Shouldn’t we be judged as a society by how we treat our most-vulnerable members?
FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE SCENTED LOTIONS…
While we’re on the subject of perfume/cologne-wearers: I hereby officially forbid you from petting my dog until you learn to apply your nasty pseudo-scents in a considerate manner. Ever see somebody awkwardly putting that stuff onto their wrists and NOT THEIR HANDS? Yeah? Well, that’s what consideration looks like, you horrible scent-smearing bastards. When you apply it directly onto your hands, you transfer that oily shit onto everything you touch, including my dog’s coat. From there it gets onto my hands, my truck, my couch, my goddamn everything. Thank you in advance for your forthcoming consideration in this matter. — Management
(And, really, a little soap and some tame antiperspirant is all that’s ever necessary anyway, folks…)
If this is a real issue, why it only tend to effect hippies and vegans? I’m sure there are people with this actual condition, but it seems like another gluten sensitivity thing, just a way for a White Person to declare themselves too refined and sensitive for the world at large. Like neuralgia in the 19th century.
My ex fiancee is a biochemist and is very sensitive to this. I never wore anything along those lines because she honestly had an obvious reaction. I don’t know about disability but this is a real phenomenon, not an act
@seanpdx, there’s a difference between what you describe and someone with a serious medical issue, just like there are degrees of gluten intolerance that range from very mild to very, very serious. Some people have mild asthma, some people have life-threatening asthma.
Like all of the above, the reason you hear more about the conditions now is because it’s being researched and publicly talked about where it rarely was before. Modern research science and internet-age communication each haven’t existed all that long. People with gluten intolerance have always existed, they just lived a life where “normal” meant feeling like shit all the time.
Again, every time someone claims something you think smells like bullshit, find a similar person and politely ask them about it (or notice when they post a confirming story the exact same minute as you). Chances are, it’s not BS – it’s just new to you.
Here’s another way to tell a difference: one of the top law firms in Portland took this woman’s case, and will now spend the next year litigating against the City – a formidable opponent – investing hundreds of hours and many thousands of dollars. If they lose, they won’t get a dime for their costs or their time.
Top-tier law firms know many of the jurors they eventually will have to convince come from the same default skepticism you, Andy and frankieb have displayed above. If they didn’t think they could overcome that, they wouldn’t take the case and sink the time and costs.
Bottom line: firms don’t knowingly run risks like that because Moonbeam Nightshade’s tum-tum hurts.
lmao colin do you really, honestly believe that bullshit about lawyers that you just wrote? let me lay down some facts for you:
lawyers don’t fucking take cases because they think their clients are right. lawyers take cases because they think they can win. whether it is or isn’t pseudoscientific garbage has literally nothing to do with their case.
@anthony!: lol, tell us another funny one!
I never heard of Chemical Sensitivity until an Immununologist diagnosed me with MCS. I asked what it was and he told me to look it up on the Internet and to ‘avoid chemicals’. I went to 5 more Doctors to get rid of this diagnosis and get me back to normal. I was told time and again the only real treatment is practicing avoidance. I had to leave my job. It is nearly impossible to avoid and work. I was awarded permanent disability due to MCS. I would rather have a real job, but I still get sick when I am exposed to chemicals even at very low doses. We as a society will one day look back at the notion of perfuming everything, the way we now look at smoking cigarettes indoors. Being asked not to wear something is not such a big burden. We ask smokers to rearrange the habit they are addicted to. Same difference. Accommodation in public is key. This MCS is a nightmare that anyone can acquire. May you never know how real it is. Good luck with the suit.
Commenty Colin, I don’t know why I’m wasting my time with this but: you got my point all fucking wrong and you totally mischaracterized me. When I said, “I normally don’t agree with this type of lawsuit, but I hope Reynolds wins.”, I meant I don’t always agree with seeking monetary damages from the city, state and or fed, that in the end comes out of the tax payers pockets. Get off your high horse!
The plaintiff has a pretty uphill battle and better hope the scientific literature has advanced in the last ten years, because this issue was litigated in the Oregon District Court and the Court found that evidence of MCS wouldn’t even be admissible because it was not reliable under existing test for admissibility of scientific evidence.
“Although Daubert instructs that none of these four factors are dispositive, the fact that plaintiffs’ proffered evidence fails each one is troubling. After examining the evidence as a whole, and with due consideration of the four Daubert factors, the court is convinced that plaintiffs’ MCS-related evidence is not sufficiently reliable to allow it to be considered by a factfinder.” Gabbard v. Linn-Benton Hous. Auth., 219 F. Supp. 2d 1130 (D. Or. 2002)