Medical selection upon hiring and the applicant's right to lie about his health status: A comparative study of French and Quebec Law

Abstract

As democracies respecting human rights, France and Quebec both prohibit discrimination in hiring on the grounds of disabilities. On the other hand, businesses wish to select the most effective job applicants possible in light of the physical and psychological demands of the job. In order to avoid being eliminated from the selection process, applicants may be tempted to hide or even lie about their health status. Consequently, the law has been put to the test, seeking a delicate balance regarding the consequences of applicants’ silence or false declarations concerning their health status. The legal consequences of this situation have been viewed differently in France and Quebec. In Quebec, contractual synallagmatic obligations appear to take precedence over rules limiting the collection of discriminatory information, allowing for a selection that is nevertheless prohibited by the laws protecting human rights. By contrast, in France, the employer has no right to intrude in matters of worker health and the withholding of information or even lies on the part of applicants can only rarely be used to justify a dismissal. This interpretation poses great challenges in view of the “safety obligation of result” that is imposed on the French employer. Through a comparative analysis of French and Quebec positive law, this paper explores the limits of the employer's ability to investigate an applicant's health during the hiring process. It then turns to the question of the right to lie as a way to avoid being discriminated against on the basis of disability and the consequences of this right on the employment relationship.