HR Hero Line

Making Sense of Scent Issues at Work

It seems that the number of people with allergies or sensitivities to various scents and smells has grown substantially. Some of those allergies can be severe, causing severe respiratory difficulties and other serious health issues. Questions continue to arise about the often competing rights of allergic employees and coworkers who wish to be able to eat what they want and use whatever hygiene and personal products they choose. Read on for the most recent information on this conflict for employers.

Are ‘scent’ allergies protected under the law?
For employees to be protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), they must have a mental or physical condition that substantially limits a major life activity. Before the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) took effect in early 2009, courts considering whether an allergy to odors in the workplace qualified a person as “disabled” analyzed the following criteria:

  • the nature and severity of the impairment;
  • the duration or expected duration of the impairment; and
  • the permanent or long-term effect of the impairment.

Significantly, courts did not consider a person disabled if mitigating measures (e.g., allergy shots or medicine) prevented the impairment from substantially limiting a major life activity.

When the employee’s allergy was unrelated to his work environment, courts typically found that the employee wasn’t disabled under the ADA. For example, a Pennsylvania court ruled that while an employee’s allergy to cats and dogs was a “physical impairment,” it didn’t substantially limit a major life activity and therefore wasn’t covered under the Act. In fact, even when the allergy stems from exposure to an aroma at the workplace, courts have been reluctant to find an individual “disabled” under the ADA.

In one noteworthy Minnesota case in 2001, an employee suffered from a condition known as “multiple chemical sensitivities,” which caused him to experience sinus and respiratory difficulties while working as a chemical engineer. Again, although the judge found that the condition qualified as an impairment, the employee wasn’t “disabled” because his symptoms were “ameliorated or eliminated by avoiding the environment at work.”

However, in January 2009, Congress enacted extensive changes to the ADA. One of the most significant changes involves determining whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity. Under the ADAAA, that question must now be answered without regard to mitigating measures (except “ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses”). In addition, even if the individual’s impairment doesn’t currently limit a major life activity in a substantial way, he may still be disabled if he is limited when the impairment is “active.”

Taking its cue from Congress, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued proposed regulations addressing the issue. The proposed regulations state in part:

An individual with asthma who is substantially limited in respiratory functions and breathing compared to most people, as indicated by the effects experienced when exposed to substances such as cleaning products, perfumes, and cigarette smoke, is an individual with a disability.

Thus, it appears that if the employee’s allergy is “severe” when he comes in contact with the odor or substance, he is likely “disabled” under the ADA.

HR Guide to Employment Law: A practical compliance reference manual covering 14 topics, including ADA

How do employers accommodate scent allergies?
If allergies and sensitivity to odors are in fact disabilities, the issue becomes whether you can reasonably accommodate an employee with a scent allergy. As we all know, the ADA provides that reasonable accommodations may include “job restructuring, part-time or modified work schedules, reassignment to a vacant position . . . and training materials or policies.” However, an accommodation isn’t reasonable if it imposes undue financial or administrative burdens on the employer or requires a fundamental alteration to the nature of the job.

Ten years ago, the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided an important case. An employee suffered from severe sinus attacks that were triggered by common workplace irritants (e.g., heavy perfumes, smoke, nail polish, glue, and adhesives). According to the court, the employer “made great efforts” to accommodate the employee, prohibiting the use of nail polish in his department and creating a workstation for him in a room with better ventilation. It also allowed him to stop working if he was sensing an irritant so he could wait for the problem to be remedied by his supervisor.

The appeals court ruled that the employer’s accommodations were sufficient to meet its obligations under the ADA. Significantly, the court refused to require the employer to go so far as to provide the employee with “an irritant-free work environment.” Buckles v. First Data Resources, Inc.

Other appeals courts have issued similar decisions. Recently, the Third Circuit in Pennsylvania determined that an employer reasonably accommodated an employee’s disability of being allergic to various scents by instituting a perfume-free workplace policy, providing the employee with a fan and a new air filter, and changing old air filters throughout the workplace. Like the Eighth Circuit, the Third Circuit concluded that the employer didn’t have to ban all odors from the workplace, explaining:

It is unreasonable to expect [the employer] could have prevented all violations of its perfume policy, but when employees were suspected of wearing scented products, [the supervisor] responded appropriately, reminding employees, individually and collectively, of the importance of keeping a perfume-free environment.

When faced with employees claiming sensitivity to odors, you should remember that the first order of business is to engage in what the EEOC calls “the interactive process” — discussing the problem the complaining employee is having and talking with him about possible resolutions. That includes reviewing medical information and investigating the feasibility of various accommodation options.

Employers should be careful not to get hung up on semantics. In a recent Michigan case, the employer rejected a request for a “scent-free policy” because it would impose an undue hardship. However, upon closer inspection in court, it appeared that the employee was simply seeking a “perfume-free” policy and had provided the employer with a sample of such a policy. The sample policy provided that “mild scents may be worn in moderation, but strong or offensive scents that become detrimental to the work unit will not be tolerated.”

The court observed that this type of policy doesn’t require a completely scent-free environment, nor does it address the public or those outside a department. Because the employer failed to evaluate the actual accommodation that was requested and didn’t introduce any evidence showing why the perfume-free policy would create an undue burden, the court held that it was “unreasonable” in failing to accommodate the employee.

Can an employee insist on telecommuting as an accommodation?
One final issue is whether working at home is a reasonable accommodation that must be considered in response to scent allergies. The Eighth Circuit has found that “regular and reliable attendance is a necessary element of most jobs” and therefore is reluctant to require telecommuting as an accommodation. Other courts have issued similar rulings, such as the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, which explained:

Most jobs in organizations[,] public or private[,] involve team work under supervision rather than solitary unsupervised work, and team work under supervision generally cannot be performed at home without a substantial reduction in the quality of the employee’s performance. This will no doubt change as communications technology advances, but is the situation today. Generally, therefore, an employer is not required to accommodate a disability by allowing the disabled worker to work, by himself, without supervision, at home.

However, the EEOC is not convinced. Guidance from the commission on reasonable accommodation suggests that allowing an employee to telecommute might be a reasonable accommodation that has to be considered. The guidance states in part:

Changing the location where work is performed may fall under the ADA’s reasonable accommodation requirement of modifying workplace policies, even if the employer does not allow other employees to telework. However, an employer is not obligated to adopt an employee’s preferred or requested accommodation and may instead offer alternate accommodations as long as they would be effective.

It is reasonable to expect that with increasing numbers of employees working at home on a regular basis, and as technology increasingly overcomes physical distance, the EEOC will scrutinize refusals to offer the option to telecommute.

Bottom line
In light of court rulings on the issue, employers are advised to view allergies to odors and sensitivity to chemicals as disabilities in most cases and to anticipate that accommodation may be necessary. As in previous cases, instituting a perfume-free policy, providing fans or other ameliorative devices, and adjusting the air filters and air flow in the work area will probably be viewed as sufficient to meet your obligations under the law. Rules mandating completely fragrance-free environments are likely not going to be required by the courts because of the virtual impossibility of enforcing them.

In addition, employers shouldn’t reject telecommuting options. Although it might seem reasonable that an employee’s physical presence is a necessity, it’s best to at least review the possibility during the interactive process and make sure that old assumptions about telecommuting remain valid in your current way of doing things. In short, it makes sense to address scents in the context of disability accommodation.

27 thoughts on “Making Sense of Scent Issues at Work”

  1. Greetings.

    I have read this information with great interest, and wish to advise you that I have been working full-time from home for my employer since 2003; unsupervised; highly productive; & a valued member of the team.

    I am a Canadian, with Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, and severe multi-system reactions to scented products and environmental contaminants (eg. cleaning solutions; adhesives; printer toner; vehicle exhaust fumes; etc.). Exposures can not only be unpleasant, but could also precipitate a heart attack; stroke; or anaphylaxis.

    I am aware of many ‘remote’ workers who choose to work in a ‘safe’ environment. I can assure you that not one of these individuals is a ‘slacker’.

    I always tell individuals who are questioning a ‘scent-free’ workplace; seminar; workshop; or meeting venue that everyone has a responsibility for doing their part in achieving a safe environment and ….. telling someone that a little bit of scent is OK, is like telling someone in a wheelchair, that it is only 8 steps to maneuver ….. a very powerful analogy.

    Paula Bilton

  2. This is such an important issue and frequently overlooked. I get migraine headaches triggered by strong scents. I can’t tell you how miserable it is to be in a confined space with someone with too much perfume or aftershave on. I can’t go to public movie theaters due to this problem. Workplaces could easily adopt a no scent policy and it isn’t uncommon in California for employers to have scent free workplaces.

  3. Employers are scared to institute the scent-free policy. My employers asked my co-worker to stop wearing any scents and she didn’t for 2 months. She’s back to it and I’m fearing that if I ask them again to ask her to stop (she’s been here longer), that “I” will be fired for “something” and black-balled in my field of work. BTW, anyone else HATE Bath & Body Works?! :/ I hope many more lawsuits come down the pike and curtail all this scent-wearing madness. Employers will get the hint and put a stop to it, once and for all!

  4. I think it’s reasonable to ask people to refrain from wearing perfume/cologne but it is unreasonable to ask people to not wear any scents. Shampoo, conditioner, hair spray, body wash, soap, lotion, and deodorant all have scent (whether it be a ‘natural’ scent or perfumed)and to tell someone they cannot wear certain products becomes dictatorial. What about skin allergies that determine what products a person can wear?

    I would rather smell something nice than someone’s bad body odor. As a female who is going through the ‘change’, I wear scented deodorant and do not want someone telling me I can’t.

    There has to be a balance out there and companies need to do a better job of communicating these changes to staff so that no one side feels ostracized. There should be a team effort.

  5. Yes bath and body works is the worst. Perfume today is the same as second hand smoke twenty years ago. Why do you think people call it per”fume” its a mixture of volatile chemicals. If I had a peanut allergy and needed co-workers not to eat peanut butter products while at work there would be no problem but because most can’t see how painful and disruptive asthma attacks can be they just don’t have any sympathy. There will be more lawsuits because we have a right to breath safe air while working.

  6. well… i have a serious allergy to extremist and selfish people.

    I myself am allergic to dust and certain smells but i don’t go demanding my workplace to ban anything or anyone. I simply avoid contact and always carry with me an allergy pill.

    I find it selfish and disrespectful of others that a whole workplace has to abide by a rule dictated by one person that suffers such allergy.

    Yes, we – allergic people – suffer a lot with our symptoms when it gets triggered, however we can not make everybody else’s pay for our disability.

    There are far many ways of avoiding triggering the allergy without causing such a mess all around.

    Let’s leave in peace, shall we? Communication is the key!

  7. moni, I’m glad your situation is one where you can choose not to force what feel like unfair working conditions on others, since you can tolerate exposure to your triggers, but I wonder whether you’ve ever had an anaphylactic reaction to an odor.

    I experience dangerous airway swelling when I’m around even tiny amounts of my trigger, and I’m not aware of an allergy pill that could help to shut down that type of reaction quickly or efficiently enough to continue working in the same area without interruption. My choices are to drop everything and leave the area immediately until the odor is gone, taking extra Benadryl and rescue inhalers as I go, or use my Epipen and then head out to the ER afterwards. Either way, my ability to do my job is affected.

    I feel strongly that it would be equally selfish of me to choose to be unemployed and rely on taxpayer support provided by others, when I have a condition where I can still be a contributing member of society and take care of myself money-wise, given the right accommodation. In not working, I would still be making others pay for my disability, as you say, and I agree with you that that’s not right if it can be avoided.

    I honestly am glad that your situation is so well-controlled and easy to accommodate – I’d give almost *anything* to be like that. But not all of us have such a manageable allergy, where we can avoid having to ask our coworkers for help. Yet we still want to be able to live and work and provide for our families, like everyone else does, and we can do that just fine, with a little extra understanding and adapting in the workplace.

  8. i work in the court system in Utah. there is a clerk that wears a LOT of perfume and i am allergic to it. she and i sometimes have to use the same phone and her perfume is suffused through the air and on everything she touches. HR has forbidden me to even speak to her about it, and has also refused to speak directly to her about it. perfume causes my skin to swell, including my eyes, and makes my skin burn. it’s very frustrating that HR completely protects the perfume wearer and insists that i continue to either suffer or find other employment.

  9. HUD Legal Staff has a position statement and legal opinion on the HUD.gov website regarding multiple chemical sensitivity. The statement distinguishes between a regular allergy (controlled by a pill) and life threatening multiple chemical sensitivity that is also known as environmental illness or fragrance sensitivity. Fragrance chemicals are undisclosed (trademark secrets)to consumers and contain known carcinigens and hormone disruptors. Once a person becomes reactive to fragrance, that person may be very close to total disability and unable to work anywhere. We do not know how the copier fumes, printer fumes, cleaning chemicals and room deodorizers, plus personal fragrance are mixing together to form a toxic brew in a building that just recirculates the air with no outside ventilation. Add remodeling, paint, glue, new building isulation, cigarette smoke and it will get someone completely disabled. SSA found me disabled under their rules after I had to leave with burning eyes and face, never to enter that building again. My opthalmologist found holes in my eye surface, lipid layer. Solvents can burn through the lipid layer of the eye surface and burn the cornea. I had terrible distress from Bath and Body Works products too. Too bad employers don’t realize they may be setting all their employees up for disability down the road. I would not want this to happen to my children either. Now I live with my elderly mother. People seem surprised when I tell them I cannot be around perfume, and therefore cannot work now. Too bad – safe air should be everyone’s concern. Perfume or fragrance can easily be part of the dress code at work. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC)has a fragrance free policy also because of the unknown chemicals in fragrance interfering with office productivity and causing disability for some employees.

  10. Accommodations for asthma, fragrance sensitivity, multiple chemical sensitivity, alergies, allergic rhinitis, environmental illness are found at ASKJAN.org a website sponsored by the US DEPT of LABOR. Ask your employer for a copy of their policy on accommodations AND get any forms they require you to fill out. Discuss accommodations found at ASKJAN.org with your doctor. Give your employer a diagnosis of your medical condition from your doctor and ask your doctor to recommend an accommodation for that diagnosis. Good luck.

  11. I like the policies that tell people not to wear scents, of any kind, that can be perceptible. It’s not just perfumes that are a problem, but lots of other body products too. We had a new staff member with long hair who used a highly scented shampoo, conditioner, and hair-care products. This caused allergic reactions in three staff members: asthma, hay fever, and migraines. The untrained HR manager didn’t handle it well (telling allergy sufferers ‘not to say anything’ and the woman wearing the hair products wasn’t concerned that she was making three co-workers extremely ill). The case ended up before the California Fair Employment & Housing agency and nearly landed in litigation. (Kudos to other employers in our area who even tell job applicants that they aren’t permitted to wear scented products to the job interviews or on the job.)

  12. I think it is unreasonable for others to thrust their smells whether it be perfume, shampoo, lotion, hand sanitizer, cologne, smoke whatever on everyone else. I do not see what the need is in the workplace anyway? Who are they impressing? I am a person with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity as well as chronic daily migraine MOSTLY because of other people’s “smells” and it is a miserable life. It is hard to go in the grocery store, walk into a library, work in the office, go to church…ANYTHING because it makes me gravely ill. So if 10-20 people in an office decide to bathe in smells and it all mixes up together…I am done and it lasts for days. I think people need to focus on WORK and not on being a walking scent billboard. Save that mess for home or after hours on a date night.

  13. Although I have compassion for people who have Multiple Chemical Sensitivity as no one wants to torture a fellow co-worker more often than not it is the responsibility of the sufferer to produce legal proof via a doctor’s note that they do indeed have a life-altering allergy. How do you justify that everyone who doesn’t have any allergies be educated if you aren’t willing to share your medical dilemma. Also, when you work with the public how can you say co-workers are affecting me and the public is not with their “smells”? Just imagine in history how perfumes were invented to cover-up humans most smelly trauma; which means no deodorant, lack of bathing etc. I am willing to do all I can to help others with their allergies just please realize most people who have no allergies do not understand because no one has taken the time to explain how and why someone has a hard time with their allergies. Be aware,
    no one is out to get you; they just don’t know.

  14. I have fibromyalgia and chemical sensitivity, among other things. Perfume and other fragrances give me migraines – debilitating migraines. My office employed a fragrance free policy. Nice. If everyone would comply. We are not a large office but a large company. My boss, her secretary, and a new hire are all violators of the policy, yet when I need to leave because they have induced a migraine, I am forced to take pto. I believe this is actually a workers’ compensation claim and is also an EEOC violation. My coworkers all know that I suffer from these illnesses and feign caring yet turn around and continue to wear the offending fragrances. one even has the audacity to spray it in the office while I am there. My business unit will not allow me full time remote work (I work 5 hours at home and 3 in the office) because then all the paralegals will want to work from home. I’m sorry, but not all the paralegals have disabilities either. The corporate medical advisor even agrees with my physician that I should be 100% remote. I believe it is time for an EEOC Claim even though I don’t want to. I really like what I do, really like the attorneys I work with, and really want to work. I’ve been with the company almost 8 years and have had exceptional reviews every year. That should count for something. My job can be done completely remote with no modifications.

  15. Back in the 1980’s scent was everywhere. Anyone else remember the scent of Opium. These days I believe that employers are cutting back on circulating air and we are much closer together in the workspace. Why in the world does someone have to wear a scent, perfume or after shave to work. Please save it for elsewhere! I was employed by a company where no scent was allowed, body lotion, deodorant, etc.

  16. I work in a major car retailer and we have this one lady who sprays body spray to cover her heavy smoke odor after her breaks. I do not have a problem with her usingthe products, but I do have a problem with WHERE she is applying the body spray. She uses it in a public hallway 2 feet from my office door. Why can’s she spray this spray OUTSIDE in her car where she smokes? Management refuses to tell her to quit. I have to take 1000mg of Tylenol to get rid of the headache. So Ihave to wreck my liver and my health due to her use of body spray….thanks!

  17. I have allergies, but not any chemical allergies, but rather dog, cat, pollen and such. I have a coworker who claims severe chemical allergies, and while I don’t feel she is lying, she is a constant smoker and I think our group has a hard time understanding how she can smoke but claim chemical sensitivity. Can anyone explain to me how you can be severely sensitive to perfumes and such but smoke. I personally don’t smoke, don’t like to be around it, but understand it comes with a terrible addiction that is hard to break. If anyone questions her about the two she flies into a rage, and that is the end of the discussion. I think people want to understand the situation, but cannot reconcile the smoking with the sensitivity. Can anyone speak to this situation?

  18. I have endured offensive smells for years!! Heavy, especially musky perfumes give me an instant headache. I don’t understand why people take a bath in fragrance (aka stinky stuff) . Fragrance should be worn so only those very close to you can smell it- not so it wafts throughout the office.
    There should be a fragrance rule in all workplaces along with bathing requirements. And yes, obese people tend to have an offensive body smell (not just B. O. ) than normal sized persons. Both are gross!

  19. I have eczema and have to use lotions just to be able to put clothes on. A coworker complained that I smelled so bad she was I’ll. I changed all my products to fragrance free and unscented and she complained even more. I was repeatedly asked about my products by my boss even after submitting a note that I was under medical treatment. I was asked to use a separate entrance and too keep my office door shut. I did that and she still complained. My boss said I could not work in the office any longer and told me to work from home. This coworker is not bothered by the perfume of public who have very strong scents but is bothered by every lotion I use? The harassment got so bad I was afraid to leave my office to go out to the ladies room. I completely cooperated in trying to find a solution that would allow me to treat my medical condition and not bother her but she continued to say I smelled so bad she could tell where I had been by the smell left behind. She got to others to say I had a distinct smell. But several other coworkers and friends said they had noticed any scent on me. I had to resign my job because the environment had become so hostile and the stress was making my eczema worse and causing anxiety issues. My doctor and dermatologist both said she was using this issue to harass and bully me.

  20. First, the smoker with chemical issues. I have chemical issues (perfumes- whether perfume, lotion, etc.) and trying to feel better, I quit smoking. They go worse. I started smoking again and it improved. It turns out that Drs. used to suggest asthma sufferers take up smoking because it relaxes the lungs.
    At my job, a factory job, there is a girl that knows I have issues with her lotion. I have breathing difficulty, get a rash in my armpits while my body tries to detox from the stuff, I get swelling of the joints and muscle spasms… all that after the migraine starts! My boss said she didn’t do it deliberately, but she washed herself in the bathroom before going to talk to him… He gave me a particle mask to wear when she’s working near me (actually, he gave me 2). I wore it yesterday because her and 2 others would come into my area and apply their lotion all day long. I’m still trying to recuperate from the other days that she did this. She looks over at me in this particle mask and smiles really big while putting the stuff on(again). Yeah, it’s not deliberate. So, I got blisters on my ears and raw spots on my nose and chin from this mask… and felt like I was cooking! Of course, there’s a fan nearby taunting me! I had turned a fan on a few days before (was on for about 30 seconds before she SCREAMED that I was making her freeze. I turned it off (didn’t have a chance to try to adjust it or move it). So, the boss says I can’t use a fan and will have to use a particle mask (doesn’t really effectively work on airborne chemicals- the scent comes right through). Funny thing is, I’m usually ok around small amounts of the poisons and toxins, but if I get a big exposure, it can take days or weeks to recuperate… so she’s started this circle of sickness for me. I’m not sure, but I think my next step will be to make an official report and see if that gets anything done… HR has helped before, so we’ll see. I have been informed that if the offending person has been informed and deliberately keeps it up I can file assault charges. I’m sure she’d love that! You can’t tell me that she can’t find a lotion that isn’t perfumed… I use coconut oil and it works great! (if anyone has tree nut allergies, I will refrain from using it at work!)

  21. I have asthma. I have allergies. I cannot tolerate various scents. I take 5 different meds for asthma and allergies. Recently, a co worker sprayed a disinfectant. It burnt my throat made my chest hurt. I lost my voice in 10 minutes. Bronchioles closed. Here’s the thing. The co worker is still on time for work….a preschool, she recently began the job of cleaning after preschool is over. Trouble is she doesn’t want to stay longer to clean so she begins to clean while the children are napping. This is a preschool for special needs. So,I’m off for 2 days per Dr. orders and management wants me to use 2 of my sick days!! Really…management failed to control the situation. Workman Comp. paid for the office visit to Dr and meds. Somehow I’ve been cheated. Somehow, the children are cheated.

  22. I agree, scent control at work is necessary and people do suffer allergies to them. I just want to point out that it is a very convenient way to get special treatment and or disability checks. We have a person at work that suffers all these horiffic problem;, gets her own office; dictates what people can wash their hands or clothes with; gets all kinds of benefits; no-one else does; yet has no problem going to resturants, shopping, movie theaters; It is just another way people can scam, and they do.

  23. Hi. I teach Middle School. I’m asthmatic and my students sometimes aerosolize body spray in the air because they think it is funny to see me dash for my inhaler. Today this happened and very quickly I got hives, then my throat started to swell and I couldn’t breathe. They had to call 911 and the paramedics had to use an epi pen on me. It was the scariest thing I’ve ever experienced and I’m scared to death the students are going to do it again. They are in middle school and have no understanding of the seriousness of their actions. Im home now but a little freaked out and maybe someone who has been in my shoes could offer some advice. Thanks so much!

  24. Has anyone had a problem at work where you bring up the sensitivity issue and instead of it getting better, it gets worse? Co workers are inconsiderate. No one cares.

  25. For Rita (1/2016): Shouldn’t the person watch and care for children with disabilities during naptime instead of cleaning?! I’d call that neglect. Especially for that vulnerable population.

    I’m HR so I struggle with why managers have such issue with making reasonable accommodations. I feel this is what a leader should do to for employees, with our without law. The working force is so different than in the 50s with the way they think about work and the employer. The same goes for the business. Gone are the days of automatically retaining the forever employee. Retention is key and if a few policies to be respectful of people’s possible med conditions/allergies to scents will keep hard workers in the door for a year or 2 longer, great.

    If you have a condition, let the employer know the accommodations needed to be able to do the essential functions. Most requests are rather easy. Tell the employees not to where perfume and make it policy. They do and you have issue, they broke policy… commence discipline. There are amazing hardworking people out there. Yes, some make it bad but that’s for everything. Get to know the law and work with it. It’s honestly not hard and most accommodations are mild and inexpensive.
    If the person can’t do their essential work after accommodating them, then they can’t do it. They are then on equal ground. Commence discipline.

  26. Perfumes and scented personal products don’t bother me. I don’t care for them but I don’t complain. Air freshener though makes me physically ill with hard to shake migraines. I work with a woman who insists on having air freshener at her desk.

    She has been asked not to by HR in the past because of my migraines. She has hidden the Renuzit at her desk before and lied about having it. Now it is in a locked drawer in her desk. She is the only member of the department with a locking drawer. Not even our supervisor has one. Mrs. Renuzit has always insisted on it. Our supervisor doesn’t have a key to the drawer.

    Another coworker got in on the air freshener action just because he disliked me and sprayed an aerosol product into one of the vents so that the wall of odor boomed out over an area the size of a large convenience store.

    For awhile I was allowed to sit away from the harassment duo on another floor. Frequently strong fragrance came belching out of the air vent nearest my desk. I puzzled about that until I realized there was a step stool around the corner in the supply room and saw dirty finger prints on the ceiling tiles near the vent in question but none other. He had very early hours and was in the office long before others. Motive and opportunity. Backstory: guy is a real creep so this would be pretty mild for him. Another co-worker said he was physically afraid of him and someone thought he might have been shaking down this same co-worker. The supervisor shared her concerns to HR and the OA but she was not listened to. Mr. Wonderful was very friendly with the OA.

    Now Mr. Wonderful has been laid off and I have been moved into his old desk. The wall of odor is gone but I am back in the Bermuda Triangle of passive aggressive behavior and hidden air freshener. Mrs. Renuzit has an overpowering floral odor emanating from her desk. It’s not on her person because when I walk past her away from the desk it’s not on her.

    She does something in her locked desk drawer to start the smell. She opens the drawer and does something before she goes to lunch and smell goes away. Considering that Renuzit was her product of choice in the past, I am thinking she is opening and closing one in the drawer.

    In the two weeks since I have moved into the area she has missed 3 days,and there was no odor any of the days she was gone. I spent $100 on an air purifier and today she complained about the noise. My husband said I should have said I didn’t know where the noise was coming from since she says she doesn’t know where the smell in her desk is coming from.

    My supervisor told me she had trouble explaining to my team members they couldn’t have air freshener in the department. I was shocked by the attitude of Mr. Wonderful, Mrs. Renuzit and another employee who kept a Renuzit at his desk (& took to social media after leaving to exclaim about how he could finally have them again).

    They said there was no need for three people to give up something if it only bothered one person. As if I should go home with a daily migraine, nauseous, unable to eat, my systolic blood pressure up 30 points and crawl into bed without even speaking to my little boy. That was my day. My head felt like it would explode all the time. Constant daily migraine due to air freshener which is hardly a necessity.

    My right not to be near collapse from pain, exhaustion and the stress of medical harassment vs. apple pie Renuzit, a fake-cinnamon scented pile of benzene, toluene and formaldehyde.

    My performance reviews have always been good with two previous OAs and the three immediate supervisors I have worked under. Last year’s review was fairly bad with this OA;we had no HR manager at the time because the OA was holding the position open for a personal friend of hers who was still on maternity leave. I was told I didn’t get along well with my teammates and my job skills were so-so. When I tried to explain the situation I was told that no harassment would be taken seriously unless the OA had it on videotape.

    A few weeks later the OA had a meeting with my department to address morale. As soon as I came in the door, Mr. Wonderful and Mrs. Renuzit spun their chairs around in unison to give me their backs. I chatted with my supervisor and the co-worker who had said he was afraid of Mr. Wonderful. When the OA opened the door their chairs quickly spun back around. Ms.OA gave us a lecture about respecting each other and said everyone needed to get along, everyone is equally to blame, there will be personnel changes if things don’t improve.

    After this I am afraid to speak up to HR about the air freshener again for fear of being fired. I am going to ask my neurologist for a note explaining the medical situation since HR is the OA’s personal friend. I don’t feel comfortable saying anything to this person without medical documentation to back me up. Someone ran the numbers and we have had almost 70% turnover in the last four years; morale office-wide is not great. I don’t quite know what to do. My supervisor is sick every day with headaches too. I hate to put her in the middle of dealing with the Renuzit person. I don’t want to quit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *