United States: Protecting Alcoholics, Preventing Alcohol Misuse And Distinguishing Between The Two

It has long been clear that the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) protects alcoholism if it qualifies as a "disability."1  That said, courts have consistently held that employers can have legitimate work rules that prohibit alcohol use in the workforce.  However, the line between having a protected disability and engaging in unprotected misconduct while working can easily become blurred, and employers across all industries likely have struggled over this issue.  The distinction is important because protected alcoholics may be entitled to reasonable accommodations under the ADA and state laws.

Two recent federal district court decisions address both issues.  In Lankford v. Reladyne, LLC, an Ohio district court considered a plaintiff's claim that the employer unlawfully terminated the employee upon his return to work from a medical leave for alcohol rehabilitation.  A few months later, the Northern District of Mississippi in Clark v. Boyd Tunica, Inc. dismissed a former employee's claim that her employer unlawfully terminated her for being at work while under the influence of alcohol.  Both cases touch on the competing issues confronting most employers today—the obligation to accommodate disabled alcoholic workers and the right to enforce policies that prohibit alcohol use while at work.

Alcoholism in workplaces presents many legal and human resource management issues.  Correctly navigating federal and state discrimination and leave laws is crucial not only for helping avoid litigation but also for ensuring a safe environment for all employees.  These issues and the Lankford and Clark decisions are discussed below. 

Employers May Have a Duty to Provide Alcoholics with Reasonable Accommodations, Including a Protected Leave of Absence

Does the ADA Protect the Employee's Alcoholism?

The National Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependence defines alcoholism as:  "a primary, chronic disease with genetic, psychological, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations.  The disease is often progressive and fatal.  It is characterized by impaired control over drinking, preoccupation with the drug alcohol, use of alcohol despite adverse consequences, and distortion in thinking, most notably denial."  According to the Council, 17.6 million people, or one in every 12 adults, suffer from alcohol abuse or dependence. 

Under the ADA, individuals who abuse alcohol may be considered disabled if the person is an alcoholic or a recovering alcoholic.2  Indeed, alcoholism can result in the fairly obvious impairment of major life activities such as walking, standing, and thinking.  Case law is in agreement.  For example, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has noted that "it is well-established that alcoholism meets the definition of a disability" under the ADA.3  In addition, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has held that where a plaintiff could show she was regarded as an alcoholic, she was "disabled within the meaning of the ADA."4

Some courts, however, have called into question whether alcoholism should categorically be a covered disability.  Specifically:

  • The Fifth Circuit concluded that alcoholism is not a disability per se, finding that the plaintiff's alcoholism was not a covered disability under the ADA because it did not substantially limit any of his major life activities.5
  • The Eighth Circuit suggested it would analyze alcoholism on an individualized basis regarding whether it is a covered disability under the ADA, mentioning in a footnote that the plaintiff had not presented evidence "that his alcoholism impaired a major life activity."6 
  • Similarly, the Tenth Circuit concluded that while alcoholism could qualify as a disability under the ADA, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his condition restricted a major life activity after he testified that he could function normally if he attended Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and that his alcoholism did not affect his ability to go to work and complete his job duties.7

When is There a Duty to Accommodate Employees with Alcoholism?

Under the ADA, an employer must engage in the interactive process when an employee asks for an accommodation or when the employer becomes aware of its necessity.8  The issue of when the employer becomes aware of the necessity for an accommodation raises an interesting question.  Can (or should) an employer ask applicants about their drinking habits?  According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC):  "[t]hat depends on whether the particular question is likely to elicit information about alcoholism, which is a disability.  An employer may certainly ask an applicant whether s/he drinks alcohol because that does not reveal whether someone has alcoholism.  However, questions asking how much alcohol an applicant drinks are likely to elicit information about whether the applicant has alcoholism."9  Therefore, an employer should be wary of making such inquiries and should consult with counsel regarding the circumstances where such inquiries might potentially be appropriate.

A corollary to the duty to engage in the interactive process is the duty to reasonably accommodate employees with covered disabilities.10  This does not mean, however, the employer must ignore an individual's use of alcohol in violation of a reasonable work rule.  A reasonable accommodation for an employee suffering from alcoholism may be a modified work schedule so the employee can attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings or a leave of absence so the employee can seek treatment provided the desired accommodation would not cause unreasonable hardship to the employer.11  The many side effects of alcoholism may also require reasonable accommodation.  For example, depression, a common disability accompanying alcoholism, may necessitate transfer of the employee to a less stressful position if one is available and the employee is qualified. 

However, an employer is generally not required to provide leave to an employee suffering from alcoholism to seek treatment if the treatment would likely be futile.  In one Ninth Circuit case, the court held that where the plaintiff's previous attempts at recovery had not been successful, he could not stave off discharge indefinitely by attempting to enter into yet another course of treatment after several relapses.12  Similarly, one federal district court concluded that "an employer would not be required to provide repeated leaves of absence (or perhaps even a single leave of absence) for an alcoholic employee with a poor prognosis for recovery."13 

Moreover, an employer does not have a duty to provide an accommodation to an employee who denies having a disability and has not requested an accommodation.  In one case where the plaintiff denied having a disability, the court held that "imputing . . . knowledge [of the disability] is inappropriate where the employee has openly denied having any problems."14  Similarly, one plaintiff's failure-to-accommodate claim based on the employer's not offering him a non-driving job or a last-chance agreement allowing him to return to work after drinking on the job—the offense for which he was fired—was foreclosed by his failure to request any accommodation from the employer prior to his termination.15  

Does the Family and Medical Leave Act Require an Employer to Grant a Medical Leave to an Employee with Alcoholism?

The federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) entitles employees who are unable to perform the functions of their job because of a serious health condition to an unpaid leave of absence of up to 12 weeks.16  The FMLA defines a "serious health condition" as an "illness, injury, impairment or physical or mental condition" that involves "inpatient care in a hospital, hospice, or residential medical care facility;" or "continuing treatment by a health care provider."17  Thus, whether an employee's alcoholism qualifies him or her for FMLA leave depends on whether impatient care or continuing treatment is necessitated. 

The FMLA permits employers to require that employees taking such leave provide medical certification signed by the employees' health care provider.18  Leave under the FMLA is not appropriately provided, however, due to the incapacity of an employee to work as a result of intoxication or its after affects.   

Employers Can Implement and Enforce Rules Regarding Alcohol in the Workplace

While employers may be required to accommodate alcoholic employees, the law also makes clear that employers can enforce rules concerning alcohol at the workplace, including prohibiting the consumption of alcohol while at work.  The Ninth Circuit noted in an ADA case that "alcoholics . . . are not exempt from reasonable rules of conduct, such as prohibitions against the possession or use of alcohol . . . in the workplace, and employers must be allowed to terminate their employees on account of misconduct, irrespective of whether the employee is handicapped."19 

By the same token, employers can prohibit their employees from being under the influence of alcohol at the workplace.  A federal district court judge in Massachusetts explained: "[r]easonable accommodation does not extend to accommodating an alcoholic employee's showing up to work under the influence of alcohol or drinking alcohol on the job.  Because [the plaintiff] violated a company policy . . . he cannot now, without more, belatedly avail himself of . . . [a] reasonable accommodation."20  Indeed, employers can hold an employee who is an alcoholic to the same standards for employment or job performance and behavior as it does other employees, even if any unsatisfactory performance or behavior is related to the employee's alcoholism.

A guidance memorandum issued by the EEOC provides the following example:

An employer has warned an employee several times about her tardiness.  The next time the employee is tardy, the employer issues her a written warning stating one more late arrival will result in termination.  The employee tells the employer that she is an alcoholic, her late arrivals are due to drinking on the previous night, and she recognizes that she needs treatment.  The employer does not have to rescind the written warning and does not have to grant an accommodation that supports the employee's drinking, such as a modified work schedule that allows her to arrive late in the morning due to the effects of drinking on the previous night. However, absent undue hardship, the employer must grant the employee's request to take leave for the next month to enter a rehabilitation program.21

On the other hand, the EEOC provided the following scenario:

An employer has a lax attitude about employees arriving at work on time.  One day a supervisor sees an employee he knows to be a recovered alcoholic come in late.  Although the employee's tardiness is no worse than other workers and there is no evidence to suggest the tardiness is related to drinking, the supervisor believes such conduct may signal that the employee is drinking again.  Thus, the employer reprimands the employee for being tardy.  The supervisor's actions violate the ADA because the employer is holding an employee with a disability to a higher standard than similarly situated workers.22

Thus, employers must walk the tightrope between terminating employees based on workplace rules violations and terminating them because of their alcoholism.  The following cases are illustrative:

  • One district court found for the employer in its decision to terminate its police chief after he caused a car accident injuring two people while under the influence on the grounds that he was not a "qualified individual," inasmuch as his conduct violated several clearly established work rules.23   
  • An appellate court affirmed a ruling for the employer where the employee alleged he had been wrongly discharged as a result of 12 unexcused absences that were the result of his incarceration due to consequences of his alcoholism.24 
  • The Ninth Circuit rejected the employee's claim that he could not be discharged for misconduct after a "drunken rampage" because the misconduct was a result of, or linked to, his alcoholism.25   
  • An appellate court concluded that, even assuming the employee's alcoholism qualified as a disability under the ADA, the employer did not have to accommodate her by overlooking her violations of workplace rules.26 

Recent Federal District Courts Affirm the Duty to Accommodate and Uphold Substance Abuse Work Rules

Jury to decide claims of discrimination and retaliation against an employee diagnosed with alcoholism

In Lankford v. Reladyne, LLC,27 the district court in the Southern District of Ohio considered a former employee's claim that his employer unlawfully terminated him upon return from a medical leave for alcohol rehabilitation.  In that case, the plaintiff requested and took a 35-day leave of absence to attend an alcohol rehabilitation program.  Upon his return from leave, the employer confronted him about some allegations that, prior to his leave, the plaintiff had given a customer free supplies in exchange for a free oil change for his mother.  The plaintiff denied the allegations but, nevertheless, was terminated.  The plaintiff sued the employer for disability discrimination, FMLA interference and retaliation.

In its motion for summary judgment, the employer argued the plaintiff did not have a disability and, even if he did, the employer lawfully terminated him for misconduct.  The court rejected the employer's arguments.  On the question of whether the plaintiff had a disability, the court relied on the plaintiff's medical records, which demonstrated that the plaintiff's alcoholism substantially limited major life activities (including the ability to concentrate and care for himself), resulted in his admission to two separate rehabilitation programs and had caused the plaintiff gastrointestinal issues. 

In finding a genuine issue of fact as to whether the employer had terminated the plaintiff for lawful reasons as opposed to discriminatory and retaliatory reasons, the court pointed to various internal emails and statements made during the plaintiff's termination meeting and following his termination, which made reference to the plaintiff's medical leave and expressed concern about his "lapses and ethics."  In response to why the employer would not re-employ the plaintiff, the general manager stated, "personal life in ruins" and "needs outside help."  These facts, in addition to the close proximity between the plaintiff's leave and his termination, resulted in the court denying the employer's motion for summary judgment. 

Court dismisses employee's claim that employer unlawfully terminated her after a failed alcohol test

More recently, in March 2016, the district court in the Northern District of Mississippi considered a challenge to an employer's termination of an employee who tested positive for alcohol while working.  In Clark v. Boyd Tunica, Inc.,28 the employer had a "Substance/Alcohol Abuse and Drug Testing" policy, which required employees to submit to a drug and alcohol test following an on-the-job injury. 

The plaintiff twisted and fractured her ankle while working.  At the clinic, the plaintiff provided both blood and urine samples for drug and alcohol testing.  The urine sample revealed that the plaintiff's blood alcohol content was .12% (above the designated cutoff level for the screening).  However, the blood sample was negative for alcohol.  After determining that the plaintiff's medications could not have caused a false positive, the employer terminated the plaintiff.

The plaintiff sued, claiming the urine test was inaccurate and also claimed the employer was truly motivated by her disability (the ankle injury).  The court dismissed the disability discrimination claim, finding the plaintiff could not prove she had a protected disability.  Even if she had been able to meet this burden, the court nevertheless concluded the employer had demonstrated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the plaintiff's termination.  The employer had presented evidence that employees who tested positive for alcohol while on the job were terminated.  The plaintiff maintained that the alcohol test showed a false positive and, thus, claimed the employer's reason was a pretext for discrimination.  According to the court, however, "[e]ven if the positive result was in fact false, an employer's reliance on an erroneous result does not create a claim under the ADA absent an independent showing that the real reason for the firing was a disability."  The court found it important that the employer had given the plaintiff the "benefit of the doubt" by waiting to terminate her until after the lab determined her medications did not cause a false positive.  As a result, the court dismissed the plaintiff's claims.

Recommendations for Employers

Undoubtedly, alcoholism adversely affects employers and their businesses just as it affects those who suffer from it.  Threats to safety at work, job injuries, theft, low employee morale, and costs related to absenteeism, recruiting, training, turnover, and healthcare utilization all contribute to the detrimental effects of employees who cannot control their drinking.  Correctly navigating employment laws governing what you can and cannot do as an employer is challenging.  Consider consulting experienced counsel in making employment decisions regarding employees suffering from alcoholism and in devising drug and alcohol screening programs. 

The following are some additional recommendations for employers to consider:

  • Establish a policy against alcohol use in the workplace addressing when alcohol consumption is permitted or prohibited and highlighting the availability of rehabilitation services and your employee assistance program.  The employee's willingness to consume alcohol should almost never be considered necessary to obtaining or holding a job.  Consider adding provisions that allow for post-accident and reasonable suspicion drug and alcohol testing. 
  • If you suspect alcohol abuse, refer to your workplace drug and alcohol policy and employee assistance program.  Educate supervisors and managers about the signs of use and abuse and steps for reporting any suspicious behavior.  Such training is important for those who will determine whether an employee will be tested based on the reasonable suspicion of abuse.  
  • Consider assisting an employee suffering from alcoholism instead of terminating them from employment.  As described above, alcoholism may be a disability protected by anti-discrimination laws, thus triggering the employer's duty to engage in the interactive process and to reasonably accommodate an employee suffering from alcoholism.
  • Nationwide employers should also familiarize themselves with the myriad state and local laws that regulate employer drug and alcohol testing programs.  Some of these jurisdictions restrict the types of drug and alcohol testing employers may conduct, including random testing.  

While the above guidance should assist with developing workplace policies, it is recommended that all policies concerning alcoholism in the workplace be considered and implemented with the assistance of counsel.

Footnotes

1 References to the ADA include the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.

2 Williams v. Widnall, 79 F.3d 1003 (10th Cir. 1996).

3 Office of the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms v. Office of Senate Fair Emp't Practices, 95 F.3d 1102, 1105 (Fed. Cir. 1996).

4 Miners v. Cargill Communications, Inc., 113 F.3d 820, 823 (8th Cir. 1997).

5 Burch v. Coca-Cola Co., 119 F.3d 305 (5th Cir. 1997).

6 Wallin v. Minnesota Dep't of Corr., 153 F.3d 681, 686, n. 4 (8th Cir. 1998).

7 Burris v. Novartis Animal Health U.S., Inc., 309 Fed. Appx. 241, 250 (10th Cir. 2009).

8 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o)(3).

9 http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/medfin5.pdf.

10 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o)(3).

11 42 U.S.C. § 12111(9); Brown v. Lucky Stores, Inc., 246 F.3d 1182, 1188 (9th Cir. 2001).

12 Fuller v. Frank, 916 F.2d 558, 561-62 (9th Cir. 1990).

13 Schmidt v. Safeway Inc., 864 F. Supp. 991, 997 (D. Or. 1994).

14 Larson v. Koch Refining Co., 920 F. Supp. 1000, 1006 (D. Minn. 1996).

15 Blazek v. City of Lakewood, Ohio, 576 Fed. Appx. 512 (6th Cir. 2014).

16 29 U.S.C. § 2612(a)(1)(D).

17 29 U.S.C. § 26611(11); 29 C.F.R. § 825.115.

18 29 U.S.C. § 2613(a); 29 C.F.R. § 825.305(a).

19 Collings v. Longview Fibre Co., 63 F.3d 828, 832 (9th Cir. 1995).

20 Flynn v. Raytheon Co., 868 F. Supp. 383, 387 (D. Mass. 1994).

21 http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html.

22 Id.

23 Budde v. Kane County Forest Preserve, 603 F. Supp. 2d 1136 (N.D. Ill. 2009).

24 Leary v. Dalton, 58 F.3d 748, 753 (1st Cir. 1995).

25 Newland v. Dalton, 81 F.3d 904, 906 (9th Cir. 1996).

26 Ames v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 629 F.3d 665 (7th Cir. 2011).

27 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156640 (S.D. Ohio, Nov. 19, 2015).

28 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25223 (N.D. Miss., Mar. 1, 2016).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.