A Sick Note Is Not an Open Book: Swiss Temp Worker Pushed to Disclose Pregnancy and Psychiatric History
Published on 11/02/2026 at 10:40 | Editorial boerse-global.de
A Basel recruitment firm demanded that a temporary employee reveal her symptoms, prior illnesses, mental-health history and whether she was pregnant — then gave her three working days to answer or risk losing her pay. The woman refused, and employment lawyers say she was right to.
What the company asked for
The employee had been placed by the payroll firm at a Basel pharmaceutical company. At the start of September, after three days unable to work, she filed a proper doctor's certificate. The employer's response, sent by email, was a lengthy questionnaire.
It sought specifics on her symptoms and any pre-existing conditions, along with possible psychological illness. The form also asked whether she was pregnant and, if so, requested an estimated due date for insurance purposes.
A three-working-day deadline came attached. Failure to supply the information in time, the firm warned, would mean benefits being reduced or withheld entirely. As reported by the portal 20min.ch on 1 November 2026, the employee declined to answer questions about her intimate health data.
Where the law draws the line
Employment-law specialists at the union Syna say such demands have no basis in either the Swiss Code of Obligations (Obligationenrecht) or the Data Protection Act. Health data counts as especially sensitive personal information under employment law, and an employer may generally request only what is strictly necessary to assess whether someone can actually do their job.
In practice that means confirmation that the employee is unfit for work and an indication of how long the absence is expected to last — normally covered by a medical certificate. Diagnoses, clinical findings, details of symptoms and personal circumstances such as pregnancy sit inside the employee's protected private sphere.
Pressure tactics without legal footing
The case exposes the friction where absence management, wage-continuation insurance and personal rights meet. Employers and insurers do face a genuine task in processing lost working time and guarding against abuse. What they cannot do, according to the Syna experts, is let insurance administration erode the legal protection around intimate health data.
Nor is a deadline with the threat of withheld benefits a legitimate lever when the underlying request for information was never justified.
