(USA TODAY) The surge in genetic research has employees worried bosses will use DNA tests in hiring and firing. Concern is mounting because genetic tests are no longer the stuff of science fiction. Research advances are making it possible to identify a host of health risks related to genetic traits. Just this month, a federal appeals court ruled secret testing of employees is unconstitutional. The ruling stemmed from a lawsuit by workers who say Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory covertly tested them for syphilis, pregnancy and the sickle-cell trait. The action sends the lawsuit to a lower court for trial. The lab says workers were aware they were being tested as part of a comprehensive medical exam and agreed to the tests. But the workers claim they were being targeted and their privacy invaded. Many workers say they thought they were just being checked for common health problems or high cholesterol. ``It's not appropriate in an employment context,'' says Vicki Laden, a lawyer for the workers. Numerous agencies and politicians are now calling for legislation to protect employees from genetic discrimination, but many workers already worry. ``It's a real barrier,'' says Alison Whelan, a geneticist at Washington University School of Medicine. ``Because of the concern about discrimination, many individuals will pay out of pocket for tests.'' Workers fear employers will use information to weed out those with traits linked to inherited medical conditions. Bosses may fire those employees they think will be likely to use sick leave or run up insurance costs. ``Employers have a lot of latitude,'' says Susan Root, director of human genetics at the National Center for Genome Resources (NCGR). ``There have been instances of people losing their jobs because of genetic discrimination.'' But discrimination fears could keep employees from learning if they have traits linked to breast cancer, cystic fibrosis, Huntington's disease or other conditions. Nearly 65% of respondents wouldn't take a genetic test if health insurers or employers could see the results, based on a 1997 report by the NCGR, a federally funded agency in Santa Fe that looks at ethical issues surrounding genetic research. ``I don't think a boss should know,'' says Deb Uhlenhake, 39, a factory worker in Celina, Ohio. ``I just think they shouldn't have access to information like that.'' Last month, the Clinton administration called for legislation banning genetic discrimination in the workplace. The effort is coming in part because the issue is so new. Supporters want laws that would: - Prevent employers from requiring workers to take a genetic test as a condition of employment or benefits. - Ban companies from using genetic information to discriminate. - Restrict employers from obtaining or disclosing genetic information about employees. ``It's almost a pre-emptive strike,'' says Karen Rothenberg, director of the Law and Health Care Program at the University of Maryland School of Law in Baltimore. ``When the technology gets cheap, there may be more attempts to use this to have an impact on employment.'' As of October, 14 states had laws providing varying levels of protection. Little exists at the federal level. Legal experts say a boss could ask a worker to submit to a genetic test. ``The bulk of patients don't want information sent to their family physician for fear it will get into the wrong hands,'' says Henry Lynch, director of the cancer center at Creighton University in Omaha. How genetics can be used in the workplace Genetic screening -- examines the genetic makeup of employees or job applicants for specific inherited characteristics. It can be used to detect certain traits that leave an employee more susceptible to certain diseases if exposed to environmental substances. Genetic monitoring -- this gauges whether an individual's genetic material has changed over time due to workplace exposure to hazardous substances. Copyright 1998, USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co., Inc. Workers fear genetic discrimination..