If, like many employers, you offer employees more than the required 12 weeks of unpaidin any given year, you may have a powerful response to a disability or discrimination lawsuit. The fact that you pay employees during FMLA leave or offer more generous leave terms can help prove that you aren’t an employer that resents sick workers and tries to drive them out.
Recent case: Shat worked as a Bloomberg investment banker for years, earning well over $300,000 annually. He then began having heart problems and developed related conditions. As a result, he missed months of work over a three-year period.
Each time, Bloomberg continued to pay him because it had a generous sick leave policy. For example, Shat received his entire salary while he was on medical leave for six months. He also received two raises after taking lengthy leaves.
When the company fired Shat for deteriorating performance, he sued. He claimed that he was being retaliated against for taking FMLA leave and that allegations ofwere just a sham to cover up the real reason he was terminated.
The court disagreed.
It reasoned that it was clear from Bloomberg’s policies and how well it treated Shat that it wasn’t likely to give employees generous leave benefits and then turn around and fire them for taking that leave. (Ben-Levy v. Bloomberg, L.P., et al., No. 11-Civ-1554, SD NY, 2012)
- How to Fire an Employee the Legal Way: 6 Termination Guidelines
- The EEOC's new initiatives for 2008: All talk … or a real threat?
- No unemployment comp for job lost due to absenteeism
- Stay on top of FMLA recertifications—Track when employees receive your requests
- Employee returning from FMLA leave? OK to assign her to different, equivalent job