Recently, lawyers representing former employees have been pushing the envelope in thinking of new ways to make employers pay big bucks. Fortunately, courts aren’t accepting some novel arguments, like the one in the following case.
Recent case: Anthony claimed he was fired for wanting to take time off to bond with his newborn child and care for his wife. He took another job, where he hurt himself. He claims that had he never been fired he would not have been working at the new job and would not have been injured.
Therefore, he told the court, he was due damages in addition to any damages owed him for not being allowed time off following his child’s birth.
The court tossed out the claim, reasoning that there was no direct connection between Anthony’s injury and his earlier discharge. (Blackburn v. Sturgeon, No. 1:13-cv-00054, ED CA, 2014)
- Is there anything in the law that makes it illegal to change employees' schedules?
- Florida high court sides with employees—Employers liable for unconcealed negligence
- Volunteerism can benefit your bottom line
- Testifying for subordinate may be protected activity
- When worried about religious accommodation, keep lines of communication open