Family Medical Leave and Disability: 3 Takeaways from a Recent Court Decision
The start of a new job can feel very optimistic. Typically, both employers and employees have high hopes for their future together. Many grow together for years – however, sometimes unforeseen roadblocks can complicate the relationship, such as serious illness.
The Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) provides 12-weeks of unpaid leave for employees with a qualifying serious health condition, applicable to employers with 50 or more employees. Employees typically qualify after about one (1) year of employment. A recent Fourth Circuit decision highlighted the nuances associated with FMLA and the responsibilities associated for both the employer and employee.
In Coffman v. Nexstar Media, Inc., the Court reviewed the case of an employee who was terminated for exhausting FMLA and being unable to return to work. The employee sued, alleging discrimination based on disability as well as retaliation based on her FMLA use. The district court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed her claims – and the Fourth Circuit affirmed. I recommend that employers and employees consider the following based on the decision:
Family Medical Leave can be finite in duration. The FMLA places an affirmative obligation on employers to offer Family Medical Leave (FML) to leave for employees with potentially qualifying conditions. The employer must then review and process the employees’ submitted documentation surrounding their request for leave in a timely manner. That being said, the FMLA does not require that an employer extend the protected leave beyond 12 weeks, absent a justification relating to a potential reasonable accommodation (under the Americans with Disabilities Act). In Coffman, the employer provided the employee with an additional 12-weeks of FMLA beyond the initial leave. The employee argued that she should have been afforded additional job protection because she was out on disability benefits – however, the Court found disability benefits differ from job protection. The Court also ruled that the employer was justified in terminating her employment because she could not perform her job duties. In short, because the employee could not work at all, her existing disability (relating to post-birth complications) did not justify additional FML (or a reasonable accommodation).
Terminating someone on FMLA may not support a retaliatory discharge claim. In Coffman, the Court disagreed with the employee’s claim that her use of FML was causally linked to her termination and therefore constituted retaliation. More specifically, the Court found that the three (3) months between the employee’s termination and the expiration of her FML allotment did not form a causal nexus of retaliation. The Court further opined that “two months and two weeks” from the date of FML expiration and the termination was enough to remove the inference.
State or local leave laws must be read in connection with FMLA. In Coffman, the employee worked in West Virginia, where there are no existing required paid/unpaid leave laws. Therefore, the entirety of the Court’s analysis surrounded the applicable federal FML statute and state discrimination law. Most employers – including those locally in Maryland and DC (to name a few) must also analyze the applicability of paid leave laws in deciding how to approach time out of the office for a serious illness. While most jurisdictions’ leave laws run concurrently with FML, some apply to smaller employers (i.e., DC Paid Family Leave applies to employers with only one employee) and therefore may apply even in the absence of a federal FML requirement. Employers must therefore be mindful of the state and federal landscape – particularly when they have teams working remotely in various states.
Please feel free to reach out to me to discuss your FMLA-related leave questions at tstringham@kramerelias.com or (703) 202-7633.
Theodora Stringham focuses her practice on bringing solutions-oriented representation and zealous advocacy to complex issues impacting individuals, organizations, and businesses. Ms. Stringham seeks to understand clients’ concerns and provide thorough and strategic options aimed at achieving their goals. She has been recognized for her work in the Real Estate, Labor and Employment, and Commercial Litigation practice areas, providing counseling and litigation support for a wide variety of concerns.