Royal

Employee Not Insulated from Discipline by Completing FMLA Paperwork

January 26, 2023

The United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled on December 13, 2022, that an employee on thin ice with an employer does not insulate themselves from discipline by completing Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) paperwork.


An employee at Drake University for 16 years was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) during her tenure.  Despite this diagnosis, she was seemingly able to work with the dean(s) over many years without needing to file formal FMLA paperwork. However, this all changed in July 2018 when a new dean was hired.


Animosity seemed to fester as a result of the employee’s erratic work schedule. The dean was not informed of some of the employee’s absences, and continually spoke with the employee about performance and work issues. As a result, the employee was then given a performance improvement plan (PIP). This PIP laid out requirements for notice of any absences. Performance issues and any absences were documented, with FMLA time being documented separately.


The employee’s absences and performance did not seem to improve, and as a result, the employee was terminated.


The employee then filed a lawsuit against Drake University, claiming that the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) were violated.


The Court disagreed, and found that the employee had failed to provide substantial evidence to support that the termination was retaliatory or discriminatory under FMLA or ADA.


The Court held that an employee who exercises her rights under the FMLA “has no greater protection against termination for reasons unrelated to the FMLA than she did before doing so.” … “Otherwise, a problem employee on thin ice with the employer could effectively insulate herself from discipline by engaging in protected activity.”


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Employer’s Counterclaims in Response to Suit Under Wage Act Dismissed Per Employee’s Anti-SLAPP Motion

January 15, 2025
An employer brought counterclaims of malicious prosecution and abuse-of-process in response to a Wage Act suit brought by an employee. The Appeals Court cited that the employer’s counterclaims should have been dismissed under the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) law. Anti-SLAPP laws are meant to provide parties with a way to quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits filed against them, usually in response to a lawsuit. The plaintiff in this case, an hourly laborer, claimed that his employer violated the Wage Act by failing to pay him for four of the six weeks he worked for them. The employer refuted these allegations, stating that the employee had only worked for two weeks, that he had been paid in full and then brought counterclaims of malicious prosecution and abuse of process. The District Court judge denied the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the counterclaims under the anti-SLAPP law. When brought to the Appeals Court, the decision was reversed; the Appeals Court stated that the defendants did not meet the burden of showing that plaintiff’s claims lacked an objectively reasonable factual basis. This ruling suggests that it might behoove an employer to pause and wait to see if a plaintiff’s Wage Act claim fails before filing a counterclaim of abuse of process or malicious prosecution in response.  If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Compensation Plans and Contingent Compensation Pitfalls

January 8, 2025
Attorney Trevor Brice hosted a seminar on Wednesday, January 8, 2025, discussing the possible issues with current compensation plans and contingent compensation pitfalls made possible by recent court rulings. Some of the topics discussed included: Issues with current compensation plans under the FLSA Restrictive Covenants and Compensation Plans Problems with Commission-Based Compensation Plans and Possible Solutions When a Bonus is not actually a bonus and issues under the Massachusetts Wage Act This seminar was perfect for H.R. professionals and anyone in a management position. Please feel free to contact any of the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm if you have any questions on this topic!
Share by: