The use of light duty assignments to employees who are returning to work after recuperation from an illness or injury is an often used mechanism. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that neither the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) nor the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) creates an obligation for an
D.C. Circuit holds recess appointments to NLRB invalid.
On January 25, 2013, a three-member panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision in finding that the recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) by President Obama on January 4, 2012 were unconstitutional. Noel Canning v. NLRB, No. 12-1115, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (January 25, 2013).
Employer not obligated to make an otherwise temporary “light-duty” position permanent to accommodate disabled employee under the ADA.
In an unpublished opinion, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld summary judgment in favor of an employer who refused to convert a light-duty position into a permanent job for a disabled employee. Wardia v. Campbell County Regional Justice Dept. of Corrections, 6th Cir., No. 12-5337, January 3, 2013. In that case, a
Employer’s reliance on third party assessment to determine reasonable accommodation may lead to ADA liability.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed an issue of first impression, finding that the ability to hear is not necessarily an “essential function” of the job of lifeguard. Keith v. County of Oakland, 6th Cir., No. 11-2276, January 10, 2013. In addition, however, the Court made a number of other, more generally
One district court finds that “sincerely held belief” of vegan employee may support a religious discrimination claim.
A federal district court in Ohio has refused to dismiss a complaint for religious discrimination made by a hospital employee after the employee was fired for refusing to be vaccinated for the flu. The basis of the refusal to be vaccinated was the employee’s veganism. The Court denied the employer’s motion to dismiss, holding that
Assignment to a lesser position upon return from leave may support FMLA interference claim.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment in favor of an employer, holding that a plaintiff’s testimony and evidence related to her transfer to a position of less responsibility upon return from Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave created an issue of material fact that required a jury to determine whether
Layoff upon return from military leave may qualify as a “reemployment position” under the USERRA.
USERRA reemployment ‘escalator principle’ ‘military service’ ‘military leave’
Continue Reading Layoff upon return from military leave may qualify as a “reemployment position” under the USERRA.
Temporal proximity between FMLA leave and firing does not always lead to successful legal claim.
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) continues to create administrative challenges for employers. One particular issue of concern is the discipline and or termination of an employee who has requested or is on FMLA leave. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld the dismissal of an individual’s interference and retaliation claims in
Termination for Facebook posting does not violate state invasion of privacy law.
Recent court decisions related to employees’ online postings have centered on whether disciplinary decisions regarding those postings may violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NLRA protects certain employee “concerted activities” aimed at discussing or improving working conditions, and precludes interference with such communications, including online messages. However, individuals also have brought other legal
Employee’s signs of severe emotional distress and anxiety may constitute a “report” of the need for FMLA leave.
To state a claim of interference under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), an employee must show that he or she has put the employer on notice that an absence may be covered by the FMLA. This ordinarily means that at least verbal notice must be provided to the employer within one or two