FMLA Does Not Protect Employee From Dismissal Due to Misconduct

 A court in Indianapolis found that the plaintiff, who was on approved FMLA leave at the time she was discharged from employment for prior acts of theft of food pantry donations--which violated the city's code of ethics--failed to prove that she had not violated city policies and that she would have retained her job had she not taken FMLA leave.  

The court granted summary judgement in favor of the city of Indianapolis on the plaintiff's FMLA retaliation claim despite the timing of her dismissal that occurred just a few weeks after her request of leave because the city's investigation into the theft allegations against her predated her request for FMLA leave.

The summary judgement was also appropriate on the Title VII claim alleging race discrimination because the plaintiff failed to establish that her dismissal was motivated by race or that similarly situated White employees were treated more favorably under the city's policies.

The court’s decision affirms that the FMLA will not shield employees from the repercussions of misconduct, and exercising rights afforded by the FMLA does not immunize an employee from the consequences of conduct that warrants disciplinary action or termination of employment. The FMLA does not afford employees any greater protection than they would have had if they had not requested FMLA leave. Employers may be able to defeat an FMLA interference claim based on a termination that occurred during FMLA leave by showing that the employee would have been fired even if he or she had not taken FMLA leave. Similarly, employers may be able to overcome claims of FMLA retaliation based on the timing of the discharge by establishing that the investigatory process that culminated in the termination predated the employee’s exercise of FMLA rights.

Source: Ogletree Deakins, received on May 15, 2024, govinfo.org, accessed on May 16, 2024