Comments on: Fired employee not eligible for FMLA — sues for retaliation anyway http://www.hrmorning.com/fired-employee-not-eligible-for-fmla-sues-for-retaliation-anyway-2/ Your daily dose of HR Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:43:13 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: mike R http://www.hrmorning.com/fired-employee-not-eligible-for-fmla-sues-for-retaliation-anyway-2/comment-page-1/#comment-20059 mike R Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:06:52 +0000 http://www.hrmorning.com/?p=3103#comment-20059 At first I thought this was crazy. If a person puts in for FMLA protections for their leave and is told they are not eligible, then takes time off without those protections and is terminated, there would be no recourse. However, I reread the article and I saw that he was asking for leave that would not be taken for three months, when he most likely would have met the eligibility requirements. In that case, he would be covered and the retaliation protections would apply. I understand that the article focuses on the employer having documented proof that the stated reason for termination (lack of skills) is valid. However, even with that documentation an employee can file a complaint with the EEOC. In this case, he would have been eligible and the protections would apply and so he would have standing in a court of law. I can’t imagine an employee who has only worked 3 months having the same standing. At first I thought this was crazy. If a person puts in for FMLA protections for their leave and is told they are not eligible, then takes time off without those protections and is terminated, there would be no recourse. However, I reread the article and I saw that he was asking for leave that would not be taken for three months, when he most likely would have met the eligibility requirements. In that case, he would be covered and the retaliation protections would apply.

I understand that the article focuses on the employer having documented proof that the stated reason for termination (lack of skills) is valid. However, even with that documentation an employee can file a complaint with the EEOC. In this case, he would have been eligible and the protections would apply and so he would have standing in a court of law. I can’t imagine an employee who has only worked 3 months having the same standing.

]]>