Under certain circumstances, alcohol-related absences are protected by FMLA and ADA. But what about an absence that involves criminal activity and jail time? Read the facts of this real-life case and decide: Who won?
The facts:
An employee missed two weeks of work without authorization. Why? He was arrested for a DUI (his second offense) and couldn’t make bail, so he spent two weeks in prison. No shocker here: The company fired him. But he sued, claiming the absence was caused by a disability (alcoholism) — therefore he had the right to take time off.
The employer said:
The laws give companies several obligations for accommodating employees with addictions — but giving them time off for incarceration isn’t one of them. Firing him was the only reasonable choice.
Who won the case?
Answer: The employer.
Why: The employee claimed the absence was caused by actions that were “a manifestation of his disability.” Therefore, firing him for those absences was, in essence, firing him for his disability.
But the judge wasn’t willing to make that stretch. Generally, addicted workers are only granted time off to seek treatment, not because the addiction makes them unable to work.
Cite: Leary v. Dalton
