An employee takes FMLA leave. Her duties are shared by the rest of the department, and her supervisor decides they really don’t need her anymore. Can the company lay her off?
The answer, according to a federal court in Georgia, is “no.” Here’s what happened in a recent case:
A department manager took 2 months of FMLA after she adopted a child. While she was gone, her duties were shifted to other employees. Due to various factors, the department shrank in size during her absence, resulting in even less work for the woman to do. So as a cost-cutting measure, when the leave was over, the company decided not to bring her back on.
She sued. The company claimed the position was eliminated completely. But the court ruled for the woman, saying it looked like the woman wouldn’t have lost her job if she hadn’t taken leave – so it’s now up to a jury to review the facts.
Sticky situation
It’s not always illegal to let an employee go while on FMLA leave. For example, if someone’s picked for inclusion in a reduction in force (RIF) – for reasons unrelated to taking leave – than a court will usually find that to be legit.
However, it can be very tough to prove that the leave had nothing to do with it. In this case, the woman wasn’t let go in a larger RIF (in fact, the company was apparently growing, overall) and no formal organizational review was done to determine whether or not her position was no longer necessary.
Had either or those things happened, the outcome could have been different.
Cite: Conner v. Sun Trust Bank
