In August of 2014 the United States Court for Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard an employment discrimination case involving an employee who claims he was fired after he took time off under the self-care provision of the FMLA. (See Crugher v. Prelesnik, 2014 WL 3765713 (6th Cir. 2014)). One of the things that the plaintiff wanted was reinstatement to his old job.
The plaintiff began working for the defendant in 1994. Id. In 1999 he develope3d irritable-bowel syndrome and a generalized anxiety disorder. Id. In 2009 he was transferred to a new correctional facility. Id. Plaintiff claims at this new location he was subjected to harassment and intimidation because he took FMLA leave. Id. He was written up a few times for alleged violations of the time attendance rules of the company. In November of 2010 he was notified to attend a performance rating conference. On January 11, 2011 he was discharged. Id.
Shortly thereafter, the plaintiff filed a grievance with his union for being wrongfully terminated. Id. A determination was made that his termination was justified. In April of 2013 plaintiff’s Kentucky FMLA Harassment, Retaliation and Termination lawyer filed a one count complaint alleging FMLA discrimination. Id. One of the defendant’s argument was that the plaintiff brought the case after the two year statute of limitations period for an FMLA case. Id.
An FMLA action must be brought “not later than 2 years after the date of the last event constituting the alleged violation for which the action is brought.” (cites omitted). Plaintiff claims he had a three year statute of limitations period because the conduct was willful. Id. This is what her Kentucky FMLA Harassment, Retaliation and Termination lawyer tried to argue.
This court discussed an issue about bringing the lawsuit against the state and employers in their individual capacity. The court ruled that the FMLA allowed employees to sue against a state official. But, not in their individual capacity. Further, there was some discussion as to whether the employee could recover money damages or just equitable relief.
Finally, the court looked at if the three year argument held any merit. It stated that it did not. Plaintiff did not present any proof that the termination was willful or that any defendant employee acted intentionally or recklessly to violate the plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA. The court discussed how the defendant was negligent in interpreting the plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA as they interrelated with his use of sick leave; implying that the defendant just did it wrong, but that it was not willful.
If you have been the subject of a Kentucky FMLA Harassment, Retaliation and Termination Case, please call and speak to a Kentucky FMLA Harassment, Retaliation and Termination lawyer at the Law Offices of Andrew Alitowski, P.A. at 888-ASK-ANDREW (888-275-2637) or contact us. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
If you are injured…Ask Andrew!!!