A former freight handler for FedEx can move forward on his interference claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday, reversing a district court’s decision in the case.
The worker’s job included a requirement at the end of his shift of loading and unloading trailers to check with a supervisor to ensure no other trailers needed attention. If so, he was expected to work overtime to complete the work.
In March 2020, the worker informed his managers that his wife was pregnant. He inquired about his Family and Medical Leave Act rights in case he needed leave related to his wife’s pregnancy, but was told he was “moving too fast” and would not need to inquire until after his child was born.
In June, the worker and his wife learned her pregnancy was high risk and that she would be unable to work or drive and would need more of his care. He informed his supervisors of his wife’s condition and his need to leave early or miss days to care for her. No one informed him of his FMLA rights, the 11th Circuit said.
On two occasions in late June and early July, the worker told his supervisor he’d need to leave at the end of his shift to ensure his wife’s health and take her to an appointment. When he refused to work overtime, management recorded the first incident in a disciplinary form and, the second time, told him the action was considered “job abandonment.”
A manager then requested his termination, which occurred a few weeks later, after the premature birth of his child and several weeks of paid parental leave. The worker filed a lawsuit alleging FMLA interference and retaliation.
A district court granted summary judgment to FedEx, finding the company’s actions didn’t amount to inference because they didn’t prevent the worker from caring for his wife or taking her to appointments before the birth or taking leave after.
The worker argued, however — and the 11th Circuit agreed — that “the prejudice he suffered pre-labor was not the missed appointments, but being fired from his job as a direct result of leaving after completing his shift to care for his wife.”
“Had [the worker] used the intermittent FMLA leave that he was entitled to so he could care for his wife’s pregnancy complications, he would not have been fired for refusing to work overtime,” the court said.
While it reversed on interference, the 11th Circuit upheld findings for FedEx on FMLA retaliation, as well as associational discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Employers’ failure to recognize the need for intermittent FMLA is a “common trap,” an employment attorney told HR Dive about a year ago. He recommended training managers to recognize absences as potential FMLA absences and keeping thorough documentation related to these absences.
