Employee’s Need for time off for Medical Reasons does not Protect her from Termination

The Seventh Circuit Court of appeals recently affirmed summary judgment for the employer on an employee's ADA and FMLA claims. In this case, the employee was terminated after she was absent many times due to symptoms (and the ultimate diagnosis) of multiple sclerosis. She was unable to adhere to the company's attendance guidelines, was not eligible for leave, and could not perform the essential functions of her job (e.g., attendance) even with reasonable accommodation. 

Here, the employee worked as a dispatcher for a ground transportation service for railroads. The employer had an attendance policy which provided that after an employee’s fifth absence in a year, he/she could be subject to a verbal warning, and after further absences, a written warning, suspension, and/or termination. The policy did not differentiate between absences for medical reasons and other absences.

The employee was absent from work for several days due to various symptoms which led to her being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. She was then absent several more days thereafter with further symptoms. She provided doctors’ notes following her absences, but was written up anyway. After further absences, she was suspended. She then requested a 30-day leave of absence, as she was not eligible for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act due to her length of employment, but was denied because she had not yet been employed with the company for a year as required per the company’s policy.

The employee then filed suit, alleging that her employer violated the ADA and the FMLA. The employer moved for summary judgment, and the district court granted, finding that the employee failed to present evidence sufficient to establish a prima facie right to the protection of either statute.

On appeal, the Seventh Circuit similarly found that the employee could not prevail on her ADA claim because she could not show that she was qualified to perform the essential functions of her job, even with reasonable accommodation. An individual whose disability prevents her from coming to work regularly cannot perform the essential functions of her position. The court considered that there was no anticipated date by which the employee would have been expected to attend work regularly, even if she had been granted leave. The court also looked to the fact that after she was terminated, she worked for another employer for a very short time frame, and was absent for many days there, too, due to her illness. Considering all of the evidence at hand, the court could not conclude that a jury could potentially find that the combination of leave and medication would have enabled her to return to work.

The employee’s FMLA claim further failed because she was not eligible for leave at the time of her request due to her length of service, and thus, she was not entitled to the benefits or the protections of the statute.

Employers must take caution to properly consider and address employees’ requests for leave for medical reasons so as to ensure compliance with federal and state laws, and to minimize potential risk for future litigation. For more information read Basden v. Professional Transportation, Inc., No. 11-2880 (7th Cir., May 8, 2013).