No Violation of FMLA for Firing Employee During Leave

Ruling in a case of first impression, the 8th Circuit has held that an employer does not necessarily violate the Family and Medical Leave Act by firing an employee during her FMLA leave.

The court explained that both the FMLA's "plain language and structure" and "uncluttered logic" support a conclusion that the Family and Medical Leave Act is not a strict-liability statute. The statute does not force an employer to retain an employee on FMLA leave when the employer would have fired her if she were not on leave, the panel explained.

Plaintiff Sandra Throneberry began working as a home health care nurse for McGehee Desha County Hospital in Arkansas in 1988. Although she initially received positive performance reviews, her mental health and her attention to job duties began to deteriorate in 1998 after her father died and she got divorced, according to court records.

Throneberry became so disruptive at work so often that her supervisor finally asked her to resign. According to court records, after attempting suicide, Throneberry did agree to resign as long as the hospital paid her severance benefits and allowed her to take a leave of absence with pay and benefits until the end of the year when her resignation became effective.

While Throneberry was on leave, however, she continued to appear at the hospital and disrupt her department.

After Throneberry resigned, her co-workers and supervisors assumed her responsibilities and became aware of the full extent of her failure to do her job, court records say. Among other things, the hospital had to repay Medicaid $40,000 for Throneberry's improperly documented billings.

The supervisor testified that based on these very serious deficiencies, she would have fired Throneberry before her resignation date took effect.

Throneberry filed suit against the hospital in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, alleging that the hospital interfered with her rights under the FMLA, failed to reinstate her at the conclusion of her leave and retaliated against her for taking that leave. She later dismissed her retaliation claim, according to court documents.

The jury found in favor of Throneberry on the interference claim, but in favor of the hospital on the reinstatement issue. However, the District Court entered judgment for the defense based on the jury's findings that the hospital would have fired Throneberry regardless of the exercise of her FMLA rights and that Throneberry would not have been eligible for reinstatement if she had requested it at the end of her leave

Throneberry appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, where a three-judge panel affirmed the District Court's decision.

The panel concluded that an employer that interferes with an employee's FMLA rights will not be liable if the employer can show that it would have made the same decision had the employee not exercised his or her statutory rights.

The panel explained that the statute does not provide "leave for leave's sake," but provides leave with the understanding that the employee returns to work at the end of the leave.

The FMLA's plain language mandates a conclusion that if an employer had grounds to fire an employee if he or she were not on leave, the FMLA does not protect an employee on leave from that same, lawful termination, the panel said.