Employer that fired employee a day before returning to work loses bid to have case dismissed

In September, Yexy told Daniel, her supervisor, that she was pregnant. She told the company's HR department on October 10 saying she would need to take maternity leave, under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), in the spring.

In January, Yexy talked with Daniel and Melissa from HR about her leave and subsequent return to work. Melissa gave Yexy the required paperwork, which Yexy returned in mid-March, requesting leave from May 18 to August 10. The employer approved her leave.

During the leave, the employer divided Yexy’s tasks among other employees.

Around the end of July, Yexy reached out to Melissa to discuss her return to work on August 10. On August 9, however, Yexy received a termination letter, saying her role had been dissolved.

Yexy sued, claiming that the employer interfered with her right to be reinstated following her protected leave.

In court, Yexy said that the company hadn’t decided to terminate her before she began her maternity leave, and that she was fired for taking leave. She pointed to the termination letter, which said that her job was reviewed while she was on leave and not before, and the company determined that other employees were able to perform Yexy’s tasks in addition to their own regular duties.

Yexy also pointed to the FMLA regulations, which say that when employees return from FMLA leave, they’re supposed to be returned to their job, even if their position was restructured to accommodate their absence (825.214).

The employer countered that, at the time it first learned of Yexy’s pregnancy, it had already decided that, unless work picked up, her job would likely be eliminated due to a work shortage. Yexy’s right to reinstatement wasn’t absolute, and she had no greater right to reinstatement than if she hadn’t taken leave. Her employer argued that the business downturn caused her job to be eliminated.

Yexy countered that the company wouldn’t have terminated her if she hadn’t taken leave; that if she hadn’t been out on leave, the company wouldn’t have determined that other employees could manage her responsibilities.

The court held that there were too many issues that needed to be resolved by a jury, so the employer lost its bid to have the case closed. Part of the issue had to do with the timing of events and the contents of the termination letter.

Clear evidence of a downturn in the business and a scheduled layoff could provide a lawful reason not to bring an employee back after FMLA leave. Yexy, however, raised key issues that could lead a jury to conclude that her being on leave contributed to the decision not to reinstate her.