Facing layoffs? Court provides insight on RIFs and FMLA leave

Brian worked for the company for a long time. A few years into his tenure, he began asking for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to care for his wife, who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. He continued to take FMLA leave for years without any issues.

Brian had a good work history with the company, and he became a production supervisor reporting to Johnnie, who was aware of Brian’s leave history.

In May 2023, Brian’s wife’s condition worsened, and he began taking more FMLA leave.

On July 13, one of the days Brian was on FMLA leave, the company terminated Brian, along with 14 other employees, as part of a reduction in force (RIF). The employer told Brian that he was included in the RIF because he had the least seniority among the production supervisors.

Evidence of FMLA violation

Brian sued the employer, claiming that it included him in the RIF because of his FMLA leave. He argued that Johnnie knew about his FMLA and fired him on a day he was on leave. Johnnie had talked with the HR manager about including Brian, saying he was doing a good job, but picked him for the RIF. Johnnie also indicated that he wanted to give the company an advantage if employees take time off, including FMLA leave, as “the machines have to run.”

The employer argued that Brian’s inclusion in the RIF had nothing to do with his FMLA leave, even though it couldn’t explain why a similarly situated employee wasn’t.

The court felt that Brian had enough evidence to suggest that Johnnie wouldn’t have included him in the RIF if he hadn’t taken FMLA leave.

What employers can do

The case reminds employers planning a RIF to:

• Define all selection criteria before deciding who will be included, and carefully document how they applied the criteria.
• Ensure that all related communication is consistent with the selection criteria.
• Review whether similarly situated employees aren’t treated differently and, if so, ensure that legitimate reasons for the differences are clear, strong, and documented.
• Check to see if selected employees recently used FMLA leave.

Donald v. TOPPAN USA, Inc., Northern District of Georgia, No. 3:24-cv-00243, September 28, 2026.

Court decisions are based on the specific facts presented and each court’s interpretation of the law. Because courts may reach different conclusions, similar situations can lead to different outcomes. Employers should avoid relying on a solitary case as definitive guidance and instead assess each situation carefully, considering applicable laws, and seeking advice when needed.