$2.2M Price Tag for FMLA Violations

May 13, 2008

Millions are awarded each day in courtrooms over a multitude of disputes. Not many of those encompass such a large amount for damages, such as the FMLA case won by Nicholas Lore, a former Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp. (Chase) regional manager. A federal jury awarded $2.2 million to Lore for violations under FMLA.

Lore filed suit against his former employer claiming retaliation for seeking to obtain benefits under FMLA and denial of FMLA benefits, an interference claim. FMLA entitles eligible employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave per year for “care of a child after birth, adoption or placement for foster care; to care for their spouse, son, daughter or parent who suffers from a serious health condition; or to care for their own serious health condition that prevents them from performing their job.”

On April 30, 2002, Lore telephoned his supervisor to discuss taking time off from work. He explained he felt ill and wanted to get some rest and a physical; he additionally mentioned concern about his weight and difficulty with his knees. Lore requested a medically related leave of absence on multiple occasions. Following the request for time off, the supervisor indicated to his superiors that Lore had resigned. The dispute that followed revolved around whether Lore had resigned or was terminated along with whether he had a “serious medical condition” qualifying him for FMLA.

An "interference" claim is one in which an employee asserts that his employer denied or otherwise interfered with his rights under FMLA. Lore needed to demonstrate that he had a serious health condition and was thus entitled to FMLA.

Chase argued that Lore did not suffer from a serious health condition and did not communicate sufficient information to indicate he might be entitled to FMLA. However, Lore requested time off from work to obtain multiple treatments and evaluations to determine whether a serious medical condition existed. Additionally, his enlarged prostate and knee condition qualified as both chronic conditions and serious health conditions. Not surprisingly, the jury easily found that Lore did have a serious health condition and was therefore eligible for FMLA.

The "retaliation" claim is one in which an employee asserts that his employer discriminated against him because he engaged in activity protected by FMLA. It is unlawful for any employer to discharge or in any other manner discriminate against an individual for using FMLA. To succeed in a retaliation claim, Lore had to "demonstrate that his employer intentionally discriminated against him in the form of an adverse employment action for having exercised an FLMA right."

Lore argued he exercised his rights under FMLA by requesting leave to seek treatment for his medical problems. His employer retaliated against him by terminating him immediately after his request for leave in April 2002.

The jury determined that Lore had suffered from a serious health condition and had given Chase proper notice of using his FMLA rights. Based upon this information, the jury awarded over $2.2 million to Lore for the FMLA violations by Chase. The recovery could total between $6.2 and $7.5 million, when you add liquidated damages (equal to the amount of the verdict), and prejudgment interest.

FMLA has been a difficult area to administer for many employers. When it asked for opinions on the topic last year, the DOL received more than 15,000 comments on how to change FMLA. In February 2008, the DOL issued 127 pages of proposed regulations. Two areas of greatest need have been a tightening of the intermittent leave rules and a more workable definition of serious health condition. Clarification in this area won’t help Chase, but may assist other employers down the road from finding themselves in the courtroom fighting an FMLA claim.