When someone is unable to work due to a medical issue, it can be stressful. While workers may get by financially for a period of time, the prospect of not having a job to return to makes it even more difficult to heal. Fortunately, many New Jersey workers are protected by the federal Family Medical Leave Act and its corresponding state Family Leave Act. Under both laws, qualifying workers can take up to 12 weeks of leave per year, without pay, and have job security when they are ready to return.

The law seems straightforward, yet employers throughout the state and nation struggle with it.  Too often, leave is inappropriately denied or truncated or workers find that they are retaliated against for requesting or taking the leave. Barry Boles, a New Jersey employee who formerly worked as an assistant manager at Wal-Mart, faced this very situation.

The case

Mr. Boles sought a leave of absence after he developed an ulcerated wound on his leg. Wal-Mart granted a month less leave than what the doctor recommended. When Boles was unable to return to work after the reduced leave, he sought an extension. When Boles tried to go back to work several weeks later, he was fired. The reason provided?  “Job abandonment.”

The federal verdict

Boles filed a lawsuit alleging Wal-Mart had interfered with his rights under the FMLA and retaliated under New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination. Though he dropped the FMLA claim before trial, Boles succeeded on his other claims.  Earlier this year, a federal jury awarded Boles $200,000 for emotional distress, back pay, and punitive damages. Boles’s courtroom success was due in part to a controversial email that his supervisor sent to a Human Resources manager while Boles was on leave. In that email, the supervisor sought permission to terminate Boles’s job.

After the jury’s verdict, Wal-Mart filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The federal judge denied that motion, and the retailer was ordered to pay $200,000 in damages plus legal fees totaling $274,000. In denying the motion, the judge found that the medical leave Boles took was a protected activity and that the testimony he presented was credible.

Conclusion

When it comes to employment law cases, the statutes are complex and the facts are extremely important.

Please call or write us if you have any questions or concerns about employer misconduct, discrimination, retaliation, your rights under FMLA or FLA, or any other matters that arise in the workplace.  As experienced employment lawyers for workers, we will investigate the facts and research the relevant law with those facts in mind.  We will advise you of your rights, the likelihood of success, the probable dollar value of your claims, and the wisdom of pursuing various avenues of recovery.

We look forward to hearing from you in these matters of importance.