In March, this blog reported the story of the United States Supreme Court ruling in an employment discrimination case that said an employer could be held liable for discrimination when an innocent decision maker fires an employee based upon information provided by a supervisor contaminated with discriminatory intent. Recently a federal judge chambered in Ohio applied the ruling in a Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) retaliation lawsuit.

Two workers who requested leave under the FMLA reportedly were fired after a performance review stated the employees failed to meet performance goals. The two fired employees brought a wrongful termination lawsuit against their former employer, claiming the real reason they were fired was for making the FMLA request.

The company asked the judge to throw the case out of court. The company argued that the decision maker who fired the employees did so because the employees had not made their performance goals. The workers claimed they had been disciplined and fired for not making goals because they requested family medical leave. The claim the FMLA leave and that was the reason they were subjected to accelerated discipline. The employees showed evidence that supervisors had a policy to discipline employees who took family medical leave.

The federal judge will allow the case to proceed to jury trial. The court found the worker's supervisors influenced the higher level management who ultimately fired the employees. One employee received relatively lenient disciplinary treatment for roughly a year. She took FMLA leave and was treated more strictly in discipline and ultimately was fired on her first day back from leave. The court found her performance was not significantly poorer than prior to her FMLA request. The case will be allowed to proceed.

Source: HR.BLR.com, "'Cat's Paw' Liability and Leave of Absence Laws," 31 May 2011