Employee fired for failing to cooperate with FMLA leave approval process
EmployerLINC - August 11, 2014 - McAfee & Taft
By Nathan Whatley
Managing employeesf FMLA leave can be one of the most challenging and
frustrating responsibilities for an HR department. So what can an employer
do when an employee is slow to provide documentation and respond to exam
requests? In the case of Bridget Dalpiaz, a federal appeals court ruled
the employer was justified in firing her for failing to cooperate with the
FMLA leave approval process.
Fired for not cooperating
Bridget Dalpiaz, who had served for 15 years as the benefits
administrator for Carbon County, Utah, sued the county, alleging several
claims against both the county and a number of county officials. Dalpiazf
complaints included allegations that the county violated the Family and
Medical Leave Act by terminating her and that it interfered with her FMLA
rights.
Late last month, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the countyfs
decision to discharge Dalpiaz because she had gacted insubordinately by
choosing to submit her FMLA forms at almost the literal last minute, more
than seven weeks after the county made its first request for these forms
to be submitted as soon as possible and after several reminders that the
county was still waiting.h The court further found that the county was
justified in terminating Dalpiaz who gfail[ed] to make more than a
belated, half-hearted effort to comply with a direct and legitimate orderh
to attend an appointment with an independent physician to obtain a second
opinion regarding her condition.
The court concluded that Dalpiaz was not discharged for exercising her
rights under the FMLA, but because she was obstinate in the face of the
countyfs directions and requests. The court explained that, gLike any
other county employee, [Dalpiaz] was required to comply with legitimate
directions given by her supervisors, and her request for FMLA leave did
not shelter her from this obligation, even when her supervisorsf
instructions were related in some way to her use of FMLA leave.h
The decision recognized that when the county
suspended and then terminated Dalpiaz while she was apparently on
intermittent FMLA leave, the employment discharge interfered with Dalpiazf
FMLA rights. Nevertheless, the court concluded that the record did not
support an inference that Dalpiazf termination was related to her FMLA
leave. The court likewise conceded that there was an indirect causal link
between Dalpiazf FMLA leave and her termination. After making note of her
insubordinate behavior, the court continued by stating, gSince these were
forms for FMLA leave, there is an indirect causal link between Plaintifffs
exercise of FMLA leave and the ultimate termination decision.h But, the
court concluded that this did not mean that Dalpiazf termination was
grelated toh her exercise of FMLA leave. The court also addressed the
countyfs decision to terminate Dalpiaz because of her reluctance to attend
an independent medical exam to confirm the legitimacy of Dalpiazf
entitlement to FMLA leave. The court concluded that the county had
successfully established that it would have terminated Dalpiaz regardless
of her request for FMLA leave, gand for the same type of conduct outside
of the FMLA context.h
The court went on to state that the key question was gwhether the
county terminated [Dalpiaz] because it sincerely, even if mistakenly,
believed she had abused her sick leave and demonstrated significant
evidence of untruthfulness.h The court found that the county had lawful
grounds for firing Dalpiaz. Consequently, the court dismissed her FMLA
interference claims.
What do I do?
This case doesnft mean employers are always free to fire employees
seeking FMLA leave. Make sure your FMLA policy spells out an employeefs
obligation when it comes to necessary documentation for seeking FMLA
leave. Remind the requesting employee what is expected of them. If the
employee drags their feet in providing necessary information during the
FMLA request and approval process, remind them of their responsibilities
and explain what may happen if they do not satisfy the FMLA documentation
requests.
- Dalpiaz v Carbon County, Case No. 13-4062 (10th Cir.
7/25/14)