An employee with a knee injury who sought Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits by claiming that he was totally disabled could not sue his employer for his discharge under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld summary judgment, finding his inability to work rendered him unprotected by the ADA.
The plaintiff began working for Gold Medal Bakery in 1979. He held various positions at the company over the course of his employment there, before becoming a production technician in 2010.
In January 2016, the plaintiff suffered a knee injury. He consulted with his physician, who referred him to an orthopedic surgeon, who recommended complete knee replacement surgery. The operation was scheduled for May 8, 2016. The plaintiff requested medical leave to begin on May 8. The FMLA entitled him to 12 workweeks of unpaid leave for his medical condition. This meant he could take leave until Aug. 1. Gold Medal's short-term disability policy paid 85 percent of his salary during that leave.
The FMLA certification that his orthopedic surgeon completed stated that his expected return to work date was Aug. 9, 13 weeks after surgery. The plaintiff met with a company HR professional, who told him that he was entitled to more than 30 weeks of leave from Gold Medal because he had worked at the company for many years.
After the plaintiff's surgery, Gold Medal sent him a letter stating that his leave request was approved for 12 weeks. The letter did not mention any other leave that he was entitled to receive. The letter also stated that he had to provide a fitness-for-duty certificate from his health care provider before he could return to work.
The plaintiff's first scheduled appointment with his orthopedic surgeon following his receipt of the letter was Aug. 12—after his approved leave was set to expire. The plaintiff called the HR professional and asked that Gold Medal extend his leave through Aug. 12, and she agreed.
Shortly before the appointment, the orthopedic surgeon's office tried to reschedule it to September. The plaintiff called and moved the appointment up to Aug. 17 by agreeing to see another doctor. He called the HR professional and asked for a further extension to Aug. 17, and she said it should not be a problem. She e-mailed the plaintiff's supervisor, who opposed extending the leave further.
The HR professional allegedly called the plaintiff on Aug. 11 and stated that the leave would not be extended. On Aug. 12, the company mailed the plaintiff a letter terminating his employment that day. On Aug. 17, the plaintiff's doctor sent a certificate to Gold Medal stating that he could return to work.
On Aug. 23, the plaintiff also filed an application for disability benefits through the SSDI program. In that application, he claimed that he was totally unable to work as of May 8 due to extreme pain and physical limitations. He obtained a psychological evaluation that found he had a major depressive disorder and extreme anxiety about his health. The Social Security Administration awarded him SSDI benefits for his osteoarthrosis, spine disorders and fibromyalgia conditions that began on May 8.
In February 2018, the plaintiff filed suit against Gold Medal, claiming violation of Massachusetts law and the ADA and FMLA. Gold Medal moved for summary judgment on the claims, which the district court granted.
On appeal, the 1st Circuit determined that an SSDI application claiming total inability to work can bar an ADA claim, which requires that an individual be qualified to perform the essential job functions. The ADA claim can go forward if the plaintiff can explain why the SSDI application is consistent with being a qualified individual with a disability under the ADA. Here, however, the plaintiff could not explain the consistency because he claimed total inability to work after May 8 based on severe conditions.
The 1st Circuit further found no basis to support the FMLA claim, as the plaintiff received more than 12 workweeks of leave and was not entitled to more. Gold Medal's strict adherence to the terms of the FMLA did not demonstrate interference or retaliation, and the plaintiff could not show pretext.
Therefore, the 1st Circuit upheld the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims at summary judgment.
Thompson v. Gold Medal Bakery Inc., 1st Cir., No. 20-1027 (March 2, 2021).
Professional Pointer: HR professionals must be careful to avoid overpromising employees with respect to the length of medical leave available and extensions for FMLA leave. Nevertheless, an employee may lose legal protections if he or she makes representations that bar his or her claims.
Jeffrey Rhodes is an attorney with McInroy, Rigby & Rhodes LLP in Arlington, Va.
"claim" - Google News
May 12, 2021 at 05:23AM
https://ift.tt/33y119I
Employee's Social Security Disability Application Bars ADA Claim - SHRM
"claim" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FrzzOU
https://ift.tt/2VZxqTS
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Employee's Social Security Disability Application Bars ADA Claim - SHRM"
Post a Comment