September 16 Tip of the Week
“The ADA and Pretext”
A recent case in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the issue of return to work paperwork under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act. A 24 year old employee of the Georgia Ports Authority, who was also a military veteran suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, sued his employer claiming that he was discriminated against when his return to work was denied based on non-compliance with the employer’s policies.
The case, Jones v. Georgia Ports Authority, No. 22-12844 (11th Cir. 2024), upheld a lower court’s grant of summary judgement to an employer who refused to allow the military veteran to return to work when he submitted a return to work note that did not comply with the employer’s requirements. In appealing the lower court decision, the employee alleged that the employer’s stated reason for refusing his return to work was a pretext and that the decision was really based on disability discrimination.
The plaintiff, a crane operator who worked for his employer for 24 years, alleged that his supervisor created a stressful working environment by regularly threatening the crane operators’ job security and personal safety if they complained about their working conditions or his treatment of them. The plaintiff took leave under the FMLA, claiming that that stressful working environment was exacerbating his PTSD. In total, the employee took 24 weeks of unpaid leave under the FMLA and was told by his employer that he would need to submit a doctor’s note indicating that he was able to return to work. At the time that the employee sought to return to work, he also requested an accommodation, asking to be moved to a less stressful work environment. The employee was informed by HR that he needed to provide a doctor’s note that stated that he was able to return to work and should include any accommodations that he would require upon his return.
The employee provided his employer with a note from a Veterans’ Administration doctor, which stated that the employee “reported that he was able to return to work” but that he would need to continue to attend follow up psychiatric appointments and to attend individual or group therapy. The note was not signed by the VA doctor, although it did identify the doctor and provide her contact information. Upon receiving the note, the employer determined that it did not meet their requirements as it was not signed and it did not indicate that the employee was actually being released to return to work by the doctor. Shortly thereafter, the employee was terminated for failing to provide an adequate return to work letter.
The employee sued his employer claiming that the reason given for his termination was pretextual and that he was actually fired due to disability discrimination. The employer filed a motion for summary judgement, which was granted by the lower court. The employee appealed the lower court’s decision. Finding that there were no issues of fact that supported the employee’s appeal, the 11th Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision stating that “an employer’s honest belief that an employee violated employer policy, even if such belief was wrong, may constitute a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for termination.”
Why is this case important for employers? It demonstrates the need for comprehensive and established policies and the importance of consistently following those policies for all employees. myHRcounsel can assist you both in creating those policies and in applying them in a uniform and effective manner in your workplace. Clear policies and consistent enforcement and application of those policies are the best defense to any claims of discrimination.