Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm 2026-06-22T17:00:59Z https://www.calltherightattorney.com/feed/atom/ WordPress /wp-content/uploads/sites/1604777/2020/06/cropped-site-identity-1-32x32.png by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Can Equitable Tolling Save My Discrimination Case?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263091 2026-05-29T18:44:09Z 2026-06-18T16:00:45Z Employee mailing a race discrimination lawsuit before a filing deadline as a hurricane delays delivery.

When Extraordinary Circumstances Delay A Wrongful Termination Claim 

“Everyone’s heard the famous U.S. Postal Service motto: ‘Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.’ But that slogan says nothing about hurricanes.”  That is how the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit opened Beazer v. Richmond County Constructors, LLC, 169 F.4th 1082 (11th Cir. 2026). And honestly, that is a pretty good way to start a statute of limitations case where the employee did almost everything right, paid for guaranteed overnight delivery, and still watched his race discriminationhttp://www.calltherightattorney.com/practice-areas/employment-discrimination.html lawsuit arrive late because Hurricane Idalia hit the Southeast.  Employment discrimination deadlines are brutal. After receiving a right-to-sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), an employee usually has 90 days to file a lawsuit in court. Miss that deadline, and the employer will almost certainly argue the case is dead. No jury. No discovery. No chance to prove race discrimination, retaliation, or wrongful termination.  But there is a narrow escape hatch: equitable tolling.  Beazer, a Black employee, alleged that Richmond County Constructors subjected him to race discrimination and retaliation after he reported harassment and discrimination. He timely filed an EEOC charge asserting that he was wrongfully fired from his job. Then, on June 2, 2023, he received his right-to-sue notice. The notice told him he had 90 days—until August 31, 2023—to file his lawsuit.  Here is where the story gets painful. Within a week of receiving the right-to-sue letter, Beazer quickly paid a law firm a consultation fee and tried to retain an attorney. (Side note: Spitz never charges anything upfront.) The firm had already charged him once during the EEOC process and told him to come back after the right-to-sue letter. He did exactly that. He sent the attorney his file. Then he waited. And waited. He repeatedly tried to reach the firm. Crickets. A few days before the deadline, the attorney finally called and said he was too busy to take the case. The attorney told Beazer to file pro se.  So, Beazer moved fast. On August 29, 2023, two days before the deadline, he mailed his complaint by USPS Priority Mail Express and paid for guaranteed overnight delivery. If the package arrived as guaranteed, it would reach the court on August 30, one day before the deadline.  Then Hurricane Idalia hit – a freaking hurricane. The complaint arrived September 2, two days late.  The district court dismissed the case as untimely. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that Beazer pursued his rights diligently and that the combination of the attorney’s delay and Hurricane Idalia created extraordinary circumstances beyond his control. His lawsuit was treated as timely and he will now have his race discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination claims heard on the merits. 

Legal Takeaway: 

[box] Equitable tolling can save a discrimination case when an employee diligently pursues their rights and an extraordinary circumstance prevents timely filing. But employees should never rely on equitable tolling as a plan. The best employment lawyer or law firm acts quickly after a right-to-sue letter because statute of limitations deadlines can destroy even strong race discrimination and wrongful termination claims.  [/box]

What Is Equitable Tolling?

Equitable tolling is a narrow doctrine that can save an untimely filed lawsuit when two things are true: (1) the employee pursued the claim diligently, and (2) an extraordinary circumstance outside the employee’s control prevented timely filing. It is not a do-over. It is not a sympathy rule. It is not a backup plan for waiting too long. Equitable tolling is exception-based, not deadline insurance. It is Hail Marry long shot.  The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff seeking equitable tolling must show both that “(1) he pursued his rights diligently and (2) an extraordinary circumstance prevented timely filing.” Beazer, 169 F.4th at 1086. The Court also explained that diligence means “reasonable diligence,” not “maximum feasible diligence.” Id. at 1087. That distinction mattered.  Beazer did not ignore his deadline. He acted. He contacted a law firm within a week of receiving his right-to-sue letter. He paid a consultation fee. He sent his file. He repeatedly tried to follow up. When the attorney finally declined the case days before the deadline, Beazer quickly prepared his own complaint and paid for guaranteed overnight delivery.  That is why the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals treated the case differently from an employee who simply waits until the last minute and hopes everything works out. Beazer had been trying to protect his race discrimination and retaliation claims. He was not sleeping on his rights.  But diligence alone was not enough. Beazer also had to show an extraordinary circumstance. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals found that the combination of the attorney’s delay and Hurricane Idalia’s interference with delivery created an extraordinary circumstance beyond his control. The Court held that Beazer was entitled to equitable tolling and that his lawsuit should be treated as timely.  That is the important point for employees. Equitable tolling can save a discrimination case, but only when the employee can show real effort plus a real and surprise obstacle. If the employee misses the statute of limitations deadline because they waited, guessed, or assumed the court would understand, equitable tolling will not likely help.  Practical Tip: If you receive a right-to-sue letter, treat the deadline like an emergency. Contact an employment attorney immediately, save proof of every call, email, payment, mailing receipt, and delivery confirmation, and do not wait until the final days to file because equitable tolling is hard to win even when the facts are sympathetic.  Best Race Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Can Attorney Delay Help Prove Equitable Tolling? 

Maybe, but not usually by itself. Attorney delay can support equitable tolling when it is part of a bigger picture showing that the employee acted diligently and something extraordinary still prevented timely filing. But an employee should never assume that waiting on a slow attorney will excuse a missed statute of limitations deadline.  That was the dangerous part of Beazer’s case. Within a week of receiving his right-to-sue notice, he contacted a law firm, paid a consultation fee, and sent his file. The law firm went quiet while the clock kept ticking. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that Beazer acted with reasonable diligence. Beazer, 169 F.4th at 1087–88.  This was not an easy win. He was lucky. The Court could have said Beazer should have contacted other attorneys sooner. After all, he knew the firm was not responding well before the filing deadline. The court could have held that the multiple failed calls to the attorney were a clear warning to Beazer that he ignored, making him responsible for the delay. That is why employees should not read this case as a free pass to wait. The attorney delay mattered, but it was likely Hurricane Idalia that pushed the facts into extraordinary-circumstance territory.  The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the combination of the attorney’s shortfalls and Hurricane Idalia’s conditions created an extraordinary circumstance beyond Beazer’s control. Id. at 1089.  Here is the springboard lesson. Employees need a firm with the resources to act fast. A discrimination case should not sit in someone’s inbox while the filing deadline bleeds out. The best employment lawyer does not wait until the eve of the deadline to decide whether the case matters. The best attorney moves quickly, evaluates the right-to-sue letter, calculates the statute of limitations, identifies the claims, and gets the complaint filed before the deadline becomes the employer’s best defense.  Equitable tolling saved Beazer’s case. But no employee should want to have that fight. The better plan is to hire a law firm built to move before the storm hits.  Practical Tip: Do not rely on the mail when a filing deadline is close. At Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, our goal is typically to file at least two weeks before the deadline whenever possible so employees are not gambling their race discrimination, wrongful termination, or employment law claims on weather, delivery delays, or last-minute chaos.  Best Wrongful Termination Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Who Is The Best Employment Lawyer If My Discrimination Case Has A Deadline Problem? 

If your race discrimination case is close to a filing deadline, the best employment lawyer will not treat the statute of limitations like a calendar suggestion. A right-to-sue letter starts a countdown. Waiting on a slow attorney, relying on mail delivery, or hoping equitable tolling will save the case is dangerous. Beazer won that fight, but he should never have had to fight it.  Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm has the resources to move quickly when an employee receives a right-to-sue letter, faces a deadline, or has already been wrongfully fired. Spitz never charges anything upfront, and our attorneys know how to evaluate race discrimination claims, including claims brought by Black employees, calculate filing deadlines, and act before the employer turns a timing issue into a dismissal argument. If another lawyer waited too long, stopped responding, or left your case sitting while the clock ran, call Spitz for a free initial consultation. The best employment law attorney protects the claim before the deadline becomes the whole case. 

FAQ

[box] What Is Equitable Tolling In A Discrimination Case?  Equitable tolling is a narrow doctrine that can treat a late filing as timely when the employee pursued the case with reasonable diligence and an extraordinary circumstance prevented timely filing. It is not automatic, and it is not a backup plan for missing a statute of limitations deadline.  Can Equitable Tolling Save A Missed Employment Law Deadline?  Yes, but only in limited circumstances. The employee usually must prove diligence and an extraordinary obstacle outside the employee’s control. Courts may look at the totality of the circumstances, including attorney delay, mail failure, severe weather, or other events that actually caused the late filing.  What Is A Right-To-Sue Letter Deadline?  After the EEOC issues a right-to-sue letter, an employee usually has 90 days to file a lawsuit in court. Missing that deadline can lead the employer to seek dismissal of race discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, or other discrimination claims.  Should I Rely On The Mail To File A Discrimination Lawsuit?  No. Mail can be delayed by weather, delivery problems, court closures, or simple bad luck. Employees should work with an attorney or lawyer who files early and electronically when possible instead of gambling a discrimination case on last-minute delivery.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights and employment law blog about equitable tolling, race discrimination, Black employees, right-to-sue letters, statute of limitations issues, filing deadlines, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every employee’s situation is different, especially when a deadline may have been missed because of attorney delay, mail problems, weather, or other extraordinary circumstances. If you believe you were discriminated against, wrongfully fired, missed a filing deadline, or need to know whether equitable tolling may apply, consult a qualified employment lawyer immediately about your specific facts, deadlines, evidence, damages, and legal options. This blog is a legal advertisement. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer unless and until a written agreement is signed. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Can I Sue After Missing The EEOC Deadline?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263089 2026-05-29T18:36:32Z 2026-06-16T16:00:26Z Employee reviewing termination notice, disability discrimination paperwork, EEOC charge deadline, and statute of limitations calendar.

How Waiting Too Long Destroys Disability Discrimination Claims 

Some deadlines are soft. Returning a library book three days late may cost a few dollars. Missing a dinner reservation may get you a dirty look when you show up. Eating cheese a few days past the expiration date is probably not a big deal.  Other deadlines are hard. Legal deadlines are steel doors. Miss the filing deadline, also known as a statute of limitations, and the door slams shut hard, with the bolt locks clicking firmly into place.  That is true even when the employee has what appears to be a clear disability discrimination or wrongful termination winner. The employer could admit on video that it fired the employee because of a disability discrimination. The boss could issue a termination letter saying the company no longer wants the employee because of their disability. HR could send an email saying the employee’s medical restrictions are “too much trouble.” A manager could write, “We need someone without these health issues.” The facts could scream disability discrimination. Heck, the company owner can state, “I am wrongfully firing you and engaging in disability discrimination and I know we are violating the law.” But if the employee misses the deadline to file the required charge, the claims will die the moment that deadline passes. No case. No jury. Nothing.  Before an employee can usually sue under the ADA, the employee must first exhaust administrative remedies. That means filing a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC by the applicable deadline and giving the agency the first chance to process the disability discrimination claim. In plain English: you generally do not get to start in court. You have to go through the EEOC doorway first. If you miss that administrative deadline, the courthouse door may already be locked before your lawsuit begins.  In Plagianes v. Fulton County School District, No. 25-12282, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12682 (11th Cir. May 1, 2026), Dawn Plagianes sued Fulton County School District after her employment ended. She brought claims under the ADA and FMLA based on her termination. On appeal, Plagianes challenged only the dismissal of her ADA claims for failing to timely exhaust administrative remedies.  The timeline was everything. In March 2021, Plagianes, a teacher on leave without pay, told a school district employee she would return from disability leave in April 2021. But in April 2021, the school district’s legal counsel told her the district was no longer going to allow her to return as scheduled. Instead, she had three options: resign, medically resign, or be terminated. Plagianes later chose to medically resign and sent a letter reflecting that decision on April 12, 2021. Her resignation became effective months later, around July 31 or August 1, 2021.  Those dates decided the case. If the 180-day clock started when she gave notice of her medical resignation on April 12, 2021, she had until approximately October 9, 2021, to file her Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC. If the clock instead started from the later effective resignation date—July 31 or August 1, 2021—she had until approximately January 27 or January 28, 2022, to file her EEOC charge. Plagianes filed on January 5, 2022.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that the ADA filing deadline started in April 2021, when Plagianes received clear notice that she was losing her job, not when the resignation later became effective. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals also rejected her continuing-violation and equitable-tolling arguments. Because she filed more than 180 days after the clock started, her ADA disability discrimination claims were dismissed. Door locked tight. 

Legal Takeaway:

[box] For ADA disability discrimination claims in a non-deferral state like Georgia, an employee generally must file an EEOC charge within 180 days of receiving clear notice of the challenged termination decision. The statute of limitations deadline usually starts when the employer communicates the final decision, not when the employee’s last day arrives or when the consequences become most painful.  [/box]

When Does The ADA Deadline Start For Disability Discrimination Claims? 

When the challenged action is termination, the clock usually starts with notice. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the filing period begins to run from the “final decision to terminate the employee” because the final termination decision, “rather than actual termination,” is the discriminatory act. Plagianes, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12682, at *4. Stated more simply: the deadline can start before the final paycheck, before the last day, and before the employee has fully processed what just happened.  That is what happened to Plagianes. In April 2021, Fulton County School District told her she would not be allowed to return to work as scheduled and gave her three options: resign, medically resign, or be terminated. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that this notice was “unequivocal” because it clearly communicated that Plagianes was losing her job “in any circumstance.” Id. at *5–6.  There are arguments employees can make when the deadline should run later. Maybe the employer was still actively reconsidering the decision. Maybe a boss said the termination was not final. Maybe HR promised to look for another position. Maybe the employee was invited to apply for a transfer as an alternative to termination. Maybe the employer’s message was genuinely unclear. In those situations, an attorney may argue the employee did not yet receive unequivocal notice or that the clock should be extended.  But those are arguments, not guarantees. The old saying applies: better safe than sorry. If there are two possible triggering dates, calculate the statute of limitations from the earliest one. Filing early protects the claim. Waiting gives the employer the argument every defense lawyer loves: “Too late.”  That is why employees need to contact an employment attorney as quickly as possible after the employer provides notice of termination, forces a resignation, demands a medical resignation, or says the employee can “resign or be fired.” The EEOC will not calculate your deadline for you. The agency may accept a charge for filing, but that does not mean the charge was timely or that your disability discrimination claim is safe. A missed deadline can kill the case before the facts ever matter.  Practical Tip: If your employer gives you two possible dates that might start your EEOC deadline, calculate the statute of limitations from the earliest date and talk to an employment lawyer immediately because filing early is safer than losing a disability discrimination claim over a deadline fight.  Best Disability Discrimination Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Can The Continuing Violation Doctrine Save A Late ADA Claim? 

Sometimes, but not just because the employee is still suffering from the employer’s earlier decision. The continuing violation doctrine can help when the claim is built from repeated or ongoing acts that combine into one unlawful employment practice. Think of a disability-based hostile work environment, where separate comments, exclusions, or mistreatment may add up over time. In that kind of case, the deadline may run from the last act in the pattern.  The rule has a hard limit. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals explained that the continuing violation doctrine can apply to claims based on the “cumulative effect of individual acts,” where the deadline runs from the “last act composing the claim.” Plagianes, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12682, at *6–7. But the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals also held that the doctrine “cannot convert ‘related discrete acts into a single unlawful practice for the purposes of timely filing.’” Id. at *7. A termination decision is usually a discrete act. The later consequences do not restart the statute of limitations.  That is where Plagianes lost. She argued that her EEOC charge was timely because she asserted a constructive discharge claim. But the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals explained that a constructive discharge claim accrues when the employee gives notice of resignation, “not on the effective date of that resignation.” Id. at *8. Plagianes told the school district on April 12, 2021, that she would medically resign. She did not allege later discriminatory acts that contributed to the constructive discharge. So the deadline started then, not months later when the resignation became effective.  The continuing violation doctrine will not give an employee extra time to save a wrongful termination case after the employer has already made the termination decision clear.  Practical Tip: If you think your forced resignation was really a constructive discharge, do not wait for the resignation’s effective date to calculate your EEOC deadline. Treat the date you gave notice of resignation as the safer statute of limitations date because courts may use that earlier date to decide whether your disability discrimination claim is timely.  Best Wrongful Termination Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Can A Late EEOC Charge Be Excused In Disability Cases?

Sometimes, but rarely. A late EEOC charge can be excused through equitable tolling, but equitable tolling is not the normal rule. It is the emergency exit, not the front door.  The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the 180-day EEOC deadline is subject to equitable tolling, but equitable tolling is an “extraordinary remedy” that should be used “only sparingly.” Plagianes, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12682, at *9–10. The employee has the burden to prove it applies. That usually requires something more than confusion, uncertainty, or hoping the employer might change its mind.  Good equitable tolling arguments may exist if the employer misled the employee, concealed the real decision, promised the employee that the job was not actually ending, actively searched for another position, invited the employee to transfer instead of being terminated, or gave mixed signals that made the deadline unclear. Those facts can matter because the employee may not have had clear notice that the statute of limitations was already running.  Plagianes did not have those facts. The school district told her she had three options: resign, medically resign, or be terminated. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that “[a] reasonable person could only interpret that message as conveying that she was losing her job in any circumstance.” Id. at *10. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals also held that Plagianes “had all the facts [s]he needed” to file her EEOC charge. Id. at *11.  Equitable tolling is not a rescue plan for waiting too long. It is a narrow doctrine for truly unfair deadline problems.  Best Employee’s Rights Law Firm Blogs on Point:  Practical Tip: If you think your employer misled you about whether your job was ending, save every email, letter, text, voicemail, and note from those conversations, but still file as early as possible because equitable tolling is hard to prove and courts may refuse to excuse a missed disability discrimination deadline. 

Who Is The Best Employment Lawyer For Employees Who Missed An EEOC Deadline? 

If you believe you were fired because of a disability, the best employment lawyer will not start by asking only whether the employer was wrong. The first question may be harsher: are we still on time? Disability discrimination facts matter. So do emails, medical records, termination notices, leave documents, and witness statements. But none of that helps if the statute of limitations deadline has already passed.  There is no need to try to calculate the deadline on your own. ADA and employment law deadlines can turn on the date notice was given, whether the resignation was forced, whether the employer gave mixed signals, and whether any tolling argument applies. Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm has attorneys who are well versed in these deadlines and how to calculate them. The best attorney does not guess at the statute of limitations; the best lawyer protects the claim before the deadline fight begins. Spitz offers free initial consultations so employees who were wrongfully fired can find out quickly whether they still have time to file an EEOC charge and protect a possible disability discrimination or wrongful termination claim. 

FAQ

[box] What Is The EEOC Deadline For ADA Disability Discrimination Claims?  The basic EEOC deadline is 180 days from the discriminatory act, but it can extend to 300 days when a state or local agency enforces a law prohibiting discrimination on the same basis. For example, employees in Ohio, Kentucky, and Texas often may have up to 300 days. By contrast, for private-sector employees, Georgia and North Carolina are safer examples for assuming the 180-day rule unless an attorney confirms otherwise. Do not guess which deadline applies. Calculate from the earliest possible triggering date and contact an employment attorney immediately because missing the statute of limitations deadline can destroy a disability discrimination claim before the facts are ever heard.  When Does The ADA Statute Of Limitations Start Running?  The ADA statute of limitations usually starts when the employer gives clear notice of the final termination decision, not when the employee’s last day of work arrives. If the employer says the employee must resign, medically resign, or be terminated, the deadline may start immediately.  Does A Forced Resignation Give Me More Time To File With The EEOC?  Not necessarily. In a constructive discharge or forced resignation case, the deadline may start when the employee gives notice of resignation, not when the resignation later becomes effective. Employees should calculate from the earliest possible date.  Can The Continuing Violation Doctrine Save A Late Disability Claim?  Usually not for a wrongful termination claim. The continuing violation doctrine can help with ongoing conduct, but it generally will not give an employee extra time after the employer has already made a clear termination decision.  What Is Equitable Tolling?  Equitable tolling is a narrow rule that can sometimes pause or extend a filing deadline when extraordinary circumstances made timely filing unfairly impossible. In ADA and employment law cases, it may apply if the employer misled the employee, concealed key facts, or created genuine confusion about whether the job was ending. But equitable tolling is hard to win. Employees should never rely on it if they can file on time. [/box]  Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights and employment law blog about disability discrimination, ADA claims, EEOC deadlines, administrative exhaustion, statute of limitations issues, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired is for general information only and is not legal advice. Deadlines can vary by state, claim, agency, employer, and the facts surrounding notice of termination, forced resignation, medical resignation, or final employment decisions. If you believe you were discriminated against because of a disability, wrongfully fired, missed a filing deadline, or need to know whether you still have time to file a Charge of Discrimination, consult a qualified employment lawyer immediately about your specific facts, deadlines, evidence, damages, and legal options. This blog is a legal advertisement. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer unless and until a written agreement is signed. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Wrongfully Fired Soon After Requesting FMLA?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263087 2026-05-29T18:32:00Z 2026-06-11T16:00:34Z Employee reviewing FMLA paperwork, termination notice, HR emails, and calendar dates showing close timing after medical leave request.

How The Best Employment Lawyers Build A Winning Record 

Getting fired right after asking for FMLA leave feels like the whole case.  The employee sees the timeline. The employer gets the paperwork required under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). Days later, the employer cuts the job. To any normal person, that looks suspicious. It looks like retaliation. And sometimes it is. Timing can be powerful evidence in an employment law case. It can make a wrongful termination claim feel obvious. It can make an employee think, “They fired me because I asked for leave.”  But court is not a group chat. Suspicion does not survive summary judgment unless the record proves the legal test.  In Conklin v. ABEC Inc., No. 25-1905, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12643 (3d Cir. May 1, 2026), Tammy Conklin sued ABEC after she was fired. She brought FMLA retaliation and interference claims. On the retaliation claim, Conklin had two pieces of the puzzle. She properly submitted FMLA paperwork to ABEC human resources personnel. Then ABEC terminated her either eighteen or twenty-nine days later, depending on whether the clock started when HR sent her the FMLA process letter or when she submitted the paperwork.  That is close timing. Close enough to make any employee wonder what really happened.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit focused on the chief operating officer, who made the unilateral decision to terminate Conklin’s employment. The record did not show that this decisionmaker knew about Conklin’s FMLA-protected activity. Worse, Conklin did not depose the ABEC employees involved in her termination. The record also did not answer the question the best employee rights attorney would have chased hard: what did HR do with the FMLA information after receiving it?  That failure mattered. If HR passed the FMLA information to the decisionmaker, that could help prove knowledge. If HR sat on the information while the termination moved forward, that could create a different fight about how the employer handled protected leave information. If someone who knew about the FMLA request influenced the firing, that could open another path. But none of those paths matter if the lawyer does not build them into the record. 

Legal Takeaway(s):

[box] An employee can use temporal proximity to help prove FMLA retaliation, but close timing usually requires proof that the decisionmaker knew about the protected FMLA activity. The best employment lawyers do not rely on timing alone; they build the record through discovery, depositions, internal documents, HR communications, and summary judgment briefing so the employer cannot win by pointing to missing proof.  [/box]

Can Timing Alone Prove FMLA Retaliation After Wrongful Termination? 

Sometimes. Close timing can help prove FMLA retaliation, but only if the record connects the FMLA request to the firing decision. A calendar is evidence. It is not the whole case.  Conklin had the timing. She invoked her FMLA rights when she properly submitted FMLA paperwork to ABEC human resources personnel. ABEC fired her either eighteen or twenty-nine days later. That is not stale timing. That is close enough to raise eyebrows.  The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that courts “can infer causation when the ‘temporal proximity’ between the FMLA-protected activity and the adverse action is ‘unduly suggestive.’” Conklin, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12643, at *2. That rule gives an employee a real path when an employer fires fast after an FMLA request.  But fast is not enough. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that when an employee relies on close timing to prove causation, the employee must also show “that the decision maker had knowledge of the protected activity.” Id. at *2. That is where Conklin’s claim broke.  ABEC’s chief operating officer made the unilateral decision to terminate Conklin. The record did not show that the chief operating officer knew about her FMLA-protected activity. So the timing looked suspicious, but the proof stopped short of the legal test.  That is the hard lesson. Close timing can start a wrongful termination case. Decisionmaker knowledge keeps it alive.  Practical Tip: If you are fired soon after requesting FMLA leave, preserve every email, HR message, text, calendar invite, and conversation showing who knew about your FMLA request before the termination because temporal proximity becomes stronger when it is tied to decisionmaker knowledge.  Best FMLA Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

How Do Employees Prove The Decisionmaker Knew About FMLA Leave?

An employee proves decisionmaker knowledge by showing that the person who fired them knew about the FMLA request before making the termination decision. That was the missing link in Conklin’s case. ABEC’s human resources personnel received her FMLA paperwork. But the chief operating officer made the unilateral decision to terminate her employment. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that “nothing in the record demonstrates that ABEC’s chief operating officer, who made the unilateral decision to terminate Conklin’s employment, knew about Conklin’s FMLA-protected activity.” Conklin, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12643, at *2-3.  Start with the easiest source: the employee. A good attorney asks every version of the knowledge question before discovery ever starts. Who did you tell? What did you send? Who responded? Did any manager mention FMLA? Did anyone complain about your leave request? Did the person who fired you say anything about paperwork, absences, medical leave, HR, timing, or “problems” after the request? If the decisionmaker mentioned the FMLA request to the employee, the employee’s affidavit should be enough to create a factual dispute for a jury. Credibility belongs to the jury, not the judge.  The next step is written discovery. Interrogatories should ask who received the FMLA paperwork, who reviewed it, who discussed it, who knew about it, who participated in the termination, who recommended termination, and when each person learned each fact. Requests for production should demand HR notes, FMLA files, leave logs, termination drafts, email chains, internal messages, calendars, meeting notes, personnel records, decision documents, and metadata showing when documents were created, edited, forwarded, opened, or accessed. Metadata matters because polished employer explanations tell one story. Timestamps can tell another.  The employer’s policies and practices matter too. A top employee rights attorney would demand the written FMLA policy, leave-processing procedures, HR workflow, management-notification rules, discipline-review policies, and anything showing whether FMLA requests normally moved up the chain before discipline or termination. If the employer’s normal practice was to report FMLA requests to leadership, that practice could help prove knowledge or expose why the company suddenly claims the decisionmaker knew nothing.  Then come depositions. HR should be deposed. The decisionmaker should be deposed. Supervisors, leave administrators, payroll employees, and anyone in the termination chain should be deposed. Former employees with knowledge of the employer’s FMLA reporting practices may matter as well. The written policy tells one story. The people who lived under it often tell the better one.  Conklin’s record did not get there. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals noted that Conklin “did not depose any of the ABEC employees involved in her termination.” Id. at *3. That left her asking the Court to impute constructive knowledge to the decisionmaker. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held, “That does not suffice.” Id. Actual knowledge mattered. Assumption did not.  Knowledge is not a vibe. It is actual evidence or it is nothing.  Practical Tip: If HR receives your FMLA paperwork, keep proof of submission and write down every person who discusses the request with you, especially managers or decisionmakers, because sworn testimony about what they said can help create the factual dispute needed to reach a jury in an FMLA retaliation case.  Best Wrongful Termination Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Can Bad Lawyering Ruin An Employee’s FMLA Retaliation Case? 

Yes. An FMLA retaliation claim can die if the attorney does not build the record and then defend that record at summary judgment. Discovery creates the proof. Summary judgment is where the lawyer has to use it.  Conklin’s retaliation claim failed because the record did not prove decisionmaker knowledge, as discussed above. Her interference claim failed for a different reason: she did not challenge ABEC’s summary judgment arguments on that claim. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that a party’s failure to “make [an] argument at summary judgment below” forfeits that argument. Conklin, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12643, at *3.  That rule is unforgiving. A claim can be in the complaint. It can be discussed earlier in the case. It can still be lost if the employee’s attorney does not respond when the employer moves for summary judgment. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that forfeiture can occur “even if the party raised [the argument] earlier in the litigation.” Id. at *3-4.  That is not a paperwork technicality. Summary judgment is the employer’s attempt to end the case before a jury ever hears it. If the employer attacks causation, knowledge, interference, damages, or any other required element, the employee’s lawyer must answer with record evidence and legal argument. Silence is not strategy. Silence is surrender dressed up as a brief.  Bad lawyering rarely announces itself with fireworks. It looks like an unanswered argument, a claim left undefended, a record cite that never appears, or a summary judgment response that assumes the judge will connect the dots. Judges do not build employee cases. Lawyers do.  The best lawyer does not just file the case. The best lawyer preserves it.  Practical Tip: Before hiring an attorney for an FMLA or wrongful termination case, ask how much of their practice focuses on employee rights, whether they have handled summary judgment in employment law cases, what trial experience they have, and whether they have the resources to take depositions, review records, and fight the employer’s motion practice. The best lawyer is not just available; the best lawyer is equipped to build and defend the proof your case needs.  Best Employee’s Rights Law Firm Blogs on Point: 

What Is The Best Employment Lawyer For Employees Fired After Requesting FMLA? 

If you were wrongfully fired soon after requesting FMLA, the best employment lawyer is not the one who simply spots the bad timing. Any lawyer can circle the dates on a calendar. The real work is proving what the employer knew, who knew it, when they knew it, and how that knowledge reached the termination decision. That is where FMLA retaliation cases are won or lost. Timing creates suspicion. Evidence creates leverage.  Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm is one of the largest law firms in the United States dedicated to employee rights. Employees get attorneys who know how to build the record before the employer turns missing proof into a defense. Spitz offers free initial consultations, a no-fee guarantee, deep trial experience, empathy, and a history of great results for employees facing FMLA retaliation, discrimination, employment discrimination, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired. If your employer fired you after you asked for FMLA leave, call Spitz and speak with an employee rights attorney who knows how to protect the claim before the company’s story becomes the only story. 

FAQ

[box] Can Timing Alone Prove FMLA Retaliation After An Employee Is Fired?  Timing can help prove FMLA retaliation, but timing alone may not be enough. An employee usually needs evidence that the employer decisionmaker knew about the FMLA request before the wrongful termination.  How Close Does A Firing Need To Be To An FMLA Request To Show Temporal Proximity?  There is no automatic number of days that proves temporal proximity. Courts look at how close the FMLA request and firing were, the context, and whether the employee can connect the timing to actual employer knowledge.  What Evidence Helps Prove The Employer Knew About An FMLA Request?  Useful evidence can include HR emails, FMLA paperwork, leave logs, internal messages, termination documents, manager comments, deposition testimony, affidavits, metadata, and proof of the employer’s normal FMLA reporting practices.  Can HR Knowledge Prove FMLA Retaliation If The Decisionmaker Denies Knowing?  HR knowledge may help, but the employee should build evidence showing how the FMLA information reached the decisionmaker or influenced the termination process. Without that connection, the employer may argue that the firing decision was not tied to protected FMLA activity.  What Is A Motion For Summary Judgment In Civil Litigation?  A motion for summary judgment asks the judge to decide a civil claim before trial because the moving party argues there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the law entitles it to judgment. The process usually requires the other side to respond with admissible record evidence, cite the facts that create a jury question, and explain why the legal elements of the claim can still be proven at trial. If the motion is granted, the claim ends without a jury ever hearing the evidence.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights, FMLA retaliation, workplace discrimination, and wrongful termination blog provides general information about employment law, employee protections, employer obligations, discrimination, being wrongfully fired, temporal proximity, summary judgment, and when an attorney or lawyer may be able to help, but it should not be taken as legal advice. Every employee’s situation is different, and readers should consult with a qualified employment lawyer for advice about their specific facts, deadlines, claims, defenses, damages, and legal options. No promises are being made about any outcome, result, settlement, verdict, or claim value. This blog is a legal advertisement, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Can My Employer Refuse To Pay Me During Medical Leave?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263085 2026-05-29T18:23:00Z 2026-06-09T16:00:43Z Employee reviewing unpaid medical leave, FMLA paperwork, ADA accommodation forms, and household bills at a kitchen table

How FMLA And ADA Rules Decide Paid Leave Rights

Medical leave sounds simple until the paycheck disappears. Let’s talk about the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).  An employee facing a serious medical condition may know they need time away from work. Surgery. Treatment. Training. Recovery. A disability accommodation that cannot wait. But rent does not pause because an employer approved leave. The car payment still hits. Groceries still cost money. Kids still need cleats, braces, lunch money, field-trip fees, and everything else life throws into the cart when you are already trying not to panic.  So the real question is not just: can I take medical leave?  The question is: can my employer refuse to pay me during medical leave?  In Tumbleson v. Lakota Local School District, No. 25-3548, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13795 (6th Cir. May 13, 2026), Andrea Tumbleson was not a weak employee looking for a loophole. She was an excellent art teacher who had worked for Lakota Local School District for more than twenty years. She had Usher syndrome, a rare genetic disease that caused progressive hearing and vision loss. She was totally deaf, used cochlear implants, and had worsening vision. She had already received workplace disability accommodations, including more lighting, a larger monitor, dark mode, and a laptop with a giant monitor.  Then Tumbleson sought a guide dog. Leader Dogs for the Blind approved her for a mandatory three-week training course with Henry, her matched guide dog. The timing was rough. She had to miss the end of the school year and her son’s high-school graduation. She asked Lakota to use thirteen paid sick days, writing that the leave was “medically related” and asking about “FMLA?” Lakota denied paid sick leave but allowed unpaid leave as an ADA accommodation.  Tumbleson sued. She claimed Lakota violated the ADA in two ways: first, by discriminating against her because of her disability when it denied paid leave; and second, by failing to reasonably accommodate her disability. She also claimed Lakota violated the FMLA by refusing to let her use accrued paid sick leave instead of unpaid leave. Those claims put one practical question in the spotlight: when an employee needs medical leave, does the law require the employer to keep the paycheck coming?  That is the fight. Tumbleson got leave. She got Henry. She got an accommodation. But she did not get the paycheck she believed should come with it. For employees dealing with FMLA, ADA, disability, accommodation, and medical leave, that distinction can decide whether protected leave feels like protection or just another bill coming due. 

Legal Takeaways:

[box] An employee may have protected medical leave under the FMLA or receive leave as a reasonable ADA accommodation without automatically having a right to be paid during that leave. Paid medical leave often depends on whether the employee satisfies the employer’s normal paid leave policy, not just whether the leave involves a disability, medical condition, or accommodation.  [/box]

Does FMLA Give Employees A Right To Paid Medical Leave? 

No. FMLA can protect an employee’s right to take medical leave, but it does not automatically require the employer to pay the employee during that leave. That is the paycheck trap. Protected leave and paid leave are not the same thing.  The FMLA gives eligible employees up to twelve workweeks of leave for certain qualifying reasons, including a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the job. That rule protects time away from work. It does not, by itself, guarantee wages during that time.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “the FMLA presumptively allows employers to treat the required leave as unpaid.” Tumbleson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13795, at *22. That rule mattered because Tumbleson asked to use paid sick leave for the three-week Leader Dogs training, but Lakota approved unpaid leave instead.  Tumbleson’s need for leave was real. She had Usher syndrome, a progressive disability affecting her hearing and vision. Leader Dogs approved her for mandatory guide-dog training with Henry. The training required her to miss work. Lakota did not deny the leave. It denied paid sick leave.  That is the employment law distinction employees need to understand. FMLA protects the absence. FMLA protects the job. FMLA stops an employer from treating protected medical leave like misconduct. But FMLA does not automatically keep the paycheck coming. For an employee facing wrongful termination concerns, that distinction matters because unpaid leave can still be protected leave.  Protected medical leave is not always paid medical leave.  Practical Tip: If you need FMLA leave, ask HR in writing whether the leave will be paid or unpaid before the leave begins because job protection and wage replacement are different legal issues.  Best FMLA Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Do I Have To Use Unpaid FMLA Leave If I Have Paid Sick Time?

Not always. An employee can sometimes use accrued paid sick leave during FMLA leave. But the employee must qualify for paid sick leave under the employer’s normal leave policy. FMLA gives job-protected leave. It does not force an employer to pay for an absence that the employer would not normally pay for.  The rule is built into the statute. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the FMLA gives employees the right “to substitute any of [their] accrued paid vacation leave, personal leave, or medical or sick leave” for FMLA leave. Tumbleson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13795, at *22. But that right has a limit. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “nothing in [the FMLA’s general rules] shall require an employer to provide paid sick leave or paid medical leave in any situation in which such employer would not normally provide any such paid leave.” Id. at *22-23.  That is where Tumbleson’s claim hit the wall. Lakota’s sick-leave policy allowed teachers to use sick leave for absence due to “personal illness.” Tumbleson argued that her guide-dog training was medically connected to her Usher syndrome. Her doctor later wrote that the guide dog was part of her treatment plan and that the training was needed to keep her safe.  Lakota viewed the request through its normal paid-leave rules. Kramer testified that the training did not fall within “the definition of sick leave” in Ohio law, the collective-bargaining agreement, or the school board’s policy. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals focused on that ordinary paid-leave rule, not just the medical seriousness of Tumbleson’s disability.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “[t]o obtain paid leave under the FMLA, then, the employee must satisfy ‘the additional requirements in an employer’s paid leave policy[.]’” Id. at *23. Tumbleson’s two-sentence challenge to the district court’s interpretation of “personal illness” did not move the needle. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that nothing in her argument called the district court’s reasoning into doubt.  Having paid sick time is not the same as having the right to use it for every medical-related absence. If the employer normally pays for that type of absence, FMLA can let the employee substitute paid leave. If not, the leave can still be protected and unpaid.  Paid sick time is useful. Paid sick time is not automatic.  Practical Tip: If you want to use paid sick leave during FMLA leave, ask the employer to identify the exact policy language that controls payment because the strongest evidence may be whether the employer normally pays employees for the same kind of absence.  Best Medical Leave Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Can The ADA Require Paid Leave As A Disability Accommodation?

Usually, no. The ADA can require an employer to provide a reasonable accommodation for an employee with a disability. That accommodation can include leave. But the ADA does not usually let the employee demand the most expensive version of an accommodation when another reasonable option works.  Under the ADA, unpaid leave can be a reasonable accommodation when it lets the employee address the disability-related limitation and return to the job. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ADA requires a reasonable accommodation to be work related, meaning it must help the employee “perform the essential functions” of the job. Tumbleson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13795, at *17. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that an employer “need not provide the specific accommodation that the employee wants.” Id. at *18.  Tumbleson wanted paid leave to attend the mandatory Leader Dogs training. Lakota gave her unpaid leave. Tumbleson’s point was easy to understand. Paid leave would have helped her absorb the cost of doing something she needed because of her disability. Lakota saw it differently. The district did not dispute that she could attend the training. It gave her time off to do it. The fight was whether the ADA required Lakota to pay her for that time.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals focused on what the accommodation accomplished. The unpaid leave let Tumbleson attend the three-week training, obtain Henry, and return with a guide dog that made a positive impact at school. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held, “There is no dispute that unpaid leave allowed Tumbleson to attend the Leader Dogs training and bring home Henry.” Id. at *20.  That was enough for Lakota. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “Lakota had the ‘ultimate discretion’ to choose between the paid-versus-unpaid alternatives because both allowed Tumbleson to perform her job.” Id. If both options reasonably address the workplace limitation, the employer can choose the cheaper option.  Tumbleson argued that unpaid leave caused financial difficulties for her family. That argument makes human sense. Missing three weeks of pay can hurt. It can threaten rent, groceries, car payments, and everything else that does not care whether the leave was legally protected. But the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that those financial difficulties arose “outside the work environment” and did not make the unpaid-leave accommodation unreasonable under the ADA. Id. at *20-21.  That is a hard rule. A disability accommodation must address the employee’s ability to work. It does not automatically protect the employee from the financial pain of unpaid leave. If an employee is later wrongfully fired after requesting an ADA accommodation, the best evidence will often be the written request, the employer’s response, and whether the employer treated the request as a problem instead of a legal obligation.  The ADA can protect the leave. It does not always protect the paycheck.  Practical Tip: If you need paid leave as a disability accommodation, explain in writing why unpaid leave will not let you perform or return to your job, because the ADA fight may turn on whether payment itself is necessary for the accommodation to work, not just whether unpaid leave causes financial hardship.  Best Workplace Disability Accommodation Law Firm Blogs on Point: 

What Is The Best Employment Lawyer For Employees Denied Paid Medical Leave? 

When an employee asks for medical leave, paid sick time, FMLA protection, or an ADA accommodation, the employer’s answer can sound reasonable while still leaving the employee exposed. “You can take leave, but it will be unpaid” may be lawful in some cases. In other cases, it may hide disability discrimination, a failure to accommodate, wrongful termination, or a setup for being wrongfully fired. The difference usually lives in the documents: the leave policy, the emails, the doctor’s notes, the accommodation request, how other employees were treated, and whether the employer followed its own rules.  Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm is one of the largest law firms in the United States dedicated to employee’s rights. That means employees get a team that knows how to evaluate the real fight: whether the employer had to pay for the leave, whether unpaid leave was a reasonable accommodation, whether the employee was treated differently because of a disability, and whether the employer’s explanation holds up under employment law. The best employment law attorney will not just ask whether the employee needed leave. The best lawyer will ask whether the employer applied its policy honestly, whether disability discrimination infected the decision, and whether the employer used unpaid leave as cover for something worse. Spitz offers free initial consultations, a no-fee guarantee, deep trial experience, empathy, and a history of great results for employees facing ADA violations, FMLA disputes, disability discrimination, denied accommodation requests, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired. If your employer approved leave but cut off your paycheck, call Spitz and talk with an attorney who knows how to find the pressure points before the employer’s version hardens into the company story. 

FAQ 

[box] Does FMLA require paid medical leave for employees?  No. FMLA protects eligible employees who need qualifying medical leave, but FMLA does not automatically require an employer to pay the employee during that leave. Paid medical leave usually depends on whether the employee qualifies under the employer’s normal paid leave policy.  Can an employee use paid sick time during FMLA leave?  Yes, an employee may be able to substitute accrued paid sick leave during FMLA leave if the absence qualifies under the employer’s usual paid sick leave rules. The employer does not have to provide paid sick leave for a situation where it would not normally provide paid leave.  Can the ADA require paid leave as a disability accommodation?  Sometimes, but not automatically. The ADA requires a reasonable accommodation that allows an employee with a disability to perform the essential functions of the job, and unpaid leave may be reasonable if it gives the employee the time needed to address the disability-related limitation.  Is unpaid leave a reasonable accommodation under the ADA?  Unpaid leave can be a reasonable ADA accommodation when it allows the employee to obtain treatment, training, recovery, or other disability-related support needed to perform the job. The employee may need evidence showing why unpaid leave is not enough if paid leave is requested as the accommodation.  Can an employer deny paid leave but approve unpaid medical leave?  Yes. An employer can sometimes deny paid leave while approving unpaid medical leave if the employee does not qualify for paid leave under the employer’s normal policy and unpaid leave reasonably accommodates the disability or medical condition.  Can financial hardship make unpaid leave illegal under employment law?  Financial hardship matters in real life, but it does not automatically make unpaid leave unlawful under FMLA or the ADA. The legal question usually focuses on whether the employee was entitled to paid leave under a policy or whether paid leave was necessary as a disability accommodation.  What evidence helps an employee challenge denial of paid medical leave?  Useful evidence can include the written leave policy, collective bargaining agreement language, HR emails, medical notes, accommodation requests, examples of other employees receiving paid leave, and records showing whether the employer followed its normal rules. For the best shot at proving disability discrimination or wrongful termination, employees should preserve the exact words used by HR and management.  Can being wrongfully fired after asking for paid medical leave violate employment law?  Yes. Being wrongfully fired after asking for paid medical leave may violate employment law if the firing was tied to protected FMLA activity, an ADA accommodation request, disability discrimination, or retaliation. An employee who was wrongfully fired should preserve leave requests, medical notes, policy language, and termination paperwork.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights, paid medical leave, workplace disability discrimination, and accommodation blog provides general information about employment law, FMLA, ADA rights, disability leave, wrongful termination, being wrongfully fired, employee protections, employer obligations, discrimination, and when an attorney or lawyer may be able to help, but it should not be taken as legal advice. Every employee’s situation is different, and readers should consult with a qualified employment lawyer for advice about their specific facts, deadlines, claims, defenses, damages, and legal options. No promises are being made about any outcome, result, settlement, verdict, or claim value. This blog is a legal advertisement, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Can My Employer Fire Me For Just Asking About FMLA?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263083 2026-05-29T18:18:30Z 2026-06-04T16:00:55Z Confused employee reviewing FMLA paperwork, medical leave forms, and employment law documents after workplace stress.

When FMLA Paperwork Requests Become Protected Activity 

The Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) is complicated. There are forms, deadlines, doctors, HR people, managers, and enough fine print to make any normal employee feel, well, just plain lost and confused. Many employees think the best way to get answers about FMLA is to ask their employer or HR. That is what they are there for, right?  But what happens when the boss or manager does not like the question?  Can an employee be fired for simply asking about FMLA?  In Paris v. MacAllister Machinery Co., No. 25-1726, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13908 (6th Cir. May 14, 2026), Daniel Paris brought two different FMLA claims, and the difference matters. One was an FMLA retaliation claim. That claim asked whether MacAllister punished and wrongfully fired Paris for trying to use FMLA rights. The other was an FMLA interference claim. That claim asked whether Paris was actually entitled to FMLA leave and whether MacAllister denied him a benefit the law protected.  Those are not the same fight.  Paris worked for MacAllister Machinery Company and had a disciplinary history involving attendance, productivity, performance, and conduct issues. He had signed a last chance agreement. Then supervisor Patrick Monahan accused Paris of not wearing steel-toed boots. Paris denied it. Monahan allegedly tried to grab him and step on his foot to check. Paris emailed HR that he was “mentally distraught and having an anxiety attack from the harassment.” HR pointed him toward FMLA. Paris asked Irina Itskovich about “the process necessary to request FMLA leave” and what forms his doctor needed to complete. He never returned the FMLA form.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that Paris’s FMLA paperwork request was protected activity. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that Paris established a prima facie case of FMLA retaliation. That matters for any employee who feels wrongfully fired after asking about leave, because the first question to HR can be legally protected. But the separate interference claim required proof of a serious health condition. That is where the medical record became decisive. 

Legal Takeaways:

[box] An employee can engage in protected activity under employment law by asking for FMLA paperwork, even before returning completed forms. An FMLA interference claim requires proof that the employee was entitled to leave, including medical proof of a serious health condition when the claim is based on anxiety, stress, or workplace mental distress.  [/box]

Is Just Asking About FMLA Leave Protected Under Employment Law? 

Yes. An employee can be protected under employment law just by asking about FMLA leave if the question is part of trying to start the FMLA process. The employee does not have to know legal terminology. The employee does not have to complete every form before the law protects the act of asking how to begin. Under the FMLA, the first protected act can be the question itself.  That was Paris’s strongest retaliation point. After Monahan allegedly tried to grab him and step on his foot to check his boots, Paris emailed HR that he was “mentally distraught and having an anxiety attack from the harassment.” Peter Israel, a MacAllister HR employee, told Paris he could inquire about FMLA leave through Itskovich. Paris then asked Itskovich about “the process necessary to request FMLA leave” for his medical condition and asked what forms were needed and what his doctor had to provide.  MacAllister’s defense was simple: Paris only asked for information. He did not submit the FMLA form. He did not complete the certification. He did not finish the process. So, in MacAllister’s version, there was no protected activity yet.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that narrow view. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “the term ‘protected activity’ under the statute must include an employee’s ‘first step’ in requesting leave.” Paris, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13908, at *20-21. That rule matters because an FMLA right that starts only after the paperwork is complete leaves the employee exposed during the exact moment the employee needs protection most.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that “FMLA rights and the statute’s purpose would be significantly diminished if employers could fire an employee who simply took the required initial steps to access FMLA leave.” Id. at *21-22. Employers cannot turn the first FMLA question into a firing opportunity. If that were allowed, the law would protect the doorway only after the employer had already slammed it shut.  Paris also proved the rest of the prima facie retaliation case. MacAllister knew about the protected activity because Itskovich received and responded to his request. MacAllister fired Paris, which was an adverse employment action. And the timing was close: Paris made the FMLA inquiry in late December 2018, and MacAllister terminated him in early January 2019. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that this close timing supported a causal connection at the prima facie stage.  FMLA retaliation is a form of unlawful employment law discrimination when an employer acts against an employee for exercising or attempting to exercise protected leave rights. For an employee who was wrongfully fired after asking about FMLA, the first proof question is simple: did the employer know the employee was trying to use or even just learn about protected leave rights before the firing?  A question can be protected. That is the rule. That is the employee’s first shield.  Practical Tip: If you ask HR or a manager about FMLA leave, do it in writing and use words like “FMLA,” “medical condition,” “doctor,” and “leave” because those words help prove the employer knew you were trying to exercise protected rights before any wrongful termination.  Best FMLA Interference Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Can Workplace Anxiety And Stress Qualify For FMLA Leave? 

Yes. Mental and emotional conditions can qualify for FMLA leave. Anxiety, stress, mental distress, and emotional symptoms are not automatically excluded just because the injury is not visible on an X-ray. Under the FMLA, a mental or emotional condition may qualify as a serious health condition if it involves inpatient care or continuing treatment by a health care provider.  That rule matters because employers often treat mental health differently from physical injury. A broken ankle gets a chair, a brace, and sympathy. Anxiety gets side-eye, gossip, and a supervisor pretending that “stress” is just another word for “dramatic.” That is not the law. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a serious health condition can include a “physical or mental condition” when it involves inpatient care or continuing treatment by a health care provider. Paris, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13908, at *12-13.  Paris’s claimed condition was mental and emotional. After Monahan allegedly tried to grab him and step on his foot to check whether he was wearing steel-toed boots, Paris emailed HR that he was “mentally distraught and having an anxiety attack from the harassment.” That language mattered. Paris was not just saying he was annoyed, angry, or offended. He was describing anxiety and mental distress tied to an incident at work.  Paris later described more than a bad day. He identified anxiety, stress, drinking problems, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, weight loss, marital problems, financial problems, and “sheer mental anguish” because he believed he could be fired at any moment while other employees were “all doing the same thing.” Id. at *14. Those facts show why mental health claims need to be taken seriously. Work can follow an employee home. It can follow them to bed. It can turn Sunday night into a countdown clock.  MacAllister’s defense could not simply be that anxiety is not covered by FMLA. That would be wrong. The FMLA framework recognizes mental conditions. So the better employer defense was not “mental distress does not count.” It was “Paris did not prove this mental distress met the statutory definition.” That distinction is critical for any employee, attorney, or lawyer evaluating an FMLA claim, discrimination claim, or wrongful termination case.  Mental health can count. The question is whether the record proves it under the FMLA.  Practical Tip: If workplace anxiety or emotional distress is affecting your ability to work, describe the condition in writing using medical terms and work-impact terms, such as “anxiety,” “panic,” “sleep loss,” “doctor,” “treatment,” “work restrictions,” and “leave,” because those details help show the employer understood the issue was medical, not just ordinary workplace conflict.  Best FMLA Retaliation Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Can An Employee Prove FMLA Leave Without Medical Treatment? 

Usually, no. An employee can have real anxiety, real stress, and real fear about being wrongfully fired, but an FMLA interference claim still requires proof of a serious health condition. In this case, Paris had symptoms. He did not have the treatment evidence the statute required.  The rule is strict. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “the statute states in no uncertain terms that an employee must either obtain inpatient care or receive ongoing treatment from a health care provider to establish a ‘serious health condition.’” Paris, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13908, at *15 n.1. That is the line. The employee does not have to prove the employer liked the medical condition. The employee must prove the condition meets the FMLA definition.  Paris’s testimony showed why he felt he needed leave. He described anxiety, stress, drinking problems, loss of sleep, appetite loss, weight loss, marital problems, financial problems, and “sheer mental anguish.” Those facts are human. They matter to the story. But MacAllister’s defense went to the missing legal proof: Paris had not received inpatient care, and he had not received continuing treatment by a health care provider.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “the record reflects that Paris did not receive inpatient care for his anxiety or consult with a health care provider.” Id. at *14. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that when Paris was asked whether he had seen a “mental health professional” for those issues, “Paris stated that he had not.” Id. at *15. That left Paris with symptoms but without the statutory proof needed for the interference claim.  Paris argued that the district court had taken the issue away from the jury by weighing evidence about his serious health condition. That argument works when the record contains competing admissible evidence and the judge picks a side. It does not work when the required proof is missing. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held, “No jury could have found in Paris’s favor on this element.” Id. at *15.  Without inpatient care or continuing treatment, Paris could not prove the serious-health-condition element of his FMLA interference claim. A jury decides credibility fights. Missing medical proof does not become a credibility fight just because the employee suffered.  Symptoms may tell the story. Treatment records prove the FMLA element.  Practical Tip: If you believe workplace anxiety or stress may require FMLA leave, schedule medical care before the dispute becomes a termination fight because treatment records can prove the serious health condition element that personal testimony alone may not satisfy.  Best Wrongful Termination Law Firm Blogs on Point: 

What Is The Best Employment Lawyer For Employees Fired After Asking About FMLA?

Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm is one of the largest law firms in the United States dedicated to employee’s rights, which means employees get more than a quick opinion and a sympathetic nod. They get lawyers who know how to pressure-test the employer’s story, identify the missing proof, and build the wrongful termination case before the employer turns confusion into a defense. Spitz offers free initial consultations, a no-fee guarantee, vast trial experience, empathy, and a history of great results for employees facing discrimination, FMLA violations, workplace harassment, and wrongful termination. If your employer punished you after you asked about leave, do not wait until the paperwork gets messier and the company’s story gets cleaner. Call Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, and let an employee rights attorney help you figure out what happened, what can be proven, and what to do next. 

FAQ

[box] Can an employee be fired for asking about FMLA leave?  An employee may have an FMLA retaliation claim if the employer fires the employee for asking about FMLA leave, requesting FMLA paperwork, or taking steps to use protected leave rights. Under employment law, the question is whether the employer knew about the protected FMLA activity and whether the firing was connected to it.  Does an employee have to finish FMLA paperwork before being protected?  No. An employee may be protected when taking the first step to request FMLA leave, including asking for the paperwork needed to begin the process. But incomplete paperwork can still create problems if the employee later needs to prove entitlement to FMLA leave.  Can anxiety or stress qualify as a serious health condition under FMLA?  Yes. Anxiety, stress, and other mental or emotional conditions may qualify under FMLA if they meet the legal definition of a serious health condition. The employee usually needs medical evidence showing inpatient care or continuing treatment by a health care provider.  Can an employee prove FMLA leave without medical treatment?  Usually, no. An employee’s symptoms may be real and serious, but an FMLA interference claim often requires medical proof that the condition qualifies as a serious health condition under the statute.  What evidence helps prove wrongful termination after an FMLA request?  Strong wrongful termination evidence can include written FMLA requests, emails to HR, timing between the request and firing, medical records, witness statements, and proof that the employer’s stated reason does not match the facts. An employee who was wrongfully fired needs evidence that shows both protected activity and employer knowledge.  Can FMLA retaliation overlap with workplace discrimination or harassment?  Yes. FMLA retaliation can overlap with discrimination or harassment when an employer targets an employee after the employee reports medical issues, asks for leave, or complains about workplace treatment. The claims are different, but the same facts may matter to more than one employment law theory.  Can being wrongfully fired after asking for FMLA support an employment law claim?  Yes. Being wrongfully fired after asking for FMLA may support an employment law claim if the employer knew about the FMLA request and the facts show a connection between the protected request and the firing. Medical proof may also matter if the employee claims entitlement to FMLA leave.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights, workplace discrimination, and FMLA wrongful termination blog provides general information about employment law, FMLA rights, wrongful termination, being wrongfully fired, employee protections, employer obligations, discrimination, and when an attorney or lawyer may be able to help, but it should not be taken as legal advice. Every employee’s situation is different, and readers should consult with a qualified employment lawyer for advice about their specific facts, deadlines, claims, defenses, damages, and legal options. No promises are being made about any outcome, result, settlement, verdict, or claim value. This blog is a legal advertisement, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[When Do I Have To Report Intermittent FMLA Leave?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263081 2026-05-29T17:46:21Z 2026-06-02T16:00:49Z Employee reviewing intermittent FMLA paperwork, medical leave approval, call-in rules, and return-to-work instructions.

How Late Reporting Can Kill An FMLA Claim

Medical leave using the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) can be a lifeline when an employee is sick, caring for a family member, or dealing with a serious medical issue. It lets employees keep their jobs while they handle health problems that do not politely wait for weekends.  But FMLA leave still has rules.  Employees have to report FMLA related absences the right way. They have to follow call-in procedures. They have to notify the right people. And when approved medical leave ends, they have to return to work unless they have properly secured more protected leave.  That is where employees can get tripped up. Some employees assume that because they were approved for intermittent FMLA once, every later absence is automatically protected. Not so. Intermittent FMLA leave is not a blank check. It has to be used and reported correctly.  In Chitwood v. Ascension Health Alliance, 168 F.4th 493 (7th Cir. 2026), Elizabeth Chitwood worked as a human resources specialist for Ascension. In July 2021, Ascension approved Chitwood for intermittent FMLA leave for migraines. Ascension required her to report intermittent FMLA leave to Sedgwick, its third-party leave administrator, on “the same day the absence occurs” and to notify her supervisor “as soon as practicable.”  Later, Chitwood received continuous FMLA leave to care for her son from August 31 through November 3, 2021. When that continuous leave ended, Ascension told her at least three times to return to work on November 15. Ascension also warned that if she did not return, she would be fired.  Chitwood did not return. Instead, on November 15, she left a voicemail on Ascension’s attendance line saying she could not log into her computer and assumed she had been terminated. She thanked Ascension for the opportunity and said she planned to return company property. Ascension fired her later that day for “Leave Exhaust/Failure to Return to Work.”  The next day, Chitwood tried to report intermittent FMLA leave for November 11, 12, and 15. Ascension rejected the requests because she had already been terminated.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Ascension. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that Chitwood failed to show Ascension denied FMLA leave to which she was entitled or fired her for legitimate use of FMLA leave. 

Legal Takeaway: 

[box] FMLA protects eligible medical leave, but employees must follow the employer’s notice rules for intermittent FMLA leave and must return to work when approved leave ends unless they have properly secured additional protected leave. Late reporting, retroactive requests, and failure to return can defeat FMLA interference, FMLA retaliation, employment law, and wrongful termination claims. [/box]

Do I Have To Report Intermittent FMLA Leave The Same Day? 

Maybe. It depends on the employer’s policy and what is practicable under the facts. But if the employer has a same-day reporting rule for intermittent FMLA leave, employees should treat that rule like it matters because courts often do.  Chitwood had already been approved for intermittent FMLA leave for migraines. That approval mattered, but it did not eliminate her reporting obligations. Ascension’s policy required Chitwood to report intermittent FMLA leave usage to Sedgwick on “the same day the absence occurs” and to notify her supervisor of FMLA time “as soon as practicable.” Chitwood, 168 F.4th at 496.  The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that FMLA regulations require employees to give notice of leave “as soon as practicable under the facts and circumstances of the particular case,” and generally within the employer’s usual notice requirements. Id. at 498. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals also held that failing to follow regulatory and workplace notice requirements can defeat an FMLA interference claim. Id.  That is where Chitwood ran into trouble. On November 15, she called Ascension’s attendance line. So she could communicate with the employer that day. But she did not say she was taking intermittent FMLA leave. Instead, she said she assumed she had been terminated, thanked Ascension for the opportunity, and said she intended to return company property. She waited until November 16, after she was fired, to report intermittent FMLA leave for November 11, 12, and 15.  That was too late.  The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that no reasonable jury could find the notice requirements satisfied because nothing in the record showed Chitwood was unable to report the absences the same day they occurred. Id. at 498. Her ability to call the attendance line on November 15 made the late reporting harder to defend.  The lesson is simple. Approval for intermittent FMLA leave is not the same as properly using intermittent FMLA leave. Employees still have to report the absence the way the employer’s policy requires unless there is a real reason they could not do so.  Practical Tip: If you have intermittent FMLA leave, save the approval paperwork, know exactly who you must contact, and report each FMLA absence as early as possible—preferably the same day—because late reporting can turn a protected medical leave absence into an attendance problem.  Best FMLA Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Can My Employer Fire Me For Failure To Return After FMLA Leave? 

Yes. If approved FMLA leave ends and the employee does not return to work, the employer can usually treat that as a serious attendance problem unless the employee has properly requested and secured more protected leave.  That is what hurt Chitwood. Her continuous FMLA leave ended on November 3. Ascension instructed her at least three times to return to work on November 15 and warned her that failure to return would result in termination. She did not return.  Ascension fired Chitwood later that day for “Leave Exhaust/Failure to Return to Work.” Chitwood, 168 F.4th at 497. The next day, she tried to report intermittent FMLA leave for November 11, 12, and 15. But by then, Ascension had already terminated her.  The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that Chitwood’s FMLA interference claim failed because she was no longer employed when she tried to retroactively report those absences. Id. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals also held that Chitwood was not denied FMLA benefits to which she was entitled because the employer had already terminated her before she attempted to invoke FMLA for those days. Id.  That is the clean employment law point: FMLA protects leave that is properly requested and used. It does not let an employee skip work after approved medical leave ends, ignore return-to-work instructions, and then ask for FMLA coverage after termination.  An employee who needs more medical leave should request it before the current leave expires, follow the employer’s process, and keep written proof. Waiting until after the employer fires the employee is how a possible FMLA issue becomes a lost wrongful termination claim.  Practical Tip: If your approved FMLA leave is ending and you still cannot return to work, ask for additional leave before the return date, document the request, and follow every reporting rule because failure to return can give the employer a legitimate reason to fire you.  Best Medical Leave from Work Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

What Evidence Proves FMLA Retaliation After Medical Leave?

FMLA retaliation requires more than “I used FMLA, and then my employer fired me.” Timing can matter, but timing alone does not win the case if the employer has a clean, documented reason for termination.  Chitwood argued that Ascension retaliated against her for using FMLA leave. But the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the record showed something else: Ascension fired her because she failed to return to work after her continuous FMLA leave ended. Chitwood, 168 F.4th at 499.  Chitwood pointed to internal emails discussing her FMLA use. One employee wrote that if Sedgwick denied her leave, Ascension would “move to term if she does not RTW,” and another stated that Chitwood appeared to be using FMLA for herself, her son, and her daughter, perhaps trying to make “at least one of them stick.” Id. at 499–500.  Those emails were not great for the employer. A good FMLA attorney would absolutely look at them. They may not have been enough to win summary judgment, but they still had settlement value. A smart employee-side lawyer would use them to push resolution and remind the employer that trial risk, expense, and uncertainty are real even when liability is disputed.  But the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that, at most, the emails showed an honest suspicion that Chitwood was abusing FMLA leave. Id. at 500. The Court held that the FMLA does not protect employees from discipline for abusing FMLA rights. Id.  That is the difference between suspicious evidence and winning evidence. To prove FMLA retaliation, an employee needs evidence that the employer fired the employee because of protected FMLA use—not because the employee failed to return to work, failed to follow notice rules, or used medical leave improperly.  The best employment lawyer will look for the proof that closes that gap: shifting explanations, hostile comments about medical leave, uneven discipline, stronger treatment of employees who did not use FMLA, ignored doctor notes, manipulated attendance records, or evidence that the return-to-work reason was false.  Chitwood did not have enough of that. Ascension’s reason stayed simple: she exhausted leave and failed to return. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that “the simple story is the one borne out by the evidence here.” Id. at 500.  Best Wrongful Termination Law Firm Blogs on Point: 
  •  
Practical Tip: If you believe you were wrongfully fired after FMLA or medical leave, preserve emails, texts, call logs, leave approvals, doctor notes, return-to-work instructions, and attendance records, because retaliation claims usually turn on whether the employer’s stated reason is real or just cover for punishing protected leave use. 

Who Is The Best FMLA Lawyer If My Employer Fired Me After Medical Leave?

If your employer fired you after FMLA or medical leave, the best employment lawyer will not stop at the termination notice. The real work is in the timeline. When did approved leave end? What did the employer require for intermittent FMLA reporting? Did the employee follow the call-in rules? Did the employer accept late reports before? Did managers make comments suggesting frustration with medical leave? Did the stated reason shift? Those are employment law questions that can decide whether the employee was wrongfully fired.  Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm knows how to pressure-test FMLA cases before the employer turns “failure to return” into the whole story. Spitz helps employees who were wrongfully fired, denied protected leave, punished for intermittent FMLA, accused of abusing medical leave, or targeted by disability discrimination tied to medical absences. The best attorney does not just say the firing was unfair; the best lawyer builds the evidence, uses bad employer emails as leverage, and pushes for settlement when the employer faces real litigation risk. If your employer fired you after medical leave or rejected your FMLA request, call Spitz for a free initial consultation. 

FAQ

[box] What Is Intermittent FMLA?  Intermittent FMLA is protected leave taken in separate blocks of time instead of one continuous stretch. For example, an employee may use intermittent FMLA for migraine flare-ups, medical appointments, recurring treatments, or periodic symptoms from a serious health condition. But intermittent FMLA still has rules: the employee must follow the employer’s reporting procedures and give notice as soon as practicable.  When Do I Have To Report Intermittent FMLA Leave?  You should report intermittent FMLA leave as soon as practicable and within your employer’s usual call-in or reporting rules. If your employer requires same-day reporting, treat that rule seriously unless there is a real reason you cannot comply.  Can I Report Intermittent FMLA Leave After I Am Fired?  Usually, no. If the employer already terminated the employee before the employee tries to report intermittent FMLA leave, the employee may no longer be entitled to FMLA benefits for those absences. That can make a later claim for discrimination, FMLA interference, or wrongful termination much harder.  Can My Employer Fire Me For Not Returning After FMLA Leave Ends?  Yes. If approved FMLA or medical leave ends and the employee does not return to work or properly secure more protected leave, the employer may have a legitimate reason to terminate employment. That is why employees should request more medical leave before the return date whenever possible.  What Evidence Helps Prove FMLA Retaliation?  Useful evidence can include emails criticizing FMLA use, shifting explanations, uneven discipline, call logs, leave approvals, doctor notes, return-to-work instructions, and proof that the employer treated employees who did not use FMLA more favorably. This is the kind of evidence an employment law attorney will examine to determine whether the employee was wrongfully fired.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights and employment law blog about FMLA, intermittent FMLA, medical leave, late reporting, discrimination, failure to return to work, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired is for general information only and is not legal advice. Every employee’s situation is different, especially when the facts involve call-in rules, leave approvals, attendance policies, return-to-work instructions, retroactive leave requests, employer emails about protected leave, or possible disability discrimination. If you believe your employer denied FMLA leave, punished you for taking medical leave, refused intermittent leave, discriminated against you, or fired you after protected leave, consult a qualified employment lawyer about your specific facts, deadlines, evidence, damages, and legal options. This blog is a legal advertisement. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer unless and until a written agreement is signed. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Yes, You Can Be Fired For Creating Workplace Chaos]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263065 2026-05-26T13:45:19Z 2026-05-28T16:00:29Z Employee reviewing discipline records, workplace complaint notes, and termination documents after reporting gender discrimination.

Despite Claims Of Gender Discrimination And Retaliation

Gender Discrimination in the workplace violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Retaliation for reporting gender discrimination is illegal. Employees should be able to report employment discrimination treatment without wondering whether that complaint just put a target on their back.  But a complaint about employment discrimination is not a force field that protects an employee from their own bad conduct. Reporting a boss or manager for favoring men or making sex-based comments does not give employees a free pass to cause workplace chaos or refuse their supervisor’s instructions.  An employee who reports gender discrimination can still be fired for misconduct. Insubordination. Dishonesty. Mishandled evidence. Ignoring a direct order. Creating morale problems. Showing up late after warnings. The law protects the complaint. It does not erase bad conduct.  That is the fight in this case.  In White v. North Louisiana Criminalistics Laboratory, No. 25-30293, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12877 (5th Cir. May 4, 2026), Carla White worked for the North Louisiana Criminalistics Laboratory as a firearms examiner and later as interim firearms section supervisor. White complained about gender discrimination. She also told the new system director, Joey Jones, about inappropriate behavior and gender discrimination by a prior supervisor toward female employees. Then the record showed a pileup of workplace problems caused by White: poor evidence handling, unsealed evidence, old cases sitting untouched, a combative response to correction, concerns about her treatment of a trainee, tardiness, a negative impact on morale, and a call to an outside ATF contact after being told not to discuss staffing changes.  That is not the clean retaliation story employees want to be able to tell in court. It is the messy one employers love.  White claimed she was fired because of sex discrimination and retaliation. The employer said she was fired for legitimate reasons, including insubordination, dishonesty, poor evidence handling, tardiness, morale problems, and failing to follow management instructions. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the employer, holding that White could not establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination and could not prove that the employer’s reasons were pretext for retaliation.  The question becomes brutally practical: did the employer fire the employee because she complained, or because it had legitimate reasons to fire her anyway? 

Legal Takeaway: 

[box] An employee can complain about gender discrimination and still be fired for legitimate workplace misconduct. Retaliation claims require proof that the firing would not have happened but for retaliatory motive, and documented insubordination, dishonesty, policy violations, tardiness, poor performance, and morale problems can defeat a wrongful termination claim.  [/box]

Does Being Replaced By A Woman Defeat A Gender Discrimination Claim? 

Not automatically. Being replaced by another woman can make a gender discrimination claim harder, but it does not end the case by itself. A smart employee rights attorney does not stop at “who got the job next.” The better question is whether the employer treated the employee worse because of sex.  White had a problem with the replacement evidence. After she was fired from her senior scientist and firearms examiner position, the North Louisiana Criminalistics Laboratory hired Sonia Nunnery, a woman, to serve as firearms examiner and NIBIN coordinator. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that White “was not replaced by someone outside of her protected class.” White, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12877, at *8.  That hurt her prima facie case. But replacement evidence is only one path. An employee may also prove gender discrimination by showing that similarly situated male employees were treated more favorably, that management made sex-based comments, that discipline was uneven, that the employer ignored comparable misconduct by men, that the investigation was slanted, or that the employer’s stated reason shifted over time.  White tried the comparator route. She argued that male coworkers Richard Beighley, Alex King, and Joshua DeBord were treated better. Comparator evidence can be powerful, but only when the comparison is tight. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a comparator must be “similarly situated,” which requires looking at things like “job responsibility, experience, and qualifications.” Id. at *9-10.  That is where White’s proof failed. Beighley was not properly raised in the district court. King worked in drug chemistry at a different lab and was fired for different conduct. DeBord worked in a different section and was accused of different misconduct. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “neither King nor DeBord is a valid comparator.” Id. at *10.  That is not a technicality. The law requires a real match. Same kind of job. Same kind of misconduct. Same decisionmaker if possible. Same rules. Without that, the employer can argue the situations are too different to prove gender discrimination.  This is where the best employment law lawyer earns the title. A weak lawyer asks, “Was she replaced by a man?” A better lawyer asks, “Who else broke similar rules, who knew about it, who made the decision, what happened to them, and why was this employee treated worse?”  A gender discrimination claim does not survive because the firing felt sexist. It survives because the proof shows sex changed the outcome.  Practical Tip: If you believe you were fired because of gender discrimination, identify male coworkers with similar duties, supervisors, discipline history, and alleged misconduct who were treated better, because the strongest comparator evidence shows the employer punished the same conduct differently based on sex.  Best Gender Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Can My Employer Fire Me For Insubordination After I Complained About Discrimination? 

Yes. An employer can fire an employee for insubordination, dishonesty, poor performance, policy violations, or morale problems even after the employee complains about gender discrimination. The complaint is protected. The misconduct is not.  White had facts worth investigating. She complained to Jones about sex discrimination and joined other female employees in reporting Barnhill’s inappropriate behavior. That is enough to make any good attorney look closely at retaliation.  But NLCL had its own file. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that NLCL gave legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons for firing White, including “insubordination, long-term tardiness, poor evidence handling, negative impact on employee morale, and disability discrimination against a subordinate.” White, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12877, at *13.  That shifted the fight to causation. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that White had to show “the adverse action would not have occurred ‘but for’ the employer’s retaliatory motive.” Id. Complaining and then getting fired is not enough. Retaliation requires proof that the complaint caused the firing, not merely that the firing happened after the complaint.  White could not do that. After her complaints, the record showed evidence-room problems, violations of written lab procedures, conflict over Stout, a poor response to correction, and the ATF call after Jones told her not to discuss staffing changes. Worse, White initially denied the call before admitting it after Jones showed her the text message.  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the “natural chronology of this evidence” showed White’s insubordination, dishonesty, and negative impact on morale were the but-for causes of her termination. Id. at *14. That killed the retaliation claim.  The law protects employees from retaliation. It does not protect them from consequences.  Practical Tip: If you complain about gender discrimination, keep your work clean afterward: follow written instructions, document your performance, avoid side conversations that can be framed as insubordination, and be truthful if management asks what happened, because post-complaint misconduct can give the employer a legitimate reason to fire you.  Best Workplace Retaliation Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Who Is The Best Employment Lawyer If I Was Fired In Retaliation For Reporting Gender Discrimination? 

If you reported gender discrimination and then got fired, the best employment lawyer will not stop at the timeline. Timing matters. So does what happened next. Did the employer already have performance complaints? Did management document policy violations? Did the employee ignore a direct order? Did the employer exaggerate normal workplace friction after the complaint? Did the company treat similar employees differently? That is where a serious retaliation and wrongful termination analysis starts.  Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm helps employees who were retaliated against, wrongfully fired, or targeted after reporting discrimination. Spitz has the resources to dig into the emails, discipline records, comparator evidence, witness testimony, and employer decision-making that often decide employment law cases. The best attorney does not just say the firing was unfair; the best lawyer figures out whether the employer’s stated reasons were real, exaggerated, or cover for retaliation. If you complained about gender discrimination, were retaliated against, and then lost your job, call Spitz for a free initial consultation and let an employee rights lawyer help you figure out whether you have a wrongful termination claim that can actually be proven. 

FAQ 

[box] Can I Be Fired After Reporting Gender Discrimination?  Yes. There is a critical difference between being fired because you reported gender discrimination and being fired after you reported gender discrimination. An employer cannot legally fire an employee because of the report, but it can fire an employee afterward for legitimate misconduct, poor performance, insubordination, dishonesty, or policy violations if those reasons are not a cover for retaliation. If you were wrongfully fired or retaliated against after reporting discrimination, the evidence must connect the firing to the report.  What Does But-For Cause Mean In A Retaliation Case?  But-for cause means the employee must prove the firing would not have happened without the employer’s retaliatory motive. It is not enough to show that the employee complained and was later fired; the evidence must connect the complaint to the termination decision.  Can My Employer Fire Me For Insubordination After I Complained About Discrimination?  Yes. An employer may fire an employee for insubordination after a discrimination complaint if the employer honestly relied on legitimate workplace reasons. The employee must show those reasons were false, exaggerated, inconsistent, or used as cover for retaliation.  Can Gender Discrimination Be Proven If Another Woman Replaced Me?  Yes, but it may be harder. An employee can still prove gender discrimination through evidence that similarly situated male employees were treated better, the employer made sex-based comments, discipline was uneven, or the employer’s stated reason does not hold up.  What Evidence Helps Prove I Was Retaliated Against At Work?  Useful evidence can include complaint emails, timing, discipline records, witness statements, shifting explanations, comparator evidence, text messages, performance reviews, and proof that the employer treated the employee differently after the protected complaint.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights blog about gender discrimination, retaliation, workplace misconduct, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired is for general information only and is not legal advice. Reporting discrimination is protected, but every employee’s facts are different, especially when the employer claims the firing was based on insubordination, dishonesty, poor performance, policy violations, or morale problems. If you believe you were retaliated against, discriminated against, wrongfully fired, or fired because you reported gender discrimination, consult a qualified employment lawyer about your specific facts, deadlines, evidence, damages, and legal options. This blog is a legal advertisement. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer unless and until a written agreement is signed. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Yes, You Can Be Fired For Refusing To Talk To And Train Coworkers]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=263063 2026-05-26T13:38:16Z 2026-05-26T16:00:58Z Pregnant employee at desk reviewing workplace emails, coworker complaints, FMLA paperwork, and termination documents.

Even If You Are Pregnant And Scheduled For FMLA Leave

Pregnancy protects employees from pregnancy discrimination. The Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) protects eligible employees who need maternity leave. Neither one gives an employee a golden ticket to make coworkers miserable, refuse to communicate, resist training, and then act shocked when the employer chooses peace over payroll chaos.  That may sound blunt. Good. Employment law is full of hard lines that employees only learn after someone has already packed up their desk and tries to sue for wrongful termination.  In Moreno v. Dealer Integrated Services, L.L.C., No. 25-20470, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13530 (5th Cir. May 11, 2026), Jocelyn Moreno worked for Dealer Integrated Services as a payroll administrator. She told office manager Deborah Devine in April 2023 that she was pregnant and intended to take leave in September. She requested two months of leave from Devine and owner Chad Roberts. Roberts promptly granted it. Moreno later testified that Roberts told her he could not cover the three-month absence she was entitled to under the FMLA.  The workplace was already a pressure cooker. Moreno testified that Devine caused much of the strain and that her falling out with Valerie De la Cruz and Patricia Mauricio began when they learned how much she was paid. DIS told a different story. Roberts submitted an affidavit that Moreno refused to communicate with Mauricio and De la Cruz even though communication was an essential function of her job. According to DIS, Moreno shut her door to coworkers, responded only to Devine, resisted payroll changes, refused more payroll duties without a raise, and was “aggressive and hostile” when asked to train Mauricio for Moreno’s upcoming absence.  Then the office went full group-project-from-hell. Mauricio resigned and returned to a job that did not require working with Moreno. Moreno secretly listened outside a closed door to a private conversation between Devine and De la Cruz. By late June, Mauricio and De la Cruz told Devine they would resign unless Moreno was fired. Roberts and Devine met with Moreno and fired her. Moreno claimed Roberts said he could not “lose two employees” and have Moreno out too.  Moreno sued for pregnancy discrimination, FMLA retaliation, FMLA interference, and failure to provide FMLA notice. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for DIS. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that DIS had legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for firing Moreno and that she did not produce enough evidence of pretext, pregnancy discrimination, or FMLA retaliation. That is the best reminder for employees who believe they were wrongfully fired: protected status matters, but proof still has to beat the employer’s stated reason. 

Legal Takeaway:

[box] An employee can be pregnant, scheduled for FMLA leave, and still be fired for legitimate workplace conduct problems if the employer proves a nondiscriminatory reason and the employee cannot show pretext. Pregnancy and FMLA rights protect against discrimination and retaliation; they do not block termination for refusing to communicate, refusing to train coworkers, or contributing to workplace dysfunction.  [/box]

How Do You Prove Pregnancy Discrimination?

Pregnancy discrimination is a form of gender discrimination that is protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  An employee proves pregnancy discrimination by showing that pregnancy caused the employer’s decision or was at least one motivating reason for it. The employee can use direct evidence or circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is the smoking gun. Circumstantial evidence is the trail of footprints. Most cases are built with footprints.  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that Title VII prohibits an employer from firing an employee “on the basis of their pregnancy.” Moreno, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13530, at *4. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that an employee may prove pregnancy discrimination under a “but-for” standard or a “mixed-motive” standard. Id. Under but-for causation, pregnancy must be the reason for the firing. Under mixed motive, pregnancy must be a motivating factor, even if the employer also had other reasons.  Direct evidence has a strict test. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that comments count as direct evidence only if they are “(1) related to the plaintiff’s protected characteristic; (2) proximate in time to the challenged employment decision; (3) made by an individual with authority over the challenged employment decision; and (4) related to the challenged employment decision.” Id. at *5. That is a high bar. A comment can be suspicious, relevant, and worth investigating without being direct evidence.  Another way to prove pregnancy discrimination is circumstantial evidence. That usually means showing suspicious timing, comments about pregnancy or leave, different treatment of nonpregnant employees, shifting explanations, weak discipline, false accusations, or an employer story that does not hold together. Circumstantial evidence is not second-class evidence. It just requires the employee to connect the dots with facts.  Once the employer gives a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for firing the employee, the employee must prove pretext. Pretext means the employer’s stated reason is not the real reason, is false, or is too weak to explain the firing. To prove pretext, an employee must produce evidence that the employer’s stated reason was false, inconsistent, unevenly applied, or not the real reason for the firing. Rebutting the employer’s reason means answering it with evidence, not outrage.  Pregnancy discrimination is not proven by vibes, timing, or a bad feeling alone. It is proven by evidence that links the employer’s decision to pregnancy. The best pregnancy discrimination attorney looks for that link before the employer turns “office conflict” into the whole story.  Practical Tip: If you believe you were fired because of pregnancy, preserve comments about pregnancy, leave, coverage, scheduling, absences, and coworkers, but also gather evidence showing the employer’s stated reason is false or unevenly applied because pregnancy discrimination claims often turn on pretext.  Best Pregnancy Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Can An Employee Lose A Discrimination Claim Over Office Drama? 

Yes. An employee can lose a discrimination claim over office drama if the employer proves it fired the employee for workplace dysfunction, refusal to communicate, refusal to train coworkers, or coworker conflict—not pregnancy, FMLA leave, or another protected reason. Pregnancy matters. FMLA matters. Employment law matters. But none of those rights give an employee immunity from ordinary workplace consequences.  DIS gave the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals concrete workplace reasons for the termination. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that DIS identified evidence that Moreno “refused to communicate with her coworkers in a job where communication was essential; she contributed to a ‘toxic’ work environment that led two colleagues to threaten to resign; and she refused to carry out some of the responsibilities of her position.” Moreno, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 13530, at *7. That is a serious record. Payroll requires communication. Training coworkers for upcoming leave requires cooperation. Employers do not have to keep the office running like a reality show reunion special just because the conflict involves someone with protected rights.  This case turned on whether Moreno could prove pretext. DIS said the problem was communication, coworker conflict, refusal to take on duties, and hostility around training. To rebut that, Moreno needed evidence that she did communicate with De la Cruz and Mauricio, that communication was not essential to her payroll job, that she did not refuse duties, that she was not aggressive or hostile when asked to train Mauricio, or that DIS tolerated the same kind of workplace conflict from nonpregnant employees. She did not have that record.  Instead, Moreno admitted the workplace was strained and tried to put the blame on Devine and coworkers. That does not work. Blaming the manager may explain why the office was miserable. It does not show pregnancy discrimination. It does not show that DIS’s stated reasons were false. And it does not answer the employer’s evidence that Moreno contributed to the dysfunction and that two coworkers threatened to resign rather than keep working with her.  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “[t]he issue is not whether Moreno’s conduct was reasonable; rather, it is whether she was fired for that conduct as opposed to her protected basis.” Id. at *8. That is the line employees need to understand. A workplace can be unfair. A manager can be difficult. Coworkers can be petty. None of that proves discrimination unless the evidence connects the firing to pregnancy, FMLA, or another protected basis.  Moreno also argued that DIS gave shifting explanations. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that argument. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that DIS’s reasons were “entirely consistent”: Moreno refused to cooperate with coworkers and was fired after two coworkers threatened to resign rather than work with her. Id. at *8 n.2. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that “minor variations in explanation and emphasis in legal briefs are not evidence of discrimination.” Id. Small wording changes do not prove pretext if the employer’s core story stays the same.  The blunt employee-rights lesson is this: yes, you can be fired while pregnant. Yes, you can be fired before FMLA leave. Yes, you can lose a wrongful termination case if the employer proves it fired you because coworkers would rather quit than keep working with you, and you cannot prove pretext. Being wrongfully fired requires evidence that the employer’s reason was unlawful, not just evidence that the firing felt harsh.  Protected rights protect employees from discrimination and retaliation. They do not protect workplace chaos.  Practical Tip: If your employer claims you were fired for workplace conflict, gather evidence that directly rebuts each stated reason, such as emails showing you communicated with coworkers, proof you completed disputed duties, witness statements about who caused the conflict, and documents showing the employer treated similar nonpregnant employees better. Pretext is not proven by saying the employer was unfair; it is proven by showing the employer’s reason was false, inconsistent, or not the real reason.  Best Wrongful Termination Attorney Blogs on Point: 

Who Is The Best Employment Lawyer For Employees Fired While Pregnant Or Before FMLA Leave? 

If you were fired while pregnant, scheduled for FMLA leave, or accused of causing workplace conflict, the best employment lawyer will not just ask whether the timing looks bad. Timing matters, but it is not the whole fight. The real question is whether the employer’s stated reason holds up. Did the employee actually refuse to communicate? Did coworkers really threaten to quit? Did the employer treat nonpregnant employees with similar conflict differently? Did the company suddenly exaggerate ordinary office tension after learning about pregnancy or leave? That is where pretext lives.  Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm knows how to pressure-test the employer’s story before it becomes the official courtroom version. Spitz is one of the largest law firms in the United States dedicated to employee rights, with the resources to dig through emails, policies, witness accounts, discipline history, and inconsistent explanations. Spitz offers free initial consultations, a no-fee guarantee, experienced trial lawyers, empathy, and a history of great results for employees facing pregnancy discrimination, FMLA retaliation, workplace discrimination, wrongful termination, and being wrongfully fired. The best attorney does not just say the termination was unfair; the best lawyer builds the evidence needed to prove pretext. If your employer says you were fired for “drama,” call Spitz and speak with an attorney who knows how to find out whether that word is covering up discrimination or whether the employer can actually prove what it claims. 

FAQ

[box] Can An Employee Be Fired While Pregnant?  Yes. An employee can be fired while pregnant if the employer has a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason that is not pregnancy discrimination. Pregnancy protects an employee from discrimination; it does not prevent termination for documented workplace misconduct, refusal to perform job duties, or serious coworker conflict.  Can An Employer Fire An Employee Before FMLA Leave Starts?  Yes. FMLA protects eligible employees from interference and retaliation, but it does not block an employer from firing an employee for legitimate reasons before leave starts. The employee must show the firing was connected to FMLA, not just close in time to FMLA leave.  How Does An Employee Prove Pretext In A Pregnancy Discrimination Case?  An employee proves pretext by showing the employer’s stated reason is false, inconsistent, too weak to explain the firing, unevenly applied, or not the real reason. Evidence can include emails, witness testimony, comparator evidence, shifting explanations, or proof that nonpregnant employees were treated better for similar conduct.  What Evidence Helps Employees Prove Pregnancy Discrimination?  Useful evidence includes pregnancy-related comments, timing, discipline records, emails, witness statements, proof of completed work, evidence of communication with coworkers, comparator evidence, and documents showing the employer treated nonpregnant employees more favorably.  Can I Have A Wrongful Termination Claim If I Was Wrongfully Fired While Pregnant?  Yes. An employee may have a wrongful termination claim if pregnancy, FMLA leave, discrimination, or retaliation caused the firing. But if the employer proves a legitimate reason, the employee must show pretext with evidence that the stated reason was false, inconsistent, unevenly applied, or not the real reason.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights blog about pregnancy discrimination, FMLA, pretext, workplace conflict, and wrongful termination is for general information only and is not legal advice. Reading this blog does not mean that your employer broke the law, that you have a claim, or that any result is promised. Every employee’s facts are different, especially when the employer claims the firing was based on coworker conflict, performance, refusal to communicate, or other workplace conduct. If you believe you were wrongfully fired, discriminated against, retaliated against, or treated differently because of pregnancy, FMLA leave, or another protected right, consult a qualified employment lawyer about your specific facts, deadlines, evidence, damages, and legal options. This blog is a legal advertisement. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading it, and no attorney-client relationship exists with Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, any Spitz attorney, or any Spitz lawyer unless and until a written agreement is signed. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Who Should I Ask For A Disability Accommodation At Work?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=262992 2026-04-30T13:55:30Z 2026-05-21T16:00:10Z

What Employees Must Do To Trigger Employer’s ADA Accommodation Process 

Employees dealing with disability discrimination often assume that if their employer knows they are struggling, the law will step in to protect them. That assumption feels fair—but in employment law and specifically the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), fairness and legal protection are not always the same thing.  In Molosso v. Bd. of Supervisors Univ. of La. Sys., No. 25-30362, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 8520, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment against an employee who claimed disability discrimination and failure to provide a disability accommodation. Molosso, a nursing student, alleged she suffered from ADHD and depression and struggled academically, including freezing during exams and failing multiple courses. She spoke with instructors, who had no authority, about her difficulties and even discussed possible accommodations—but she never went to the university’s designated office responsible for handling accommodation requests.  That seemingly small detail ended up deciding the entire case.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that to succeed on a failure-to-accommodate claim, an employee must show the employer knew not just about the disability, but about the resulting limitations and need for accommodation. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found that because Molosso did not follow the required process to request a disability accommodation, there was “no genuine dispute of material fact,” and her case was dismissed.  In other words: she may have needed help—but under the law, she didn’t ask the right way.  That result is harsh. And it happens more often than most employees realize. Let’s walk through how to avoid these mistakes so your disability discrimination and failure to accommodate claims are protected. 

Legal Takeaway

[box]An employee must put the employer on notice of both the disability and the resulting limitations—typically by making a clear request for a disability accommodation—to trigger protection under employment law. Mere knowledge of a disability alone is not enough to require an accommodation unless the need is open and obvious. [/box]

How Do You Properly Request A Disability Accommodation Under Employment Law? 

To properly request a disability accommodation under employment law, an employee should clearly identify their disability, explain the resulting limitations, and request a specific accommodation through the employer’s designated process—whether that is HR, a supervisor, or another identified decision-maker with authority to act on the request. If a formal process exists, it generally should be followed to trigger legal protection and obligations. Simply venting about struggles or casually mentioning a condition is usually not enough.  That principle drives real outcomes in disability discrimination cases.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that when a disability is not open and obvious, “the initial burden rests primarily upon the plaintiff to specifically identify the disability and resulting limitations, and to request a reasonable accommodation in direct and specific terms.” Molosso, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 8520.  Molosso did not meet that standard. She spoke with instructors about her academic struggles and even discussed possible accommodations. But the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals focused on what she failed to do: she did not use the school’s established process for requesting a disability accommodation. That misstep became the turning point.  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee must direct the request to the proper channel, “rather than making it verbally to [an] advisor.” Molosso, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 8520. In some situations, telling the wrong person may be treated the same as not making a request at all.  Courts often accept this position from an employer because structured systems create documentation and consistency. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals emphasized that bypassing that structure creates “an alternative, undocumented process,” which employers are not required to manage. That gap can seriously weaken a disability discrimination or wrongful termination claim based on a denied disability accommodation.  At the same time, this is not always the end of the story. Even if an employee did not follow the exact process, there may still be arguments about what the employer knew, whether the system was clearly communicated, or whether the need for a disability accommodation was obvious. This is where experienced employment law strategy matters.  Practical Tip: Make your disability accommodation request clear, specific, and documented, and follow your employer’s process if one exists. That step puts you in the strongest position to protect your rights.  Best Workplace Disability Accommodation Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Is It Enough That My Employer Knows I Have A Disability To Trigger Legal Protection? 

Yes—but only in part. Under employment law, an employer’s knowledge that an employee has a disability can trigger protection against disability discrimination. But that alone does not automatically require the employer to provide a disability accommodation.  The obligation depends on whether the employer understands both the disability and the resulting limitations. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that an employee must show “the disability and its consequential limitations were known by the covered entity.” Molosso, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 8520. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals further held that “[m]ere knowledge of the disability is not enough.”  That is where many cases turn.  In Molosso’s situation, the school may have known she had ADHD. But the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that her struggles—like freezing during an exam—did not make her limitations or need for a disability accommodation clear. Performance issues can arise for many reasons, and an employer is not required to guess.  This is especially true for non-visible conditions. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals noted that mental disabilities are often not “open, obvious, and apparent,” which means the burden remains on the employee to make the need for a disability accommodation clear.  That disconnect is where many wrongful termination and wrongfully fired claims break down. An employee believes the employer knew enough, while the employer argues it did not understand the need to act. When that connection is missing, courts often side with the employer.  Practical Tip: Do not assume your employer understands your limitations. Clearly explain how your condition affects your work and what disability accommodation you need.  Best Disability Discrimination At Work Attorney Blogs on Point: 

How Does Hiring The Best Employment Lawyer Help If I Was Wrongfully Fired After Asking For An Accommodation?

If you were wrongfully fired after asking for a disability accommodation, the outcome of your case often depends on how the facts are presented under employment law. That is where hiring the best employment lawyer matters. A strong attorney will focus on what the employer knew, how the request was made, and whether the situation supports a claim for disability discrimination or wrongful termination. Even where the process was not followed perfectly, an experienced lawyer can identify arguments that keep a case alive.  At Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, we represent employees and understand how employers defend these cases. We have the resources, experience, and track record to handle complex disability discrimination and failure to accommodate claims. We offer free consultations and a no-fee guarantee. If you believe you were wrongfully fired or denied a disability accommodation, contact the best attorney for your situation and get answers about your rights under employment law.  Best ADA Law Firm Blogs on Point: 

Frequently Asked Questions

[box] What is a disability accommodation for my job?  A disability accommodation is a change that helps an employee perform their job despite a medical condition and addresses limitations recognized under employment law.  Can my employer fire me because I asked for a disability accommodation?  No—an employer generally cannot fire an employee for requesting a disability accommodation. Doing so may support a disability discrimination or wrongful termination claim.  What should I do if my employer denies my accommodation request?  Document everything and speak with an experienced employment lawyer to evaluate your disability discrimination claim.  Can a small employer still be responsible for failure to accommodate a disability?  Yes. A smaller employer can be liable under employment law for failure to accommodate if a reasonable disability accommodation was available. However, an employer is not required to provide an accommodation that creates an undue burden, meaning significant difficulty or expense.  [/box] Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This workplace disability discrimination and employee rights blog provides general information about employment law, including wrongful termination, being wrongfully fired, and failure to accommodate a disability accommodation. It is not legal advice. Every employee’s situation is different, and you should consult a qualified employment lawyer or attorney. No promises are made. This is a legal advertisement, and no attorney-client relationship is created. ]]> by Spitz, The Employee's Law Firm <![CDATA[Can I Be Denied A Job For Pending Charges?]]> https://www.calltherightattorney.com/?p=262990 2026-04-30T13:52:01Z 2026-05-19T16:00:51Z Job applicant worried after background check reveals pending criminal charges

How Criminal History Decisions Can Lead To Race Discrimination Under Title VII 

You apply for a job. You’re perfectly qualified. It’s the right role, the right pay, the right timing—one of those rare opportunities that actually fits. Then something happens. You get charged with something that wasn’t your fault, or something you expect to beat, or maybe something that will end with a fine or diversion. And just like that, the opportunity feels like it’s slipping away.  Now you’re not thinking about the job—you’re thinking about whether the employer is going to find out. And if they do, whether that’s the end of it.  For many employees, that fear is not just about losing a job—it raises concerns about wrongful termination, retaliation, and whether the employer is using pending charges as a reason to deny an opportunity because of race discrimination.  That fear is justified. Race discrimination is real, and employers do run background checks. They ask questions. And many will look at pending criminal charges and decide you are not worth the risk. Under employment law, they are often allowed to do that.  But not always.  This is especially true when criminal history intersects with race discrimination. Courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) have long recognized that using arrests or pending charges can disproportionately impact Black employees and other protected classes, which means what looks like a neutral hiring decision can actually raise serious employment discrimination concerns.  Here’s the line most employees don’t see: the law does not protect you from unfair decisions. It protects you from discrimination. That means an employer can make a harsh decision—even a wrong one—without violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  So when does it cross the line?  An employee claiming failure to hire has to prove more than “they used my charges against me.” The law requires proof that the employer used those charges because of race, or that the practice creates a measurable, provable impact on a protected class.  That is a much higher bar than most people realize.  Because an employer can point to pending charges and call it judgment. The question is whether that judgment is real—or just a cover. 

Legal Takeaway

[box]Under Title VII, an employer may consider pending criminal charges when deciding whether to hire an employee, but a failure to hire becomes illegal when the employee proves intentional discrimination or a specific hiring practice that causes a proven disparate impact. [/box]

What Is The Difference Between Disparate Treatment And Disparate Impact? 

There are two ways an employee can prove race or other forms of employment discrimination under Title VII: disparate treatment and disparate impact. They are fundamentally different and confusing them is one of the most common reasons cases fail.  This distinction becomes critical in cases involving criminal history, because what appears to be a neutral decision about pending charges can actually function as race discrimination if it is applied unevenly or disproportionately affects a protected class.  Disparate treatment is intentional discrimination. The question is whether the employer treated the employee differently because of race. In a failure to hire case, the employer will usually point to a reason—like pending charges—and the issue becomes whether that reason is real or just a cover. That is where pretext comes in. If the employer applies the rule inconsistently, treats other employees differently, or shifts its explanation, that is where discrimination begins to show.  Disparate impact does not require intent. Instead, it focuses on policies that appear neutral but disproportionately harm certain employees. When an employer relies on something like criminal history, the question is whether that practice creates a measurable disparity tied to the employer’s hiring process. That requires proof, not just a belief that the policy feels unfair.  The distinction is critical. Disparate treatment is about unequal treatment of an employee. Disparate impact is about a policy that creates a pattern of harm. In cases involving pending charges, choosing the right theory—and proving it correctly—is often the difference between a strong employment discrimination claim and one that gets dismissed.  Practical Tip: If your concern is how you were treated, focus on inconsistencies in the employer’s explanation. If your concern is a policy, you will need proof that it creates a real and measurable disparity.  Best Race Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point: 

Can Pending Charges Be Used To Deny Me A Job? 

Yes—but not through blanket rules.  The EEOC has warned that policies excluding employees based on criminal history or pending charges can violate employment law because they often create a disproportionate impact on minority employees. Employers are expected to make individualized assessments, considering the nature of the offense, how recent it is, and whether it relates to the job. The decision must be job-related and consistent with business necessity—not based on assumptions or stereotypes.  The reason for that guidance is rooted in race discrimination. Data has consistently shown that criminal history screening can disproportionately exclude Black employees, which is why Title VII requires employers to justify these decisions carefully rather than rely on assumptions.  In some cases, this can function like being wrongfully fired before you even start—what employment law recognizes as a failure to hire.  That is the theory. The cases show how it works in practice.  In Matthews v. Runyon, 860 F. Supp. 1347 (E.D. Wis. 1994), a Black employee brought disparate treatment and disparate impact claims after being denied a USPS position. He had strong test scores but also prior convictions, pending weapons-related charges, and a weak work history. He claimed he was labeled a “criminal” and not given a real chance to explain. The employer selected other candidates, including two Black applicants, and the court upheld the decision, finding it was based on comparative qualifications and safety concerns—not race discrimination. Matthews, 860 F. Supp. at 1359–60.  In Craig v. Department of Health, Education & Welfare, 508 F. Supp. 1055 (W.D. Mo. 1981), a Black employee was forced to resign after a report that she had pleaded guilty to possessing a stolen government check. At the same time, checks were missing from her workplace, though there was no evidence linking her to the thefts. She offered to take a lie detector test, but the employer refused and forced her resignation just before she gained additional protections. The court acknowledged she was “probably unjustly treated,” but held that she failed to prove race discrimination. It found the employer’s concern about dishonesty in a job involving checks was legitimate and that her white comparator was not similarly situated. Craig, 508 F. Supp. at 1057–58.  In Baker v. United States, 131 Fed. Cl. 62 (2017), an employee alleging race discrimination and retaliation lost a job offer after being charged with serious violent offenses. The employer withdrew the offer based on suitability standards requiring employees to be free of disqualifying charges. The court upheld the decision, finding the employer’s reliance on pending felony charges and the employee’s incarceration justified the failure to hire. Baker, 131 Fed. Cl. at 65–66.  And in Diamond v. United States, 649 F.2d 496 (7th Cir. 1981), the court recognized that even dismissed charges can affect employment opportunities, highlighting how criminal records can follow an employee long after a case is resolved. Diamond, 649 F.2d at 498–99.  These cases show the real rule.  Employers can consider pending charges. But when those decisions disproportionately exclude Black employees or are applied more harshly to a protected class, they can become race discrimination under employment law.  That is where discrimination begins.  Practical Tip: The issue is not your charges—it is whether the employer treated your protected class differently. If employees outside your race are given more flexibility, more explanation, or more second chances, that is where discrimination begins.  Best Wrongful Failure To Hire Attorney Blogs on Point: 

What’s The Best Way To Figure Out If I Have A Claim For Race Discrimination Or Wrongful Failure To Hire? 

The best way to figure out if you have a claim is to have an experienced employment lawyer evaluate the facts—not just rely on what the employer told you.  That is particularly true in cases involving criminal history, where what appears to be a neutral hiring decision may actually mask race discrimination against a protected class.  Because employers do not explain discrimination.  They point to neutral reasons. Pending charges. “Better candidates.” What they do not tell you is whether they applied those standards the same way to every employee, or whether someone outside your protected class was treated differently.  At Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm, we focus on uncovering that difference. We analyze whether an employer’s explanation holds up and whether the decision reflects race discrimination, retaliation, or wrongful termination under employment law.  Spitz is one of the best firms in the country dedicated to employee rights, with the resources and experience to take on employers and win. We offer free consultations and a no-fee guarantee.  If something about the decision does not sit right, trust that instinct. Talk to an employment lawyer who knows how to turn that instinct into a case. 

Frequently Asked Questions

[box] Can employers use arrest records?  Employers can consider arrest records, but relying on them without evaluating the underlying conduct can raise employment discrimination concerns under employment law.  What is a background check discrimination claim?  A background check discrimination claim arises when an employer uses criminal history in a way that disproportionately harms a protected class or is applied inconsistently.  Do I have to disclose pending charges?  It depends on the employer’s application and policies. Some require disclosure, while others limit inquiries. Failing to disclose when required can affect hiring decisions.  Can I be wrongfully fired before I even start a job?  Yes. If an employer rescinds a job offer for an illegal reason such as race discrimination or retaliation, it can qualify as wrongful termination or failure to hire under employment law.  What is failure to hire discrimination?  Failure to hire occurs when an employer refuses to hire a qualified employee for an illegal reason, such as race discrimination. [/box]  Employment Lawyer Disclaimer  This employee rights and workplace discrimination blog provides general information about employment law, including failure to hire, wrongful termination, race discrimination, retaliation, and employment discrimination. It is not legal advice. You should consult with a qualified attorney or employment lawyer for advice specific to your situation. No promises are made. This blog is a legal advertisement and does not create an attorney-client relationship. ]]>