Although the jury’s decision already has received wide publicity, it is such an interesting case that we thought we would make sure none of our readers missed it.  It seems management forced an employee to attend a birthday party it threw for him despite his request that they not do so.  While there, he had a panic attack that scared and offended some co-workers.  Management sent him home for the rest of the week to recover and when he returned to the job, it fired him on the grounds that his unpredictability made him a threat to the staff.  Most union reps would know enough to challenge that as an unjust termination, but did you also see the potential EEO disability discrimination issue.  The employee’s lawyer did, and filed an EEO charge.  When the case got to court, he not only got his job back, but the jury put an additional $450,000 in his pocket to compensate him for the damage done his mental and physical health as well as his reputation.  If the union had only grieved this as an unjust termination the employee would not have qualified for any of the $450,000.  Cases like this highlight the value of looking for the EEO angle in every grievance.

About AdminUN

FEDSMILL staff has over 40 years of federal sector labor relations experience on the union as well as management side of the table and even some time as a neutral.
This entry was posted in Disability, Reasonable Accommodations and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.