Thousands of verified Experts are ready to answer your specific questions 24/7.
Satisfaction is guaranteed and you pay your Expert only if you are satisfied.
Just type your detailed question and click "Get an Answer."
In minutes you'll get a response from an Expert. You can always ask follow-up questions.
Happy with your answer? Just click "Accept" to pay your Expert.
I am an operations manager at Fedex I was injured at work 04/28/09. I was hospitalized do to the serious nature of my injuries. Workers comp. notified me that they would no longer pay for physical theropy which was advised by the orthopedic surgeron. Additionally, Fedex has displaced me and disolved my position as a manager as of 08/24/09. As a result, I beged my doctor to release me to full duty immediately to try and get my job back. The Corporate HCMP manager contacted me and informed me that if Fedex did not terminate my employment I would still be docked negatively on my attendance which would affect my review score for the next performance evaluation period. This would ultimately have a negative impact on my pay rate and salary. Is this legal? Do I have a case under the Americans with disabilities act of 1990? Prior to my injury I had perfect attendance, I had never been injured at work and my career spans over 18years with the company. I feel Fedex has decided to punish me.
State/Country relating to Question: California Already Tried: As an 18year employee with Fedex I have no disciplinary doccumentation in my file, I have perfect attendance, I have never been injured prior to 04/28/09 and I feel that becasue of my injury Fedex has taken a position to punish me for getting hurt and costing the company money through workers compensation. The dicision to displace me and dock my pay if I should find a lateral positon I feel is unfair. Do I have legal ground to file under title I and V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990?
in what state?
I am in the state of California
The ADA does not require an employer to retain an employee after worker's comp has determined that the employee is no longer entited to worker's comp benefits. Moreover, and unfortunately, under the ADA while an employer must make reasonable accomodations this does not mean that an employer must hold an employee's position open until the employee returns. The employee must only make reasonable accomodations to keep a job available for the employee, this means that the employee is not entitled to the job or pay they enjoyed prior to the injury.
10-4 So how does one make the distinction between legally disolving a position for operational need and discriminating against an employee becasue they went out on workers comp? Is there any merit to the idea that docking someones pay if and when they should have the opportunity to return to work a form of harrasment? Ultimately, there is no other valid reason to persue such a corse unless it was in response to being out injured.
your thoughts.....
the way to differentiate between the two is the employer's justification for the docking of pay. If the employer can validate the move as a operational need then there's no case, but if the employer brought in someone else and paid them the exact same amount or more that would be a start to a claim.
Attorney
Negotiate, Draft, and Review many complex commercial agreements each year.