ADA & FMLA Compliance Failure: How One HR Eligibility Mistake Triggered a Wrongful Termination Lawsuit
Some lawsuits arise from complicated fact patterns. This one does not. It is a clear example of how a single HR mistake — miscalculating FMLA eligibility — can unravel both ADA and FMLA compliance and lead directly to litigation. When HR misunderstands eligibility, fails to administer statutory leave, and ignores the ADA interactive process, the employer loses every safeguard designed to prevent wrongful termination.
If your organization is operating without a seasoned HR leader, this is exactly the type of preventable exposure that an Outsourced CHRO eliminates. → Learn more: Outsourced CHRO Leadership»
Employment History Matters: Why Prior Service Counts Toward FMLA Eligibility
The employee originally joined the company in 2018 and worked for several years. He later separated from employment to care for a critically ill family member. Approximately six months later, the employer asked him to return, and he rejoined the organization in a new role as a trainer/Night Supervisor.
His time in the new role was less than twelve months, but his aggregate service with the employer was well over the statutory threshold for FMLA eligibility. This distinction matters. FMLA eligibility is based on twelve months of employment in the aggregate, not twelve months in the current position.
Inexperienced HR personnel often overlook prior employment, or treating FMLA eligibility as role‑based rather than employer‑based. Once HR misread eligibility, the entire leave process was handled as discretionary instead of statutory — and every subsequent decision was flawed.
This is the type of mistake that experienced HR professionals simply do not make. → Strengthen your HR compliance infrastructure
The Medical Leave: Uncertain Duration, Consistent Communication, Full Eligibility
When the employee was hospitalized for cancer treatment, he notified his supervisor and HR immediately. His leave period was uncertain, as most cancer‑related leave is, but still well within the twelve weeks guaranteed under the FMLA. He kept the employer informed, provided updates, communicated his expected return date, and returned with medical documentation when he was cleared to work.
Instead of reinstating him, HR informed him that he had been terminated weeks earlier — while he was still on leave — and that he was not permitted on the premises. He had received no warning, no communication, and no indication that his job was in jeopardy.
This is not a borderline case. It is a structural compliance failure. See this blog post about another lawsuit in which an employer fired an employee after he needed intensive medical care»
FMLA Breakdown: How HR’s Eligibility Error Created Interference and Retaliation Exposure
The FMLA requires employers to determine eligibility correctly, issue required notices, designate leave properly, protect the employee’s job during leave, and reinstate the employee upon return. None of that occurred.
HR appears to have assumed the employee was ineligible because he had not been in his new role for twelve months. That assumption was incorrect. His prior years of service counted toward the twelve‑month requirement.
Because HR misunderstood eligibility:
no FMLA paperwork was issued,
no rights and responsibilities notice was provided,
no designation notice was sent,
and no reinstatement obligation was recognized.
HR treated the leave as optional and believed it could terminate him mid‑leave without consequence. Terminating an employee during protected leave — without notice, without communication, and without exhausting the statutory leave period — is classic FMLA interference and retaliation.
This is the type of mistake inexperienced HR personnel make, and it is the type of mistake that leads directly to litigation.
FMLA does not insulate an employee from discipline, however it can expose the employer decision to increased scrutiny. See this article on whether you can fire someone after they return from FMLA leave. Need assistance with your current HR function? Contact us for a confidential consultation.
ADA Breakdown: Even If HR Thought FMLA Didn’t Apply, They Still Violated the ADA
Even if HR had been correct about FMLA eligibility (they were not), the employer still had independent obligations under the ADA. Medical leave is a well‑recognized form of reasonable accommodation. When an employee requests leave for a serious health condition, the employer must engage in the interactive process, evaluate accommodations, communicate with the employee, and avoid retaliating against accommodation requests.
The employee notified HR of his hospitalization, diagnosis, surgery, and expected return date. He provided updates throughout his treatment. He communicated clearly and consistently.
HR never initiated the interactive process, never evaluated whether leave was a reasonable accommodation, never explored alternatives, and never warned him that his job was at risk. Instead, they terminated him mid‑accommodation without analysis, without communication, and without any attempt to meet their statutory obligations.
ADA compliance is complex. It requires highly experienced HR personnel who understand how medical conditions, leave, essential functions, and reasonable accommodations intersect. → Explore CHRO’s ADA Compliance Series
Why HR Failed: A Structural Breakdown, Not a One‑Off Error
This case is not about bad intentions. It is about inadequate HR infrastructure and insufficient HR expertise. Experienced HR personnel don’t necessarily have all the answers at their fingertips, but they do know what to ask and what to research to ensure compliance. Without this experience, HR is often stabbing in the dark, oblivious to their own vulnerabilities. In this case, HR misunderstood FMLA eligibility, failed to administer the leave properly, and then failed to meet ADA obligations that exist independently of FMLA.
The employee did everything he was supposed to do: he notified the employer, provided updates, stayed within the statutory leave period, and returned with documentation. The employer did none of what the law requires: no FMLA administration, no ADA interactive process, no communication, and no reinstatement.
From one eligibility mistake, the employer now faces claims for FMLA interference, FMLA retaliation, ADA discrimination, ADA retaliation, ADA failure to accommodate, and parallel state‑law violations.
All of it was preventable. See this article on a lawsuit that was triggered when the employer failed to realize that a doctor’s note requesting leave triggered ADA and FMLA protections.
Final Takeaway: HR Must Understand Eligibility Before Making Leave Decisions
This case is a reminder that HR’s role is not administrative — it is compliance‑critical. When HR misunderstands eligibility, fails to administer statutory leave, and ignores the ADA interactive process, the employer is exposed. One HR mistake created every claim in this lawsuit.
If your organization does not have experienced HR leadership, this is the risk profile you are operating under. → Strengthen your HR compliance foundation or contact us for a confidential consultation.
If this case feels uncomfortably familiar, your organization may be relying on HR personnel who are doing their best but don’t have the depth of experience required for ADA and FMLA compliance. You don’t need to hire a full‑time executive to fix that. You need strategic HR leadership that protects your organization every day. Contact us for a confidential consultation.
FAQ: ADA, FMLA, Employment Gaps, and HR Compliance
How much of an employment gap breaks FMLA eligibility?
Under the FMLA, prior employment counts toward the twelve‑month requirement unless the break in service exceeds seven years. Anything under seven years must be counted. In this case, the employee’s six‑month gap did not reset eligibility. HR should have counted his prior years of service.
Does USERRA affect how prior service is counted?
Yes. Under USERRA, any military‑related break in service must be counted toward FMLA eligibility, even if it exceeds seven years. Employers must treat military service as continuous employment for FMLA purposes.
If HR thinks an employee is ineligible for FMLA, do ADA obligations still apply?
Absolutely. ADA obligations exist independently of FMLA. Even if an employee is not FMLA‑eligible, the employer must still engage in the interactive process if the medical condition qualifies as a disability under the ADA, evaluate medical leave as a reasonable accommodation, and avoid retaliating against accommodation requests.
Why is ADA compliance so complex?
ADA compliance requires understanding medical conditions, essential functions, reasonable accommodations, leave as an accommodation, return‑to‑work processes, and individualized assessments. This is not administrative work — it requires highly experienced HR personnel who understand the legal and operational implications of each decision. See our ADA Compliance Series for a general understanding of ADA requirements in the workplace.
How can employers prevent ADA and FMLA violations?
By ensuring that HR is trained, structured, and supported. Employers without experienced HR leadership should consider an Outsourced CHRO model to prevent compliance failures.
If your leadership team is drowning in HR issues and your HR staff is doing their best without the depth of experience these laws require, you’re operating with unnecessary risk. ADA and FMLA compliance are complex, technical, and unforgiving — they demand seasoned HR judgment, not guesswork. An Outsourced CHRO stabilizes your HR function, supports inexperienced HR personnel, and gives your organization the executive‑level HR leadership it should have had all along. If you’re ready to stop reacting to HR problems and start preventing them, let’s build the structure that protects you. Contact us for a confidential consultation.
