COVID-19 Litigation: Identifying Types and Mitigation Strategies for Employers
Taking steps in advance to avoid these risks will not eliminate them, but it will reduce the risk and better position the employer to defend future litigation and agency complaints.
July 29, 2020 at 01:55 PM
5 minute read
To date, nearly 60 percent of coronavirus-related employment litigation falls into one of three categories: wrongful discharge, leave and discrimination, according to in-house tracking by my law firm, Ogletree, Deakins.
Twenty-five percent can be classified as discharge claims, which include whistleblower and retaliation issues stemming from employers' failures to protect employees, follow guidance, and misuse of Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funds; and employees' refusals to return to work. Nineteen percent of claims are related to leave violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) and the CARES Act. Thirteen percent of COVID-19 claims can be categorized as discrimination, which include accommodations issues and are largely comprised of disability claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Following are some scenarios by which coronavirus-related claims may arise or already have.
Discharge claims
In fiscal year 2019, just under 2,100 whistleblower complaints were filed with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. To date, OSHA has already received more than that in COVID-19 related complaints, including those for inadequate personal protective equipment, exposure to illness by co-workers and customers, and failure to enforce safety rules. Although OSHA prohibits employees generally from walking off the job, they are protected "if the employee, with no reasonable alternative, refuses in good faith to expose himself to the dangerous condition," 29 CFR 1977.12. Although an employee may not pursue a private cause of action, if OSHA finds merit after investigating the complaint, OSHA litigates the case as the employee's attorney.
The National Labor Relations Act protects employees who engage in "… concerted activity for mutual aid or protection" in the workplace, including those not in a union environment. 29 U.S.C. § 157. The NLRA is another avenue for retaliation claims where employees are disciplined after acting together to raise health and safety concerns related to COVID-19, including concerns raised on social media.
Leave Claims
Less than three weeks after FFCRA went into effect on April 1, the first plaintiff filed claims under this act in federal court in Pennsylvania. The company's former director of revenue management alleges she was terminated for seeking time off to care for her child. Just as with FMLA, in addition to retaliation, other FFCRA cases allege denial of benefits and/or interference with the employee's leave entitlement. Note that managers can be sued personally because FFCRA adopts the Fair Labor Standards Act's broad definition of employer—"any person acting directly or indirectly in the interest of an employer in relation to an employee," 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
Although the severity of COVID-19 symptoms will not rise to the level of a disability for many people, the ADA also protects employees who have "a record of a disability" and those the employer "regarded as" as disabled. 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1). Further, certain employees are at a higher risk for severe illness due to underlying conditions that may be disabilities. As leave can be a reasonable accommodation for a disability, ADA claims (which must be filed first with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for failure to accommodate can arise in this context.
Discrimination Claims
A case filed in federal court in New York alleges that the employee was chosen for layoff before others because of his age, in violation of state and local age discrimination laws. The EEOC has published guidance making clear that employers should avoid blanket policies requiring "high risk" employees (as defined by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines), such as older or pregnant employees, to continue to telework while others return on-site, which blanket policies run afoul of federal laws prohibiting age and pregnancy discrimination.
Mitigating the Risk
Taking steps in advance to avoid these risks will not eliminate them, but will reduce the risk and better position the employer to defend future litigation and agency complaints.
- Monitor and comply with COVID-19 requirements.
- Prepare a workplace safety plan.
- Explore ways to increase social distancing and remote working opportunities. This will not necessarily continue after the pandemic.
- Implement and require screening and stay-home policies. Include confidentiality, complaint and non-retaliation provisions.
- Implement and publicize reopening requirements, including masks, social distancing signs and floor markers and cleaning processes.
- Ensure relevant policies are updated, including policies related to social media, non-harassment, anti-discrimination, anti-retaliation, FMLA, emergency leaves under the FFCRA, and any state or local laws.
- Check for consistency with public health recommendations and new laws.
- No policies or practices designed to "protect" older or pregnant employees more than other groups.
- Approach requests for leave and remote considering whether they are requests for accommodations and initiate the ADA interactive process as appropriate, documenting all of your communications and efforts.
- Encourage internal complaints/reports and handle them properly.
- Complaint procedures should be widely disseminated and easily accessible.
- Consider 24-hour toll-free hotlines, especially when employees work nontraditional shifts or are removed from immediate access to upper level managers and/or human resources.
- Consider additional ways to publicize the policy, such as the home screen of the company's electronic system and any relevant links.
- Investigate promptly and thoroughly.
- Educate managers who are designated to receive complaints on the policies and employment laws.
- Train/remind managers to investigate promptly and thoroughly or to escalate complaints to upper management immediately.
- Even anonymous complaints should be investigated as thoroughly as the information permits.
- Take consistent disciplinary action with respect to violations.
Amie Willis is a shareholder in Ogletree Deakins' Atlanta office. She is a member of the firm's COVID-19 Litigation practice group and represents employers across the country in employment matters in a variety of industries.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCould Everything Be Alright Without Me Knowing? The State of Professionalism Among Attorneys
Trying to Reason With Hurricane Season: Mediating First Party Property Insurance Claims
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1People in the News—Dec. 23, 2024—Barley Snyder, Marshall Dennehey
- 2How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be a Lawyer First, Foremost and Always,' Says Matthew McLaughlin of Venable
- 3Bar Report - Dec. 23
- 4Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 5The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250