A federal lawsuit filed in Camden claims an employer violated the Families First Coronavirus Response Act by denying paid leave to a worker who had symptoms of COVID-19.

A medical billing service in Pennsauken is accused of violating the FFCRA by denying paid leave to an employee who was under doctor's orders to self-quarantine after experiencing a fever, chills and body aches.

The FFCRA, which went into effect April 1, provides paid sick leave to people who are quarantined or have COVID-19 symptoms, and are waiting for a diagnosis. The act also provides paid sick leave to any employee caring for a person under quarantine or for a child whose school or day care center is closed due to COVID-19.

In the New Jersey case, plaintiff Brian Spells claims his employer, Physician and Tactical Healthcare Services, denied his request for paid leave and suggested he apply for unemployment, which he did. Spells later developed a cough, and his doctor advised him to extend his quarantine, even after his COVID-19 test came back negative.

Spells asked his employer to allow him to work from home but was told his position did not allow remote work and that he should either report to work or take a voluntary layoff, his suit claims. Later, after Spells' doctor cleared him to return to work, he notified the personnel manager of his change in status but received no response. He believes he was terminated in retaliation for his requests for paid sick leave, the suit claims.

Spells' suit brings claims under the FFCRA and the Fair Labor Standards Act for wrongful termination, unpaid wages and retaliation. Tony DiLuca, a principal of Physician and Tactical Healthcare Services, did not respond to a phone message about the suit. Spells' lawyer, Ari Karpf of Karpf, Karpf & Cerutti also did not respond to a request for comment.

Despite widespread predictions that job losses related to COVID-19 will produce an avalanche of suits, some employment lawyers in New Jersey who are familiar with the FFCRA think the law is unlikely to generate much litigation.

Alan Schorr, a plaintiff-side employment lawyer in Cherry Hill, said he is puzzled by Spells' suit. The amount at the center of the dispute is modest: two weeks' pay at Spells' rate of $15 an hour. What's more, to obtain unemployment benefits, Spells had to certify that he was not disabled, but he was unable to work while under quarantine, Schorr said. Spells is likely to face questions about his conflicting assertions, Schorr said.

Schorr says that under the circumstances, Spells could have applied for disability benefits for the two weeks he was under quarantine, instead of filing his suit, and would have received the same amount as provided under the FFCRA. The law provides some provisions, particularly for states whose disability programs are less generous than New Jersey's, according to Schorr.

The FFCRA contains some provisions that might provide a defense to Spells' employer, according to Benjamin Widener, chairman of Stark & Stark's Labor and Employment Practice Group. The FFCRA contains exemptions for health care providers and entities contracted to such companies. That exemption could apply to Physician and Tactical Healthcare Services, based on the way its operations are described in the suit, said Widener. "That's probably going to be the big issue in the case—whether the act applies to this particular defendant," said Widener.

In addition, there's the question of whether Spells is entitled to the continued protection of the FFCRA after his doctor told him he tested negative for COVID-19, said Widener.

Widener said he does not anticipate a large volume of suits filed over the FFCRA.

"My experience is that employers are trying to and do intend to comply with the act, because failure to comply could be punitive," Widener said. "Also, there's a benefit: if employees request leave and are entitled to paid leave, employers are entitled to reimbursement through refundable tax credits, dollar for dollar, when submitting their quarterly taxes."