Search the Community

Celiac.com 11/05/2024 - A new lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where a former employee is accusing her previous employer of discrimination and wrongful termination. Lauren Boyd, the plaintiff, claims that her former employer, Cigna Healthcare, violated both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Boyd's complaint outlines a series of events she believes led to her unjust dismissal from the company, centering around her chronic health conditions and her request for reasonable accommodations. The Timeline of Employment and Health Struggles According to court documents, Lauren Boyd began her employment at Cigna Healthcare on August 16, 2021, working as a customer service advocate. During her time with the company, Boyd suffered from chronic health issues, including celiac disease, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and anemia. These conditions, she alleges, were well-documented and known by her employer. Complicating her medical situation, Boyd also sustained injuries from an incident at Walmart on July 29, 2022, further exacerbating her health challenges. These injuries, coupled with her chronic illnesses, led her to require more time off work for treatment and recovery. She regularly used approved unpaid leave and ADA accommodation days when she experienced health flare-ups, particularly after incidents of gluten contamination, which worsened her condition. August 2023: A Turning Point in Health and Employment The most significant period of contention in Boyd's lawsuit took place in August and September of 2023. In August, she experienced a gluten contamination episode that triggered severe symptoms, leaving her immune system compromised. As a result, she developed an upper respiratory infection and later contracted COVID-19. Despite her deteriorating health, Boyd continued to manage her condition with approved unpaid leave and ADA days between August 11 and September 6, 2023. In her complaint, Boyd states that her health issues were compounded by Cigna's refusal to approve a medical treatment she required due to low iron levels caused by her chronic conditions. Boyd was prescribed a single-infusion iron drug, but Cigna denied her request for this specific treatment, offering a five-infusion alternative instead. This suggestion, Boyd argues, was unreasonable, given her challenging work schedule of four-day, ten-hour shifts. She found it nearly impossible to arrange the frequent medical appointments required for the alternative treatment without taking even more time off from work. The Application for Short-Term Disability and Termination As Boyd’s health issues persisted, she applied for short-term disability (STD) in early September 2023. Her request for STD was made in addition to her ongoing use of FMLA leave, as she needed extended time off to recover. However, on September 13, 2023, Cigna terminated Boyd’s employment, citing attendance issues as the reason for her dismissal. Boyd contends that her termination came at an unjust time, as her FMLA/STD applications were still pending. She also highlights that Cigna’s workforce management had previously approved her unpaid time off. According to Boyd, the company failed to adequately accommodate her disability and did not engage in an interactive process to explore reasonable solutions for her health-related needs. Instead, she argues, the company retaliated against her by terminating her employment. Allegations of ADA and FMLA Violations The core of Boyd’s lawsuit is centered around two major federal laws: the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). ADA Discrimination and Retaliation: Boyd claims that Cigna violated her rights under the ADA by failing to accommodate her medical conditions and by retaliating against her for requesting accommodations. She argues that Cigna was aware of her chronic health issues and should have made efforts to engage in an interactive process, which is required by law, to determine how best to support her continued employment. By terminating her, she believes the company punished her for seeking accommodations that were necessary for her health. FMLA Interference and Retaliation: Boyd also accuses Cigna of violating her FMLA rights. She states that her termination was a direct result of her taking FMLA leave to manage her chronic illnesses. Boyd argues that Cigna interfered with her lawful use of FMLA and retaliated against her for applying for short-term disability and using unpaid leave to attend to her health. The Plaintiff’s Requests for Relief In her lawsuit, Boyd is seeking several forms of compensation and restitution from Cigna Healthcare. She has asked the court for reinstatement to her former position with a salary and benefits package comparable to what she had before her termination. Additionally, she is requesting compensatory damages in excess of $150,000 for lost wages, back pay, and front pay. Boyd is also pursuing damages for emotional distress, alleging that the wrongful termination caused her significant personal hardship. Furthermore, she seeks punitive damages as a way to hold Cigna accountable for what she views as clear violations of her rights under federal law. Finally, she is asking the court to cover her legal fees and other associated court costs. The Case Moving Forward At this stage, the case is still in its early phases. Lauren Boyd is being represented by Mary LeMieux-Fillery from the Law Offices of Eric A. Shore P.C. No attorneys have been listed for Cigna Healthcare in the initial filings. This case could have far-reaching implications for employees with chronic health conditions and disabilities, as it may shed light on how large corporations manage requests for accommodations under the ADA and leave under the FMLA. As it progresses, the court will weigh the evidence from both sides to determine whether Cigna’s actions were in violation of federal law. Conclusion This lawsuit emphasizes the ongoing challenges faced by employees with chronic health conditions in maintaining their rights under the ADA and FMLA. Lauren Boyd’s claims against Cigna Healthcare, if proven true, could highlight the importance of employers engaging in meaningful discussions about accommodations and respecting an employee’s need for medical leave. This case serves as a reminder that employees should not be penalized for seeking accommodations for their disabilities or for taking legally protected leave to manage their health. The outcome of this lawsuit may provide further clarity on the responsibilities employers have in balancing attendance policies with the rights of employees facing health challenges. Read more at: pennrecord.com

08/01/2018 - A federal appeals court has ordered a new trial for a terminated worker who sued a staffing company for allegedly violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by not accommodating her celiac disease. Laurie Peterson suffers from celiac disease, and worked as a staffing supervisor for Troy, Michigan-based Kelly Services Inc. until her termination in January 2014 according to court papers filed in Laurie Peterson v. Kelly Services Inc. Peterson had originally sued Kelly in U.S. District Court in Spokane, Washington, alleging failure to accommodate, discrimination and retaliation under the ADA. The original court issued a partial summary judgment granting Kelly’s motion on Ms. Peterson’s claims that the company had failed to accommodate her celiac disease and had fired her in retaliation for protected activity, but allowed related charges in the case to proceed. A jury later found that Kelly had not retaliated against Ms. Peterson. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a unanimous reversal of the district court’s original ruling. The panel wrote that the district court had “failed to construe the facts in the light most favorable to Peterson as the non-moving party as required on summary judgment.” The case originally arose out of Peterson’s work as interim district manager in fall 2013 while Kelly Services was looking for a new district manager. According to the complaint in the case, when the new district manager learned Ms. Peterson had celiac disease, he began treating her differently than other employees, including changing her work schedule. The change in work schedule allegedly caused Ms. Peterson stress and anxiety, which aggravated her celiac-related condition. Ms. Peterson sought to return to her previous 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. shift. According to the complaint, the district manager told Ms. Peterson to take unpaid leave under the Family Medical Leave Act instead of seeking an accommodation from the company. Peterson and the supervisor were later fired. In reversing the lower court and remanding for trial the claims decided on summary judgment, the court found that the district supervisor’s statement “is direct evidence of retaliatory intent.” The ruling added that the supervisor’s declaration “also raises a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Kelly Services engaged in the interactive process in good faith.” Ms. Peterson’s battle against Kelly Services, Inc., has important implications for how companies treat people with celiac disease under the ADA. To find out how the retrial turns out, keep an eye on Celiac.com Source: businessinsurance.com