Sometimes, what an employee says about their own abilities can be the employer’s best defense.
TL;DR: The Fifth Circuit recently affirmed summary judgment for an employer in a case where a longtime employee claimed, through one count labeled as FMLA discrimination, interference, and retaliation, that she was fired after taking leave. But she and her doctor admitted she could still perform the functions of her job throughout the leave period. That admission doomed her claim because she was never entitled to FMLA protections in the first place.
👉 Read the decision here.
From FMLA approval to immediate termination
The plaintiff was a long-serving staff member who had worked for the organization for more than 20 years in a variety of roles. Eventually, she requested time off for mental-health concerns, and the employer approved the leave under the FMLA.
When her leave ended and she reported back to work, she was told her employment would be terminated. Believing the decision was tied to her time off, she sued, alleging her termination violated the FMLA. The employer responded that her termination was based on performance problems that had become more apparent during her absence.
No FMLA protection, even with approved leave
The court never had to decide whether performance issues were the true reason for the termination. It resolved the case on entitlement grounds. To qualify for FMLA leave, an employee must show that a “serious health condition” made them unable to perform the functions of her job. Both the employee and her doctor admitted she was never unable to do so. That testimony meant no incapacity, no entitlement to FMLA leave, and no case to pursue.
She also argued that since her employer approved the leave, it should not later be able to say it was not protected. But the court rejected that as well. Why? Because she admitted she would have taken the time off whether it was approved or not. Without showing that she relied on the approval in a meaningful way, her claim failed.
What HR should remember
- Check eligibility. FMLA only applies when a serious health condition actually incapacitates an employee.
- Be careful with approvals. Courts sometimes hold employers to their own representations about FMLA eligibility when employees can show they reasonably relied on that approval to their detriment.
- Require certification. The FMLA allows employers to require a doctor’s certification to support the need for leave. If the certification confirms the employee can still perform the functions of the job, that can shut down a claim before it starts.
- Look beyond the FMLA. Even when FMLA does not apply, ADA and state law obligations may still require accommodation.
The bottom line
By saying she could still perform the functions of her job, the employee effectively pulled the plug on her own FMLA claim. For employers, the lesson is clear: verify eligibility, document carefully, and remember that sometimes the most decisive evidence comes straight from the employee.