Here is a scenario I’ve seen too many times to count. An employee is terminated and files a lawsuit. The employer had a good reason but there are counter arguments. For example, maybe the employee violated the attendance policy too many times but the employee has excuses or explanations for some of the absences that might have some merit. Upon investigating the facts, I discover that the employee had a long history of workplace issues and shortly before termination had engaged in some truly bad conduct, e.g. stealing or sexually harassing a co-worker. Inexplicably, the employee was given a pass or at least another chance after the truly bad conduct.
This scenario presents multiple problems for the defense of the lawsuit. First, it undermines the legitimate reason for termination and creates the appearance of inconsistency. If the conduct that lead to termination was so bad, why did the employer not terminate the employee for the worse prior conduct? If the employer acknowledges that the decision to terminate was influenced by the prior bad conduct, why was the decision not made immediately after that conduct occurred? The most discouraging part of the scenario is the likelihood that the termination, if it had occurred immediately after the truly bad conduct, would provide a strong defense case with little settlement value compared to the case arising from the later termination. In essence, the employer has chosen to defend a weaker case over a stronger case by waiting to terminate the employee.
Obviously, every situation is different and there may be good reasons to try to rehabilitate an employee with workplace issues. However, employers should consider their options and not hesitate to act decisively when given the opportunity. Always keep in mind one of the primary rules of employment law: No good deed goes unpunished.
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Employment Law
- EEOC
- Department of Labor
- Discrimination
- Immigration
- Affirmative Action
- Compliance
- Labor Law
- FMLA
- NLRB
- Wage & Hour
- Arbitration
- Coronavirus
- National Labor Relations Board
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Social Media
- Diversity
- Reasonable Accommodation
- FLSA
- Sexual Harassment
- Employer Policies
- Title VII
- Sixth Circuit
- Employment Litigation
- Religion Discrimination
- Employer Rules
- Transgender Issues
- Workplace Violence
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Overtime Pay
- OSHA
- National Enforcement Plan
- Privacy
- Artificial Intelligence
- Holiday Policies
- Department of Justice
- NLRA
- Workplace Accommodations
- Independent Contractor
- Joint Employer
- Supreme Court
- Telework
- Federal Trade Commission
- Litigation
- Paid Leave Laws
- IRS
- Tax Credit
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Worker Classification
- Harassment
- Disability Discrimination
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Medical Marijuana
- Accommodation
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Department of Homeland Security
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- ADAAA
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- ERISA
- Race Discrimination
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Disability
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Whistleblower
- United States Supreme Court
- 401(k)
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Benefits
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Privacy Laws
- Securities Law
- Health Savings Account
- Preventive Care Benefits
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Healthcare Reform
- Representative Election Regulations
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Telecommuting
- Compensable Time
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Security Screening
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Attendance Policy
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- Authorization Without Documentation: Employers Left with I-9 Compliance Questions Following TPS Expirations for El Salvador, Sudan, and Ukraine
- EEOC Moves to Rescind 2012 Criminal Background Check Guidance
- EEOC Proposes Overhaul of Federal Workplace Discrimination Complaint Process
- OFCCP Publishes Final Rules Reducing Federal Contractor Affirmative Action Obligations
- US Court of Appeals puts $100,000 H-1B Fee on Hold Again
- Asking Is Protected: Sixth Circuit Expands FMLA Retaliation Protections
- New DHS Rule Will Restrict Student Periods of Admission from Duration of Status to Fixed End Date
- TPS Haiti Termination: How Employers Can Ensure I-9 Records Remain Compliant
- A New Enforcement Era: What Employers Should Know About the EEOC’s 2025–2029 National Enforcement Plan
- Beyond Paid Time Off: The Legal Side of Holiday Policies