Former Fire Fighter sues City of Eagle Pass under Family Medical Leave Act
By: Jose G. Landa, Copyright 2015, Eagle Pass Business Journal, Inc.
A former Eagle Pass Fire Department Fire Fighter, Cesar G. Garza, filed a lawsuit against the City of Eagle Pass in the 365th Judicial District Court in Maverick County, Texas on June 11, 2015, alleging that the City of Eagle Pass violated his legal rights under the Family Medical Leave Act by terminating him while under a Texas Workers Compensation claim as well as a Family Medical Leave Act claim.
Garza worked for the City of Eagle Pass as a fire fighter from December 1996 to October 2014, almost 18 years. Garza alleges that on or about June 11, 2012, he sustained a serious on the job injury while responding to a fire while working for the City’s Fire Department.
As a result of this injury, Garza opened a Texas workers compensation claim and was taken off work by his physician. As a direct result of this claim, Garza was placed on Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave by the City of Eagle Pass.
The lawsuit alleges that as a result of the Garza’s fire fighter work schedule, which required him to work 24 hours straight and then be off for 48 hours straight, his FMLA leave was intermittent as a result of the irregular fire fighter work schedule.
The lawsuit further states that Garza was later terminated on October 24, 2014 by the City of Eagle Pass, due to the City of Eagle Pass’ strict policy of only allowing city employees no more than 120 days of sick or FMLA leave. The City’s policy requires a City employee who misses more than 120 days from work due to sick leave is terminated. Thus, an employee who needs more than 120 days of sick leave in order to continue to get well, rehabilitate, or medical treatment or surgery is terminated if they do not return to work.
The lawsuit claims that the City of Eagle Pass’ sick leave policy is unreasonable because it only allows a person to be absent no more than 120 days due to sick leave or any other issue and must return to work within the time allowed under the policy if not the person is subject to termination.
The lawsuit alleges that despite Garza’s legitimate Texas workers compensation claim or intermittent FMLA leave claim, he was terminated on October 24, 2014 by the City of Eagle Pass for not being able to return to work within the 120 days. Garza’s injury required that he take more than 120 sick leave days to be able to get well, rehabilitate, or receive medical treatment or surgery.
Garza claims that as a direct result of his discharge and the City of Eagle Pass’ continued refusal to reinstate him, he has suffered substantial economic losses and severe mental anguish, and he will continue to suffer such losses in the future. Garza also claims that the City’s sick leave policy violates the Family Medical Leave Act
The lawsuit alleges that prior to Garza exhausting his 12 weeks of medical leave allowed under the Family Medical Leave Act, the City of Eagle Pass terminated his employment for taking this medical leave to care for his serious health condition.
The lawsuit alleges that because of this fact, the City of Eagle Pass terminated Garza for seeking designation and/or leave under FMLA and/or the time he was forced to take off from work to care for his serious health condition, which violates the protection of the FMLA.
As a result of the City of Eagle Pass and Liberty Mutual’s violations of the FMLA, Garza has suffered actual damages in the form of lost wages and benefits (past and future) in an amount that has yet to be fully established, but which will be provided at the time of the trial.
As a result of the willful violation of the FMLA, Garza requests that he be awarded all damages to which he is entitled as outlined in 29 U.S.C. 2617 , including , but not limited to , lost wages, salary, employee benefits, and any other compensation denied or lost as a result of the violation, plus interest.
In addition, Garza is requesting liquidated damages equal to the amount of reimbursable compensation described above and any other additional equitable relief to which he is entitled, reasonable attorney fees and court cost.
The lawsuit further states that the City of Eagle Pass allegedly violated section 451.001 of the Texas Labor Code by discharging Garza because he notified his employer of his on the job injury and/or initiated the filing of a workers ‘ compensation claim in good faith, and by not reinstating him.
Garza seeks the maximum amount allowed by section 451.002 of the Texas Labor Code and at common law.
Garza seeks a trial by jury in which final judgment is sought for all reasonable damages, lost earnings and employee benefits in the past, lost earnings and employee benefits that in reasonable probability will be lost in the future, compensatory damages, past and future (which may include emotional pain and suffering , inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other non- pecuniary losses, exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees for violation of the Family Medical Leave Act.
The defendants have yet to file an answer to the lawsuit but are expected to do so before the allowed time expires.
Under the City of Eagle Pass Code of Ordinances Section 2-22 Employment and Seperation, it is stated that at the end of the period of illness or one hundred twenty (120) days, whichever is less, the employee shall be entitled to the position held at the time the illness began. If the employee is unable to return to his/her former employment by said time, then the city shall institute termination proceedings.
