The ADA, FMLA and Mike Martz

[AvengerRam]

Some, including Bernie "Harvey Dent" Miklasz, are calling for Mike Martz's immediate dismissal.

Won't happen.

Among the myriad of reasons why, I suspect (hope) that someone in the Rams' legal department has realized that doing so could result in a civil action.

Two federal statutes in particular, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) could come into play here (assuming a terminated Martz would desire to make waves).

The ADA protects against discrimination in employment (among other things) against individuals with disabilities (Martz's condition likely would not qualify) as well as those who are discriminated against due to a perceived disability.

The FMLA protects employment status for a period 12 weeks of leave for (among other things) serious health conditions (Martz's condition surely would qualify).

If, at the end the season, the team decides to terminate Martz, it could likely do so. The decision then would not immediately follow the commencement of a medical leave, and could be justified based upon the team's success (justifed as being "in spite of Martz's absence") or failure (justified as being "due to the team Martz built, or ongoing animosity with the front office").

Of course, even if Martz were to have a viable claim, his damages might be limited. Regardless of his status, he will be paid next year under his contract. Thus, his actual damage claim (not including compensatory and punitive damages) would have to be premised on the theory that, but for his condition/leave of absence, his contract would have been extended (could be a tough argument).

In any event, if the front office has any business sense, it will do nothing until the season is over.

[general counsel]

In order to qualify for fmla, there are a series of documents that need to be filed by the employee at the time that they leave work. we have no knowledge as to whether martz filled out that paperwork. Furthermore, in almost every case that i have ever heard of, fmla does not require that you PAY an employee who is out on leave, only that you dont fire them. You can reassign them to a comparable position when they return, it doesnt have to be exactly the same job.

So much for the lawyers banter.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

[STLRAMSFAN]

Does anyone know if he wanted to and was able to get them pissed off enough to go in another direction next year if they would still owe him his salary if he signed elsewhere after they let him go?

That would be like two years worth of paychecks for one year worth of work. I doubt he would do that but it is interesting.

[maineram]

Yes Av, ADA would not apply, but FMLA would if terminated within thatr time frame you mentioned.

Hostile work environment, could be considered an option for Martz though. If upper management (Zygmunt) has created an environment that Martz is unable to work in.
Add to that the incident from his throat slashing assistant, I'd say that would be considered HOSTILE !!!!

Maineram -

[AvengerRam]

In order to qualify for fmla, there are a series of documents that need to be filed by the employee at the time that they leave work.

Incorrect. The employee need only give sufficient notice to the employer - verbal or written - to indicate that they need leave for a potentially qualifying condition. The employer then has the burden of providing any paperwork to process the request. If the employer fails to do that, the leave si still protected.

Furthermore, in almost every case that i have ever heard of, fmla does not require that you PAY an employee who is out on leave, only that you dont fire them. You can reassign them to a comparable position when they return, it doesnt have to be exactly the same job.

The leave under FMLA is unpaid, but the fact that one is paid does not impact the right to reinstatement. You can return an employee to an "equivalent position," but in the context of a Head Coach, there is no equivalent position.

[general counsel]

I have won a case with an employee who failed to file the paperwork at the time they left despite repeated requests from our hr dept to do so. the verbal notice after the fact didnt help the employee. obviously, different courts at different times can hold different things.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

[AvengerRam]

ADA would not apply

Again, that is not correct. The ADA protects employees subjected to discrimination because they have been "perceived as" having a disability, even if their condition does not actually qualify as a disability under the law.

Hostile work environment, could be considered an option for Martz though. If upper management (Zygmunt) has created an environment that Martz is unable to work in.
Add to that the incident from his throat slashing assistant, I'd say that would be considered HOSTILE !!!!

Again, not correct. The term "hostile work environment" is often misunderstood. There is no cause of action that arises from general "hostility." Rather, this term applies when a workplace is made hostile due to discriminatory animus. For example - sexual harassment, racial harassment, ageism harassment, etc. If Shaw repeatedly called Martz "Typhoid Mikey" or something to that effect, it could be actionable.

Samir's comment would not constitute a "hostile work environment" legally speaking, though it could form a basis for a civil tort claim for assault.

[AvengerRam]

I have won a case with an employee who failed to file the paperwork at the time they left despite repeated requests from our hr dept to do so. the verbal notice after the fact didnt help the employee. obviously, different courts at different times can hold different things.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

Actually, the law is relatively consistent on this issue.

I would imagine that the deciding factor in your case was either the fact that the notice was given "after the fact" (meaning that there was a period of time when the employee was absent and the employer did not know the reason why) or that the employee failured to complete paperwork within a reasonable time following the request (which would cause the employee to lose the protection of the Act).

However, the regulations interpetting the FMLA clearly provide that verbal notice given in advance or within a reasonable time after an unforeseeable need for leave arises is sufficient to raise the protection of the Act.

There is absolutely no question that the Rams organization has been sufficiently notified of Martz's medical need for a leave of absence, so he is clearly protected.

[jkramsfan]

Do We Really Think Its Going To Get To This Point ?

[rebel13]

Wouldn't his idiotic handling of replays and timeouts:tongue: as well as his pathetic handling of veteran players be enough proof to classify him as being "not of sound mind" or possibly at the very least "mentally unbalance" thereby affording him status as handicapped? Are you allowed to fire employees just because you realize that they are retarded?

[STLRAMSFAN]

Wouldn't his idiotic handling of replays and timeouts:tongue: as well as his pathetic handling of veteran players be enough proof to classify him as being "not of sound mind" or possibly at the very least "mentally unbalance" thereby affording him status as handicapped? Are you allowed to fire employees just because you realize that they are retarded?

Very good point you are thinking outside the box. I would want you for my lawyer rebel13. Do you have a cousin named Vinny? LOL

[RamsFanSam]

You can reassign them to a comparable position when they return, it doesnt have to be exactly the same job.

So much for the lawyers banter.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

OK, I am not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV. BUT, I think I have a solid question for those who are.

Regarding the above quote:

Since Martz has shown above average ability at the position of OC, could an offer of employment at that position qualify if the offer stipulated that the compensation for such position be equal to or greater than that he has been recieving as head coach?
For instance, offer him OC. Give him all the benefits that he currently recieves. Offer him more money to sweeten the deal. Therefore, if he accepts, he would not have the title or position, but would have greater compensation than he currently has, creating a potentially "comparable" position.
Could this be possible?

[AvengerRam]

That would not be an equivalent position for the purposes of the law, given that it has far lesser power and authority. It would be a demotion, notwithstanding the pay.

[adarian_too]

OK, I am not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV.

Don't worry. So long as you were similarly situated as one by having stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, you won't be constructively evicted through some legal fiction pleading because of the reasonable person standard. - Black's Law Dictionary, 2006

[txramsfan]

Don't worry. So long as you were similarly situated as one by having stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, you won't be constructively evicted through some legal fiction pleading because of the reasonable person standard. - Black's Law Dictionary, 2006

IMHO.....adarian has just posted the funniest post in the history of Clanram