December 3, 2021

Volume XI, Number 337

Advertisement
Advertisement

December 02, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

December 01, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

November 30, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Seventh Circuit Ruling Means Retailers May Need to Provide Paid Leave Under USERRA

In a February 3, 2021 decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit determined that the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (“USERRA”) may require employers to provide employees with short-term paid military leave. Specifically, if an employer provides short-term paid leave for other comparable purposes such as sick time, jury duty, or bereavement, then the employer may need to do the same for military leave.

The case, White v. United Airlines, was brought as a class action by a United Airlines pilot who was on reserve duty for the US Air Force.  He had taken multiple short-term leaves for his military service during his employment and argued that those leaves should have been paid. The company’s policy provided paid leave for jury duty and paid sick leave, but not military leave. A three judge panel of the Seventh Circuit determined that the “rights and benefits” of employment that USERRA protects include paid leave. It remanded to the district court to determine whether the types of paid leave that United provided to its employees are comparable to military leave, considering (i) the duration of the leave; (ii) the purpose of the leave; and (iii) the ability of the employee to choose when to take leave.

All employers, and particularly those in the retail industry, should be mindful of the holding in White, the further analysis that will emerge from the district court, and the evolving law on this topic.  District courts across the country have rendered mixed decisions regarding whether USERRA requires employers to provide paid leave, and similar class actions are pending in multiple states. This litigation activity could well result in split decisions among the courts of appeals. Retailers should take action now by partnering with counsel to determine the potential for liability under their current policy and to make necessary revisions to mitigate liability in the future.

Copyright © 2021, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume XI, Number 96
Advertisement

About this Author

Robert T. Quackenboss Labor & Employment Litigation Attorney Hunton Andrews Kurth Washington, DC & New York, NY
Partner

Bob litigates complex employment, labor and business disputes.

Bob is a litigator who represents businesses in resolving their complex labor, employment, trade secret, non-compete and related commercial disputes. He was recognized as a Labor & Employment Star in Benchmark Litigation’s Rankings for 2019. He advises employers regarding union organizing activities, manages union election campaigns and litigates labor arbitrations nationwide. He also serves as co-chair of the firm’s Unfair Competition and Information Protection Task Force, which concentrates on trade secret theft,...

202-955-1950
Katherine Sandberg Employment Lawyer Hunton Andrews Kurth Law Firm
Associate

Katherine has extensive experience in wage and hour class actions and high-stakes trade secrets litigation. She also has a demonstrated track record of favorable outcomes in federal and state courts for clients facing claims of discrimination, harassment, retaliation and unfair competition. Moreover, she has guided clients through difficult interactions with administrative agencies and claimants to resolve disputes before lawsuits are ever filed.

Katherine also has significant experience defending business owners in public accommodation access litigation involving claims of...

415 975 3705
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement