The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision in James v. FedEx Freight Inc., partially reversing a grant of summary judgment in favor of FedEx on claims brought under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The ruling serves as a cautionary reminder to employers, particularly those operating in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, which are within the Eleventh Circuit, that failure to recognize and respond appropriately to informal leave requests may result in liability under the FMLA.
Case Background
The plaintiff worked for FedEx in Alabama as a freight handler. He informed his supervisors that his wife’s pregnancy had become high risk, requiring her to stop working and driving. He told them he might need to leave work early or miss shifts to support her. The plaintiff was never informed of his rights under the FMLA as it related to supporting/assisting his wife.
On two occasions, the plaintiff left work at the end of his scheduled shift to be with his wife. Both times, he was told to work overtime, and both times he declined, citing his wife’s worsening condition. FedEx recorded the incidents as violations of company policy, and shortly thereafter terminated him for what it labeled "job abandonment."
What the Court Decided
The plaintiff filed suit, alleging FMLA interference, FMLA retaliation, and associational discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The district court granted summary judgment for FedEx on all claims. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the retaliation and ADA claims but reversed on the FMLA interference claim.
FMLA Interference Claim Survives
The Eleventh Circuit emphasized that an employee need not utter the words "FMLA" to trigger an employer’s obligations to provide notice of the employee’s rights under the federal law. When an employee provides enough information to reasonably suggest that leave may be FMLA-qualifying, the employer must assess eligibility and provide notice of rights within five business days.
The court concluded that the plaintiff provided sufficient notice by informing his supervisors of his wife’s condition and his need to leave work to care for her. It rejected the argument that the plaintiff needed to point to a specific emergency or medical appointment. His wife’s high-risk pregnancy and inability to care for herself — especially her need for transportation and assistance — met the FMLA’s "serious health condition" threshold.
FedEx argued that the plaintiff was fired for failing to check in with a supervisor, not for refusing overtime. But the court found FedEx’s internal records, including disciplinary memos referencing his refusal to unload trailers due to hitting his eighth hour, cast doubt on that explanation. The Eleventh Circuit held that a reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff’s termination was the result of FedEx’s failure to recognize and accommodate his FMLA rights.
Employer Takeaways
This case underscores the importance of training supervisors to recognize potential FMLA triggers and respond accordingly. When employees reference family medical issues — even informally — employers must treat such statements as potential FMLA notices and initiate the statutory process.
Additionally, employers should carefully document the basis for disciplinary actions, particularly when an employee has raised medical or family-related concerns. Inconsistent justifications can jeopardize the success of a summary judgment motion and expose the employer to liability.
Click here to subscribe to our latest alerts and insights.