Groening v. Glen Lake Cmty. Sch.
884 F.3d 626
6th Cir.2018Background
- Joan Groening, superintendent of Glen Lake Community Schools, took FMLA leave for hip surgery and intermittent leave to care for her ill mother; she later returned part-time.
- Board members expressed frustration about her absences, requested a breakdown of her time off, and the president said leave would be addressed in her evaluation.
- After Groening announced retirement (later changed to resigning early), the board ordered an audit of the business office partly to verify leave records and payout calculations in her contract.
- Groening resigned the day before the auditors delivered their report, alleging she was forced out in retaliation for taking FMLA leave and filed suit under the FMLA.
- The district court granted the board summary judgment; Groening appealed. The Sixth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether board's actions amounted to FMLA retaliation via constructive discharge | Groening: months of hostility, critical comments, audit and threatened negative evaluation made conditions intolerable and forced her to quit | Board: no termination, demotion, or discipline; criticisms were isolated, some private and unknown to Groening, and an audit/investigation is permissible | Held: No constructive discharge; plaintiff failed to show objectively intolerable conditions or employer intent to force resignation; retaliation claim fails |
| Whether audit and planned negative evaluation interfered with FMLA rights (interference-by-retaliation) | Groening: board used her FMLA leave against her (audit/evaluation) amounting to denial of benefits under Wysong theory | Board: investigations and evaluations are not adverse employment actions; Wysong does not eliminate the requirement of an adverse action for retaliation/interference claims | Held: No interference-by-retaliation; audit and prospective evaluation were not adverse actions and did not amount to denial of FMLA benefits |
| Whether board interfered by requiring Groening to work while recovering | Groening: board pressured her to work and stay involved during recovery | Board: hired interim superintendent, did not require meetings; Groening voluntarily contacted board and attended meetings; only made a de minimis request for time-off breakdown | Held: No interference; limited contact and the records request were de minimis and did not unlawfully disrupt FMLA leave |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (framework for circumstantial evidence and burden-shifting)
- Wysong v. Dow Chem. Co., 503 F.3d 441 (6th Cir. 2007) (employer actions based on FMLA leave can constitute interference/denial of benefits where tied to adverse employment action)
- Logan v. Denny's, 259 F.3d 558 (6th Cir. 2001) (elements and high bar for proving constructive discharge)
- Daugherty v. Sajar Plastics, 544 F.3d 696 (6th Cir. 2008) (summary judgment standard and adverse action requirement in FMLA claims)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard)