Kathryn Pereda v. Brookdale Senior Living Communities, Inc.
666 F.3d 1269
| 11th Cir. | 2012Background
- Pereda was employed by Brookdale and terminated in September 2009 after Brookdale learned of her pregnancy.
- She alleged in May 2010 that Brookdale interfered with and retaliated against her under the FMLA.
- At the time of her request for leave (June 2009), Pereda had not yet met the FMLA eligibility hours/12-month requirements.
- Brookdale argued Pereda was not eligible for FMLA leave when she requested it and thus could not have been interfered with or retaliated against.
- The district court dismissed both claims, holding no protected activity and no pre-eligibility protections under the FMLA; the Eleventh Circuit reversed.
- The issue presented is whether the FMLA protects a pre-eligibility request for post-eligibility leave.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FMLA protects pre-eligibility requests for post-eligibility leave | Pereda argues pre-eligibility notice is protected | Brookdale argues no protection until eligibility | Yes, pre-eligibility requests are protected. |
| Interference claim viability where no triggering event occurred yet | Pereda seeks protection for notice and protection against interference | Brookdale contends no denial of a benefit since no leave was eligible | Interference protect applies to pre-trigger requests. |
| Retaliation claim viability when not yet eligible | Pereda engaged in protected activity by discussing leave | Pre-eligibility activity cannot be protected | Pre-eligibility discussion is protected activity. |
Key Cases Cited
- Walker v. Elmore County, Board of Education, 379 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2004) (left open whether FMLA protects pre-eligibility requests for post-eligibility leave; court resolved the issue here)
- Smith v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., 273 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2001) (employee considered an ‘employee’ for FMLA purposes to prevent evading rights)
- Brungart v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., 231 F.3d 791 (11th Cir. 2000) (eligibility determinations tied to when leave is to start; limitations on transforming ineligible employees)
- Skrjanc v. Great Lakes Power Serv. Co., 272 F.3d 309 (6th Cir. 2001) (recognizes right to declare intent to take leave in the future under FMLA)