A ruling by the California Court of Appeal has employers looking at terminations based on unexcused leaves of absence. In Henry Avila v. Continental Airlines, Inc., justices found that a trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the employer was wrong. The court further found that Continental had failed to follow the requirements of the California Family Rights Act by terminating Avila after he exceeded the company’s allowance of six absences in a “rolling” 12-month period. Whereas Continental argued it had not violated CFRA, which protects those with disabilities from discriminatory labor practices, because it was not given advance notice of the employee’s disability, which turned out to be pancreatitis. But the court’s majority said knowledge of Avila’s extended absence, along with the fact that he told coworkers he was ill,and most significantly,documents from his doctors (supplied to the employer after the fact) stipulating that his absences were medically excusable, combined to be the equivalent of Avila requesting CRFA leave.
