A Huntsville employer is going to trial because a supervisor told an employee: “Get your shit and leave.” Griffith v. Nicholas Financial, Inc., No. 5:14-cv-02330-MHH, 2016 WL 5724725 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 30, 2016). Based upon that statement, and other facts, Judge Madeline Haikala found that the employee could reasonably believe that her employment was terminated.
Krysti Griffith suffers from lupus and claims that her employer, Nicholas Financial, discriminated against her and terminated her employment in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Prior to November 2013, Ms. Griffith generally had a good working relationship with her supervisors. In November 2013, however, Ms. Griffith was denied a promotion and the evidence in the case indicated that her relationship with her supervisors deteriorated thereafter. In December 2013, her desk was moved to the front of her office facility and she objected, because she feared that sunlight in her new location might cause a flare-up of her lupus. Then, she missed work on January 20 and 21, 2014 because of a lupus flare-up. On January 29, 2014, Nicholas Financial, began interviewing candidates to replace Ms. Griffith, and she found out about those interviews. Later on January 29, 2014, Ms. Griffith received a negative performance evaluation from her immediate supervisor.
On January 30, 2014, Ms. Griffith spoke with Nicholas Financial’s district manager, who scolded Griffith for a “bad attitude” and commanded her to “get her shit and leave.” Ms. Griffith then packed her belongings and left the facility. She did not return to work.
Nicholas Financial argued that the district manager did not actually terminate Ms. Griffith’s employment. Instead, it argued that Ms. Griffith was merely being sent home for the day, and that Ms. Griffith voluntarily resigned when she packed her belongs and left the facility.
Judge Haikala found that she was required to determine whether plaintiffs in the position of Ms. Griffith would have “reasonably concluded that their employers had terminated their employment taking into account all of the circumstances surrounding the employees’ separation from the employers.” Griffith, 2016 WL 5724725 at *7. Judge Haikala found that Nicholas used language or engaged in conduct that would logically lead a prudent person to believe that she had been terminated — particularly in light of the poor job review, the interviews of other candidates and the command to leave.
Nicholas argued that the district manager never explicitly told Ms. Griffith that she was fired. But, “an employer need not use the term’fired’ in order for a discharge to occur.” Id. at *8. Judge Haikala was required to view the facts favorably for Ms. Griffith, and in doing so Judge Haikala determined that a jury should decide whether Ms. Griffith was fired or quit.
Griffith presents a simple warning to Alabama employers: “Anything you say can, and will, be used against you in a court of law.” The district manager might not have intended to terminate Ms. Griffith. But, when emotions ran high a statement was made that ultimately forced the employer to trial. When communicating with employees about performance issues, try to keep emotions in check and communicate as clearly as possible.