On October 7, 2005 the United States Department of Justice ("D.O.J.") filed a lawsuit under Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act of 1994, 38 U.S.C. §§ 4301-4333 ("USERRA"), in the US District Court for the Western District of Missouri, against the City of Independence, Missouri. ...
read more >
On October 7, 2005 the United States Department of Justice ("D.O.J.") filed a lawsuit under Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act of 1994, 38 U.S.C. §§ 4301-4333 ("USERRA"), in the US District Court for the Western District of Missouri, against the City of Independence, Missouri. The D.O.J asked the court for injunctive and compensatory relief, alleging that the defendant had violated USERRA by suspending and placing on probation a firefighter because of his failure to provide unnecessary documentation related to his active military service.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that the City of Independence, Missouri violated USERRA by: (1) requiring the firefighter to provide official military orders or an official memorandum or letter to indicate that he was absent for military purposes, suspending him from employment, and placing him on a six month probationary period; and (2) failing and refusing to take appropriate action to remedy the effects of the violations described above, including failing and refusing to pay the firefighter for the period he was not allowed to work due to his suspension and to clear his personnel profile of any wrongdoing in this matter.
On December 6, 2005, the District Court (Judge Fernando J. Gaitan Jr.) entered the consent decree agreed upon by the parties. The consent decree provides that the defendant: (1) shall not take any action against any person which constitutes retaliation or interference with the exercise of such person's rights under USERRA, or because such person gave testimony or assistance or participated in any manner of proceeding or investigation connected with this case; (2) shall compensate the firefighter for the loss of monetary compensation incurred as a result of suspension and probation; (3) acknowledge that any advance written or verbal notification of an obligation or intent to perform service in the uniformed services provided to an employer by the employee who will perform such services or by the uniformed service in which such service is to be performed constitutes adequate and proper notice of military leave; (4) shall not discipline any employee for failing to provide notice for military leave when these requirement are met.
The case was closed on December 6, 2005.James Floyd - 11/06/2007