IN 11TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, ATTORNEY SETS LEGAL PRECEDENT ON BEHALF OF INJURED EMPLOYEES
Federal employees have a right to file
employment discrimination claims
after receiving worker’s compensation
For Immediate Release, Sarasota, Fla . . .
Local attorney Kevin F. Sanderson, Esq. successfully established the right to sue for damages on behalf of federal employees who experience employment disability discrimination after receiving worker’s compensation, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals published Thursday in their opinion on Charles Edward Center, Jr. v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security.
“While this was not a personal victory for Customs and Border Protection Agent Center, it is a real victory for federal employees who experience disability discrimination after receiving worker’s compensation. They now have an established right to file disability discrimination claims even after receiving worker’s compensation; before, they could be effectively discriminated against based on a disability acquired in a worker’s compensation injury. In the states under the jurisdiction of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (Florida, Georgia, Alabama), that’s no longer the case,” said Sanderson. “I hope that this issue will be affirmed by courts around the country to firmly establish this right for all federal employees.”
Background
In the three-panel decision issued July 19, 2018 by Circuit Judges William Pryor and Julie Carnes and Senior Circuit Judge Frank Hull, Charles Center, who was a Customs and Border Protection Agent, was determined by the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs to have permanent physical restrictions and requested that the agency find him a suitable position. The position that they found for him was 4 pay-grade levels below his attained pay-grade, even when there were positions open and available at his prior established pay grade. While the agency eventually corrected this error, Center sued for back compensation and discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act of 1974, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by federal agencies. The Middle District of Florida dismissed Center’s claims under the Rehabilitation Act for lack of jurisdiction claiming the Compensation Act (better known as the federal worker’s compensation program) forbids judicial review for monetary damages for work-related injuries.
The 11th Circuit disagreed with the Tampa District Court, stating that even though the two Acts are similar, the Compensation Act and the Rehabilitation Act “concern different kinds of injuries, [thus] they are not in conflict.” The court went on to quote late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s book Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts (co-authored with Bryan Garner) that “[t]he provisions of a text should be interpreted in a way that renders them compatible, not contradictory.”
“Any employee is already having a hard time when they receive an injury that falls under the worker’s compensation umbrella. We hope this may someday also help state and private sector employees,” said Mr. Sanderson.
