After many years working for San Francisco-based McKesson Corporation, Charlene Roby began suffering from sudden panic attacks.
Shortly thereafter, McKesson implemented a complex absenteeism policy, and employees received progressive discipline for not giving at least 24 hours’ notice for tardiness or absences — even absences due to sudden illness.
Roby was terminated under McKesson’s absenteeism policy. Even though the company was aware of her medical condition, McKesson’s policy didn’t account for the unique circumstances of disabled employees.
How To Survive an Employee Lawsuit: 10 Tips for Success
With lawsuits against employers becoming ever more common—and jury verdicts skyrocketing—your risk of getting sued has increased dramatically even if you’ve done all the right things. Learn how to protect yourself with our free White Paper, How To Survive an Employee Lawsuit: 10 Tips for Success.
Roby sued for disability bias and harassment.
Following trial, the jury awarded her $3.5 million in compensatory damages and $15 million in punitive damages. The jury also imposed over $500,000 in damages on Roby’s immediate supervisor, who frequently ridiculed Roby for her frequent absences, physical appearance, and body odor (Roby took medication for her condition, which resulted in an unpleasant body odor). In addition, her nervous condition caused her to scratch at her arms, leaving open sores.
McKesson appealed, and the Court of Appeals found that the jury’s damages award was not warranted, and that there was insufficient evidence of harassment. The Court of Appeals reduced Roby’s award to a total of $3.4 million. The California Supreme Court revised the award, ad approved final amount of $3.8 million.
Although this final result is far less than the jury’s original award to Roby, it’s still a hefty price to pay for an avoidable mistake. For California employers, the most important lesson to take away from this case is that if you have an absenteeism policy that doesn’t allow flexibility for disabled employees, you’re running afoul of disability bias laws.
We’ll have more on this case in an upcoming issue of California Employer Advisor.