Woida v. Genesys Reg'l Med. Ctr. & Jennifer Roth
| Decision Date | 18 March 2014 |
| Docket Number | No. 12–12978.,12–12978. |
| Citation | 4 F.Supp.3d 880 |
| Parties | Lori WOIDA and Carolyn Viera, Plaintiffs, v. GENESYS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER and Jennifer Roth, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Dean T. Yeotis, Nancy K. Chinonis, Cristine Wasserman Rathe, Law Offices of Dean T. Yeotis, Flint, MI, for Plaintiffs.
Bradley M. Taormina, Bruce M. Bagdady, Jennifer H. Gonzalez, Larry R. Jensen, Jr., Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman, Troy, MI, for Defendants.
Plaintiffs Lori Woida and Carolyn Viera are former employees of Genesys Regional Medical Center. They are suing their former employer and their former supervisor, Jennifer Roth, for alleged violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act. This matter is presently before the Court on Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs have responded and Defendants have replied. Having reviewed and considered the parties' briefs and the voluminous exhibits submitted in support, the Court has determined that oral argument is not necessary. Therefore, pursuant to Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 7.1(f)(2), this matter will be decided “on the briefs.” This Opinion and Order sets forth the Court's ruling.
Plaintiffs Lori Woida and Carolyn Viera are former employees of Genesys Regional Medical Center (“Genesys”) in Flint, Michigan. Both Plaintiffs were employed by Genesys as part-time Financial Administrative Associates (“FAAs”) pursuant to a Collective Bargaining Agreement entered into between Genesys and AFSCME Local 3518, and both worked under the direct supervision of Genesys' Revenue Manager Jennifer Roth. Plaintiff Woida's employment was terminated on July 6, 2010; Plaintiff Viera was terminated on November 1, 2011.
Upon being hired by Genesys, both Woida and Viera signed “Acceptance of Employment” forms acknowledging that as a condition of employment they “agree [d] to comply with all applicable rules, regulations and policies,” and further acknowledging that their scheduled hours and job assignments were “subject to change.” See Defendants' Ex. 1, Dkt. Nos. 59–2; 63–2. They each also acknowledged receipt of the corporate Standards of Conduct [Defendants' Woida SJ Ex. 20, Dkt. 70–21] 1 and agreed to follow them, understanding that compliance with the Standards of Conduct and the Corporate Responsibility Program was a condition of their continued employment. Dkt. Nos. 59–3; 63–4. Woida and Viera also acknowledged their receipt of copies of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (“CBA”) entered into by Genesys and AFSCME Local 3518. See Defendants' Ex. 1; Woida Dep. pp. 56, 66; Viera Dep. p. 40. The CBA expressly approved of Genesys's adoption, revision and enforcement of its rules and regulations. See CBA Art. 7, Defendants' Ex. 5, p. 14. The CBA further provided that Genesys had the right to change starting and quitting times for each employee and to decide the assignment of time for lunch and relief time. CBA Art. 13, § 4.
The Genesys CBA also provided for progressive discipline for all disciplinary infractions.See CBA Art. 8 and Art. 19. Generally, the CBA called for five-steps of progressive discipline:
Step One—Written Warning
Step Two—Written Reprimand
Step Three—3–Day Suspension
Step Four—Five–Day Suspension or more
Step Five—Discharge
Defendants' Ex. 5, Art. 8, § 1.2
The CBA also detailed the rules governing leaves of absence, and included a separate section governing FMLA leave. See CBA, Art. 12, § 4. This section expressly informed employees that to be eligible for FMLA leave, the employee must have been (1) employed by the Medical Center for at least 12 months and (2) have worked 1,250 hours during the previous 12–month period. Id. The CBA further informed that an employee is eligible for a total of 12 workweeks of leave in a 12–month period, and that this 12–month period “is measured back from the date an employee uses any FMLA leave.” Id. The CBA also advised employees that “[c]opies of the FMLA Notice of Rights and Responsibilities as administered by Genesys are available at the Human Resource Department.” Id.
With respect to taking leave time off, the CBA specified a notice requirement:
Requests for leaves of absence must be in writing and submitted to Employee Health not less than thirty (30) days before the date the leave is to begin. If such notice is not practicable, then notice is to provided as soon as practicable, but no later than seven (7) calendar days from the last day of work. Failure to do so may result in termination of employment.
Id., Art. 12, § 1.E. FMLA leave is subject to these notice requirements. See id., Art. 12, § 4.
In addition to the information provided in the CBA, according to the record evidence provided in this case, Genesys management kept employees informed of their FMLA rights and responsibilities and any changes in the law or Genesys FMLA policies and procedures. Tamika Zinn, one of Genesys' Disability Specialists who was responsible for processing FMLA leaves from 2003 through August 2012, testified in her deposition that after the new FMLA regulations came out in 2009, Genesys seized the opportunity to clean up its policies and tighten up “gaps” in enforcement of its notice requirements. See Zinn Dep., Plaintiff Woida's Ex. 22, Dkt. # 70–23, p. 23. Employees were specifically informed at this time that the seven-day notice policy was going to be strictly enforced. Id. at p. 24. Zinn testified that stringent enforcement began in May or June 2010, but before then, Genesys had to educate and communicate this to its employees. Id. She testified that to do so,
[w]e put an article in our employee newsletter called The Ink, we posted some information on our employee bulletin board, we did some learning sessions, several different learning sessions, actually, three different learning sessions, and we opened it up to all employees. We updated our FMLA leave of absence paperwork to kind of highlight the seven-daypolicy. We did a Q and A to give out to employees any time they requested FMLA paperwork. And we also had a representative explain to every employee that comes into the office to pick up paperwork, we sit down and go over the leave paperwork and what the policies are.
Genesys also put on several “Lunch and Learns” in 2010 which were open to all Genesys employees, which Zinn personally handled, during which all policies and procedures, including the seven-day, policy were reviewed. Id. at pp. 25, 122–23.
Lori Ann Woida began her part-time employment at Genesys in September 2003 as an Administrative Associate in administrative support services. [Woida Dep. p. 15.] Soon thereafter, she became a Financial Administrative Associate (“FAA”) in the emergency department, a position she held throughout the rest of her employment at Genesys. Id. As an FAA, Woida was responsible for registering patients, verifying their insurance coverage, and obtaining from them required authorizations for treatment and payment. [ See Deposition of Jennifer Roth, p. 17.]
During the course of her tenure as an FAA, Woida worked for five different supervisors—Judy Walker, Lisa Goyette, Suzanne Heiple, Blake Graves and Jennifer Roth. [Woida Dep. at pp. 57–61]. Jennifer Roth became Woida's supervisor in April of 2008. Id. at 77. Although Woida claims in this lawsuit that she was not subject to disciplinary action until after Jennifer Roth became her supervisor and until after she applied for FMLA leave in October of 2008, the record evidence shows that Woida was written up and/or reprimanded by every one of her supervisors dating back to 2004. See Defendants' Woida SJ Exhibits 16–21. She was, in fact, disciplined no less than 11 times prior to October 2008, eight times by supervisors other than Jennifer Roth, for offenses ranging from excessive absenteeism and tardiness to insubordination. See id.3 Roth herself issued Woida a written reprimand and two three-day suspensions prior to her applying for FMLA leave. Id.
On October 14, 2008, Woida obtained the certification of her physician for intermittent FMLA leave because of menstrual migraine headaches. See Woida SJ Ex. 7. The certification stated that “[t]he migraines were first diagnosed April 3, 2008” and that “[e]ach episode may vary in intensity ... and may last one to several days.” Id. Her doctor further stated that Woida “may be unable to work when pain is severe,” and, therefore, certified her as needing intermittent leave for “up to one episode monthly.” Id.
Woida thereafter timely submitted the required FMLA leave of absence forms and her leave requests for intermittent FMLA leave days on October 20, 2008, November 5 and 7, 2008, January 13, February 13, March 20, April 14 and 21, May 20, and July 12 through 14, 2009. See Woida SJ Ex. 8. However, her request for intermittent FMLA leave for July 27, 2009 was denied. Woida SJ Ex. 9 pg. 1960. The denial letter Genesys sent to Woida by certified mail explained that the reason her request for FMLA intermittent leave on this date was denied was because “[t]he frequency of your episodes of incapacity does not correspond with the medical information provided by your Attending Physician,” id. which was for “one episode monthly.” Id. at pg. 1965.
Woida thereafter submitted requests for intermittent FMLA leave for August 23, September 28 and 30, 2009, and these requests were approved without incident. Woida SJ Ex. 8.
On October 30, 2009, Woida' physician provided a new certification for intermittent FMLA leave. See Woida SJ Ex. 10. This new certification reiterated the need for intermittent leave because of recurrent headaches but this time, did not limit the need for one episode of menstrual headaches monthly; rather it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holladay v. Rockwell Collins, Inc.
...FMLA leave request because it exceeded the amount of leave indicated in a physician's certification. See Woida v. Genesys Reg'l Med. Ctr. , 4 F.Supp.3d 880, 894–95 (E.D. Mich. 2014). However, in reaching that conclusion, the Woida court relied on "negative certification cases." See id. at 8......
-
Villegas v. Albertsons, LLC
...about procedures raised “genuine issue of fact as to whether this ambiguity would excuse” noncompliance); Woida v. Genesys Reg'l Med. Ctr., 4 F.Supp.3d 880, 896 (E.D.Mich.2014) (opining that employer's acceptance of noncompliant requests for FMLA leave pursuant to company—union agreement “m......
-
Patten-Gentry v. Oakwood Healthcare Inc.
...drawn that her protected activity was a but—for cause of the alleged adverse action by her employer." Woida v. Genesys Reg'l Med. Ctr., 4 F. Supp. 3d 880, 899 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 18, 2014) (citing University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, ___ U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 2517, 2533 (2......
-
Smith v. Am. Modern Ins. Grp.
...protected act and the termination is sufficient to establish causation at summary judgment stage). See also Woida v. Genesys Reg'l Med. Ctr., 4 F. Supp.3d 880, 899 (E.D. Mich. 2014) ("the Sixth Circuit has repeatedly held that, in the FMLA context, close proximity in time between the protec......