UPS Is Latest Employer Forced to Face Paid Military Leave Claims

An Army reservist accusing UPS Inc. of improperly denying paid leave for employees who serve in the military advanced his lawsuit under the federal law giving job protection rights to servicemembers, according to a Washington federal court ruling.

Pay during an absence from work is a “right and benefit” protected by the “broad” statutory language of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, Judge Salvador Mendoza Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington said Thursday.

And deciding whether short-term military leave is comparable to the other types of leave UPS gives its workers requires a “fact-based determination” that can’t be done at the motion to dismiss stage, Mendoza said, declining to dismiss the proposed class action.

Mendoza’s ruling is the latest victory for military reservists in their litigation push for paid leave. Several recent lawsuits have targeted airlines and other employers for allegedly denying regular wages to pilots on military leave while offering paid leave to employees who are sick, grieving, or serving jury duty. The lawsuits claim this practice violates USERRA, the federal law extending job protections to workers who serve in the military.

Last year, both the Seventh and Third circuits sided with military reservists advancing these claims. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit revived a case against United Airlines Inc., concluding that paid military leave is a right and benefit protected by federal law. The Third Circuit revived similar claims against FedEx Corp., saying that USERRA “does not allow employers to treat servicemembers differently by paying employees for some kinds of leave while exempting military service.”

The Labor Department recently signaled that it’s considering supporting the reservists raising similar claims against Alaska Airlines Inc. in the Ninth Circuit.

UPS is represented by Greenberg Traurig LLP and Jeffers, Danielson, Sonn & Aylward PS. The proposed class is represented by Crotty & Son Law Firm PLLC, Outten & Golden LLP, Block & Leviton LLP, Gupta Wessler PLLC, and Thomas G. Jarrard of Spokane, Wash.

The case is Baker v. United Parcel Serv. Inc., 2022 BL 112737, E.D. Wash., No. 2:21-cv-00114, 3/31/22.