Skip to content
Home ยป The $450000 workplace birthday party – Lexology

The $450000 workplace birthday party – Lexology

Review your content’s performance and reach.
Become your target audience’s go-to resource for today’s hottest topics.
Understand your clients’ strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing.
Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them.
add to folder:
Questions? Please contact [email protected]
There was this disability discrimination issue . . .
An employer who shall remain nameless had a tradition of throwing a little birthday party for each of its employees on their special day.
The birthday of one employee — we'll call him "Elmo" — was only one week away.
But unlike his co-workers, Elmo didn't want anyone celebrating his birthday. His parents were going through a divorce during one of his childhood birthdays, and apparently it was very unpleasant, and ever since that time he couldn't be the honoree at a birthday party without having a panic attack.
So, on the Friday afternoon before his birthday, Elmo went to see his office manager. He nicely explained to her that he preferred not to have a birthday party because it would be upsetting to him. The office manager led him to believe she'd take care of it. Elmo went home happy.
The office manager apparently did, too, because she left the office and completely forgot that she had promised Elmo that she'd cancel his birthday party. She went out of town without cancelling the party.
On his special day, Elmo came to work. A few people wished him a happy birthday, and Elmo tolerated that well. But then at lunch time, Elmo saw that the break room was fully decorated with streamers, and he saw a big cake on the table.
Elmo's heart started palpitating, and he immediately left the building, got into his parked car, and ate his lunch there, alone. He also sent a message to his office manager, who was still out of town, and told her he was "a little upset" that the party had not been canceled as she'd led him to believe it would. He was gloomy at work the rest of the day. That afternoon and the next morning, there were questions about "What's wrong with Elmo?" "Why wouldn't he come to his party?"
Sometime that afternoon, the office manager told Elmo's supervisor that he'd asked her to cancel the party, that she had forgotten to do it, and that he wanted to talk with her about that. The supervisor decided to meet with Elmo herself first, and asked the director of business operations to join her.
In the meeting with the supervisor and DBO, Elmo felt another anxiety attack coming on. He had been taught to clench his fists and open and close his eyes to try to fight off the attack. The supervisor and DBO didn't know this, so they tried to get him to open up about his feelings. Elmo's face got red, and he kept clenching and squinting. He told them, "Silence. Please be quiet." He started shaking. Not understanding his behavior, both the supervisor and the DBO got scared. If she'd had her cell phone with her, the supervisor would have called the cops.
She and the DBO left Elmo alone in the room and talked it over. They agreed that Elmo's behavior was scary. They told Elmo that he'd need to leave and turn in his key fob. Elmo did so without objection and left the facility. He later apologized.
The supervisor and DBO then called the Chief Operating Officer and told her what had happened. They both said they were afraid and felt unsafe around Elmo.
The COO decided that Elmo's behavior violated the company's policy against workplace violence.
So Elmo got fired for workplace violence. Technically, threatening behavior.
This happened in August 2019. Last month, a jury awarded Elmo $450,000 in his lawsuit brought under the Kentucky Civil Rights Act. The judgment was issued last week.
I sure hope that birthday party was worth it.
It turned out that Elmo had a genuine, diagnosed, preexisting anxiety disorder. The company said he didn't disclose that, but Elmo said he did. That creates what the courts call a "disputed material fact," meaning that a jury has to decide who is telling the truth. The jury is free to believe the company, but it could also believe Elmo.
But, just for fun, let's assume Elmo never did come right out and tell the company that he had an anxiety disorder. How could this have been handled better — both from an HR standpoint* and from a disability discrimination/accommodation standpoint?
*It appears that no HR person was involved in this, which was probably part of the problem for the company.
In other words, the employer threw what turned out to be a $450,000 birthday party. That's $150,000 in front and back pay, plus $300,000 in emotional distress damages. And court costs. And Elmo's attorneys' fees as well as their own. After a jury trial. So, really, that party cost significantly more than $450,000.
And the guest of honor didn't even show up.
add to folder:
If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected].
© Copyright 2006 – 2022 Law Business Research


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *