Dive Brief:
- A U.S. District Court denied Union Pacific Railroad Co.’s request to dismiss a conductor’s claims that the company allegedly fired him, rehired him, then “unilaterally” forced him to extend his medical leave without pay for reporting a potential shooting on site and taking leave, according to a Monday filing by U.S. District Judge Donald Walter.
- The employee reported an unsafe work environment and requested medical leave after allegedly hearing what sounded like three gunshots close to where he was working. Union Pacific later fired the worker, alleging he didn’t file the appropriate paperwork for his medical leave, but later reinstated him upon receiving documents from his counselor, according to court documents filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana Shreveport division.
- Judge Walter denied the request for dismissal because “the evidence of the bullet holes in the derail switch sign combined with the testimony” of the worker and another worker who was nearby at the time of the alleged incident, as well as other arguments, showed “there is not a complete absence of probative facts to support [the worker’s] position.” Union Pacific did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Dive Insight:
In the lawsuit, the conductor claimed Union Pacific violated the Federal Employer’s Liability Act “by negligently and carelessly failing to provide him with a reasonably safe place to work,” which led to a post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis resulting from the alleged shooting.
In its request for summary judgment, Union Pacific argued that the worker’s emotional distress claim doesn’t hold because he was “well outside the zone of danger.”
The worker also alleged two counts of retaliatory adverse actions under the Federal Railroad Safety Act. He alleged the company terminated him after he made several reports about the shooting and refused to work in the rail yard under “hazardous safety or security conditions” and that Union Pacific didn’t allow him to return to work for several months, during which he wasn’t paid, after reversing his termination.
The company, in its summary judgment request, denied there was any connection between the worker’s termination and the alleged shooting and instead argued that the termination was related to his failure to provide the proper medical paperwork.
