Employers often ask: “How long do I have to hold a job open for someone on extended medical leave?” The Fourth Circuit recently tackled this issue in Coffman v. Nexstar Media, offering helpful guidance for navigating ADA and FMLA obligations.
Coffman’s Story (Which May Sound Familiar)
Coffman was an account executive at Nexstar. After becoming pregnant with twins, she developed a serious condition requiring bed rest. Nexstar allowed her to work remotely during the final weeks of her pregnancy, and when she delivered by C-section in February, she took 12 weeks of FMLA leave.
Shortly into that leave, Coffman learned she had suffered an injury during the C-section that severely limited her mobility. She began a prolonged back-and-forth with Nexstar about whether and when she could return, and whether remote work was possible.
By June—four months into her absence—HR checked in again. Coffman referred them to her attorney and then texted: “Please do not contact me regarding a return to work date when I have been classified as unable to return and still have short-term disability plus bonding leave.”
Nexstar grew concerned. In late July, the company formally requested a return date, noting, “A directive not to contact you is not acceptable.”
Coffman still didn’t provide a date. Instead, she wrote back to say she was “still under intense care,” had surgery coming up that would require up to six weeks of recovery, and likely needed another procedure in October.
Nexstar terminated her employment by email, stating, “Since you have been off work since February 23, 2022 and given the critical nature of the Account Executive position, we can no longer hold your job.”
Coffman sued, alleging disability discrimination under a state law similar to the ADA and retaliation for taking FMLA leave.
The Employer Won—and Here’s Why
Nextstar was successful on all of Coffman’s claims, and the court’s reasoning is helpful to employers as they consider what to do when an employee has a complicated, long-term need to be absent from the office. Here are five takeaways from the decision:
- You don’t have to wait forever. Remember, the law requires an accommodation to be “reasonable,” and the employee has to be “qualified” for the job. It is not reasonable to expect an employer to wait an indefinite amount of time for an employee to get healthy enough to be “qualified” for the job again.
- Employees owe employers some degree of certainty. The court pointed out that with Coffman, the problem was not her inability to give a precise return date, it was that Nexstar did not know whether she would come back in the near future.
- Remote work isn’t a reasonable accommodation for an employee who can’t work. Coffman argued that Nexstar should have allowed her to work remotely, but this is the same employee who texted HR and told them not to contact her at all during her short-term disability. If you have an employee who demands remote work, that’s not a reasonable accommodation when the employee refuses to work.
- You must engage in the interactive process unless no accommodation is possible. Employers should engage in the interactive process when they’re on notice about a disability—in other words, there needs to be a sincere attempt to figure out if there’s an accommodation that will help the employee do their job. But when Coffman basically said she could not work, she shut down the interactive process. An employer is not going to be faulted for declining to engage in the interactive process when the “accommodation” the employee is really requesting is to not work at all.
- Timing is everything with FMLA retaliation claims. Nexstar approved Coffman’s FMLA leave and didn’t pressure her to return early. More importantly, they waited several weeks after her leave expired before taking action. That kind of patience and documentation makes retaliation claims hard to prove.
The ADA and FMLA are two of the most complex areas of employment law—and missteps, even unintentional ones, can expose your organization to serious liability. Plus, keep in mind that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) wasn’t even in effect when Coffman worked for Nextstar. If it had been, the legal analysis—from accommodations to the interactive process—might have looked very different, because the PWFA offers broader, more aggressive protections for employees with pregnancy-related complications.
If you’re facing a tricky leave or accommodation issue—regardless of the condition behind it—don’t guess. A quick call to experienced counsel is far less costly than defending a lawsuit over a preventable mistake.
