Leanna Coffman was a Nexstar Media employee who suffered serious pregnancy-related complications and took 12 weeks of FMLA leave after giving birth. When her FMLA leave expired, Nexstar continued to provide support—giving her months of additional time off and approving her short-term disability benefits.
But when she still couldn't return to work six months after going out on leave, and also couldn't provide a clear return date, Nexstar made the difficult decision to terminate her.
So she sued for discrimination and FMLA retaliation. She lost on all counts. Why? Because Nexstar handled this situation correctly. They followed the law, communicated clearly, documented their decisions, and gave Coffman much more than the law required.
The court found that: (1) she was not entitled to indefinite leave as a reasonable accommodation; (2) she was not capable of performing her job (remotely or otherwise); and (3) her alleged "accommodation request" wasn't actually actionable because the law does not require that an employer provide an indefinite leave of absence.
📌 Here are the key takeaways for employers:
1. You can be compassionate and compliant. Nexstar granted far more leave than required, which mattered. Courts and juries will want to see that you accommodated the employee's absence for some amount of time.
2. Job protection has limits. Once FMLA ends, employers can assess whether extended leave or accommodations are still reasonable. Some amount of continued unpaid leave will usually qualify as an reasonable accommodation, but the law doesn't require that it last forever.
3. Protected status is not a shield. Employees still must prove actual discrimination, not just membership in a protected class.
Litigation isn't about whether someone feels wronged. It's about what the law requires and whether it was followed. In this case it was, and the employer won this lawsuit as a result.
But when she still couldn't return to work six months after going out on leave, and also couldn't provide a clear return date, Nexstar made the difficult decision to terminate her.
So she sued for discrimination and FMLA retaliation. She lost on all counts. Why? Because Nexstar handled this situation correctly. They followed the law, communicated clearly, documented their decisions, and gave Coffman much more than the law required.
The court found that: (1) she was not entitled to indefinite leave as a reasonable accommodation; (2) she was not capable of performing her job (remotely or otherwise); and (3) her alleged "accommodation request" wasn't actually actionable because the law does not require that an employer provide an indefinite leave of absence.
📌 Here are the key takeaways for employers:
1. You can be compassionate and compliant. Nexstar granted far more leave than required, which mattered. Courts and juries will want to see that you accommodated the employee's absence for some amount of time.
2. Job protection has limits. Once FMLA ends, employers can assess whether extended leave or accommodations are still reasonable. Some amount of continued unpaid leave will usually qualify as an reasonable accommodation, but the law doesn't require that it last forever.
3. Protected status is not a shield. Employees still must prove actual discrimination, not just membership in a protected class.
Litigation isn't about whether someone feels wronged. It's about what the law requires and whether it was followed. In this case it was, and the employer won this lawsuit as a result.