The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that the USPS didn’t violate the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) after terminating Antoinette Pirant, a former worker.

To be eligible for those benefits, an employee must have been employed by a company for at least 12 months and must have worked at least 1,250 hours in the 12-month period before making the request. After Pirant left for FMLA leave, USPS looked through their payroll records and discovered she didn’t meet the criteria.

Pirant had only logged in 1248.8 hours in the 12 months preceding her absence. As a result, USPS was forced to terminate her.

Pirant did not challenge the accuracy of USPS’ payroll records — instead, she claimed she was wrongly suspended for two hours at the end of one of her shifts, and those missed hours would have been enough to put her over the 1,250-hour threshold.

But a court ruled in favor of USPS, noting that Pirant could have challenged her suspension when it was placed into effect to have her lost hours restored. Because she didn’t file a grievance until long after the deadline had passed, there was no way for her to gain the lost hours — or her job back.

Cite: Pirant v. U.S. Postal Svc., 7th CA, No. 542-F3D-202

Wayne and Valerie Davis, managers of a Toolking Plus shop in Hamilton, New Zealand, successfully argued they were unfairly fired from their positions. After store director Neil Edge approached the duo about their performance, Wayne launched into a heated exchange that ended with him saying Edge could “stick his job up his arse.”

According to the local authority, a fair and reasonable employer would have realized the Davises didn’t intend to immediately resign from their positions. To be sure their resignation was clear, Edge should have approached the couple the next day to clarify their intentions.

Because Edge didn’t warn the Davises about the performance concerns beforehand and no disciplinary process was followed, their termination was unjustified. The authority awarded Wayne Davis $8,450 in lost earnings and $6,000 compensation for distress, while Valerie Davis was given $2,739 for lost earnings and $6,000 for distress.

Doris Sexton, former employee at the Cumberland Manor Nursing Home, claims that a co-worker’s rampant perfume sprays left her permanently disabled and unable to work. Sexton said the incident that deteriorated her health so dramatically was when the co-worker sprayed perfume near her three separate times in a single day.

Sexton already had a chronic lung condition before working at the New Jersey nursing home. The worker that sprayed perfume near her reportedly exacerbated her condition.

A lower court rules Sexton’s reaction to the perfume didn’t arise out of her employment. Sexton had been a pack-a-day smoker for 43 years prior to the perfume incident, the court noted, and that was likely the cause of her disability.

But an appeals panel found in favor of Sexton, because the exposure to the perfume happened while at work. “The air Sexton had to breathe in order to fulfill her contract of service, contaminated by a co-employee, was a condition of the employment for Sexton and thus a risk of this employment for her,” the court said in its ruling.

The case now goes back to a lower court to determine whether Sexton is indeed eligible for worker’s compensation.

After an employee was murdered on the job, an insurance firm is denying workers’ comp because the killing was supposedly race-related, but not work-related.

Taneka Talley, an African-American employee at a Dollar Tree store in Fairfield, CA, was murdered in March 2006. Because prosecutors say her killer’s only motive was that she was African-American, Specialty Risk Services is refusing to pay $250,000 in death benefits to Talley’s son.

The insurance company’s lawyers claimed that because Talley’s murder by Tommy Joe Thompson was entirely personal, it shouldn’t be considered an on-the-job injury. Compensation law doesn’t consider an injury to be work-related if motives were personal — for example, if an ex-lover or spouse comes to the workplace and attacks an employee because of a personal grudge. Even though Thompson did not know Talley before he murdered her (he walked into the store and attacked the first African-American he saw), the fact that it was race-related made it “personal.”

But Moira Stagliano, the Talleys’ lawyer, said Taneka’s murder was entirely work-related. She “was at work, doing her job, when she was killed,” said Stagliano. “If she had not been in that store, she would not have been available to the killer, and she would still be alive.”

After word of Specialty’s treatment of the case was publicized, the company decided to abandon its position and has now given Talley’s mother and son the full amount allowed under California compensation law.

A statement issued by Dollar Tree and Specialty claims the companies felt it was “the right thing to do.” Stagliano’s claim: “I think they wanted this to be done with. The media helped settle this claim.”

What’s the next step after someone steals from your company? If you said “paying the crook,” you and this employee are both winners.

Former facilities manager Gary Lean was placed on paid administrative leave from Montana’s Butte Civic Center when the state started investigating theft allegations against him. Nearly two years later and after receiving $118,835 in administrative pay, Lean was formally charged and pleaded guilty to eight counts of felony theft and tampering with public records.

During his three active years of employment with the Center, Lean stole more than $40,000 from taxpayers and non-profit funds associated with the facility.

After he was found guilty, the county sought to have Lean’s administrative pay returned. His response? He counter-sued the county, claiming it owed him an additional $92,000 in compensatory time, sick leave, annual leave and longevity pay.

Peter Meloy, Lean’s lawyer, claims the county doesn’t have “clean hands” and can’t deny the accrued pay — even though Lean openly admitted to stealing.

When North Port, FL, police officers responded to a reported shooting and robbery, it didn’t take long for them to see something wasn’t right. John “Richard” Lynn had been shot in the chest, and told officers two people stole his wallet and money while putting a gun to his chest. According to Lynn’s statement, he knocked the gun away from his head and was immediately shot in his chest.

But Lynn couldn’t explain why he still had his wallet and identification on him when police officers arrived. After being airlifted to a nearby hospital for treatment, detectives discovered the gun Lynn had been shot with — along with his fingerprints on the weapon. He’d shot himself to obtain disability benefits.

Lynn was charged with filing a false police report, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and violating probation.

Yves Julien, employee of the Canada Border Services Agency, has gotten his just deserts after more than five years of legal battles. The dispute began on Dec. 27, 2003, when Julien was called into work. Because the Saturday was normally a day off for Julien, he was paid time and a half for his shift. Toward the end of the 11-hour workday, supervisors asked Julien if he’d be willing to stay on for an extra three hours. He obliged, and collected double-pay for the extra time.

But when Julien asked his supervisors for a $9 reimbursement to cover a meal, they refused. He argued employees were entitled to the meal allowance when they worked three hours beyond their normal shift — which Julian had done. But supervisors said the rule didn’t apply on holidays or during overtime.

Julien filed a grievance on Feb. 14, 2004, and it traveled through the court system until it was turned down on Jan. 23, 2006. He then brought the case to Canada’s Public Services Labour Relations Board, where his lawyer and government officials clashed over whether or not he was entitled to the $9 compensation.

Eventually, Adjudicator Renaud Paquet sided with Julien, ruling that similar companies had issued the same kind of reimbursements to employees, whether they were working normal or overtime hours.

Officials at the Public Service Alliance of Canada said: “To some people it looks like $9, but to others this is how labor relations work.”

Not only will Fox News have to pay its exterminator bill, but it’ll have to take out the checkbook to pay for the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder that some critters caused.

Jane Clark, a 12-year veteran of Fox News, was bitten at work by bed bugs three times between October 2007 and April 2008. She claims that her complaints only brought ridicule and inaction from managers and co-workers.

According to Jane, the infestation was brought in from a co-worker who used her workstation on the weekends.

Jane was terrified of taking the bugs home to her child and now experiences regular nightmares. She also keeps a flashlight close by at night in case she needs to look for bugs at night.

She’s filed a lawsuit for an undisclosed amount and a workers’ comp claim because of the PTSD and inability to work. Fox News is currently paying her medical bills and lost wages.

Jane’s home was never infested and Fox News is bringing in independent bed bug experts to take a look at the problem.

Keith McNiffe, former mayor of Pembroke in western Wales, claimed state disability benefits for two years because he was "too ill to walk."

Apparently, he wasn’t "too ill to run around in a striped shirt," because he officiated at 67 football games during that time.

The 49-year-old stepped down as mayor to fight the accusations. He soon admitted to not notifying the proper authorities of his improved health.

McNiffe collected nearly $18K over the two years, which he has to pay back. But that’s not the only punishment he’s getting. He’s been sentenced to a four-month stint in jail, suspended for 18 months and he has to pay almost $150.

Here’s the kicker (pun intended) — along with all that he has to complete 200 hours of unpaid work and gets to sport a criminal record.