Petty vs Metropolitan Gov's of Nashville and Davidson County

Petty v. Metropolitan Gov’t of Nashville & Davidson County

HRM 510 – Business Employment Law

What were the legal issues in this case?

The legal issue is whether or not the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) were violated in Mr. Petty’s case. Mr. Petty was seeking his employment position back with the Metro Police Department after returning from a deployment on active duty in the United States Army.

Explain how the reemployment provisions of the USERRA were violated in this case.

In accordance with USERRA, the employee is responsible to notify their employer about taking leave for their military service commitments. The employee does not have to wait for permission from his employer before he can begin his leave. In order for an employee to be reinstated, the employee is required to request his position upon their return from their military commitment. The employer is responsible for ensuring the reinstated is within a specific amount of time set established in the USERRA for the number days/months which the employee was on active duty with the Army National Guard.

The only exceptions to the USERRA is if the business has closed, additional training would have needed to be completed due to the position qualification, or additional accommodations would cause “undue hardship” on the business and if Mr. Petty was hired as a temporary, seasonal, or contractual basis and the job had been accomplished. Companies can be held liable if they delay the reinstatement of an employee who returns from their military service commitment which in this Mr. Petty’s case, he was released from the military and received an “honorable discharge”. Mr. Petty appears to have met all the provisions of the USERRA.

Explain why the court concludes that Petty has a claim for discrimination under USERRA.

Mr. Petty was reinstated back to the Police Department but was not given his position back as a patrol sergeant, but was...