Petty V. Metropolitan Gov't of Nashville & Davidson County

Assignment #3 - Petty v. Metropolitan Gov't of Nashville & Davidson County

Nancy Wilcox

May 19, 2013

Business Employment Law - HRM 510

Dr. Zelphia A. Brown

Strayer University

Assignment #3 - Petty v. Metropolitan Gov't of Nashville & Davidson County

What were the legal issues in this case? The legal issue in this case was concerning the former Metro police officer, Petty. Who left the department for active duty in the United States Armed Forces. When Petty returned from active duty he returned to the Metro police department and requested for reinstatement to work. However, Petty was not reinstated in a timely manner nor was he placed within his original duties, position or a similar position based on the information he completed on the return-to-work form. Metro claims that on this form Petty did not disclose all the facts that lead up to his discharge status on this form correctly and honestly.

The return-to-work process is required of all officers when they come to work after being out for any extended period of time. Metro claimed that one of the questions on the questionnaire asked: “During your absence were you arrested, charged, detained, or a suspect in any criminal action or military disciplinary action for any reason, or do you have any action pending? If yes, explain in detail.” Petty answered that question truthfully and honestly by saying “yes” he also gave a description of the account. He also gave Metro written consent to view his records even that of his discharge paperwork, DD-214, which states that Petty was discharged with “honorably”. Therefore under that reason alone Metro returned Petty to work and assigned him to desk duty. What Metro failed to realize and honor that under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), employers are cannot discriminate against any person who has actively served in the uniformed military services. This act also guarantees the veteran the right to reemployment and...