My employer told me FMLA applies and I filed the correct paperwork in a timely manner. Prior to leaving on maternity leave, I was in one type of position, and was told I would be in a different but equal position when I returned. However, there was already someone who had the position I would be returning to, but my boss told me they needed two people in this position. He told me he did not want me to worry about my job while I was on maternity leave. A week before I was to return to work, I called my boss to check in. He told me the position had been eliminated due to lack of business. He states they would have made the same decision (i.e., lay me off instead of the other person in the same position) whether or not I was on maternity leave. I was the only one in the company who was laid off. I was not given any severance, and I believe I am the only person in the company who was not given severance who was not fired for cause. Do I have a case? It seems this position they created for me when I returned from maternity leave was never actually created - eliminated before I could begin.

Thanks for any help!

If the action would have happened regardless of your leave, then your employer was not obligated to change their decision because you took leave. Taking FMLA does not provide you any additional protection you would not have had otherwise.

Severance is not required by law so unless there was an actual established policy to pay this and you were not paid it because of your leave, it is perfectly legal.

If the action would have happened regardless of your leave, then your employer was not obligated to change their decision because you took leave. Taking FMLA does not provide you any additional protection you would not have had otherwise.

Severance is not required by law so unless there was an actual established policy to pay this and you were not paid it because of your leave, it is perfectly legal.

It seems to me that the way an employer can get around following the law is to say "it would have happened anyway"... What's to stop anyone and everyone from making something like that up?!

Because if it ever is challenged, the employer would have to be able to show that it would have happened anyway. If they could show for example, that business did take a downturn or there was less work to be done and that you would have been the one eliminated because you had the least seniority or experience, then it isn't because you took leave that you were being let go and it isn't against the law.

Look at it this way, is it fair to your coworker to be let go when she otherwise would not be simply because you took leave and she did not? The law says you can not be fired for taking leave, it doesn't say you get extra job protection for taking leave.