Lost a Job Because of Depression

Question about feasibility of lawsuit in WASHINGTON STATE...

I fell ill with depression in Oct 06 and was hospitalized. I was unable to work. My employer learned of my hospitalization and diagnosis of depression from an unknown third party. I was off work for 3 months. On 8.5 weeks into my hospitalization, my employer called me to inform me that they had decided, in a committee meeting, to not reappoint me after my contract was up (I have a yearly contract that is renewed in July of every year as part of my job). At 12 weeks to the day (I think to comply with FMLA), I was sent a letter stating the same. The reasons given were: I was absent from work and therefor my performance could not be evaluated; the employer had no sense of my ability to do my job; and had no sense of when I would return. Based on these things, they declined to reappoint me when my contract expired in June of 07.

There was no mention of my illness in the letter. In talking to my employer, I was told that the committee was debating whether or not I could do my job when I returned, given the severity of my depression, and ruled based on this.

I had an exemplary record of performance with no issues.

1) Since it was my illness that led to my absence and it was my illness that formed the subject of discussion and reason for the ruling by the committee that I essentially be terminated, could this be discrimination (wrongful termination)?

2) Washington State itself offers protection in addition to the ADA statute. My employer was a state institution and I was designated as a Washington State employee. Does this change things?

3) The institution usually settles these things out of court. What are the odds that a lawyer would take this case on a contingency basis?

Thank you for all of your help.

were you actually an employee or were you an independent contractor? Your mention of your contract makes it sound like it could be either and what was required would be different in each situation.

Quote:

---

Quoting goldleader

---

Question about feasibility of lawsuit in WASHINGTON STATE...

I fell ill with depression in Oct 06 and was hospitalized. I was unable to work. My employer learned of my hospitalization and diagnosis of depression from an unknown third party. I was off work for 3 months. On 8.5 weeks into my hospitalization, my employer called me to inform me that they had decided, in a committee meeting, to not reappoint me after my contract was up (I have a yearly contract that is renewed in July of every year as part of my job). At 12 weeks to the day (I think to comply with FMLA), I was sent a letter stating the same. The reasons given were: I was absent from work and therefor my performance could not be evaluated; the employer had no sense of my ability to do my job; and had no sense of when I would return. Based on these things, they declined to reappoint me when my contract expired in June of 07.

There was no mention of my illness in the letter. In talking to my employer, I was told that the committee was debating whether or not I could do my job when I returned, given the severity of my depression, and ruled based on this.

I had an exemplary record of performance with no issues.

1) Since it was my illness that led to my absence and it was my illness that formed the subject of discussion and reason for the ruling by the committee that I essentially be terminated, could this be discrimination (wrongful termination)?

2) Washington State itself offers protection in addition to the ADA statute. My employer was a state institution and I was designated as a Washington State employee. Does this change things?

3) The institution usually settles these things out of court. What are the odds that a lawyer would take this case on a contingency basis?

Thank you for all of your help.

---

They cannot be required to conform to ADA requirements unless they know that you have an ADA documented illness. Your post does not mention that you ever had a conversation with your employer in regards to your illness.

Additionally, the maximum that your employer is required to hold your job, no matter what the medical condition, is 12 weeks. If you were out for three months, you received all the time entitled to you by law and you can LEGALLY be terminated after that.

jk: I was an employee

moburkes: in fact, I did talk to my supervisor one month before I became ill. I told that person I was depressed (noted also my symptoms, trouble sleeping, anxiety, depressed mood, trouble concentrating) and listed some stressors in my personal life. I was told to keep on, in a sympathetic way, and to let my employer know if I needed anything. There was no intervention.

I think I should note that my supervisor was a psychiatrist, who had much expertise in mood disorders.

Quote:

---

Quoting goldleader

---

jk: I was an employee

moburkes: in fact, I did talk to my supervisor one month before I became ill. I told that person I was depressed (noted also my symptoms, trouble sleeping, anxiety, depressed mood, trouble concentrating) and listed some stressors in my personal life. I was told to keep on, in a sympathetic way, and to let my employer know if I needed anything. There was no intervention.

I think I should note that my supervisor was a psychiatrist, who had much expertise in mood disorders.

---

You originally said that your employer learned of your illness through a 3rd party.

moburkes: My employer learned of my hospitalization due to depression from a third party. When I called to ask for a leave a absence, they already knew about my situation.

Quote:

---

Quoting goldleader

---

moburkes: My employer learned of my hospitalization due to depression from a third party. When I called to ask for a leave a absence, they already knew about my situation.

---

I'm absolutely confused.

You just wrote this:

Quote:

---

in fact, I did talk to my supervisor one month before I became ill. I told that person I was depressed (noted also my symptoms, trouble sleeping, anxiety, depressed mood, trouble concentrating) and listed some stressors in my personal life. I was told to keep on, in a sympathetic way, and to let my employer know if I needed anything. There was no intervention.

---

I'll bow out now, cause I'm obviously not understanding.

moburkes: my employer learned of the hospitalization from a third party. is that clear? not from me. i had a conversation before the hospitalization about my diagnosis. is that also clear?

Quote:

---

Quoting goldleader

---

moburkes: my employer learned of the hospitalization from a third party. is that clear? not from me. i had a conversation before the hospitalization about my diagnosis. is that also clear?

---

No need to get nasty. Mo simply read what you wrote. Whether she was confused for her misreading or confused for how you wrote things, those that respond aren;t getting paid for this so it does not help to be nasty in response.

Quote:

---

I think I should note that my supervisor was a psychiatrist, who had much expertise in mood disorders.

---

so you are expecting your boss to have diagnosed you, correct? How else was your employer supposed to know what you were hospitalized for? If you did not release the records to them or you did not tell them, they could only guess. As to the unkown 3rd party telling them; how are they suppossed to know the accuracy of the report, let alone what they were actually told?

Your statement of "I am depressed" does not mean there was a diagnosis of clinical depression. I often get depressed when I read questions from folks that expect the world from the psychics here and don;t get what they want but that is not clinical depression.