MARIA G. ESPINDOLA, ) No. 35262-5-III
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) PUBLISHED OPINION
)
APPLE KING, a limited liability company, )
)
Respondent. )
PENNELL, A.C.J. — Under the state and federal family medical leave acts, an
employee who is incapacitated due to a serious medical condition, such as pregnancy,
has the right to take protected leave from work. This right persists even when an episode
of incapacitation is unforeseeable. Should an employee invoke protected leave, including
unforeseeable protected leave, an employer cannot use the employee’s actions as a
negative factor in a subsequent employment decision. Doing so would constitute
retaliation in violation of state and federal law.
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 35262-5-III
Espindola v. Apple King
While employed with Apple King, Maria Espindola discovered she was pregnant.
Over the course of her pregnancy, Ms. Espindola experienced medical complications
that caused her to miss work. Apple King was aware of Ms. Espindola’s pregnancy and
knew she had experienced some health problems. Nevertheless, Apple King used some
of Ms. Espindola’s work absences as negative factors in its ultimate decision to terminate
employment. According to Apple King, Ms. Espindola was properly penalized because
she failed to comply with the company’s attendance policy, requiring at least one day’s
advance notice of all medical absences not involving hospitalization.
Apple King’s reliance on its attendance policy is unavailing. Because Apple
King’s policy did not account for an employee’s right to take unforeseeable protected
leave, Ms. Espindola’s failure to comply with the policy was not a legitimate basis for an