Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Tacoma News Tribune
September 15, 2007 By Michael Gilbert, News Tribune
A federal jury has awarded more than a half-million dollars in lost pay and damages to a McChord Air Force Base reservist who was fired from his civilian job after returning from active-duty service in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The U.S. Department of Labor previously ruled against retired Tech. Sgt. Gerald Delay when his employer, Ace Heating of Seattle, produced documents that said he was a disciplinary problem.
But those documents proved to have been fabricated after Delay’s firing, and one was even dated Feb. 29, 2005, a “leap day” in a nonleap year, Delay’s lawyer said.
A jury this week awarded the Federal Way resident $250,000 for the false statements and $292,000 in lost pay and punitive damages.
The panel agreed Ace Heating had defamed the former C-17 loadmaster and retaliated against him for trying to assert his rights under the Uniformed Service Employment and Reemployment Act. The federal law was designed to protect the jobs of National Guardsmen and reservists called to active duty.
Delay, 40, who has since retired from the military, said he hopes the verdict serves as an example for other service members struggling with deployment-related problems at their civilian workplaces.
“The money is not that important; it’s the principle of what he did to me,” Delay said Friday. “That made me mad. This is going to make it easier for guys behind me. It’s about what’s right and wrong.”
Ace Heating owner Tim Hayes said Friday that Delay was a good employee for three years but that after his return from active-duty, he refused some assignments and some customers complained about his performance.
Hayes said the documents he submitted to the Labor Department were composed after Delay was fired but that they were based on real notes he kept on company computers at the time the complaints came in.
He said he supports federal job protections for returning service members, but in this case, he and his company were just out-lawyered.
“We’re just a mom-and-pop business and we had a mom-and-pop lawyer,” Hayes said. “It was no contest.” He said he hasn’t decided whether he’ll appeal.
Delay’s case is unusual. Employment complaints by returning guardsmen and reservists are first handled by the committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. Officials say most such disputes are resolved once the employer is made aware of the law’s requirements.
So far this year, that’s how all but nine of the 189 such cases brought to the organization have been resolved, said Ken Schwarm with the state office for the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. In those nine other cases, the service member was advised to take his or her case to the Department of Labor, Schwarm said.
But few veterans win a positive outcome when they pursue their employment complaints through the federal government, the Government Accountability Office recently reported.
And advocates for service members contend the administration has closed off access to previously open public records showing that many guardsmen and reservists are reporting problems with getting back to their civilian jobs.
After losing before the Department of Labor, Delay took matters into his own hands and went to court.
He had worked as a heating and air-conditioning technician at Ace for three years before he was called to active duty in February 2003. He flew missions to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere with the 446th Reserve Airlift Wing in support of the two wars until late 2004.
When he returned to work at Ace, he was given only about 30 hours a week, instead of the 40 or more that he typically got before he was activated. He complained to his boss, then went to military lawyers at his wing headquarters. They sent a letter to Ace setting out his rights under the federal law.
The company fired him the day the letter arrived, said Delay’s lawyer, James Beck of Tacoma.
Department of Labor officials later took Delay’s statement, reviewed the records submitted by the company and ruled in the employer’s favor.
Beck said he obtained the company documents under a Freedom of Information Act request. None was signed by Delay, and at trial the employer acknowledged that they’d been prepared and backdated after the airman was fired, Beck said.
The two-day trial was held Tuesday and Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Seattle before Judge John Coughenour.
September 15, 2007 By Michael Gilbert, News Tribune
A federal jury has awarded more than a half-million dollars in lost pay and damages to a McChord Air Force Base reservist who was fired from his civilian job after returning from active-duty service in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The U.S. Department of Labor previously ruled against retired Tech. Sgt. Gerald Delay when his employer, Ace Heating of Seattle, produced documents that said he was a disciplinary problem.
But those documents proved to have been fabricated after Delay’s firing, and one was even dated Feb. 29, 2005, a “leap day” in a nonleap year, Delay’s lawyer said.
A jury this week awarded the Federal Way resident $250,000 for the false statements and $292,000 in lost pay and punitive damages.
The panel agreed Ace Heating had defamed the former C-17 loadmaster and retaliated against him for trying to assert his rights under the Uniformed Service Employment and Reemployment Act. The federal law was designed to protect the jobs of National Guardsmen and reservists called to active duty.
Delay, 40, who has since retired from the military, said he hopes the verdict serves as an example for other service members struggling with deployment-related problems at their civilian workplaces.
“The money is not that important; it’s the principle of what he did to me,” Delay said Friday. “That made me mad. This is going to make it easier for guys behind me. It’s about what’s right and wrong.”
Ace Heating owner Tim Hayes said Friday that Delay was a good employee for three years but that after his return from active-duty, he refused some assignments and some customers complained about his performance.
Hayes said the documents he submitted to the Labor Department were composed after Delay was fired but that they were based on real notes he kept on company computers at the time the complaints came in.
He said he supports federal job protections for returning service members, but in this case, he and his company were just out-lawyered.
“We’re just a mom-and-pop business and we had a mom-and-pop lawyer,” Hayes said. “It was no contest.” He said he hasn’t decided whether he’ll appeal.
Delay’s case is unusual. Employment complaints by returning guardsmen and reservists are first handled by the committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. Officials say most such disputes are resolved once the employer is made aware of the law’s requirements.
So far this year, that’s how all but nine of the 189 such cases brought to the organization have been resolved, said Ken Schwarm with the state office for the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. In those nine other cases, the service member was advised to take his or her case to the Department of Labor, Schwarm said.
But few veterans win a positive outcome when they pursue their employment complaints through the federal government, the Government Accountability Office recently reported.
And advocates for service members contend the administration has closed off access to previously open public records showing that many guardsmen and reservists are reporting problems with getting back to their civilian jobs.
After losing before the Department of Labor, Delay took matters into his own hands and went to court.
He had worked as a heating and air-conditioning technician at Ace for three years before he was called to active duty in February 2003. He flew missions to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere with the 446th Reserve Airlift Wing in support of the two wars until late 2004.
When he returned to work at Ace, he was given only about 30 hours a week, instead of the 40 or more that he typically got before he was activated. He complained to his boss, then went to military lawyers at his wing headquarters. They sent a letter to Ace setting out his rights under the federal law.
The company fired him the day the letter arrived, said Delay’s lawyer, James Beck of Tacoma.
Department of Labor officials later took Delay’s statement, reviewed the records submitted by the company and ruled in the employer’s favor.
Beck said he obtained the company documents under a Freedom of Information Act request. None was signed by Delay, and at trial the employer acknowledged that they’d been prepared and backdated after the airman was fired, Beck said.
The two-day trial was held Tuesday and Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Seattle before Judge John Coughenour.
