Employer’s treatment of an employee’s military leave lands in court

The federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) protects military members, including reservists, from employment discrimination due to their military duties. One employer learned this the hard way.

Employee's military service

Matthew was a police officer as well as a member of the Army Reserves. During his time with the police department, he participated in various military deployments with the U.S. Army, including to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kuwait.

Early in his police career, his supervisor told him that his "active membership in [the] United States Army Reserve was difficult to manage on the schedule and the coverage for his service was too expensive." His boss transferred him to a position with less opportunity for pay. After he complained, Matthew was transferred to a different squad to isolate and punish him.

Later, Matthew applied for a position in the department's Aviation Unit. The department previously assigned qualified police officers on probation to the Aviation Unit, but told Matthew he was unqualified because he was on probation and because his military service would create too much of a hardship for that unit's schedule.

Employer negative behavior continues

In 2004, Matthew started on the path to being promoted to detective. In 2005, he was told his military service, "…would be a tremendous burden," despite being the more senior applicant. In 2007, he applied for a K-9 sergeant position. The interviewer asked whether Matthew was still in the Army Reserves and when his next deployment would be. He wasn't selected.

In 2013, Matthew was the only applicant for a sergeant position with all the qualifications. Again, the interviewer asked about his military service and likelihood of future mobilizations. The interviewer told him that the military service was too much of an interference for the position, and once again he wasn't selected.

Employee sues and wins

Matthew eventually sued, claiming that the department engaged in illegal discrimination and retaliation under the USERRA. The employer asked that the case be dismissed.

Due to the statute of limitations, the court looked only at the incidents from 2004, but there was enough evidence that the employer violated the law.

Thus, the court agreed with Matthew that his military service could be seen as a motivating factor for the employer's decisions, allowing the case to proceed.

Bjelobrk v. Suffolk County, Eastern District New York, No. 23-CV-08811, March 5, 2025.