Seventh Circuit Ruling Means Retailers May Need to Provide Paid Leave Under USERRA
Time 2 Minute Read

In a February 3, 2021 decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit determined that the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (“USERRA”) may require employers to provide employees with short-term paid military leave. Specifically, if an employer provides short-term paid leave for other comparable purposes such as sick time, jury duty, or bereavement, then the employer may need to do the same for military leave.

The case, White v. United Airlines, was brought as a class action by a United Airlines pilot who was on reserve duty for the US Air Force.  He had taken multiple short-term leaves for his military service during his employment and argued that those leaves should have been paid. The company’s policy provided paid leave for jury duty and paid sick leave, but not military leave. A three judge panel of the Seventh Circuit determined that the “rights and benefits” of employment that USERRA protects include paid leave. It remanded to the district court to determine whether the types of paid leave that United provided to its employees are comparable to military leave, considering (i) the duration of the leave; (ii) the purpose of the leave; and (iii) the ability of the employee to choose when to take leave.

All employers, and particularly those in the retail industry, should be mindful of the holding in White, the further analysis that will emerge from the district court, and the evolving law on this topic.  District courts across the country have rendered mixed decisions regarding whether USERRA requires employers to provide paid leave, and similar class actions are pending in multiple states. This litigation activity could well result in split decisions among the courts of appeals. Retailers should take action now by partnering with counsel to determine the potential for liability under their current policy and to make necessary revisions to mitigate liability in the future.

  • Associate

    Katherine provides thoughtful but aggressive representation to businesses and their executives to solve their most complicated legal problems. She has extensive experience managing high-stakes commercial and trade secrets ...

  • Partner

    Bob is a litigator who represents businesses in resolving their complex labor, employment, trade secret, non-compete and related commercial disputes. He is recognized by Chambers USA as a leader in Labor & Employment, and as a Labor ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

Google recently resolved two cases—one by verdict and one by settlement—involving allegations regarding the control that Google promised to give users over Google’s use of their data. 

Time 3 Minute Read

On September 2, 2025, two class actions were filed in federal district court alleging that defendants digital advertising platforms Xandr, Inc. and Index Exchange, Inc. violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act by unlawfully intercepting wire communications for the purpose of violating the Department of Justice’s Bulk Data Transfer Rule.

Time 5 Minute Read

On February 27, 2027, in Chabolla v. ClassPass Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a split 2-1 decision, held that website users were not bound by the terms of a “sign-in wrap” agreement.

Time 2 Minute Read

On February 20, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted a motion for class certification in a class action alleging that WebMD violated the federal Video Privacy Protection Act by disclosing certain user data to Facebook without the users’ consent. 

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page