This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: prings Partnership, Ltd., 731 F. Supp. 1054
(S.D. Fla. 1990), the district court found that the employer violated 28 U.S.C. § 1875 by
intimidating and coercing an existing employee to work additional hours in retaliation for
her federal jury service. In that case, the court found that the employer required [**12]
the juror to work more nights to make up for missing days due to jury service, threatened
her seniority for missing a management meeting, and declined to pay the difference
between her jury pay and her regular salary. Id. At 1055-56. Finding that the employer's
actions "smacked' of retaliation, the court ordered that Madonia's work schedule be
reinstated, the employer pay the difference between jury pay and her salary, fined the
employer $ 250.00, and enjoined any deprivation of seniority or managerial benefits. Id.
The public policy of Florida expressed by the legislature favors appellant's position.
Section 440.015, Florida Statutes (1997), entitled "Legislative Intent," provides in
pertinent part that: "The worker's compensation system in Florida is based on a mutual
renunciation of common-law rights and defenses by employers and employees alike."
Because of the renunciation of rights against the employer, "it is the intent of the
Legislature to ensure the prompt delivery of benefits to the injured worker." § 440.015,
Fla. Stat. (1997). Thus, it appears that the legislature intends [**13] to protect the
employee's access to [*98] worker's compensation remedy and not allow an employer's
intimidation or coercion to discourage filing valid claims.
Walgreen argues that the third district has addressed the issue at bar in Montes de Oca v.
Orkin Exterminating Co., 692 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 699 So. 2d 1374
(Fla. 1997). Specifically, Walgreen argues that the third district declined the opportunity
to extend the application of section 440.205 beyond retaliatory discharge. We think
Montes de Oca is distinguishable from this case and Walgreen's reliance on its holding is
In Montes de Oca, the plaintiff was injured in the course of his employment as a crew
chief for Orkin. Id. at 258. He then reached maximum medical improvement, w...
View Full Document
- Spring '08