Was Firing Injured Maintenance Worker for ‘Theft’ a Snow-Job?

What Do You Think?

In Illinois, an employee bringing a retaliatory discharge claim has to prove he was fired because he exercised a right under the Workers’ Compensation Act. While the employer doesn’t have to immediately show it had a valid reason for firing the employee, one case shows how a company’s failure to follow its internal policies when responding to employee misconduct can give a retaliation lawsuit legs.

The employee in that case worked for a railroad maintenance company. He injured himself during a snow removal job on Feb. 2, 2022, after falling off the footrail of his company truck. The next day, he told one of his supervisors about the incident. He saw a doctor on February 15 and told the supervisor about the visit the next day. He never told anyone he was going to file a workers’ compensation claim and did not actually file one until after he was fired.

Around February 16, the company’s chief operation officer fired him.  He contended that the employee used his credit card to buy a gift card. The COO later said he fired him because of the alleged theft and "not having the ability to leave his, you know, to perform his duty.” The company never investigated the theft or documented it on a personnel action form, as its policies required.

The employee sued for retaliatory dischrage.

An employee may recover damages for retaliatory discharge if he proves:

1. He exercised a right granted by the Workers' Compensation Act; and
2. He was fired because he filed a claim under the Workers' Compensation Act. 

Illinois courts, however, have found that actually filing a workers’ compensation claim isn’t a required element. It’s sufficient if the employee can show he was fired in anticipation of his filing a claim

Did the employee establish a retaliatory discharge action?

A. Yes. The company’s behavior was suspicious because it didn’t investigate or document the theft.

B. No. He didn’t show that the person involved in firing him knew about his injury.

If you selected B, you agreed with the court in Coca v. Prewett Enterprises, Inc., No. 23-cv-1433 (C.D. Ill. 11/18/25).

Find caselaw from Illinois and the rest of the U.S. on Simply Research.

The employee met the first element of his claim by showing that he exercised a WCA right–he sought medical attention for his injuries. His case fell apart, however, because he didn’t show that he was fired because he exercised that right. It was true that the company’s actions in response to the supposed theft conflicted with its own policies. But the employee still needed to show that someone who knew about his injuries was involved in his termination. For example, he never claimed that the supervisor he talked to about the accident conveyed that information to the COO who fired him. 

“Plaintiff does not provide any evidence that Defendant had the necessary knowledge and, therefore, motive for Plaintiff's discharge to be ’causally related to his filing a claim under the Workers' Compensation Act,’” the court said.

The court ruled for the employer, preventing the case from going to trial.

Share This Article: