Key points
- New York presumes employment is at will, and that presumption is limited by statutes, including the leave, disability and retaliation laws described here.[1][2]
- The federal FMLA makes it unlawful to interfere with FMLA rights and entitles a returning employee to the same or an equivalent position, but it gives no right to a position the employee would not have had without the leave.[3][4]
- Ending a job only because a fixed leave period ran out can raise an accommodation issue: EEOC guidance on the ADA says a "no-fault" leave policy has to be modified for an employee with a disability, absent another effective accommodation or undue hardship.[5]
- New York Labor Law § 215 forbids penalizing an employee for using a legally protected absence, and counts attendance points that could lead to discipline as retaliation.[6]
- Time limits differ by law and forum: 300 days for a federal ADA charge in New York, one year for a complaint to the NYC Commission on Human Rights, and three years for a complaint to the State Division of Human Rights.[7][8][9][10]
Being on medical leave does not make a job untouchable in New York, but it narrows the reasons an employer may lawfully use. New York presumes that employment is at will, and that presumption gives way to statutory prohibitions.[1][2] Several of those prohibitions apply to an employee who is out sick: the federal FMLA, the disability discrimination and accommodation laws at the federal, State and City levels, and New York's sick leave, attendance-point and workers' compensation retaliation rules.[3][11][12][13][14][6][15]
Which laws can apply to a firing during medical leave?
| Law | Layer | What it protects | Who is covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) | Federal | Restoration to the same or an equivalent position; no interference with FMLA rights[3] | Employers with 50 or more employees; employees with 12 months and 1,250 hours of service[16] |
| Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) | Federal | No discharge on the basis of disability; reasonable accommodation, which can include leave[11][17] | Employers with 15 or more employees[18] |
| New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) | State | No discharge because of disability; reasonable accommodation of known disabilities[19][12] | All employers within the state[20] |
| New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) | City | No discrimination because of actual or perceived disability; reasonable accommodation[21][13] | Generally employers with four or more persons[22] |
| Labor Law § 196-b (State sick leave) | State | No discharge or penalty for requesting or using sick leave[14] | Leave amounts vary by employer size[23] |
| Labor Law § 215 | State | No penalty, including attendance points, for using a legally protected absence[6] | Does not apply to employees of the State or its municipal subdivisions[24] |
| Workers' Compensation Law § 120 | State | No discharge for claiming workers' compensation or other benefits under that law[15] | Also applies to Paid Family Leave[25] |
| NYC protected time off (Earned Safe and Sick Time) | City | The City's notice of rights says it is illegal to punish or fire employees for requesting or using leave[26] | Hours vary by employer size[26] |
More than one of these can apply to the same termination. The leave entitlements themselves are compared in FMLA, Paid Family Leave and sick leave in New York.
If the leave was FMLA leave
Under federal law, an employee returning from FMLA leave is entitled to be restored to the same position or to an equivalent position with equivalent benefits, pay and other terms.[3] It is unlawful for an employer to interfere with, restrain or deny the exercise of FMLA rights, or to discharge a person for opposing a practice the FMLA makes unlawful.[27]
Three limits in the federal statute matter to a termination during leave:
- Coverage. The FMLA applies only to employers with 50 or more employees, and an employee is eligible after at least 12 months and 1,250 hours of service, with an exclusion where the employer has fewer than 50 employees within 75 miles of the worksite.[16]
- Length. The entitlement is a total of 12 workweeks in a 12-month period.[28]
- No greater rights than without the leave. The FMLA's reinstatement section says nothing in it entitles a restored employee to any right, benefit or position other than one the employee would have been entitled to had the leave not been taken.[4]
Where an employee claims to have been punished for taking FMLA leave, the Second Circuit applies a "motivating factor" causation standard to that claim.[29] An FMLA action has to be brought within 2 years of the last event constituting the violation, or 3 years for a willful violation.[30]
If the leave ran out, or there was no FMLA leave to begin with
Some workers are outside the federal leave statute's coverage, and some absences outlast it. The disability laws apply on their own terms.
Federal. The Department of Labor's FMLA regulation says nothing in the FMLA modifies any federal or State law prohibiting disability discrimination.[31] EEOC guidance on the ADA treats unpaid leave as a form of reasonable accommodation when a disability makes it necessary.[17] The same guidance says an employer has to modify a "no-fault" leave policy, under which employees are automatically terminated after a set period, for an employee with a disability who needs additional unpaid leave, unless another effective accommodation exists or the additional leave would cause undue hardship.[5]
New York State and City. In Phillips v. City of New York, the First Department reinstated the NYSHRL and NYCHRL claims of an employee who had been refused additional unpaid medical leave because it was granted only to permanent civil service employees, holding that both laws require an employer to consider a requested accommodation through an individualized, interactive process.[32][33] The Court of Appeals later held in Jacobsen that an employer that did not engage in a good-faith interactive process about a requested accommodation generally cannot obtain summary judgment under either law, while also holding that under the State law the employee still has to prove a reasonable accommodation existed.[34][35]
New York City. Failing to engage in a cooperative dialogue within a reasonable time with a person who has requested an accommodation is itself an unlawful discriminatory practice under the City law.[36] A determination that no reasonable accommodation would enable the person to do the job may be made only after the parties have engaged, or the employer has attempted to engage, in that dialogue.[37]
For how long an absence the accommodation laws can cover, see medical leave as a reasonable accommodation.
If you could not give a return date
The three layers treat this situation differently.
- Federal. The Second Circuit has said the ADA's accommodation duty does not require an employer to hold an injured employee's position open indefinitely.[17] EEOC guidance says an employer cannot claim undue hardship solely because the employee can give only an approximate date of return.[38]
- New York State. In Romanello v. Intesa Sanpaolo, S.p.A., the Court of Appeals said indefinite leave is not considered a reasonable accommodation under the State law; an employee who told his employer that his return date was "indeterminate" did not state a State-law claim.[39]
- New York City. The same decision said that under the City law it is the employer's burden to prove undue hardship and that no accommodation is categorically excluded, and it reinstated the City-law claim.[39][40] The NYC Commission on Human Rights says a return date may be approximate and may need to change.[41]
If the stated reason was performance, restructuring or misconduct
Being on leave does not suspend the at-will presumption described above.[1][2] Each claim then has its own standard for connecting the termination to the leave or the medical condition.
| Claim | Causation standard in the cited source |
|---|---|
| Federal ADA discrimination | In the Second Circuit, disability has to be the but-for cause of the adverse action[42] |
| Federal FMLA retaliation for taking leave | In the Second Circuit, a "motivating factor" standard[29] |
| NYCHRL discrimination | Discrimination was one of the motivating factors, even if not the only one[43] |
| NYCHRL retaliation | Summary judgment for the employer is appropriate only if the plaintiff cannot show retaliation played any part in the decision[44] |
| Workers' Compensation Law § 120 | The statute applies where the employee claimed benefits "and no other valid reason is shown to exist" for the employer's action[15] |
Under both the State and City laws, the Court of Appeals has said the employee has to demonstrate that the employer fired the employee based on the disability and not for some permissible reason.[45] The State regulation adds that the Human Rights Law does not require accommodation of behaviors that fail workplace standards consistently applied to all similarly situated employees, though reasonable and necessary deviations from time and attendance policy are to be allowed as accommodations.[46]
How timing and other evidence are weighed is covered in proving retaliation: timing and causation and how discrimination is proved.
Sick days, attendance points and workers' compensation
State sick leave. Labor Law § 196-b says no employer may discharge, threaten, penalize or otherwise discriminate or retaliate against an employee for requesting or using sick leave.[14]
Attendance points. Labor Law § 215 prohibits penalizing an employee "because such employee has used any legally protected absence pursuant to federal, local, or state law," and its definition of retaliation includes assessing any demerit, occurrence or other point, or a deduction from an allotted bank of time, that subjects or could subject the employee to disciplinary action.[6] An employee may sue under § 215 within two years, and the court may order reinstatement or front pay, lost compensation, and liquidated damages of not more than $20,000.[47] Section 215 does not apply to employees of the State or of its municipal subdivisions.[24]
New York City. The Department of Consumer and Worker Protection's notice of employee rights states that it is illegal to punish or fire employees for requesting or using leave under the City's protected time off law.[26] Since Local Law 22 of 2024, a person alleging a violation of that law may sue in court, within 2 years of the date the person knew or should have known of the violation.[48]
Workers' compensation and disability benefits. Workers' Compensation Law § 120 makes it unlawful to discharge or otherwise discriminate against an employee because the employee claimed or attempted to claim compensation or other benefits under that law.[15] New York's statutory disability benefit pays part of the wage during an off-the-job illness, but the reinstatement section of that part of the Workers' Compensation Law, § 203-b, is headed "Reinstatement following family leave."[49][50] An employee returning from Paid Family Leave is entitled to the same or a comparable position, but Paid Family Leave does not cover the worker's own illness.[25][51]
See retaliation for taking leave or filing workers' comp and Labor Law § 215 for those statutes in detail.
Retaliation for asking for leave as an accommodation
Under the State law it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to retaliate against a person because the person requested a reasonable accommodation; that wording was added to Executive Law § 296(7) by a law signed December 5, 2025.[52][53] The City law protects the same activity, and City-law retaliation need not be an ultimate action such as a firing so long as it is reasonably likely to deter a person from protected activity.[54] The federal ADA prohibits retaliation for opposing ADA violations and separately prohibits interference with the exercise of ADA rights.[55]
How long is there to act?
| Claim | Where | Time limit |
|---|---|---|
| FMLA (federal) | Court | 2 years; 3 years for a willful violation[30] |
| ADA (federal) | EEOC charge | 300 days in New York[7][8] |
| NYSHRL (State) | Division of Human Rights | Three years, for practices on or after February 15, 2024[10][56] |
| NYSHRL (State) | Court | Three years[57] |
| NYCHRL (City) | NYC Commission on Human Rights | One year[9] |
| NYCHRL (City) | Court | Three years[58] |
| Labor Law § 215 (State) | Court | Two years[47] |
| Workers' Compensation Law § 120 (State) | Workers' Compensation Board | Two years[15] |
| NYC protected time off (City) | Court | 2 years from when the person knew or should have known of the violation[48] |
Claims against public employers can differ. For example, the Court of Appeals has held that a one-year period applies to a State Human Rights Law damages claim against a school district, and County Law § 52 requires a notice of claim for damages claims against a county.[59][60] See public employees and notice of claim. The full table, with when each clock starts, is in New York employment claim deadlines, and the forums are compared in EEOC, Division of Human Rights, NYC Commission or court.
Practical points after a termination during leave
These are practical suggestions, not legal rules. It helps to keep, in one place, the leave paperwork you were given, medical notes you submitted, messages about your return date, any written accommodation request and the response to it, attendance records, and the termination letter. Write down the dates: when leave began, when each request was made, and when the decision was communicated. Dates matter because each time limit is measured from a particular event; an FMLA action, for example, is measured from the last event constituting the violation.[30] Keep your own copies of documents you were given or sent; do not take employer files you were not given access to.
Related guides: at-will employment in New York, unemployment benefits after being fired and health insurance and final pay after termination.
Common questions
Is it illegal to fire someone who is on medical leave in New York?
Not automatically. New York presumes employment is at will, limited by statute.[1][2] What matters is the reason. Federal law bars interfering with FMLA rights, and federal, State and City law bar discharge because of a disability.[3][11][19][21] The FMLA also says a restored employee has no right to a position the employee would not have had if the leave had not been taken.[4]
My FMLA ran out and I was fired the next day. Is that allowed?
The FMLA's 12 workweeks are not the only source of leave.[28] The Department of Labor's regulation says the FMLA does not modify disability discrimination law.[31] EEOC guidance on the ADA says an employer has to modify a policy that automatically terminates employees after a set period of leave when an employee with a disability needs more unpaid leave, unless another effective accommodation exists or the added leave is an undue hardship.[5]
Can I be fired because I cannot say when I will return?
The answer differs by layer. The New York Court of Appeals has said indefinite leave is not a reasonable accommodation under the New York State Human Rights Law.[39] Under the New York City Human Rights Law, no accommodation is categorically excluded, and the employer has the burden of proving undue hardship.[39][61] Under the federal ADA, the Second Circuit has said an employer need not hold a position open indefinitely.[17]
Can my employer give me attendance points for sick days and then fire me for the points?
New York Labor Law § 215 defines retaliation to include assessing any demerit, occurrence or other point that subjects or could subject an employee to disciplinary action because the employee used a legally protected absence under federal, local or state law.[6] The federal FMLA regulation separately says FMLA leave cannot be counted under no-fault attendance policies.[3]
I was fired after filing a workers' compensation claim. What law covers that?
New York Workers' Compensation Law § 120 makes it unlawful to discharge or otherwise discriminate against an employee because the employee claimed or attempted to claim compensation or other benefits under that law.[15] A complaint is filed with the Workers' Compensation Board within two years, and the Board may order reinstatement and lost compensation.[15] The section applies where no other valid reason is shown for the employer's action.[15]
How long do I have to act after being fired on leave?
It depends on the claim. An FMLA suit has a two-year limit, three for a willful violation.[30] A federal ADA charge in New York has a 300-day limit.[7][8] A complaint to the State Division of Human Rights has a three-year limit, a complaint to the NYC Commission on Human Rights one year, and a court action under the State or City Human Rights Law three years.[10][9][57][58]
Sources
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293, 300-301 (1983) — CourtListener, Free Law Project
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293, 305 (1983) — CourtListener, Free Law Project
- 29 U.S.C. §§ 2614(a)(1), 2615(a); 29 C.F.R. § 825.220(c) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 29 U.S.C. § 2614(a)(3) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- EEOC, Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA, No. 915.002 (Oct. 17, 2002), "Leave" — U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- N.Y. Lab. Law § 215(1)(a)(viii) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a) (incorporating 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- EEOC, New York District Office, "Timeliness" (read 5 Oct 2026) — U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-109(e). — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- N.Y. Exec. Law § 297(5) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 296(3)(a), 292(21-e) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(15)(a) — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- N.Y. Lab. Law § 196-b(7) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 120 — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- 29 U.S.C. § 2611(2)(A)–(B), (4)(A)(i) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- EEOC Enforcement Guidance No. 915.002, "Leave"; Graves v. Finch Pruyn & Co., 457 F.3d 181, 185–86 (2d Cir. 2006) — U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5)(A) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(1)(a) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Exec. Law § 292(5) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(1)(a). — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-102 (definition of "Employer") — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- N.Y. Lab. Law § 196-b(1), (3) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Lab. Law § 215(1)(c), (3) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law §§ 203-a(1), 203-b — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- NYC DCWP, Notice of Employee Rights: Protected Time Off (02/22/2026); N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 20-911 et seq. — City of New York
- 29 U.S.C. § 2615(a)(1)–(2) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 29 U.S.C. §§ 2612(a)(1), 2611(11) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- Woods v. START Treatment & Recovery Centers, Inc., 864 F.3d 158, 166 (2d Cir. 2017) — CourtListener, Free Law Project
- 29 U.S.C. § 2617(a)(2), (c)(1)-(2) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 29 C.F.R. § 825.702(a); Phillips v. City of New York, 66 A.D.3d 170, 176 (1st Dep't 2009); CCHR Disability Guidance (Dec. 2025) pp. 55–56 — Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
- Phillips v. City of New York, 66 A.D.3d 170, 176 (1st Dep't 2009) — static.case.law
- Phillips v. City of New York, 66 A.D.3d 170, 172–73, 190 (1st Dep't 2009) — static.case.law
- Jacobsen v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 22 N.Y.3d 824, 827, 837–38 (2014) — static.case.law
- Jacobsen v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 22 N.Y.3d 824, 838 (2014) — static.case.law
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(28)(a) — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(28)(d), (e), (f) — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- EEOC, Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA, No. 915.002 (Oct. 17, 2002), "Undue Hardship Issues" — U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Romanello v. Intesa Sanpaolo, S.p.A., 22 N.Y.3d 881, 884–85 (2013) — static.case.law
- Romanello v. Intesa Sanpaolo, S.p.A., 22 N.Y.3d 881, 883–85 (2013) — static.case.law
- CCHR Disability Guidance (Dec. 2025) pp. 55–56, 58 — City of New York
- Natofsky v. City of New York, 921 F.3d 337, 348–49 (2d Cir. 2019) — static.case.law
- Melman v. Montefiore Med. Ctr., 98 A.D.3d 107, 127 (1st Dep't 2012); Williams, 61 A.D.3d at 78 n.27. — static.case.law
- Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux N. Am., Inc., 715 F.3d 102, 116 (2d Cir. 2013) — static.case.law
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(15)(b); Jacobsen v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 22 N.Y.3d 824, 845 (2014) — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- 9 NYCRR § 466.11(g)(1) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- N.Y. Lab. Law § 215(2)(a) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y.C. Local Law No. 22 (2024), § 1 (amending N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 20-924(f)), § 2 — intro.nyc
- N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law §§ 204(2)(b), 205(1)(a); NYS Workers' Compensation Board, "Disability Benefits" employee page — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 203-b — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 201(9)(A), (15) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(7) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- L. 2025, ch. 600, §§ 2–4 (amending N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(7)) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(7) — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- 42 U.S.C. § 12203(a)–(b) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- L. 2023, ch. 656, §§ 1–2 — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293, 307 (1983); N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214(2) — CourtListener, Free Law Project
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-502(d). — New York City Commission on Human Rights
- N.Y. Educ. Law § 3813(2-b); Matter of Amorosi v. South Colonie Ind. Cent. School Dist., 9 N.Y.3d 367, 369 (2007) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y. County Law § 52(1); Margerum v. City of Buffalo, 24 N.Y.3d 721, 732-733 (2015) (Read, J., concurring) (describing Mills v. County of Monroe, 59 N.Y.2d 307, 309 (1983)) — New York State Senate, Laws of New York
- N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-102 (definition of "Reasonable accommodation") — New York City Commission on Human Rights