Arizona Paid Sick Leave

As of July 2022, it has been five years since the voter-approved Fair Wages and Healthy Families Act went into effect, implementing Arizona paid sick leave laws. As expected, the law has significantly altered the employer/employee relationship and given employers another employment regulation to recall.  

We’re frequently asked about how this law affects employer/employee relationships, how and when an employer grants sick leave, and what happens if action is taken against an employee after requesting sick leave.  

Arizona Paid Sick Leave in Practice

Over the last five years, courts and regulators have clarified, interpreted, and implemented the Arizona paid sick leave laws, giving employers a better idea of their responsibilities and potential liability with respect to the law.  

The amount of sick leave an employee is entitled to accrue is the most straightforward aspect of the law.  For employers with fewer than 15 employees, employees are entitled to accrue a minimum of one hour of earned paid sick time for every 30 hours worked, up to 24 hours of earned paid sick time per year.

The law’s complicated elements concern the specifics of how and when an employee requests sick leave and an employer’s reactions to those requests.  For example, the Arizona Fair Wages and Healthy Families Act specifically states that if an employer fires an employee within 90 days of the employee using or complaining about paid sick leave, the termination is presumed to be retaliatory. 

At that point, the employer must provide clear and convincing evidence that the employee was fired for a legitimate reason and not for the sick leave request.  This sets a high bar for employees, and there are certain steps that employees should take to protect themselves.  

Jett v. County of Maricopa

A recent case before the Arizona Court of Appeals, Jett v. County. of Maricopa focused specifically on the issue of employer retaliation after an employee requested sick leave.  Jett worked in human resources for Maricopa County and used her sick leave. After trying to negotiate leave with her manager, she went to the Maricopa County legal department to ask a “hypothetical question” about the leave.  

At the end of the conversation, Jett informed the legal department that the question was not applicable to her work duties as a human resource employee, and was a question for her personally.  Due to this interaction, Maricopa County decided to terminate Jett’s employment.  Jett’s manager sent her an email stating:

Dear Dawn –

I just received a call from the County Attorney’s office indicating that you had contacted them for legal advice and approached them, on your day off, as if you were inquiring about an employee in one of your departments when in reality you were seeking legal advice to use against me and the county. This is highly unethical and dishonest and, in light of the other issues we have discussed recently, I am separating you from Maricopa County effective today.

Jett was terminated within 90 days of taking sick leave.  Additionally, her termination involved her asking questions about sick leave. For these reasons, Jett brought an action against Maricopa County in Maricopa County Superior Court, claiming that Maricopa County violated the paid sick leave laws in Arizona and her dismissal was retaliation for taking and asking about sick leave.  

The court recognized the presumption of retaliation because Jett had been discharged within 90 days of taking sick leave. The burden then shifted to Maricopa County to show that it was reasonably certain that Jett was terminated for legitimate reasons other than retaliation.  

This could be shown through contemporaneous documentary evidence, such as emails and deposition testimony.  Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of Maricopa County, finding that the deposition testimony of the Maricopa County employees and the termination letter all pointed to the County’s belief that Jett was dishonest in her conversation with the legal department as the basis for Jett’s termination. The retaliation claim under Arizona paid sick leave law failed.  

Effects of Jett v. County of Maricopa

This case and others demonstrate several key lessons for employers and others that have been decided since the implementation of Arizona paid sick leave laws.

First, employees should not be disciplined for lawfully taking sick leave as this would most likely be a direct violation of Arizona paid sick leave laws. Management should be familiar with Arizona Paid sick leave laws and follow policies based on those laws.  

Second, employers must have clear, written policies about  paid sick leave.  Preferably, these policies should be in a complete employee handbook that can be referred to by the employees and management.  

Lastly, management should document, in writing, the rationale behind an employee’s termination or discipline. Any discipline should heed the employee handbook policy and only be taken for lawful reasons.    

The Arizona Industrial Commission is a helpful resource for information on Arizona paid sick leave laws.  The Arizona Industrial Commission includes an Arizona Paid Sick Leave FAQ that can be found here. The law offices of Ernst, Brown, & Draper also counsel employers and employees regarding Arizona paid sick leave laws. We are available to work with you to maintain and protect your rights, so contact us today for a consultation. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Arizona litigation attorney

Joshua Ernst

Partner

Joshua Ernst is a named partner of Ernst, Brown & Draper, PLLC.  In private practice at a large Phoenix firm, Joshua represented clients in complex commercial litigation cases, including breach of contract, fraud, misappropriation of trade secrets, and insurance subrogation claims.  In addition, Joshua has also represented parties in wrongful termination, wage and hour disputes, and defensed employers against EEOC charging letters.  Joshua has practiced in Maricopa County Superior Court, Arizona District Court, the Arizona Court of Appeals and the Arizona Supreme Court, including drafting a successful Petition for Review to the Arizona Supreme Court, ultimately leading to a successful decision in his client’s favor. 

For the past five years, Joshua has served as in-house litigation counsel for Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District. While there, Joshua defended multiple personal injury, property damage, and wrongful death claims, as well as unique antitrust and other statutory issues. Joshua’s time in-house deepened his appreciation and ability to get to a workable solution that takes into account the relevant risks, benefits, and importantly, costs to achieve his client’s desired results.  While at SRP, Joshua regularly met with executive-level management to provide practical legal advice and provide recommendations on how various business groups might accomplish their goals. Joshua understands that running a business requires a certain level of risk, and he takes pride in partnering with business owners to minimize those risks where possible and defending his clients’ interests when necessary.

Joshua is heavily involved with his family and church, and enjoys spending time with his wife and five children.

Admissions and Education

Arizona – 2012

District of Arizona – 2013

Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law – 2012 Summa Cum Laude