A federal judge has ordered Arlington to pay former fire Battalion Chief Kim Lubke $1.01 million for firing him after he stayed home during the Y2K weekend to take care of his sick wife.
In a post-verdict order issued Thursday, U.S. District Judge Terry Means scolded city officials for their treatment of Lubke, a 22-year Fire Department veteran who was fired in April 2000 after a three-month internal investigation.
In addition to the $395,000 a federal jury awarded Lubke on April 15 for lost wages and benefits, Means tacked on $300,000 in punitive damages, $305,291 in attorney fees and $9,575 in court costs.
But Lubke, 49, who earned $80,000 a year as a battalion chief and now makes his living as a goat rancher in Grandview, will have to be patient before he can collect the first dollar of the judgment.
Arlington City Attorney Frank Waite said Friday that the city will appeal the case to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
Means said the $300,000 in punitive damages "is sufficient to vindicate the public interest in employers' following the law."
The judge concluded that "the City did not have reasonable grounds for believing that its actions toward Lubke after he missed work during the Y2K weekend was not a violation" of the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Means summarized 12 facts that he said show that city officials did not treat the veteran firefighter fairly, among them:
The city launched an unprecedented internal investigation of Lubke before it had received the medical documentation he submitted Jan. 3, 2000, to justify his staying home during the Y2K weekend.
The city ignored the results of its investigation "that confirmed that Lubke had been truthful, that his wife had a serious health condition, and that he was needed to care for her over the Y2K weekend."
The city initially told Lubke that he could provide additional medical documentation during the appeal of his firing under the city's grievance procedures but then refused to consider letters from two doctors who treated his wife.
The judge addressed the city's defense that Lubke gave his superiors no reason to believe that he was seeking family and medical leave and only made that claim after he had been fired.
Lubke's supervisors felt "intense anger at Lubke for missing work over the important Y2K weekend" and failed "to take a rational look at his absence -- a look that would have given due consideration to the requirement of federal law," Means found.
Lubke said Friday that he was happy that the judge sided with his position.
"The judge recognized that the city's investigation actually showed that I needed time off," he said.
The Family and Medical Leave Act entitles an employee to up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the care of a seriously ill family member.
City officials had argued that Lubke was fired for failing to follow special rules in place under the city's Y2K Operational Readiness Plan. The policy required that unscheduled leave during that time period, except for emergencies, be justified by a doctor in writing. Fire Department officials argued that Lubke's medical documentation was inadequate.
According to trial testimony, Lubke called a voice-message system at the fire station on the evening of Dec. 30, 1999, and left a message that his wife, Debbie, was seriously ill and needed his assistance.
Debbie Lubke testified that she was suffering from chronic back pain, made worse by severe bouts of coughing brought on by bronchitis. She was unable to move about, get out of bed or use the bathroom without assistance, she said.
Kim Lubke's attorney, Roger Hurlbut of Arlington, said the city's treatment of the veteran firefighter was symptomatic of deep-rooted problems with the city's grievance and appeals system.
"The city Fire Department and top management made a mistake in bad faith," Hurlbut said. "But instead of owning up to it and correcting it, they fought this dedicated 22-year firefighter tooth and nail for four years."
City officials still believe that Lubke violated the department's Y2K policy and that the city had a right to enforce it, Waite said.
"We really believe this case is a misapplication of the Family and Medical Leave Act," he said.
Related:
