By Tim Carpenter, Kansas Reflector
TOPEKA — The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of a lawsuit filed on behalf of a Kansas Army National Guard soldier alleging she was fired from a civilian job in violation of federal law offering employment protection to individuals deployed for military service.
The decision by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals sought clarity to the definition of “employer” in terms of whether the Finney County Health Department and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment were responsible for maneuvering in 2010 that ended Staff Sgt. Stacey Gonzales’ employment as a disease intervention specialist.
The appellate court said a federal district court judge improperly dismissed in 2024 the lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2022 alleging KDHE engaged in “reckless disregard” of federal law — the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 — implemented to shield employment rights of military servicemembers.
The Court of Appeals’ decision in late December reversed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Kansas and sent the case back for further proceedings.
The district court judge had concluded KDHE wasn’t Gonzales’ employer, but the appellate court held the definition of employer under USERRA also covered entities that exercised control over employment opportunities of employees.
“The record evidence … allows a reasonable finding that KDHE retained the requisite level of control over Gonzales’s employment opportunities to be a USERRA employer,” the appellate court said. “The district court’s order granting summary judgment is therefore reversed.”
Gonzales, of Garden City, sought through the Justice Department suit lost wages and benefits as a result of KDHE’s decision to end grant funding to the Finney County’s disease prevention program and the ultimate termination of her employment.
From 2001 to 2010, Gonzales served as Finney County’s local disease intervention specialist. She intermittently had military obligations, during which she was absent from the civilian job. Gonzales deployed overseas twice to Iraq and once to Kuwait during her time in the National Guard.
In the disease specialist job, the Court of Appeals said, Gonzales was supervised by local and state personnel. Her salary and benefits were determined and paid by Finney County, the appellate court said, but her day-to-day work, training and performance evaluations involved significant oversight from KDHE.
When KDHE decided not to renew the Aid-to-Local grant in 2010 due to perceived performance deficiencies, Finney County terminated Gonzales’ position.
“The evidence indicates KDHE had some influence on the hiring of Gonzales in 2001 and the elimination of her position in 2010,” the Court of Appeals said. “Whether that rose to the level of KDHE being a USERRA employer by having sufficient control of Gonzales’s employment opportunities was something the district court did not adequately address.”
Attorneys representing the state of Kansas argued the Justice Department’s “expansive” interpretation of USERRA suggested the definition of employer could mean the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention also was Gonzales’ employer because grant funding for the job in Finney County originated with the federal agency and was passed through the state to the county.
However, the Court of Appeals discounted that theory and outlined evidence Gonzales’ evaluations were limited to a “joint venture involving both Finney County and KDHE.”
“The district court’s summary judgment ruling was driven by its erroneous view of the grant relationship between KDHE and Finney County,” the appellate court said.
