This is a really bizarre one IMO.
Back in 2019, a worker asked his company not to throw him an office birthday party because he has an anxiety disorder and a surprise party could cause him to have a panic attack. Unfortunately, his supervisor "forgot" about the request and threw a birthday party anyway, whereupon the worker did indeed have an actual panic attack. He subsequently went to his car to calm down and was back to work by the end of his lunch break. Now, that seems to me to be a pretty solid, "I'm responsible for my own health and well-being" sort of way to handle things. He made a reasonable request, and even when things went wrong due to other people, he handled it as calmly as he could and didn't throw a tantrum or demand outrageous compensation, right?
The company didn't see it that way. The next day, he was called into a meeting with higher-ups who aggressively berated him for ruining the birthday party, telling him that by leaving, he was only "stealing joy from his coworkers". He subsequently had another panic attack, which the supervisors decided constituted a threat and responded to by firing him on the spot for "violating the company's no-tolerance workplace violence policy".
Needless to say, he did file suit at that point, and the state courts ruled that this was in fact an unreasonable termination for which they awarded a total of $450,000 in damages. The company founder personally announced that they will be appealing this decision, insisting that their actions were absolutely justified and that their employees were the "real victims" for being. . . panicked at.
Source: New York Times
Back in 2019, a worker asked his company not to throw him an office birthday party because he has an anxiety disorder and a surprise party could cause him to have a panic attack. Unfortunately, his supervisor "forgot" about the request and threw a birthday party anyway, whereupon the worker did indeed have an actual panic attack. He subsequently went to his car to calm down and was back to work by the end of his lunch break. Now, that seems to me to be a pretty solid, "I'm responsible for my own health and well-being" sort of way to handle things. He made a reasonable request, and even when things went wrong due to other people, he handled it as calmly as he could and didn't throw a tantrum or demand outrageous compensation, right?
The company didn't see it that way. The next day, he was called into a meeting with higher-ups who aggressively berated him for ruining the birthday party, telling him that by leaving, he was only "stealing joy from his coworkers". He subsequently had another panic attack, which the supervisors decided constituted a threat and responded to by firing him on the spot for "violating the company's no-tolerance workplace violence policy".
Needless to say, he did file suit at that point, and the state courts ruled that this was in fact an unreasonable termination for which they awarded a total of $450,000 in damages. The company founder personally announced that they will be appealing this decision, insisting that their actions were absolutely justified and that their employees were the "real victims" for being. . . panicked at.
Source: New York Times
