Travers v. FedEx: Third Circuit Holds USERRA Requires Paid Leave When Comparable

Gerard Travers served in the United States Navy and the Naval Reserve while working for Federal Express Corporation. Whenever Travers took short-term military leave to fulfill his Reserve duties, FedEx did not pay him for that time. FedEx did, however, pay employees who missed work for other reasons such as jury duty, sick leave, or bereavement leave. Travers filed a civil action on behalf of himself and similarly situated employees, asserting that the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) required employers to provide the same rights and benefits to employees on military leave that they provided to employees taking comparable non-military leave.

The district court dismissed his claim, reasoning that paid leave was not a protected right or benefit under the statute. Travers appealed.

Statutory Framework and Early Legislative History

The Court of Appeals examined the structure and purpose of USERRA by tracing the history of federal protections for servicemembers. Earlier statutes, including the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 and the Selective Service Act of 1948, provided reemployment rights and access to employer benefits following military service. Later amendments expanded protections for Reserve members. When Congress enacted USERRA in 1994, it adopted broad language requiring equal treatment for employees on military leave and those on comparable forms of non-military leave.

USERRA section 4316(b)(1) states that an employee absent for military service “shall be deemed to be on a leave of absence” and “entitled to such other rights and benefits” that the employer generally provides to employees with similar seniority, status, and pay who are on non-military leave. Section 4303(2) defines “rights and benefits” to include the terms, conditions, and privileges of employment, as well as any advantage or profit flowing from an employer policy or practice. These definitions formed the foundation of the court’s analysis.

Comparison of Employee Groups Under the Statute

The Court of Appeals explained that USERRA requires comparing two groups of employees: those taking military leave, and those taking other forms of leave. If an employer provides a right or benefit to employees in the second group, employees in the first group must also receive that benefit. The statute’s use of the word “other” signaled that military leave and non-military leave share the common feature of an employee being absent from work, while the comparison required evaluating additional benefits tied to those forms of leave.

The court rejected the argument that the relevant benefit must be labeled “paid military leave.” Instead, the court determined the proper question was whether FedEx provided pay to employees taking comparable non-military leave but not to those taking military leave. This textual approach avoided relying on labels not found in the statute.

Pay as a Protected Right or Benefit Under USERRA

The court then addressed whether pay during short-term leave qualified as a statutory right or benefit. It examined the broad terms and examples listed in section 4303(2), noting that “advantage,” “profit,” and “gain” naturally encompassed compensation. The court reviewed employment manuals and human resources materials from the relevant period, which confirmed that pay during leave was widely understood as an employment benefit.

The court also reviewed the statutory history. Earlier versions of the law had used language excluding wages for work performed, but Congress later replaced that exclusion with language including wages or salary for work performed. Because the amendment broadened the definition, the court declined to read restrictions back into the statute.

The court rejected FedEx’s reliance on federal statutes providing paid military leave to government employees. Those statutes were interpreted as establishing minimum rights for federal workers, not limiting the application of USERRA in private employment.

The Court’s Decision

The Court of Appeals held that Travers stated a valid USERRA claim. Pay during a short-term leave of absence was a protected right or benefit under the statute. The court concluded that if an employer provided pay to employees taking comparable non-military leave, the employer must provide the same benefit to employees taking military leave. Because the district court had dismissed Travers’s complaint at the pleading stage, the Court of Appeals vacated that judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Assistance With USERRA Matters

If you’ve experienced issues involving military leave or USERRA protections, Whitcomb Selinsky PC handles USERRA matters. Reach out to our team through our contact page to learn how our team can assist with your claim.