FMLA Violations by Employers: How to Prevent Interference and Retaliation Claims (2026)

The Anatomy of FMLA Employer Liability: Strict Liability vs. Intentional Retaliation

Under the Family and Medical Leave Act (29 U.S.C. § 2615), federal employment liability is divided into two distinct statutory causes of action: Interference (§ 2615(a)(1)) and Retaliation/Discrimination (§ 2615(a)(2)). For small business owners and solo HR practitioners, misunderstanding this distinction is the single most common cause of multi-million dollar jury verdicts.

Interference claims operate under a standard of strict liability. An employer can be held liable even if the company acted in absolute good faith without a shred of animus or discriminatory intent. Under 29 CFR § 825.220(b), any employer action that discourages, chills, delays, or impedes an employee's exercise of their FMLA rights constitutes unlawful interference.

In contrast, retaliation claims require proving a causal nexus between the employee's invocation of FMLA rights and an adverse employment action (termination, demotion, PIP, or pay reduction).

The 6 Most Dangerous Manager Mistakes That Trigger FMLA Lawsuits