Fired after being injured on the job is something no California employee expects to happen, but it happens every day. You get hurt doing your job. You report the injury. You need medical treatment or time off to recover. And instead of support, things change. The employer gets distant. Patience runs out. Pressure starts. Then comes the termination. Not because you did anything wrong, but because you were injured. That is not just unfair. Under California law, it is often illegal.
I’m Matt Ruggles, and I’ve been practicing employment law in California for more than 30 years. Over that time, I have represented countless employees who were fired after being injured on the job. I have seen this pattern across industries, job titles, and employers of every size. An employee gets hurt, and instead of dealing with the injury lawfully, the employer decides the employee has become a liability. Workers’ compensation claims cost money. Insurance premiums may go up. The injury becomes an inconvenience. Rather than follow the law, some employers try to solve the problem by getting rid of the injured worker. That is exactly what California law prohibits.
I wrote this blog to show how these cases actually work in the real world. This is a true California case involving an employee who was injured on the job, blamed for the injury, denied proper accommodation, and ultimately fired. Details have been changed to protect privacy, but the facts and legal issues are real. By walking through what happened and why the employer paid more than $500,000 to resolve the case, my goal is to help California employees understand their rights and what it can look like when an injury turns into a retaliation and disability discrimination claim.
If you were fired after being injured on the job, do not assume your employer acted lawfully just because they say they did. These situations follow familiar patterns, and early decisions matter. If you want a straight answer about whether what happened to you was legal, call me at the Ruggles Law Firm at 916-758-8058 for a free evaluation.
Fired After Being Injured on the Job: When an Injury Turns Into Termination
Josh did not go to work looking for a lawsuit. He went to work to drive a forklift.
For several years, that is exactly what he did safely, competently, and without incident. He showed up, moved freight, followed procedures, and did the kind of unremarkable, reliable work that keeps large warehouse operations running without drama. He was not on a performance plan. He was not written up. He was not the subject of whispered complaints or quiet HR emails.
Then one day, while Josh was operating his forklift in the main warehouse, unsecured inventory fell and struck him. The impact injured his shoulder badly enough that conservative treatment was not enough. He needed surgery. He needed time. And he needed his employer to do something California law requires every employer to do: respond reasonably when an employee becomes temporarily disabled.
What Josh got instead was blame, skepticism, and eventually termination.
The employer’s explanation evolved over time, but the message was consistent: Josh was the problem. First, he had supposedly caused his own injury through negligent driving. Later, he had supposedly become too much of a burden to accommodate. And finally, he was simply no longer employed.
That story did not survive discovery.
The case ultimately resolved for more than $500,000, not because the employer wanted to reward Josh for being injured, but because its decisions (once exposed under oath and on video) created significant trial risk.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Injury cases become retaliation and disability cases when employers respond defensively instead of lawfully. The pivot point is rarely the accident. It is what happens next.
If you’ve just been fired and don’t know what to do next, read my post: I Just Got Fired: What Should I Do Right Away.
Background: The Job Performance Before the Employee Was Fired After Being Injured on the Job
Josh was hired by a freight delivery service to work in its primary warehouse facility. His job was physical, fast-paced, and essential. He drove a forklift daily, moving heavy inventory through a busy warehouse environment where safety depends on systems, spacing, and cooperation.
By all accounts, Josh was good at his job. He had years of experience operating forklifts. He understood the layout of the facility. He knew the traffic patterns. And importantly, he had no history of accidents or disciplinary issues.
The incident that changed everything was not subtle. While Josh was driving his forklift, inventory stored above him came loose and fell, striking him with enough force to cause a serious shoulder injury. This was not a near miss. It was not a minor tweak. It was the kind of injury that announces itself clearly and immediately.
Josh reported the injury and sought medical treatment. Eventually, doctors concluded that surgery was required.
At that point, the employer faced a fork in the road: handle the situation as a workplace injury requiring accommodation and temporary leave, or treat it as a problem to be managed away.
The company chose the latter.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Long-term safe performance matters. When an employee with a clean record is suddenly blamed for a serious accident, credibility becomes a central issue.
If you were fired while on medical leave instead of being returned to work or evaluated for a lawful return date, that timing matters. To understand how employers misuse leave and return-to-work deadlines, read my post: Fired While on Medical Leave in California? What to Know About Return to Work Dates.
How Employers Shift Blame Before Firing an Employee After a Job Injury
Rather than treating the incident as a systems failure or a warehouse safety issue, the company’s initial investigation focused squarely on Josh.
According to management, Josh’s negligent driving caused the collision that led to the falling inventory and his injury. This conclusion was presented with confidence but very little support. There were no contemporaneous witness statements documenting reckless conduct. No prior safety violations. No forklift citations. Just an assertion that Josh must have done something wrong.
That framing mattered. If Josh caused his own injury through misconduct, the employer could downplay its obligations and justify future adverse actions. If Josh was injured through no fault of his own, the company would need to deal with medical leave, disability accommodation, and a return-to-work plan.
So the narrative hardened quickly.
Josh, however, did not accept that conclusion quietly and neither did the evidence.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Employers are allowed to investigate workplace accidents. They are not allowed to reverse-engineer conclusions to avoid legal obligations.
Injury-related terminations often involve both discrimination and retaliation claims, especially when an employee requests leave or medical treatment. To understand how those claims overlap, read my post: Disability Discrimination and Retaliation in California.
Medical Leave After a Job Injury: When Support Ends and Termination Begins
Initially, the company allowed Josh to take time off to receive medical treatment. On paper, this looked cooperative. Josh was placed on leave, and the employer acknowledged that he needed time to heal.
But from a legal standpoint, what matters is not just whether leave is granted. It is how decisions are made when the leave becomes inconvenient.
Josh’s doctors determined that surgery was necessary. The timeline was clear: surgery was scheduled, recovery was finite, and Josh was expected to be able to return to work and perform the essential functions of his forklift position within approximately eight weeks after surgery.
This was not an open-ended absence. It was not speculative. It was medically supported and time-limited.
Despite this, as Josh approached the three-month mark on leave, the company’s tone changed. Management began to frame his continued absence as a problem rather than a temporary medical necessity. And instead of engaging in a meaningful interactive process about accommodation and return-to-work timing, the employer made a different decision.
Josh was terminated.
The termination occurred even though:
- Surgery was only weeks away
- A clear return-to-work timeline existed
- Josh could perform the essential functions of his job after recovery
Timing, in employment law, is rarely accidental.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, finite medical leave can be a reasonable accommodation. Ending employment just before recovery invites scrutiny.
“Undue Hardship” Claims Used to Justify Firing an Injured Employee
Once Josh was terminated, the company offered a familiar explanation: extending his medical leave further would have caused an undue hardship on operations.
This phrase appears often in employment litigation. It sounds authoritative. It suggests careful analysis. And it carries legal weight when supported by evidence.
Here, it was not.
During discovery, the employer claimed that warehouse operations could not function without Josh’s immediate return, and that holding his position open any longer was simply not feasible.
That explanation unraveled quickly.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
“Undue hardship” is not a feeling. It is a factual defense that lives or dies on evidence.
If your employer never meaningfully discussed accommodations, modified duties, or return-to-work options after your injury, they may have violated California law. To understand what the interactive process actually requires, read my post: Did My Employer Follow the FEHA Interactive Process?
Evidence That Matters When You’re Fired After Being Injured on the Job
One of the most significant moments in the case came through document discovery.
We obtained internal warehouse video footage of the incident i.e. the very footage the company had relied on when blaming Josh for his injury.
The video told a different story.
It showed that Josh was operating his forklift appropriately. There was no reckless driving. No sudden maneuver. No misuse of equipment. The falling inventory was not caused by Josh’s conduct.
In other words, the foundation of the employer’s initial blame narrative collapsed.
This mattered not only for the injury itself, but for everything that followed. If Josh was not at fault, the employer’s posture, from skepticism to termination, looked far less like discipline and far more like avoidance.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Objective evidence is devastating to subjective explanations. Video does not get nervous during cross-examination.
Many employees are told they were fired for neutral business reasons, when the real issue was their medical condition or limitations. To see how these cases are evaluated under state law, read my post: Disability Discrimination in California.
Why Employer Excuses Collapse When Employees Are Fired After Job Injuries
The real damage to the employer’s case occurred during depositions.
We deposed subordinate shift managers who worked directly in the warehouse. These were not executives or HR professionals removed from day-to-day operations. These were the people who scheduled shifts, covered absences, and dealt with staffing realities.
Their testimony was consistent and unequivocal: accommodating Josh for additional medical leave would not have been difficult. The warehouse had managed his absence already. Coverage was available. Adjustments were routine. Nothing about Josh’s continued leave posed a meaningful operational problem.
The idea that extending leave for a few more weeks constituted an undue hardship simply did not align with reality.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
When frontline managers contradict management’s hardship claims, juries listen.
By this point, most employees can tell when their employer’s explanation does not add up. If you were injured at work and then pushed out, fired, or terminated instead of being accommodated, it is worth having your case reviewed. You can reach me at the Ruggles Law Firm at 916-758-8058 to talk through what happened and what your options may be under California law.
HR Admissions That Expose Illegal Termination After a Work Injury
Then came the HR deposition.
Under oath, the HR representative responsible for Josh’s termination acknowledged what the evidence had been pointing toward all along: Josh should not have been terminated. He should have been allowed to recover and return to work.
This was not a technical admission buried in jargon. It was clear, direct, and damaging.
At that point, the employer’s defenses were no longer theoretical. They were contradicted by its own people.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Cases often turn when decision-makers admit, in hindsight, that the decision was wrong. Juries do not ignore those moments.
When a workplace injury leads to termination instead of accommodation, the issue often shifts from workers’ compensation to disability discrimination. To understand how California law protects disabled employees, read my post: California Disability Discrimination in Employment.
From Job Injury to Disability Discrimination Under California Law
By the close of discovery, the case had crystallized.
Josh was injured on the job. He required surgery. He requested a finite period of medical leave. His doctors provided a clear return-to-work timeline. He could perform the essential functions of his job after recovery. The employer terminated Josh anyway, citing an “undue hardship” that did not actually exist.
Under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), that combination is legally dangerous. The FEHA requires employers to engage in a good-faith interactive process with employees who become disabled, to reasonably accommodate temporary disabilities where possible, and to avoid terminating employees simply because accommodation requires patience. Here, the employer did none of those things. It did not meaningfully engage with Josh about accommodation. It did not wait for his medically supported return. It chose termination instead.
By that point, the forklift accident itself had become almost secondary. The real legal problem was not how Josh got hurt, but how the employer responded once he was temporarily disabled. That response is what turned a workplace injury into a disability discrimination case under California law.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Disability discrimination cases are often about impatience, not animus. The law punishes both.
If you’re curious why wrongful termination lawsuits under the FEHA often backfire on employers, read my blog: Wrongful Termination Lawsuits Under the FEHA: A Costly Gamble for Employers.
Settlement: Paying for Risk, Not Sympathy
Once the depositions concluded, settlement discussions changed tone.
The employer now faced a jury hearing about:
- A long-term employee with a clean record
- Video disproving fault
- A finite medical leave request
- Testimony that accommodation was easy
- An HR admission that termination was improper
That is not a comfortable trial posture.
The case ultimately settled for north of $500,000. The resolution reflected litigation risk, not generosity.
For Josh, the settlement provided stability, the ability to recover fully, and the resources to move forward with his career.
Matt’s Legal Perspective
Employers settle when defending their decisions becomes more expensive than admitting them.
Conclusion: Getting Hurt Is Not Grounds for Getting Fired
Josh’s case illustrates a simple but critical point: being injured at work does not make an employee expendable.
California law requires employers to slow down, evaluate options, and accommodate temporary disabilities where reasonable. When employers choose speed and convenience instead, the consequences can be severe.
Injury is not misconduct. Recovery is not refusal. And terminating an employee just before they can return to work is rarely defensible.
What to Do If You Were Fired After Being Injured on the Job in California
If you were fired after being injured on the job, what you do next matters. Many employees hurt their own cases by waiting too long, trusting the wrong people, or signing documents they do not fully understand. The steps below are designed to protect your rights and preserve your options under California law.
Step #1: Write down the timeline immediately.
While the details are still fresh, write out what happened. Include when you were injured, when you reported the injury, what medical treatment or leave was requested, and when you were terminated. Note who said what, and when. Dates, names, and sequence matter far more than opinions later.
Step #2: Preserve all documents and communications.
Save everything related to your employment and termination. This includes emails, text messages, performance reviews, disciplinary notices, medical notes, work restrictions, leave paperwork, and termination documents. Do not assume your employer will keep or provide these records later.
Step #3: Do not rely on HR to fix the situation.
After termination, HR’s role is usually to limit the company’s exposure, not to protect you. Well-intentioned explanations or informal complaints can be misunderstood or used against you. At this stage, silence is often safer than over-explaining.
Step #4: Be careful with severance agreements.
If your employer offers severance, read it carefully. Severance agreements frequently require employees to waive claims for retaliation, disability discrimination, or wrongful termination. Once signed, those claims are often gone forever. Do not sign anything without understanding what rights you are giving up.
Step #5: Speak with an experienced California employment lawyer promptly.
Cases involving employees fired after being injured on the job are time-sensitive and evidence-driven. An employment lawyer can evaluate whether your termination was lawful, identify overlapping claims, and make sure deadlines are not missed. Early guidance can make the difference between a viable case and a closed door.
If you’re trying to figure out how to choose the right attorney for your case, read my guide: How Do I Select a California Employment Lawyer?
Frequently Asked Questions About Being Fired After Being Injured on the Job
Can my employer fire me after being injured on the job in California?
Not legally, if the termination is connected to your injury, medical leave, or need for accommodation. California law prohibits employers from firing an employee because they were injured at work, required medical treatment, or temporarily could not perform their job due to a work-related injury. When an employee is fired after being injured on the job, the timing and surrounding facts matter far more than the employer’s stated reason.
Is being fired after being injured on the job considered retaliation?
It often is. When an employer terminates an employee shortly after a workplace injury, workers’ compensation claim, or medical leave request, that can constitute illegal retaliation. Employers rarely admit retaliation outright. Instead, they point to performance, restructuring, or hardship. The law looks past labels and focuses on whether the injury and resulting limitations played a role in the termination decision.
What if my employer says they could not accommodate my injury or medical leave?
Employers frequently claim “undue hardship,” but that defense requires real evidence. Under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, employers must engage in a good-faith interactive process and provide reasonable accommodation, including finite medical leave, unless doing so would cause a genuine hardship. In many cases where employees are fired after being injured on the job, that hardship claim does not hold up under scrutiny.
Do I have a case if I was fired while recovering from a work injury?
Possibly, especially if your medical leave was temporary and you could return to work within a defined timeframe. Terminating an employee just before they are cleared to return is a common fact pattern in successful retaliation and disability discrimination cases. If you were fired while recovering instead of being allowed to return, that decision deserves careful legal review.
What should I do if I was fired after being injured on the job?
You should document everything and speak with an employment lawyer as soon as possible. Preserve medical records, termination paperwork, emails, and any information showing how your employer treated you before and after the injury. These cases often involve strict deadlines, and early missteps can limit your options. If you believe you were fired after being injured on the job, a prompt legal evaluation can make a critical difference.
Contact the Ruggles Law Firm at 916-758-8058 to Evaluate Your Potential Lawsuit
Matt Ruggles has a thorough understanding of California employment laws and decades of practical experience litigating employment law claims in California state and federal courts. Using all of his knowledge and experience, Matt and his team can quickly evaluate your potential claim and give you realistic advice on what you can expect if you sue your former employer.
Contact the Ruggles Law Firm at 916-758-8058 for a free, no-obligation evaluation.
Blog posts are not legal advice and are for information purposes only. Contact the Ruggles Law Firm for consideration of your individual circumstances.
