Feel free to contribute on burning issues concerning the armed forces. Contributions would be acknowledged - Use the 'Comments' tab or email navdeepsingh.india[at]gmail.com. No operational/business/commercial matters to be discussed please. Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained. Information on this blog is opinion based and is neither official nor in the form of an advice. This is a pro bono online journal in public service related to issues, policies and benefits, and the idea behind it is to educate and not to create controversy or to incite. Be soft in your language, respect Copyrights.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

US Supreme Court comes to the rescue of a military reservist fired by his employer

Vincent Staub, an angiography technician serving a civilian hospital, was supposedly fired from his parent employment due to the fact that he was a reservist with the US Army Reserves.

Staub’s embodiment (mobilisation) in 2003 in Iraq resulted in his dismissal from the hospital in 2004. Litigation however led to an unfavourable decision with the Federal Appeals Court upholding the action of the Hospital.

The Supreme Court however overturned the Federal Appeal Court’s ruling by holding that the employer was liable under the federal anti-discrimination law for members of the military. The court also awarded Staub about $ 58,000 in damages.

More can be read about the above here.

Even in India, Territorial Army (TA) reservists have at times faced similar problems with their employers. Apart from private entities, there are instances when TA reservists serving in civil government departments have also faced difficulties despite the fact that the Territorial Army Act, 1948, provides full protection to the parent employment of TA volunteers when mobilised for military duty, whether voluntarily or compulsorily in a national emergency.


Susanta Kumar Panda said...


I am sure the Indian employers are aware and tolerant to such facts so that the TA officer don;t face any such challenges.


Anonymous said...

This refers to a query on your chat roll by Vinam on 05 March 11..a teacher wife of a naval officer denied LTC questioning her dependancy on the officer.
To my knowledge,there are NO stipulations for a wife/spouse to be dependant on the officer or any income limits for them to avail LTC.In fact ,a spouse has independant entitlement for LTC( even if the officer odes not avail LTC).
The naval officer should read the LTC rules TR paras 177 A,B etc and complain against his superior /authority who denied LTC to his wife.