His leave was already approved - but the absences kept counting against him
A Sysco worker alleges the food-distribution giant fired him after counting his approved paternity leave as misconduct.
The worker, who joined Sysco Metro New York LLC in May 2017 at its Jersey City food-distribution facility, filed a federal lawsuit on November 3, 2026, in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey. He started as an outbound selector and most recently worked as a sanitation technician.
His child was born in January 2025.
After that, according to the complaint, the worker took intermittent paternity leave throughout 2025 to bond with his newborn - in February, April, and from June through November - all approved through Sysco's third-party leave administrator, The Hartford.
But instead of honoring that approved leave, the filing alleges, Sysco treated each paternity-leave absence as an attendance infraction. The company issued the worker a series of disciplinary notices and suspensions throughout 2025 for absences that were, on paper, already approved.
Then came October.
The complaint states the worker was hospitalized on or about October 22, 2025, with pneumonia and asthma-related breathing difficulties. He also has asthma and hypertension, according to the filing. He was discharged the next day and cleared to return to work on October 26. His fiancee called Sysco's absence hotline on both days to report the hospitalization.
After returning, the worker opened a medical-leave claim with The Hartford on or about November 4, 2025, told Sysco he had done so, and submitted his doctor's medical-certification paperwork on or about November 9, the complaint alleges. When he needed more time off from November 17 through 19 for follow-up treatment and severe medication side effects, he provided a physician's note.
Then the timeline tightened.
According to the complaint, The Hartford issued initial denial notices while still listing the worker as eligible for leave. One day later - on or about December 6, 2025 - the filing alleges Sysco terminated his employment "on an explicitly unlawful basis," counting the very absences from his hospitalization and medical leave against him.
The complaint alleges the company fired the worker "in discrimination based on his disabilities and in retaliation for his protected activity" - including his paternity leave, his medical-leave requests, and his requests for reasonable accommodation such as additional time to complete the certification process.
The lawsuit brings claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, and the New Jersey Family Leave Act. It seeks compensatory and punitive damages, lost wages, reinstatement or front pay, and attorneys' fees. A jury trial has been demanded.
The worker had filed a discrimination charge with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on or about September 30, 2026, and received a right-to-sue notice on or about October 1, 2026.
For HR teams, the case spotlights a familiar operational trap: when approved FMLA or state-law leave gets fed into a points-based attendance system without proper carve-outs, the exposure can stack fast.
The allegations in this complaint have not been tested, and no court has made any findings or rulings on the merits.
