A jury in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia recently rendered a verdict in favour of a pharmaceutical sales representative, Mary Kate Breeden.

The development emerged as The Employment Law Group law firm won a jury trial brought by Breeden who was retaliated against for taking maternity leave protected by the Family and Medical Leave Act. The verdict resulted in awarding of $289,669 against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation on her claim of retaliation for taking maternity leave covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

According to an official statement, under the FMLA’s liquidated damages provision, this amount is automatically doubled to $579,338. The District Court has yet to decide the amount front pay, attorney fees, and costs to award.

Issue

Breeden worked as a pharmaceutical sales representative for Novartis for over seven years.

As per the information available , Breeden was a salesperson in Novartis’ transplant business unit (TBU). Her job was to persuade hospital transplant personnel to prescribe Novartis drugs. During the fall of 2004, Novartis developed a plan with the assistance of an outside consulting firm to overhaul the structure of the TBU. As a part of the overhaul, the geographic territories assigned to sales personnel like Breeden were realigned. Id. Around November 2004, Breeden notified her colleagues and supervisors that she was pregnant and that she intended to take leave in the spring of 2005.

After announcing that she was pregnant, Novartis cut her sales territory in half leaving her with fewer and smaller accounts.

When Breeden objected to the change, her supervisor said it was temporary and that she would be made “whole”. Upon returning from maternity leave, Breeden was informed that the change was permanent.

Novartis reorganised the sales territories again, at which time they consolidated Breeden’s territory with another and eliminated her position. Novartis claimed that an outside consulting firm coordinated the original realignment and did not take Breeden’s FMLA leave into account. However, Breeden’s maternity leave was mentioned in a PowerPoint presentation that the consulting firm prepared about the realignment.

The jury found that Novartis retaliated against Breeden by cutting her sales territory when she announced that she was going to take leave and when Novartis refused to make her “whole” after she returned to work from FMLA leave, ultimately damaging her career and leading to her termination.

Adam Augustine Carter, a Principal at The Employment Law Group law firm, said, “The jury of 12 believed Ms. Breeden and disbelieved the executives of Novartis in arriving at this verdict. She was committed to her job, but her employer questioned her commitment. No employee should have to choose between having a family or keeping their job, and this jury verdict will help teach that lesson to all employers covered by the FMLA.”

The firm represent people in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, northern Virginia, and Maryland who have legal claims against employers who disregard federal and state wage and employment laws.

1. Helping a pharmaceutical sales representative in receiving continuing education credits
2. Curbing The “Undue Influence” Of A Pharmaceutical Sales Representative
3. Role of a pharmaceutical sales representative may come under scrutiny in Minnesota
4. Techno-Derm strengthening its PhysioRED medical sales representative team