Suit claims Lockheed Martin violated Military Service Relief Act
A U.S. naval reserve commander wants his employer Lockheed Martin to follow the law by paying vacation credits and differential during the time he was called to active duty.
Wayne Glen Day has filed suit against Lockheed Martin Space Systems Corporation claiming the company failed to promptly re-employee him under the terms of the Louisiana Military Service Relief Act (LMSRA).
The act prohibits unlawful discrimination by an employer on the basis of an employee's military service and prohibits an employer from retaliation against an employee who has taken action for protection under the provisions of the act.
Day's suit, which also names Lockheed Martin human resources director Cheryl Alexander, was originally filed in the District Court for the Parish of Orleans on Jan. 27.
Lockheed Martin argues that Alexander was joined to defeat federal jurisdiction and removed the case to the Eastern District of Louisiana on March 2.
Day claims Lockheed Martin approved every set of deployment orders including his service in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
When Day was released from active duty service, he returned to Louisiana and, in writing, requested re-employment to his former position.
Day states Lockheed Martin refused to re-employ him. It was more than three months after the request, when Day was offered re-employment in the same department that he worked prior to deployment.
Day argues that the defendant had a corporate policy in place for re-employment, pay and benefits for employees who were called to active duty service.
During his mobilization, Day states he did not receive paid vacation credits as other active duty personnel received.
According to Lockheed Martin's policies, Day claims he was entitled to differential pay for any active service since Sept. 11, 2001. He also argues that his employer refused to allow a lump sum contribution to his retirement plan.
Day states his cumulative length of absence while in active military service did not exceed five years.
He is seeking damages for wages, retirement benefits, accrued vacation credits, 401k plan employer matching contributions, differential pay, back pay and liquidated damages.
He also is requesting a trial by jury.
Metairie attorney George C. Aucoin is representing the plaintiff in his allegations.
U.S. District Judge Mary Vial Lemmon will preside over the litigation.
Case No 2:10cv00730