Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 352625_pub.pdf

adverse employment action. Given that Ms. Espindola has produced sufficient facts to

demonstrate Apple King was on notice of her need for unforeseeable protected leave,

Apple King is not entitled to summary judgment on Ms. Espindola’s retaliation claim.

This matter is therefore reversed.

FACTS

Apple King operates a fruit warehouse and packing facility in Yakima County,

Washington. Maria Espindola worked for Apple King from August 2, 2007, to April 20,

2
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 35262-5-III
Espindola v. Apple King

2012. On May 1, 2011, Apple King implemented an attendance policy. Ms. Espindola

received and signed a copy of the policy on August 14, 2011. The policy provides:

As of May 1st, 2011, [Apple King] will put into practice a revised 24 point
attendance scoring system. Each employee will have 24 points to use up
between May 1st and the last day of April. You will start with 0 points and
each attendance infraction will be counted in the following manner.

NO POINTS will be counted for appts. with 24 hr. notice and proof of appt.
2 Points for not giving 24 hr. notice regardless of proof
2 Points for being Tardy
2 Points for leaving before end of shift without proof of appointment
3 Points per absence without proof of appointment (unless you use a
Vacation Day)
12 Points for a NO CALL-NO SHOW
No points will be counted for L&I appointments.