Can I Be Fired for Filing a Workers' Comp Claim in NY?

It is illegal in New York for an employer to retaliate against you for filing or testifying in a workers’ compensation claim. Workers’ Compensation Law §120 makes retaliation — firing, demoting, refusing to reinstate, discriminating in any term or condition of employment — a separate violation enforceable through the WCB. New York is otherwise an at-will employment state, so employers can lawfully terminate employees for non-retaliatory reasons even while a WC case is open. The line between “lawful at-will termination” and “unlawful §120 retaliation” turns on the timing, the stated reason, and the evidence of pretext. If you’ve been fired, demoted, or had your hours cut after reporting a work injury or filing a claim, that pattern should be examined.

Filing a workers’ comp claim is protected activity. Firing you because of it violates WCL §120 — with real remedies.

TL;DR

• WCL §120 prohibits retaliation — firing, demoting, refusing reinstatement, discriminating in pay or terms — for filing or testifying in a WC claim.
• NY is at-will employment otherwise, so employers can terminate for non-retaliatory reasons.
• A §120 complaint is filed with the WCB, separate from the underlying WC claim.
• Remedies can include reinstatement, back pay, restored benefits, attorney fees, and a penalty payable to the worker.
• The deadline to file a §120 complaint is 2 years from the date of the retaliatory act.

What §120 protects

WCL §120 protects you from adverse employment action because:

• You filed (or threatened to file) a WC claim
• You testified or are about to testify in a WC proceeding
• You exercised any other right under the WC Law

The statute names “discharge or discrimination” — courts and the Board read both broadly. Discharge is the obvious one. Discrimination includes demotion, reduction in hours, denial of overtime, refusal to reinstate after light-duty release, hostile treatment, denial of accommodations a non-claiming worker would receive.

At-will employment vs. §120

New York is at-will. An employer can terminate an employee without cause and without warning, provided the termination doesn’t violate a contract, a statute, or a public policy. §120 is a statutory carve-out: a termination caused by WC activity is unlawful even in an at-will jurisdiction.

The factual question is why. Employers facing a §120 complaint typically articulate a non-retaliatory reason — attendance, performance, restructuring, position elimination. The Board examines the evidence: the timing, the documentation, the treatment of comparable employees, the stated reason at termination versus the reason offered later.

How a §120 complaint works

The complaint is filed with the WCB, not with the EEOC, the Division of Human Rights, or in civil court. The Board investigates, the employer responds, and the matter typically proceeds to a hearing before a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge.

The remedies on a sustained §120 violation can include:

• Reinstatement to your former position
• Back pay for the period of lost wages
• Restoration of benefits (health insurance, accruals, seniority)
• A penalty payable to the worker (set by statute)
• Attorney fees

A §120 finding does not preclude separate claims under federal law (ADA, FMLA) or other state statutes (NYSHRL, NYCHRL) if those independently apply. Conversely, an at-will termination with no WC connection generally won’t satisfy §120 — but it might still violate one of those other statutes.

The 2-year deadline

A §120 complaint must be filed within two years of the retaliatory act. Don’t sit on it.

What I see go wrong

• Workers who assume “at-will means I have no recourse.” Untrue when WC activity is in the picture.
• Termination disguised as restructuring. When the position is “eliminated” 30 days after a WC filing, that’s an evidentiary question, not a defense.
• “Performance issues” that materialize only after the claim. Compare disciplinary records, prior reviews, and treatment of similarly-situated employees.
• Refusal to reinstate after light-duty release. An employer that ignores a release back to work — when the position remains open — has a §120 problem.
• Forced resignation. Constructive discharge claims are harder to prove but are cognizable under §120 in the right facts.

What about light duty?

A separate but related issue: WC carriers regularly suspend or reduce benefits based on alleged refusal of a valid light-duty offer. Whether the offer was valid — actual position, within medical restrictions, at the same employer, communicated properly — is litigated separately on the WC side.

What to do next

If you’ve been terminated, demoted, or had terms of employment changed adversely after a WC filing, the timing and documentation matter. Move quickly — the 2-year clock runs from the adverse act. Contact me directly.

Related pages

• Where Am I? — I’m receiving weekly checks
• Where Am I? — My checks stopped or got reduced
• Why did my workers’ comp checks stop?
• What happens at a NY workers’ comp hearing?
• Denied claims
• How long does a NY workers’ comp case take?