Leukemia Victim Sues Firm Over Firing : Claims That Brunswick Corp. Was Insensitive to His Plight

Was Charles Bryant fired from his job at Brunswick Corp. because he is suffering from leukemia or because he had attitude problems and was considered expendable during a layoff?

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson decided to put the question to a jury and set a Sept. 30 trial date for the lawsuit filed by Bryant against his former employer.

The issue is whether Brunswick’s Costa Mesa defense division responded properly to Bryant’s request to be treated like a handicapped employee when he was having adverse reactions to chemotherapy.

Diagnosed in 1971

The 62-year-old Bryant, a Laguna Niguel resident, first was diagnosed as having leukemia in 1971. He was working for Brunswick as a senior mechanical buyer and earning about $30,000 a year when he was laid off in the fall of 1983. He said that he was taking strong medicine that frequently left him feeling depressed.

In February and May of 1983, he said, he had told a company industrial relations representative that he might need more time off from work to cope with his medical problems but did not want to lose his job.

Bryant claims he was the only person in his department who was laid off, despite the fact that he had a college degree and had worked for the company for five years.

“These people have been brutal, absolutely brutal and callous,” Bryant said in an interview Tuesday. Tall and balding, Bryant appears frail, but when he speaks about the case his voice rises and his blue eyes flash.

Brunswick maintains that Bryant never asked for help or any kind of special treatment before being laid off with about 30 other employees when the company experienced a slump.

“He was selected for layoff because his work could be transferred to others,” said Brunswick attorney Richard DeLuce. “He was the most expendable.”

After a long discussion Tuesday with both attorneys, Judge Wilson said there is “no evidence Mr. Bryant went to Brunswick and asked for time off to rehabilitate or asked to change jobs.”

“The problem I have is, is there an affirmative duty on the part of the corporation to reach out, nurture and counsel?” Wilson asked. “I don’t think the business world and marketplace have reached that point.”

Bryant’s attorney, Maurice Mandel, says Brunswick had a responsibility to help his client because of his disability.

“This case is about the duty an employer owes an employee,” Mandel declared, adding that Brunswick has a government mandate to deal fairly with the handicapped because it is a federal defense contractor.

Cited Medical Bills

Bryant contends he was fired so that Brunswick would not have to pay expensive medical bills and other benefits associated with his disability. He is seeking more than $1 million in punitive damages.

DeLuce said that Bryant’s cancer had nothing to do with his dismissal. He said Bryant’s supervisors had chastised him for having “personality problems” that were unrelated to his physical ailments, according to Bryant’s personnel file.

“But he was not in any danger of being discharged (before) he was laid off,” De Luce said. “He wasn’t ridden out on a rail.”