Opinion ID: 895243
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Does UTEP's Personnel Handbook Waive the State's Immunity?

Text: Herrera alternatively argues that even if Congress did not abrogate the State's immunity, UTEP clearly and unambiguously waived it through its Handbook of Operating Procedures, which states [a]n eligible employee may also bring a civil action against an employer for violations [of the FMLA]. We disagree. UTEP's policy manual certainly mentions employees' FMLA rights, noting that the FMLA makes it unlawful to discharge or discriminate against someone for involvement in proceedings under the Act. The handbook also includes the may also bring a civil action sentence, which Herrera says plainly permits FMLA claims. This cursory language does not remotely constitute voluntary consent to suit, much less clear and unambiguous consent. [48] Putting aside the issue of whether UTEP (as opposed to the Legislature) can waive its immunity by declaration in a handbook, [49] UTEP's manual actually reveals nothing about an intent to waive immunity. [50] The handbook states that employees may sue for violations of the FMLA, but makes no attempt to expand the universe of actionable violations by explicitly waiving immunity that UTEP otherwise enjoys. Indeed, it is impossible to grasp how fleeting language in a policy manual can clearly and unambiguously waive immunity when far more overt declarations in statutes enacted by the Legislature fall short. [51]