Army Reservist claims he lost job because of military duty

Thomas Kallies Feb. 19, 2014, 3:15pm

Christopher Crews has filed suit against Suretech Completions Inc., accusing his former employer of letting him go after he missed work because of his military obligations.

Crews filed suit Feb. 11 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division against says Suretech, citing violations of U.S. Code.

According to the filing, Crews, a resident of Spring, was hired by Suretech in August. Crews claims Suretech promised him better opportunities and compensation than his previous employer.

Crews is also a helicopter pilot in the U.S. Army Reserve which requires him to occasionally miss work to fulfill his training obligations. His normal commitment to the Army Reserve is one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer. However, the Army required Crews to attend a six-week training class in the summer. That session was cut down to two weeks because of a government shutdown at the time.

Crews claims he returned to work, but Suretech failed to send him out on any jobs. Sometime thereafter someone from management fired Crews because they didn't have enough work for him to perform, according to the suit. Crews alleges he was eventually told he was being let go because of his "military stuff," the suit states.

The company is accused of violating the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment  Rights Act.

Crews is seeking actual damages including lost wages and benefits, compensatory damages, punitive damages, interest, costs, attorneys' fees and other equitable relief.

He is being represented by attorney Robert Lee of Lee & Braziel LLP in Dallas.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Case No. 4:14-CV-00324


This is a report on a civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The details in this report come from an original complaint filed by a plaintiff. Please note, a complaint represents an accusation by a private individual, not the government. It is not an indication of guilt, and it only represents one side of the story.

More News