Anthony Buie worked in the finishing department at Quad/Graphics. Buie’s supervisors warned him about frequent absenteeism three times between March 1998 and September 1999. When providing the last warning, his supervisor gave him a written notice that continued attendance problems could result in termination. In October 1999, Buie called in sick again and told his supervisor that he had AIDS and that his absenteeism was due to the disease. This was the first time Quad/Graphics knew of Buie’s condition. Several days later, Quad/Graphics told Buie not to return to work.

Several days later, Buie met with Caroline Vrabel, Quad/Graphics’ employee services manager, who told him that he could apply for FMLA leave for some of the absences when he had called in sick. She further told him not to report to work until he had completed the FMLA application and his attendance issue had been resolved. Buie complied, but after he returned to work, Frank Arndorfer, vice president of finishing operations, decided that Buie’s leave would be considered a disciplinary suspension for excessive absenteeism.

In November, Buie met with Vrabel and Arndorfer. Vrabel told Buie that she had excused many of his absences, but that she had calculated that he still had accumulated fourteen unexcused absences during the preceding eleven months, including six no-call, no-show absences. When Buie met again with Vrabel and Arndorfer several days later, Arndorfer presented Buie with a last-chance agreement and offered him the choice between signing the agreement or being fired immediately. The agreement, which Buie signed, stated that he could be terminated for any violation of the employee services manual or the agreement itself. Several weeks later, Buie was terminated after a couple of confrontations with coworkers. His coworkers who were involved in the incidents were disciplined but not discharged.

Did Quad/Graphics discriminate against Buie on the basis of his disability? Does Buie have a valid claim for retaliation under the FMLA? [Buie v. Quad/Graphics, Inc., 366 F.3d 496 (7th Cir. 2004).]