Janette Cowan v. General Electric

── Janette Cowan v. General Electric ── Court: Court of Appeals of Kentucky Date: May 22, 2026 Author: A. Jones Category: General RENDERED: MAY 22, 2026; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2025-CA-0330-MR JANETTE COWAN APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JULIE KAELIN, JUDGE ACTION NO. 21-CI-001541 GENERAL ELECTRIC APPELLEE OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** ** BEFORE: A. JONES, KAREM, AND MOYNAHAN, JUDGES. JONES, A., JUDGE: Acting without the assistance of counsel, the Appellant, Janette Cowan (“Cowan”), challenges the January 31, 2025, order of the Jefferson Circuit Court, which granted the Appellee’s, Haier US Appliance Solutions, Inc. (“Haier”),1 motion for summary judgment and dismissed the underlying case. 1 Haier has noted on appeal as well as in the underlying matter that it is incorrectly named by Cowan as General Electric. After carefully reviewing the briefs, the record on appeal, and the relevant law, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND Haier operates various manufacturing facilities in which it employs factory workers. When Cowan was 54, she applied for such a position at Haier, which hired her in April 2012. At the time she was hired, Cowan passed a job performance test that assessed a potential employee’s physical ability to do tasks necessary for the job, including lifting, squatting, bending, and reaching. Cowan worked for Haier for the next five years, earning multiple promotions. Each subsequent position maintained some physical requirements to perform the job. In March 2017, Cowan was involved in an automobile accident in which she sustained an injury to her neck. Cowan began treating her injury with physical therapy while continuing to work in her position. Eventually, in June 2017, she visited a physician who recommended Cowan have spinal surgery and placed her off work completely. As a result, Cowan sought information from the Industrial Division of the Communications Workers of America (“IUE-CWA”), a union in which she was a member, concerning Haier’s Transitional Workplace Program (“TWP”). The TWP is a program Haier utilizes in which it places employees with temporary work restrictions in suitable working assignments, if available. She did not inquire about the TWP directly from Haier, however. Based -2- on information received from IUE-CWA, Cowan believed she was eligible for TWP, but she was not placed in the program.2 Over the following year, Haier retained Cowan as an employee and continued to pay her benefits while she remained off work. In April 2018, Haier informed Cowan that if she was unable to obtain a physician’s assessment confirming her ability to return to work, her employment would be terminated in June 2018. The termination would be pursuant to Haier’s policies and procedures, which stated that Haier must administratively terminate an employee who has been absent from work for one year for any reason. On June 11, 2018, Cowan provided medical documentation from her physician that included workplace restrictions, further stating Cowan was scheduled for spinal surgery on June 20, 2018, and that she would not be able to return to work until at least October 2018. Haier terminated Cowan’s employment on June 15, 2018, though it informed Cowan that she could reapply for a position once any work restrictions were lifted after her surgery. After being cleared to return to work by her physician, Cowan reapplied for a position with Haier, which rehired her in S