[MN] Can I be fired for sending my employer a preservation of evidence notice after reporting ADA retaliation?

MN Employment

TJ, Esq.

17,778 satisfied customers

View context

Solved

Yes, unfortunately. You reported a manager for making a threatening statement using the phrase “gun to your head.” That is a serious comment, and you had every right to report it. The timing is critical here. You had just gotten an ADA accommodation approved, and then this threat happened almost immediately after. That proximity matters legally because it can show retaliation. (42 U.S.C. § 12203)

What happened next is where things get really problematic for your employer. After you reported the threat, HR placed you on administrative leave, and then they sent you an email using the ADA accommodation format. But here is the problem. They did not actually approve your original accommodation request. Instead, they created a new role and tried to pass off their creation as an approval of something you never requested. That is a big deal. They essentially took language from a legitimate ADA accommodation process and used it to describe a completely different job transfer that conveniently moved you away from your original role. Then that falsified accommodation description got repeated in your performance reviews to make you look incompetent in a role you never asked for and were not trained to handle.

So now you have multiple legal issues stacked on top of each other. First, you reported what could be considered a threatening statement from your manager. Second, your employer responded by putting you on leave. Third, they manipulated the ADA accommodation process by misrepresenting a job transfer as an accommodation approval. Fourth, they used that false documentation to justify poor performance evaluations in a role you were set up to fail in. And now, a year later, they are upset that you keep bringing up what they did to you. That is not ingratitude on your part. That is you documenting a pattern of retaliation and misconduct.

Here is how I suggest you move forward.

Stop all informal complaints to HR and document everything going forward in writing (emails only, no verbal conversations).
Send a formal preservation of evidence notice to HR requesting that they preserve all documents related to your ADA accommodation, the threat report, the administrative leave, the January 24 email, and any performance reviews that reference the falsified accommodation language.
Gather copies of everything you can access. This includes the original ADA accommodation approval, the threat report you filed, the January 24 HR email, the director’s communications showing he admitted to the falsified verbiage, and all performance reviews that cite the fake accommodation. (MN Stat § 181.961)
Consult with an employment attorney who handles ADA and retaliation claims, because what you are describing could support claims for ADA discrimination, retaliation for reporting the threat, and potentially even fraudulent misrepresentation in the accommodation process.

Did I completely answer your question about this situation, or do you need clarification on any of these points?

Full Conversation

Can I be fired for sending a preservation of evidence notice to my employer?

Lexi, Chatbot

I understand that you're concerned about the potential consequences of sending a preservation of evidence notice. Have you already experienced any negative reactions from your employer regarding this notice?

No, I have not sent it.

Lexi, Chatbot

What type of evidence are you trying to preserve, and how does it relate to your employment situation?

Emails, meeting logs, documentation of ghost files, performance documentation, disciplinary action write ups, meeting invites. Will prove they retaliated against me after supplying evidence of retaliation, breeched the interactive ADA process, falsified an ADA accommodation approval.

Lexi, Chatbot

Is there anything else the Employment Lawyer should know before I connect you? Rest assured they'll be able to help with your retaliation concerns.

No.

TJ, Esq.

Hello! My name is TJ and I’m an attorney. Thanks so much for the opportunity to assist you! I understand how important your legal question is, and I’m giving it my full attention. I’ll share my initial thoughts shortly, and I may also ask for a few additional details. That information will help me understand your situation more clearly so I can offer a more complete and helpful answer.

VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION:

If you don’t hear from me right away, please know I will always get back to you. I may be researching, preparing your answer, or occasionally dealing with a technical issue, so there can be a short wait between messages. However, your message will stay right where it is, and you’ll be notified as soon as I reply. I only stop responding if you ask for a second opinion, since that ends the chat. One quick note: the platform sorts chats by the most recent message I receive, so sending several short messages (instead of one longer message), or sending a check in message (like “are you there?”) can shift your chat to the bottom of my list. I apologize for that quirk, and I truly appreciate your patience.
This is general legal info only. Unfortunately, I can’t represent you or form an attorney-client relationship. This also means there is no attorney-client privilege or confidentiality.

TJ, Esq.

Hello! Thanks for reaching out with your question. You can't be fired simply for sending a preservation of evidence notice to your employer. In fact, firing you in response to sending such a notice could itself be illegal retaliation, especially given what you've described.

A preservation notice is a legitimate legal tool, and employers know that employees have the right to preserve evidence when they're considering or pursuing legal claims. That said, I want to understand your situation better. You mentioned retaliation and ADA issues. Are you saying that your employer has already retaliated against you for reporting something (like an ADA violation or something else), and you're now planning to send the preservation notice in response to that retaliation? Or is the retaliation something you're anticipating might happen?

No worries, thank you for reviewing this. I am rereading the above so I can correctly answer your question.

Correct, they have already engaged in retaliation and failure to engage in the interactive ADA process, as well as failure to deliver an approved ADA accommodation for over 60 days:

Subject: Summary of retaliation, ADA accommodation violations, and administrative leave

Background and ADA non compliance
- Approved accommodation. On October 2025, an ADA accommodation was approved requiring my manager to provide written summaries of all coaching and actionable items from one on one meetings.
- Failure to implement. On December 2025, I reported to HR that my manager was failing to adhere to this accommodation.
- Disparate impact and misclassification. I identified an error in a January 2024 (dated 2025 in error) HR email falsely stating I requested a role change for “specific work.” In reality, the move followed a report of a manager making a violent threat (“gun to my head”). Management later cited this move in my performance reviews to justify “restructuring” and isolating me.
Ethical reporting and management response
- Ethics meeting (Jan 2025). I met with the ethics manager to report retaliation, discrimination, and the discovery of “ghost files” (eight files indicating I was being audited or targeted outside of standard procedure).
- Hostile HR interaction. During a follow up with HR, advisors called me “ungrateful” when I requested an update to my documentation. They claimed they had no record of my medical provider’s specific work requests, despite my diagnosis of ADHD, PTSD, and executive dysfunction being on file since October 2025.
The “ambush” meeting and administrative leave
- The next day, I attended a meeting intended to discuss the unimplemented ADA accommodation. Instead, HR challenged my need for written communication, claiming ignorance of my memory issues despite prior documentation.
- Pretextual allegation. HR accused me of unauthorized recording. I clarified that I was using closed captioning (as a memory aid) and taking manual notes, not recording audio or transcripts.
- Immediate suspension. Following this disagreement, I was placed on indefinite paid administrative leave pending an “internal investigation.” The original issue—the failure to implement my ADA accommodation—was never addressed.

NOTE: I'm in the state of Minnesota. I work for a Bank which is headquartered in Illinois.

TJ, Esq.

Let me make sure I understand the timeline correctly: you have documentation showing your accommodation was approved in October 2025, you reported non-compliance in December 2025, you reported retaliation to Ethics on January 2025, and then the next day you were placed on administrative leave. Is that right? Also, when you say the HR advisors called you "ungrateful," can you give me a bit more context about what led to that comment? I'd like to understand whether they were directly responding to you asking for documentation updates, or if there was something else happening in that conversation.

Back in January 2025, I got an approved ADA accommodation to be able to get official training and to collaborate with peers without penalization. It was approved. About a week later, my manager at the time said in a meeting, “If I put a gun to your head, what are some things that you think you could improve on?” Towards the end of my training meeting, I then reported, to HR that my manager had threatened to put a gun to my head and that the proximal timing between having an ADA accommodation approved and me having a rebuttal to a disciplinary action that the manager had written seemed really interesting, and I did not appreciate the threat.

I was then placed on paid administrative leave. A few days after, January 24, I received a phone call from HR asking if I could continue to work with my last boss. I told them I could put my feelings aside, that I enjoyed working regulatory and executive complaints, and that I would like to stay in my job. I said that I could put my feelings aside. I was informed that the director of the department created a brand new role that would allow me to only work internal complaints and only work complaints about promotion codes. They asked what my opinion was, and I shared that I was open to it; however, I did really enjoy the role that I already had.

Also on that day, HR used the ADA accommodation email format, saying that they reviewed my request to get formal training and to be able to collaborate with peers. They said that they had reviewed it, and they approved my request, but they postulated verbiage to say that they approved my request to work only promotion code complaints.

I believe HR was referring to the fact that it appeared I was ungrateful for their assistance back in January after I reported the threat that my last manager made and that I was ungrateful in the sense that why am I bringing up the postulated ADA accommodation verbiage now at the end of the year and making a big deal about it. At that point I shared that verbiage that was populated which I have proof from the director himself on documentation showing he said it that he had purposely put me in the role that as a result of that falsified verbiage any performance review I had after introduced that same verbiage to paint me in a way. That appeared to make me seem like I was an incapable employee to be able to do casework when that is not in fact the case.

Your understanding of timeline regarding me being placed on administrative leave is correct. January 2026 they are now upset because I keep referring back to what they did a year ago and the impact it’s had.

TJ, Esq.

Here is how I suggest you move forward.

Stop all informal complaints to HR and document everything going forward in writing (emails only, no verbal conversations).
Send a formal preservation of evidence notice to HR requesting that they preserve all documents related to your ADA accommodation, the threat report, the administrative leave, the January 24 email, and any performance reviews that reference the falsified accommodation language.
Gather copies of everything you can access. This includes the original ADA accommodation approval, the threat report you filed, the January 24 HR email, the director’s communications showing he admitted to the falsified verbiage, and all performance reviews that cite the fake accommodation. (MN Stat § 181.961)
Consult with an employment attorney who handles ADA and retaliation claims, because what you are describing could support claims for ADA discrimination, retaliation for reporting the threat, and potentially even fraudulent misrepresentation in the accommodation process.

Did I completely answer your question about this situation, or do you need clarification on any of these points?

Yes you fully understand the timeline. Would me bringing up the violations in writing to HR change the bank’s likelihood to fire me, given I filed a report on January 6 of ghost files and shared the ADA accommodation failure to implement for over 60 days. Example:

To whom it may concern, my records indicate you violated:

Whistleblower protections. On January 24, 2025, the ADA accommodation email indicates I requested to move roles as a cover for a report of a physical threat (“if I put a gun to your head”) made by a prior manager. No medical documentation exists to prove I requested the move.
Failure to provide personnel file. This is a violation of Minnesota state statute Minn. Stat. § 181.961. The employer must supply within 14 days if located outside of Minnesota. The employer provided me with a PDF of a middle of year performance review on July 3, 2025, and I immediately replied indicating it was cut off and asked if they could send a full copy as it was cut off. They never replied.
ADA accommodation failure. On December 4, 2025, the bank was notified of failure to adhere to the approved ADA accommodation from October 30, 2025, requiring coaching items discussed in meetings to be provided in writing via a follow up email from the manager. HR met with the manager and advised, then postulated verbiage following the meeting with the supervisor to make it appear it was being done all along in writing, and then omitted that coaching was to be summarized in the email summary. After HR met with the supervisor about the ADA accommodation delivery issue, the manager continued to refuse to deliver the accommodation to the employee.

Would sending something like this now, while on paid administrative leave, hurt me more?

Genuinely asking. I am a little black and white in that I have a very high sense of justice, and I have consistently found it hard to be able to stick to the “keep your head down” mantra when I see explicit behaviors as such. You may have more of a level head in it all, given the fact.

TJ, Esq.

Hey, I appreciate your candor about this. Sending that letter right now while you are on paid administrative leave could hurt you, and I need to be honest about why. Your employer is currently investigating you. The stated reason is the recording accusation, but based on what you have told me, that investigation is likely a pretext. When you send a detailed letter laying out all their violations like this, you are giving them ammunition in multiple ways.

First, they can use it to argue you are being insubordinate or failing to cooperate with their investigation by making accusations instead of participating in their process. Second, they can claim you are threatening them or being hostile, which they will use to justify whatever they decide to do next. Third, they are going to scrutinize every word looking for something they can twist against you. Right now, while you are in their crosshairs, sending a formal accusation letter is like handing them a roadmap of your legal claims before you have even had a chance to preserve evidence properly or get professional guidance.

I understand your sense of justice. That is actually a strength, not a weakness. But there is a difference between standing up for yourself and strategically positioning yourself for what comes next. What you need to do instead is send the preservation of evidence notice I mentioned earlier. That is neutral, professional, and it protects you legally without being confrontational. It says “preserve these documents” without accusing anyone of anything. It is defensive, not offensive.

After your employer responds to the preservation notice or after the investigation concludes, that is when you can decide whether to send a detailed letter outlining violations. At that point, you will have more information, and you will not be actively under investigation.

Did I completely answer your question about whether sending that letter now would hurt you, or do you need clarification on any of this?

Yes, this helps. I appreciate your candor. I would much rather someone slap me with reality than pander.

I will move to send the preservation letter and hold on in the interim while I await final outcomes from this “witch hunt.” The good news, though, is I am smart (too much for my own good in some regard, to be fair), but I may or may not have procedures they have outlining record retention for the bank (I will plead the fifth on that).

So even if they were to “play a game” to erase stuff, their justification would be quickly smited in a hypothetical where I may or may not have a copy of the official record retention policy (again, I will plead the fifth).

Question. Do you support me sending an email to the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) and citing that the bank breached Minn. Stat. § 181.961 back on July 3, 2025, after I shared the performance review PDF was cut off and asked them to send a complete copy. Would this make the bank act quicker in adhering to my records request?

Note. I met with an attorney who wanted the full employee file, all performance reviews and write ups, and evidence of me reporting bank promotion code fraud. This could help me in getting evidence that much quicker so I can maximize consults.

Question. Is there a statute of limitations on this in Minnesota to act and sue (January 2025 falsified ADA accommodation by the bank to cover for a threat made by their manager).

TJ, Esq.

Good to hear you are thinking strategically. Filing a complaint with the Department of Labor and Industry could absolutely accelerate things, but I want you to understand the trade off. When you file a complaint with DLI, you are essentially putting the bank on notice that you are escalating beyond internal channels. That is not inherently bad, but combined with the preservation letter and while you are on administrative leave under investigation, it signals to your employer that you are building a legal case. They will know exactly what you are doing. That said, DLI has real enforcement power, and the bank knows that. A complaint could light a fire under them to produce those documents because they do not want a state agency involved. The question is whether accelerating the document production is worth tipping your hand that you are serious about external complaints. Given that you have already met with an attorney who wants those exact documents, I would say it is probably worth it. You need those materials to maximize your consultation time anyway.

On the statute of limitations. For ADA retaliation claims, you generally have 180 days to file a charge with the EEOC before you can file a lawsuit. However, that clock started ticking when the retaliation occurred, not when you discovered it was retaliatory. The January 24 falsified accommodation email is the smoking gun, but that is also when the retaliation arguably crystallized. You are now in January 2026, so you are past that 180 day window for that specific incident. This does not mean you have no claims, but it means timing matters enormously and the window for certain remedies may have closed. This is exactly why talking to that attorney is critical.

Did I completely answer your questions about the DLI complaint and the statute of limitations, or do you need clarification on either of these?

Good point. I appreciate the devil’s advocacy. Smoking gun. Falsified ADA accommodation showing I “requested to move to this role.”

End of year 2025 review. Mentioned it, and I raised my hand about that on December 4, 2025, and leveraged the smoking gun as the pretext to the “why.” It is in the bank’s best interest to update the verbiage in the end of year 2025 review.

Question. Can the smoking gun be “admissible” again, given it has everything to do with my request to overturn end of year 2025 verbiage, and that I mentioned the concern of fraud to HR in meetings multiple times over December 2025, and mentioned it in meetings January 6, 2026, and January 7, 2026. I made mentions of the smoking gun, and less than 24 hours later I was placed on administrative leave.

TJ, Esq.

Yes, that smoking gun is admissible. You reported it multiple times in December and early January, and then you were put on leave within 24 hours of escalating it. That sequence proves retaliation and makes the document even stronger evidence. Thank you again for using this service.

Friendly reminder. Even if you do not hear from me right away, please know I will always get back to you. I may be researching, preparing your answer, or occasionally dealing with a technical issue, so there can be a short wait between messages. However, your message will stay right where it is, and you will be notified as soon as I reply. Thanks for your patience.

Heck yes. I may as well go into debt and get my juris at this point. Jk jk, do not worry. I am well aware I could be seen as a sovereign citizen (which is not a compliment).

TJ, Esq.

Ha. I hear you. You clearly have the mind for it. Friendly reminder. Even if you do not hear from me right away, please know I will always get back to you. I may be researching, preparing your answer, or occasionally dealing with a technical issue, so there can be a short wait between messages. However, your message will stay right where it is, and you will be notified as soon as I reply. Thanks for your patience.

Anyway, I think that is all I have at this point. I will send the notice and then chill in the background for a bit while I wait for them to cut me off payroll or to take me back with parameters or a PIP.

I appreciate your patience, time, and advice. This has been eye opening. You are by far more helpful than the firm I had a consult with, who was very “grey” and wishy washy. To be fair, the firm just wanted me to supply evidence and facts likely first before committing to anything, which I can understand given I work caseloads for regulatory bank complaints, but I digress. Anyway, I hope you have a great rest of your week.

TJ, Esq.

I really appreciate that. You've got a solid head on your shoulders and you're approaching this the right way (strategically and methodically. Send that preservation notice, keep your head down, and document everything that happens next. You've already done the hard part by identifying the pattern and the violations. Those attorneys will come around once you have all your documentation in order. They're being cautious, which honestly isn't the worst thing. But you've got this. Take care of yourself, and feel free to reach out if anything changes or if you have questions as things unfold. Good luck with everything.

TJ, Esq.

17,778 satisfied customers

Welcome! Have a similar question?

By messaging AskALawyer, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy.

Ray

Lawyer

4.73 (66,079)

What can I do if my employer mishandled private employee information and treated me unfairly after a drug test?

Answered 19 hours ago

Lori

Attorney

4.83 (25,625)

[KS] Can an employer bring new allegations at an unemployment appeal beyond the termination letter?

Answered 19 hours ago

TJ, Esq.

4.68 (17,778)

What should I document if I believe I was penalized at work after taking protected paternity leave?

Answered 4 days ago

Disclaimer

By messaging AskaLawyer.com, you agree to our Terms and have read our Privacy Policy.

The information provided on AskaLawyer.com is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we strive to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the information presented, we make no guarantees regarding its completeness or applicability to your specific circumstances.

Use of this website does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and AskaLawyer.com or any of its attorneys. Communications through this website, including any responses from attorneys, are not privileged or confidential. For advice tailored to your individual situation, we recommend consulting a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

AskaLawyer.com disclaims any liability for actions taken or not taken based on the content of this site. We are not responsible for any third-party content that may be accessed through this website. Reliance on any information provided herein is solely at your own risk.