The law gives certain protections to employees with addictions. A recent court ruling clears up some confusion about what’s protected.

Here’s what happened:

A recovering alcoholic worked for a company in Indiana. He had attendance problems and was a few absences away from termination. One day he relapsed, and his wife called the hospital to have him admitted.

He didn’t start getting treated for a few days, but he missed three days of work in the meantime. So the company fired him.

He sued, claiming all his absences were covered by FMLA. But the company argued the first few weren’t. The law only gives time off for treatment of substance abuse – not incapacity due to the abuse itself.

The court agreed with the company.

The man argued that the treatment period should include the time he spent waiting for admittance to the hospital. But the law’s the law, the judge said. And under FMLA, “treatment” means actually seeing a doctor.

Cite: Darst v. Interstate Brands Corp.

Tags: ADA, alcoholic employee, alcoholism, Americans with Disabilities Act, Family & Medical Leave Act, FMLA, substance abuse