Could employee extend medical leave — without telling the employer?
July 2, 2008 by Sam NarisiPosted in: FMLA, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
Here’s another victory for employers trying to fight FMLA abuse.
A federal court recently ruled that a company could fire an employee who missed her scheduled return to work after leave.
A woman took FMLA leave from an oil drilling company in Texas. Before the leave started, she told the company when she’d be able to get back to work.
But when the day came, she didn’t show. Her boss didn’t hear from her or her doctor until almost a week later. By that point, the company had decided to fire her, so she sued under FMLA.
In defense, the company pointed to its own policy on returning from approved leaves. Under the rule, employees that don’t return to work on the agreed date or give advance notice are fired.
But the woman said it was the company’s responsibility under FMLA to try to contact her.
Not so, according to the judge. Once the planned return date had passed, the absences were no longer protected. It was up to the employee to come back, or ask for more time.
Cite: Bardwell v. Global Santa Fe Drilling Co.
Tags: certification, extension, FMLA, unexcused absences
July 16th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
good to know also!
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
FMLA is the absolute worst plague to ever befall the modern workplace. It is tailor made for slackers, leeches and problem employees and a cottage industry of bottom feeding lawyers has arisen to support the frivolous claims of these frail souls to make sure their rights aren’t violated. It should be abolished immediately.
Eighty percent or more of employees on FMLA right now could be terminated with little or no resultant loss to the workplace. It’s a drain on resources and a morale killer.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Milton, you definitely have the wrong attitude here…. I don’t know how long you’ve been in Human Resources, but it sounds like you’ve stayed too long. Maybe there’s another profession out there for you.
September 18th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Milton: I agree with Laura, your attitude towards FMLA is totally unprofessional. Most people who need this benefit are ill or has a family member who is ill and need their assistance. I don’t understand how you could be so cynical about a law that protects employee’s rights to take time off from the workplace to due a serious health condition. Keep in mind there’s a good reason why federal legislators passed such a law in the first place — I think it probably had to do with employers who think and behave unfairly like you. Shame!
September 19th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
I agree with Milton FMLA has become like everything else in the system. It started out to help those in need and as he said the slackers and leeches decided to hop on board. And now the lawyers have also found a way to make more money and tie the court system up with unnecessary evil. Wake up people its all about the almighty dollar. Work less and get more.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:55 am
I can say that there are plenty of people out there that abuse FMLA, I probably use to work with a few before I got into the HR field. The bottom line is that having a negative attitude about it is so wrong. While there are so many abusers, there are many more that really truly need it, like a person who needs Cancer treatments, or a person whose parent has a fatal illness. I am really appalled at the attitudes of both Milton and Virginia. Regardless of what we might think people are really doing with their FMLA, as an HR Professional, it is our job to make sure that the law is upheld within our business and to maintain a professional disposition at all times.
November 12th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
FMLA, if properly administered, protects employees who truly need the leave (and rights it guarentees) and it keeps the employer from loosing a valuable employee. A good employee will return to an employer that works with their need for leave and the employee will help the employer maintain a good public image and possibly refer equally skilled employees to the workplace.
Anyone who has been in HR or Operations knows that a poor performer will eventually be released from service. It’s just a matter of documenting everything thoroughly enough to justify releasing a person from service. The fact that a poor performer qualifies for FMLA leave could be an explination why a person is a poor performer and through seeking treatment they are able to return to the company as an asset rather than dead weight. Regardless of leave–if a company has a poor performer they should be documenting the poor performance with the employee and continually documenting any continuing performance discrepancies that occur during the approved leave (if intermittent) or the employees inability to provide certification for the leave (from a treating health care professional). Poor performers can be fired when on FMLA leave or immediately upon return–it’s up to HR and management to ensure all the ducks are in a row.
Milton and Virginia: instead of lambasting FMLA why not try to properly administer FMLA leaves so that if you have a poor performer you can get rid of them for the poor performance or for fraudulently taking FMLA leave rather than requesting or taking a legitimate FMLA leave. I have form letters that assist me with this and we also ask that employees update us on a monthly basis regarding their leave certification and provide form letter documentation that continually informs the employee of how many hours/days they have left in their leave and what the needs and expectations are of the employee while on leave and in order to sucessfully return to work following their leave.
In addition to this be thankful you are not in California where CFRA (similar to FMLA) may extend the protected time available to an employee and certainly qualifies more employees for protected leaves of absence. I know that I’m thankful I don’t work for either of you as your views on leave of absence leave much to be desired in my opinion.