• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Fmla

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

zoeyrs

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Iowa

I am a full time employee (36-40 hours/week). Due to some severe back problems, since December I have only been working part time. I have worked for the same company for over 16 years and have accrued many hours of sick leave. I've been using the sick leave to make up for the hours I am off. I've recently found out I will need a serious and complicated back surgery that will keep me off work for three months. I'll be undergoing that surgery in one month.

Yesterday when I went to HR to discuss my upcoming leave from work, the head of HR told me I would not have a job to come back to because I had already used all or nearly all of my FMLA time. He said I could use up the rest of my sick leave, they would cut me a check for my accrued vacation hours, and that would be that. I was shocked, to say the least, as I had never signed up for FMLA and didn't know I was using FMLA time. One of the reasons I had gone to HR, besides telling them I would be away from work, was to ask about FMLA and the paperework.

Head of HR pointed out that it wouldn't be fair if, after using all my FMLA time, I continued to work part time or be gone from work for three months and they would still be paying me benefits, i.e healthcare benefits. I thought FMLA would start when I left work to have surgery and I had used all my sick leave and vacation time. I understand I would still have to pay my healthcare premiums to still be covered.

Does this guy know what he's talking about?

He also told all the employees, in a meeting, if we missed a day of work due to illness without a 24 hour notice, it would be an occurence. But, we would have 10 days to file for FMLA for the day missed and then the occurence would be taken away. I thought in order to use FMLA, one had to have a serious illness and it had to last three days, requiring a doctor visit.

If I have been using FMLA since December, shouldn't I have been told, and wouldn't I have had to fill out some papers?

Many thanks to anyone who can help me sort this out. For sure, my HR guy can't.

Zoey
 


swalsh411

Senior Member
FMLA protects your job for up to 12 weeks in any given 12 month period. Sounds like they have been tracking your time off due to this condition and you will more than exceed that maximum if you take off 3 months for surgery. Therefore your termination would be legal.

You do not have to apply nor ask for FMLA leave. It is perfectly legal for your employer to track your time off without your knowledge / consent.

I thought in order to use FMLA, one had to have a serious illness and it had to last three days, requiring a doctor visit.
No
 

eerelations

Senior Member
Employers are legally required to apply FMLA to any leave that falls within FMLA's definitions. It's not up to the employee to decide which leaves will be FMLA and which won't be.

It's too bad your employer didn't tell you about this sooner. It's possible your employer thought you already knew. Whatever the reason though, I don't think you have any legal recourse.
 

Beth3

Senior Member
Does this guy know what he's talking about?

Yes. Whether you were aware of it or not, when you started working part-time due to your back problem, you were on "reduced schedule" FMLA. If not for that, they didn't have to allow you to work part-time at all.

Since you've been on reduced schedule FMLA leave since December, it's no surprise you've nearly used up all your 12 weeks of FMLA.

He also told all the employees, in a meeting, if we missed a day of work due to illness without a 24 hour notice, it would be an occurence. But, we would have 10 days to file for FMLA for the day missed and then the occurence would be taken away. I thought in order to use FMLA, one had to have a serious illness and it had to last three days, requiring a doctor visit.

Yes and no. Someone with a chronic serious health condition would be eligible for intermittent FMLA.

If I have been using FMLA since December, shouldn't I have been told, and wouldn't I have had to fill out some papers?

No and no. While it would have been nice for you to be informed that you were on reduced schedule FMLA leave, it's not required. Your employer can require you to fill out FMLA certification paperwork but apparently they didn't feel that was necessary in this instance. I don't think they doubted the seriousness of your back problem.

Many thanks to anyone who can help me sort this out. For sure, my HR guy can't. Actually, he does, although I think it's lousy he didn't inform you of your FMLA status back in December. It wouldn't have changed the outcome however.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top