questionable attendence policy?

[kevinnku20]

What is the name of your state?OH

I just have to say I love this forum, I feel like I cant get some straight credible answers here.

Our attendance poilcy has a questionable clause writte into it, I would like to know if this is legal.

Basically, You start out with 5 "credits" when you work your way down to 2 credits, you are on a finaly warning, when you acheive 0 credits you get a nice box and an escort out of the building. Its not clear if you are required to return the box or if it's a parting gift(getting walked out at this place is a joke because it happens everyday).

Anyhow,

This is how you lose credits:

1-10 minutes late - .5 credits deducted.
over 10 minutes late - full credit deducted
unscheduled absent(including no call no show) - full credit deducted
caveat: if in any of situations you have a note from your doctor, you lose 0 credits

***forgot to add that you get .5 back for each month you have not attendence incidents ***

Questionable clause:

If you are absent for than 5 days in a rolling 6 month period you are put on final warning for "excessive absenteeism", if you hit 6 in 6 month rolling period, you are swiftly escorted out.

I call this into question because I too was recently indicted on excessive absenteeism for which ever absence had accompnied with it a genuine doctors note. I had terrible acid refulx , an appendex removed and a false heart attack sacare (acid reflux). 2 of the 5 days I was in a hospital bed and the other 3 were due to up all night with fun that i will spare you the details of.

I was acquitted to all charges when our Phd HR overloard found out that I was admitted into the cradio center for 2 days. taking me back down to 3.

Say I wasnt in the hospital those 2 days but had family doctor notes instead. Is it legal for them to fire me, or would I automatically be protected by FMLA?

 

[justalayman]

For anybody to even venture a guess you must realize you gave no info to state that FMLA would even apply to you.

length of time at employer
how many hours have you worked in the past year
number of employees at the company

http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/fmla/faq.asp

cruise this site. it should answer most if not all of your questions.
Note the last FAQ. it seems to apply to this situation.

 

[JETX]

Is it legal for them to fire me, or would I automatically be protected by FMLA?

Based solely on the information in your post, nothing illegal about your termination....
And the FMLA does NOT apply since you were NOT on medical LEAVE (and none of the other provisions of the FMLA apply).

They are:
* for the birth and care of the newborn child of the employee;
* for placement with the employee of a son or daughter for adoption or foster care;
* to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent) with a serious health condition; or
* to take medical leave when the employee is unable to work because of a serious health condition.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs28.htm

 

[Calif-Attorney]

What is the name of your state?OH

I just have to say I love this forum, I feel like I cant get some straight credible answers here.

And you're right . . . you can't.

IAAL

 

[justalayman]

Based solely on the information in your post, nothing illegal about your termination....
And the FMLA does NOT apply since you were NOT on medical LEAVE (and none of the other provisions of the FMLA apply).

They are:
* for the birth and care of the newborn child of the employee;
* for placement with the employee of a son or daughter for adoption or foster care;
* to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent) with a serious health condition; or
* to take medical leave when the employee is unable to work because of a serious health condition.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs28.htm

JETX: why wouldn't FMLA apply. Doesn't it fall under one of the following statements from the link you posted?

Serious health condition" means an illness, injury, impairment, or physical or mental condition that involves either:

any period of incapacity or treatment connected with inpatient care (i.e., an overnight stay) in a hospital, hospice, or residential medical-care facility, and any period of incapacity or subsequent treatment in connection with such inpatient care; or
Continuing treatment by a health care provider which includes any period of incapacity (i.e., inability to work, attend school or perform other regular daily activities) due to:
1) A health condition (including treatment therefor, or recovery therefrom) lasting more than three consecutive days, and any subsequent treatment or period of incapacity relating to the same condition, that also includes:

treatment two or more times by or under the supervision of a health care provider; or
one treatment by a health care provider with a continuing regimen of treatment; or
(3) A chronic serious health condition which continues over an extended period of time, requires periodic visits to a health care provider, and may involve occasional episodes of incapacity (e.g., asthma, diabetes). A visit to a health care provider is not necessary for each absence; or

 

[JETX]

JETX: why wouldn't FMLA apply. Doesn't it fall under one of the following statements from the link you posted?

First, IF FMLA is even applicable (company size, employment duration, etc.), it is for medical LEAVES.... NOT sporadic medical illnesses/absences. And stay-at-home acid reflux doesn't count.

 

[justalayman]

First, IF FMLA is even applicable (company size, employment duration, etc.), it is for medical LEAVES.... NOT sporadic medical illnesses/absences. And stay-at-home acid reflux doesn't count.

I (possibly incorrectly) assumed this was all connected

"2 of the 5 days I was in a hospital bed and the other 3 were due to up all night with fun that i will spare you the details of. "

and believed it fell under one of the statements.

 

[HomeGuru]

First, IF FMLA is even applicable (company size, employment duration, etc.), it is for medical LEAVES.... NOT sporadic medical illnesses/absences. And stay-at-home acid reflux doesn't count.

**A: what? I have been using the acid relux excuse for 4 months now.

 

[cbg]

And now to answer the poster's question;

There is nothing illegal about the policy, as long as the employer makes appropriate exceptions on those instances when FMLA would be indicated.

 

[justalayman]

And now to answer the poster's question;

There is nothing illegal about the policy, as long as the employer makes appropriate exceptions on those instances when FMLA would be indicated.

True....but I think that WAS the original question.

 

[cbg]

Which we won't be able to answer until the OP gets around to telling us about his length of employment and size of employer, huh?

 

[pattythorn]

I was on FMLA and I did not fit all the qualifications

Yes siree,

I was placed on FMLA, by my employer and I do not work the specified 1250 hours a year. Did my employer break the law? Just curious? Yes, it was good for me, but what about other employees out there in the work force that actually qualify for it. I did not know I did not qualify until after the fact. So, my question is....Does the government reimburse employer's for FMLA?

 

[JETX]

I was placed on FMLA, by my employer and I do not work the specified 1250 hours a year. Did my employer break the law? Just curious? Yes, it was good for me, but what about other employees out there in the work force that actually qualify for it. I did not know I did not qualify until after the fact. So, my question is....Does the government reimburse employer's for FMLA?

Don't 'hijack' someone elses thread. It is both rude and confusing.
Start your own thread... with your own post.

 

[kevinnku20]

I'm happy to see that there have been so many replies, however I think some of my statements have been misinterpated. I have not been term'd. I was written up for being excessively absent. However that write up was torn up do to the fact that my medical situation is protected under fmla. I had to talk with my doctor to find this out. When I approached the company about getting the FMLA paperwork they quickly backed off and ripped up the write up in-front of me. There have been many others walked out for the same reason I ALMOST was. So, yes if you have a cronic problem that keeps you at home wether consecutive or not, as long as it is related to the same medical issue and you have supporting documentaiton, you are coverd under FMLA, or atleast I was.

Basically what it boils down to is they are kicking people to the curb left and right on grounds of excessive absenteeism. While I understnad that in MOST cases this is legitiment, there have been in the bast 2 months at least 2 cases where I know it was not nessacary, or perhaps even legal.

 

[kevinnku20]

Which we won't be able to answer until the OP gets around to telling us about his length of employment and size of employer, huh?

length of employment 2.5 years, size of employer: global over 100,000 emplyees.. its the real life umbrealla corp. Although we haven developed the T-virus yet, I'm sure we're working on it.