Termination while on SDI?

[arichelle]

I was working for a small medical office company in California when my doctor put me on SDI (for pregnancy-related condition) in June 2001. I delivered my baby on August 23, 2001 and was supposed to return to work October 4, but my doctor put me back on disability for another medical condition and I was not due to return to work until January 9, 2002. I informed my supervisor as soon as my doctor had put me on disability, and the last time we talked, we agreed that I would be back in January. The other day, I received a letter in the mail stating that my supervisor was terminating my position because "California and Federal law only requires your position be held for a total of 12 weeks under the California Family Rights Act and the federal Family and Medical Leave Act." However, she initially informed me that our company was covered under the Family and Medical Leave act. I found out that was false information (because we are a company with under 50 employees), however, and although I've been covered on State Disability, she still terminated me. Was she right for doing so? What are the grounds for conditions of employment when someone is on SDI? Thank you for your help.

Michelle

 

[cbg]

The Federal Family and Medical Leave Act permits an employee to take up to 12 week's leave for an FMLA covered purpose with their job protected. After 12 weeks, the employer is permitted to terminate the employment. I'm not aware of any difference in California law. And it's not 12 weeks per condition, it's 12 weeks total. So unless there is something major that you are leaving out, I don't see anything illegal here. While you may not be terminated BECAUSE you went on disability, being on disability does not give you unlimited leave. At some point (that point being 12 weeks) the employer has the right to fill the position.

 

[arichelle]

Clarification on FMLA

I'm sorry, I don't think I made it clear that our company does NOT have FMLA. We are a company of under 50 employees (and therefore, are not qualified under FMLA standards). My supervisor initially informed me that we did have that, but I found out that she was wrong - she basically gave me false information in the first place. So my question is, was she still right for terminating me? And if so, on what basis?

 

[cbg]

Arichelle, you have LESS protections, not more, if your company is not subject to the FMLA. Your employer is not required to keep your job open indefinitely. You've been out since June; your not going to be able to come back till January; you work for a company with less than 50 employees and your employer needs someone doing your work. NO laws have been violated. There is NO law that says you cannot be terminated while you are on disability. You cannot be laid off BECAUSE you were on disability; that is to say, your employer cannot say, I need to lay someone off and I'm going to pick arichelle because she applied for disability. He CAN say, arichelle's been out for six months and still can't come back to work; I need to get her work done; I'm going to lay her off.

Your employer has broken no laws. If she made a mistake about whether you were covered under the FMLA, that's unfortunate, but even if you did have, they'd still be able to terminate your employment at this point. FMLA oly protects you for 12 weeks. You've been off longer than that.

 

[arichelle]

Thanks CBG. That is harsh to hear, but that's the law - I guess I should've known the legal terms beforehand. I don't mean to be difficult, but I just found out today that my boss had tried to call the Employment Development Department to access my disability/medical records. I spoke with an EDD representative and was told that only I was allowed to do that (access records). So my boss basically "pretended" she was me - simple, because she had all my personal information - social security, place of birth, mother's maiden name, etc etc. Now is there anything that can justify what she did? And if she was wrong for what she did, what action can I take against that, if any?

 

[cbg]

I can think of no reason why she would want that information UNLESS it was to make a final decision as to whether she should try to keep you on or not. Was she "right" to do what she did? Of course not. Was it justified? Possibly, if she was trying to save your job. Can you take legal action against her? Probably not. If it was for any reason other than I have described, it's not justifiable at all. Problem is, how are you going to prove it? Truly, most managers have better things to do with their time than to go snooping through their employees medical records for no reason. But you'll never prove that she was looking for information to fire you rather than information to save your job, even if that's the case.