• 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.

P

Pearl7

Guest
What is the name of your state? Washington

I was out on Family Leave after the birth of my child. I worked for a non-profit organization managing a staff of 12 teachers. While I was out on leave the COO and one of my co-workers made the decision to change the teacher's hours and job descriptions. This change dramatically changed their responsibilities and, as a result, my responsibilities as their manager. Was this against the FMLA?
 


cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Only if it was done in retaliation for your taking FMLA leave. If it would have happened regardless of your taking leave or not, then it was not an FMLA violation.
 

Beth3

Senior Member
Agreed. The FMLA does not prevent employers from instituting changes that would have been made IN SPITE OF an employee taking FMLA leave.

It's extremely unlikely they instituted changes for all the teachers because you were on leave.
 

cs1720

Junior Member
FMLA Retaliation

North Dakota

I'm in law enforcement. I recently took time off for the birth of my son. I followed department policy set forth by my agency and followed the steps/guidlines required under federal law in order to take 12 weeks off.

Two weeks into my FMLA leave. I recieved a call from another co-worker. This co-worker told me that my bossess were in a meeting and he overheard them talking about me. The co-worker told me they were very upset with me for taking this time off and told me that they said they were going to take training away from me for taking so much time off.

I confronted them on the issue in a day or so. I informed them that I was aware of the meeting they had and of their intentions of taking my approved training away from me for taking this time off. I told them if they took this training away from me, it was a retaliation violation of my rights for taking FMLA leave. I told them if they took this approved training away, which had been approved for several months, that I would be forced to contact an attorney. They told me in writting to go ahead and do what ever I have to do and they will do what ever they have to do. "I have this statement in written and I have recordings of what the co-worker told me he heard.

They take the training away.

I hire a attorney. We all meet and my administrators see what they did was retaliation and wrong. Afraid of being sued they re-instate my training.

I go on taking my FMLA leave. When I return from FMLA, I go to this training. Once back to work from training. I recieved a formal letter from my boss, telling me that he is taking specialized duties away from me. I'm the only person within the department capable and certified to handle what they take from me.

Again my administration retaliates against me by taking this time off. MY boss even tells me the reason he took this away from me is because I took to much time off, "FMLA"

He does one better. I hire another attorney and he even tells my attorney in front of the States Attorney the reason he took my duties away was because I took to much time off, FMLA 12weeks. "Recorded"

I attempt to go throught the department grievence procedure, set in policy. The policy says that any grievence brought against my boss has to go in front of his boss. I'm shut down by the States Attorney and told I cannot go throught the grievence procedure, even though it states I can in policy. I'm not allowed to meet with my bosses, boss. HR tells the States Attorney this is wrong, it's in department policy. This doesn't matter to them.

A federal lawsuit is filed in federal court.

The department is attempting to send another officer away to recieved the training I have to take over my duties before federal court.

I file for an injunction.

The case gets turned over to the insurance reserve. Their attorneys meet with my bosses. After four days in meetings, they make me a offer. " A clear admission", that I'm right and there wrong and they going to loose".

Their offer is to only re-instate my duties and no monetary settlement.

My attorney wants me to settle, saying that it's a good offer. I feel that after it's cost me $10,000 in fees to fight to this point, along with all the emotional stress and time involved that by them offering me only my durties back is wrong. I want a settlement, monetary.

Should I hire another attorney and do I have a chance at recieving a monetary settlement?
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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