Discriminating or Not?

[Matikas]

What is the name of your state? TX

I have requested to work from home due to my wife is having a medical procedure done that will leave her incapacitated for several weeks. My companies HR has refused to let me do this for unknown reasons, but will let me either take time off with pay or time off without pay. Yet we have several people at my office and a couple of remotes that work from home all year long and I'm asking for up to 1 to 2 weeks.

Am I being discriminated of this or am I just SOL?

Thanks in advance.

 

[cbg]

No, this is not illegal discrimination. The employer has no legal obligation to let you work from home, even if there are others who do so. They may think that there are enough people working from home; they may not think your job can be easily done from home; there may be another reason. They don't have to give you the reason, either.

You may be entitled to FMLA, but since they are offering to let you take the time off with or without pay, they clearly have that covered.

 

[Matikas]

That really bites. I do what the other guys do, write software. It can be done just as easliy at home.

THanks for the info.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

I'm not sure but it is possible to request specifically to work from home as an ADA accommodation, allowing you to care for your wife during her time of incapication, you would need medical confirmation of the need and that doesn't mean that the employer has to accommodate and it would be wise to apply for FMLA. It would also have to not significantly affect the work, the example of other employees working from home may help you, but I know of companies in telecommunications who only allow management to work from home even though they actively promote other employers allowing telecommuting, go figure. Do you have some other compelling reason, such as working off sales commission where not working for several weeks would adversley affect your wages?

It may just be easier to take the paid time off, but be sure to apply for FMLA.

 

[cbg]

Temporary conditions are not covered under the ADA. We have NO evidence to support a belief that the ADA is even a factor here.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Temporary conditions are not covered under the ADA. We have NO evidence to support a belief that the ADA is even a factor here.

I said I wan't sure. But if he is working on a software project could still be done from home even at odd hours, and could jeopardise the project if he wasn't able to work uninterrupted. However software writers are very territorial in their work and that may be more the reason than the issue of taking time off from work.

The length of disability should not matter under ADA, only that it be medically secessary, which would have to be confirmed. I'm only looking at possibilities, there are also other unspoken implications no matter which way things go.

 

[cbg]

Frankly, considering that the medical condition is not that of the employee, but the wife, I think the ADA is a real stretch to begin with. Yes, before you explain it to me, I realize that caring for dependents can be covered under the ADA. I know that as well as you do. But there is NO evidence that the wife's condition is even covered under the ADA, let alone that the circumstances are such that the employer would need to provide the employee with an accomodation, let alone that that accomodation would necessarily be working from home.

FMLA is a real possibility, and it appears that the employer is already aware of that since they've not only offered the time unpaid, but paid, which they are not required to do. But let's not go looking for complications that most likely don't even exist, okay?