I think some employers get confused when they are subject to the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and have other leave of absence policies in a handbook or Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Sometimes it’s almost like which comes first the chicken or the egg? Let’s see if we can answer this burning question.
For some reason, many employees don’t want to use FMLA and prefer to take leave under another leave policy or just use their sick time. This makes no sense. Are they trying to “save” it for a rainy day or do they think it reflects badly on them? FMLA actually provides significant rights and protections, including that the absence cannot be counted against them for disciplinary action. But you already know this; just like you know a no fault attendance policy violates FMLA.
Well, one employee who works for a “local government public agency” wrote the Department of Labor (DOL), Wage and Hour Division, asking if his or her employer was following the law. Let’s call the employee “Dave,” so we don’t have to keep saying he or she as the DOL’s opinion letters maintain the anonymity of the person seeking guidance.
Apparently Dave’s employer used to allow employees to use paid leave under the CBA before using unpaid FMLA leave. The employer also treated the paid leave under the CBA as continuous employment without affecting its employees’ seniority under the CBA and civil service rules, but Dave believed the same may not have been true for unpaid FMLA leave.
I don’t know about you, but right now I see some problems with the employer’s policy. Apparently, the employer did too because the policy was revised, thus earning the Dave's angst. The new policy requires an employee to use FMLA whenever the time off qualifies under it and the paid CBA leave now runs concurrently.
The DOL first emphasized that whenever an employer has sufficient information to determine that an employee’s leave request might qualify under FMLA, it must designate it as such and without delay. “[N]either the employee nor the employer may decline FMLA protection for that leave.” Moreover, this obligation exists regardless of CBA rights.
However, if the employer requires the FMLA leave and paid CBA leave to run concurrently, it must allow the employee to maintain seniority rights under the CBA leave. While FMLA does not require seniority to continue to accrue during leave, the anti-discrimination rules would prohibit discriminating against employees who are on paid leave and those who are on paid leave concurrently with FMLA.
While I may have forgotten to designate which leave was the chicken and which was the egg, the answer we care about is that an employer must always designate FMLA leave whenever the circumstances qualify under the act. If the employer fails to do so, it may count a FMLA protected absence for disciplinary action resulting in a violation. Conversely, if an employer counts time off as FMLA when it doesn’t actually qualify, it may later misinform the employee that the twelve weeks of FMLA leave have been exhausted, when they haven’t, again resulting in a violation.
Bottom line: it either is or isn’t FMLA qualifying leave, and the employer has to get it right. Sometimes it can be a tough call. That is when you need to consult with an experienced employment attorney.
Incidentally, the DOL declined to offer an opinion regarding the lawfulness of the employer’s prior policy. I think we know the answer to that. Hopefully, the limitations period has run.
- Of Counsel
An of counsel attorney in the firm’s Detroit office, Claudia D. Orr exclusively represents and advises employers and management in employment and labor law matters.
Ms. Orr has an ever-growing practice in Alternative Dispute ...
Add a comment
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Employment Discrimination
- Human Resources
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Wage & Hour
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Minimum Wage
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Employment Agreement
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Regulatory Law
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- OSHA Issues
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- Title VII
- Sick Leave
- Workplace Harassment
- Hostile Work Environment
- Business Risk Management
- Noncompete Agreements
- National Labor Relations Board
- Department of Justice
- Transgender Issues
- Workers' Compensation
- Medicare Issues
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Unemployment Benefits
- Sexual Harassment
- Class Actions
- Civil Rights
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- Emergency Information
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Title IX
- Tax Law
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- Union Organizing & Relations
- Court Delays Ruling on Fate of Michigan’s Paid Sick Leave, Minimum Wage Laws Until February 2023
- Michigan Supreme Court Affirms State’s Civil Right Law Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation
- DOJ Issues Guidance on ADA, Opioid Crisis Issues
- Congress Passes Law, With Retroactive Effect, to Invalidate Forced Arbitration Provisions at the Employee’s Election
- U.S. Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks Implementation of Vaccine Requirement for Large Businesses
- Contractual Limitations Periods STILL Alive and Well... on job Applications!
- Federal Appellate Court Takes Brakes Off COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Carousel
- Employers: Hang on for Another Spin Around the Vaccine Mandate Carousel
- Stray Comments can Lead to Employer Liability
- President Biden's COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Face Uncertain Future