Comments on: They got FMLA for that? 3 sticky situations http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/ Daily dose of benefits news and know-how Sat, 18 Jun 2011 21:36:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Cathy http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-10074 Cathy Thu, 04 Jun 2009 18:54:47 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-10074 Thank you for your help. I think I understand. FMLA is such a big issue to fully understand all the ramifications, and now there are more changes happening and changing. Have a great day, Cathy Thank you for your help. I think I understand. FMLA is such a big issue to fully understand all the ramifications, and now there are more changes happening and changing.
Have a great day, Cathy

]]> By: seashell http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-10043 seashell Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:36:58 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-10043 Hi Cathy, that COULD be correct. Lets start with the assumption that her employer allows her to break up her 12 weeks of parental leave and take it over the course of a year... Say she takes 6 weeks of parental leave. ANd later her new baby has a SHC...Since this is a new condition, she would be subject to the 1250 hours worked policy. If she is a 40 hr week employee, then she should meet the eligiblity test. If she DOES NOT meet the 1250 hours (for the new condition: SHC of her baby), the she conceivably take the remaining of her 6 weeks of parental leave (even though she would be using it for the SHC of that baby, and not bonding). Does this make sense? once they give her (or him) the 12 weeks for one condition, they can't take it away. But subsequent conditions (ie change for bonding to SHC) would need to meet the eligilbity test. Let me know if this doesn't make sense. Hi Cathy, that COULD be correct.

Lets start with the assumption that her employer allows her to break up her 12 weeks of parental leave and take it over the course of a year…

Say she takes 6 weeks of parental leave. ANd later her new baby has a SHC…Since this is a new condition, she would be subject to the 1250 hours worked policy. If she is a 40 hr week employee, then she should meet the eligiblity test. If she DOES NOT meet the 1250 hours (for the new condition: SHC of her baby), the she conceivably take the remaining of her 6 weeks of parental leave (even though she would be using it for the SHC of that baby, and not bonding). Does this make sense?

once they give her (or him) the 12 weeks for one condition, they can’t take it away. But subsequent conditions (ie change for bonding to SHC) would need to meet the eligilbity test. Let me know if this doesn’t make sense.

]]> By: Cathy http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-8936 Cathy Fri, 22 May 2009 18:07:03 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-8936 I have a question for seashell. If an employee takes 6 weeks of FMLA for maternity leave; then 2 months after her return to work, she needs to take another leave for her baby's medical reasons, this would be denied because she hasn't worked the required 1,250 hrs? I have a question for seashell. If an employee takes 6 weeks of FMLA for maternity leave; then 2 months after her return to work, she needs to take another leave for her baby’s medical reasons, this would be denied because she hasn’t worked the required 1,250 hrs?

]]> By: Autumn http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-1742 Autumn Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:41:45 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-1742 I have to disagree with Cheree. If it was workers compensation then a company has every right to run FMLA concurrent with workers compensation. Check with the laws in your state. I have to disagree with Cheree. If it was workers compensation then a company has every right to run FMLA concurrent with workers compensation. Check with the laws in your state.

]]> By: seashell http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-327 seashell Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:32:42 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-327 Reply to Lillian, An employee may request multiple absences (for different FMLA reasons) but all absences must meet the FMLA requirements, and you only have to grant the protected leave for up to 12 weeks in your leave year. So they can request 10 weeks of SHC leave for their husband's heart surgery and recovery and then if the employee (or spouse or qualifying child) has another condition, you would verify they worked 1250 hours from the date the new condition commenced (for a 1 year period from that date) and if they worked the 1250 hours within the past year, then you have to grant them another 2 weeks of FMLA. Again, answer is predicated on where these leaves fall within your leave year. Reply to Lillian,
An employee may request multiple absences (for different FMLA reasons) but all absences must meet the FMLA requirements, and you only have to grant the protected leave for up to 12 weeks in your leave year. So they can request 10 weeks of SHC leave for their husband’s heart surgery and recovery and then if the employee (or spouse or qualifying child) has another condition, you would verify they worked 1250 hours from the date the new condition commenced (for a 1 year period from that date) and if they worked the 1250 hours within the past year, then you have to grant them another 2 weeks of FMLA. Again, answer is predicated on where these leaves fall within your leave year.

]]> By: Cindy http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-326 Cindy Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:00:26 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-326 I agree with Cherene -- Mary's husband should be finding out why this was not reported as a worker's comp injury. I agree with Cherene — Mary’s husband should be finding out why this was not reported as a worker’s comp injury.

]]> By: Cherene http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-319 Cherene Fri, 08 Aug 2008 15:38:46 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-319 I'm sorry, my spelling was attrocious. I meant torn shoulder and that the question should be asked if this is truly a FMLA issue or Workman's Compensation issue. I’m sorry, my spelling was attrocious. I meant torn shoulder and that the question should be asked if this is truly a FMLA issue or Workman’s Compensation issue.

]]> By: Cherene http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-318 Cherene Fri, 08 Aug 2008 15:37:03 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-318 In response to Mary Baum's question...if your husband was on FMLA due to a torn should from a fall at work then shouldn't this have been workman's comp? And if so, this sounds as if there were much more shady practices involved than a FMLA decision involving his job description. 1. His treatments and time off should have been covered by workman's comp if it is a job related injury. 2. If job related, FMLA, will not come into play at all and his job description would not be evaluated by HR and he could not be forced into early retirement. He could be placed into another position as if his injuries cause him to no longer be able to do his prior job but this would mean a disability rating. Again, workman's comp related not FMLA. Have you contacted an attorney regarding this issue? In response to Mary Baum’s question…if your husband was on FMLA due to a torn should from a fall at work then shouldn’t this have been workman’s comp? And if so, this sounds as if there were much more shady practices involved than a FMLA decision involving his job description. 1. His treatments and time off should have been covered by workman’s comp if it is a job related injury. 2. If job related, FMLA, will not come into play at all and his job description would not be evaluated by HR and he could not be forced into early retirement. He could be placed into another position as if his injuries cause him to no longer be able to do his prior job but this would mean a disability rating. Again, workman’s comp related not FMLA. Have you contacted an attorney regarding this issue?

]]> By: Mary Baum http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-316 Mary Baum Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:52:27 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-316 My husband was on FMLA for a torn shoulder from a fall at work. He worked light duty throughout the treatment including physical therapy. When it was finished, he was told he had to undergo a performance test which indicated that he could only safely lift 50 lbs. Human Resources determined that his job description requires that he lift 100lbs. Consequently, he was forced to take early retirement. They hired him back parttime (doing his same job) without any benefits. It now costs us $675/mo for insurance - he has no life insurance (he's 61 years old and diabetic). Is this legal? Thank you very much for any help you can give me. My husband was on FMLA for a torn shoulder from a fall at work. He worked light duty throughout the treatment including physical therapy. When it was finished, he was told he had to undergo a performance test which indicated that he could only safely lift 50 lbs. Human Resources determined that his job description requires that he lift 100lbs. Consequently, he was forced to take early retirement. They hired him back parttime (doing his same job) without any benefits. It now costs us $675/mo for insurance – he has no life insurance (he’s 61 years old and diabetic). Is this legal?
Thank you very much for any help you can give me.

]]> By: Lillian http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/intermittent-fmla-cures-for-3-sticky-situations/comment-page-1/#comment-313 Lillian Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:46:38 +0000 http://www.hrbenefitsalert.com/?p=202#comment-313 If an employee having more then 2 yrs of employment service requires flma, and returns back to work less then the flma requirement, can the employee request another flma time off in the same year?? If an employee having more then 2 yrs of employment service requires flma, and returns back to work less then the flma requirement, can the employee request another flma time off in the same year??

]]>