FMLA - Intermittent or in two week blocks?
My Employer (a large telecommunications leader) granted me intermittent FMLA for “bonding” with my child (The local office of this particular company is in Alabama). I was leaving work early two days a week more or less under the FMLA granted to me.When I changed management teams, the new manager informed me that my FMLA was incorrect, and that I could only take it in blocks of two weeks or more - that intermittent FMLA for this reason was not allowed.
Later that day the HR rep informed me of the same issue. I was told that our company was able to interpret the “bonding” side of FMLA at its discretion and had chosen to implement a regulation to not allow it intermittently. I was told that they would work with me for “a while” until I would be back on their required schedule.
Due to the high cost of childcare, I cannot afford to care for the child right now with any other situation than the intermittent leave. My question is, should I go ahead and face financial ruin to comply - or do I have a case against this company? Do they really have the liberty to say I cannot use bonding FMLA intermittently?
Thanks for your time!Under the FMLA, employees are permitted to take unpaid leave intermittently for their own serious health condition. If John has cancer, he can take time out of the office for treatments.
Employees are also permitted to take unpaid leave intermittently to care for an immediate family member with a serious health condition. Suzie can work 6 hours per day rather than 8 hours per day to be with her daughter, who has leukemia.
However, the FMLA does not require that employers provide intermittent leave for a parent to bond with a baby. Mothers and fathers are permitted to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in the baby’s first year of life to bond. Such FMLA may be given intermittently, at the employer’s discretion. In your case, the employer permitted intermittent leave in your old position, but no longer permits it. That is their pejorative. So, no, you have no case against this company.
This entry was posted
on Friday, May 23rd, 2008 at 9:50 am and is filed under
Attendance Management.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply
-
Ask a Question
Categories
- Attendance Management (811)
- Benefits (1222)
- Compensation (1194)
- Employment Training (295)
- Hiring and Staffing (718)
- Human Resources Management (1916)
- Labor Laws (1032)
- Management / Leadership Development (294)
- Performance Management (178)
- Structural Development (41)
- Termination (429)
- Workplace Health & Safety (218)
- Workplace Management (396)
Blogroll
Archives
Recent Posts
-
Maternity Leave
December 4th, 2008 -
Lost Payroll Check
December 4th, 2008 -
Unemployment benefits after job elimination in Texas
December 4th, 2008 -
Maternity leave
December 4th, 2008 -
Misconception on Training and Development
December 4th, 2008 -
Salary non exempt
December 4th, 2008 -
Floating Holiday
December 3rd, 2008
Pages