labor lawAdivision of labor law center

A number of states have laws that prohibit the employer from terminating an employee when an official quarantine is implemented by state or federal public health officials.

The Center for Disease Control says that H1N1 is widespread in 48 states plus Puerto Rico and Guam at this time. Only Louisiana, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia are not seriously affected.

In Delaware, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Kansas, New Mexico and New Jersey, the employee’s job is protected if the employee is subject to an official quarantine order by a public agency. In addition, Kansas and Maine protect the employee’s job if he or she must remain at home to provide childcare when the schools are closed under a public quarantine order.

In most states plus the District of Columbia, the “public policy” exception to employment-at-will may protect an employee who is under a quarantine order. This would include Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, new Mexico, north Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, (more…)

Employers need to be aware that in some cases, H1N1 virus can trigger FMLA.

While H1N1 influenza, the so-called “swine flu” is not always a serious health condition under FMLA, it can be in some cases. Many people with the H1N1 report that the symptoms are very similar to – and no more severe than – the seasonal influenza. In those cases, the employee with swine flu is not entitled to FMLA.

However, if the employee is admitted to a hospital, or is incapacitated for 3 days or more and requires continuing treatment, then the FMLA threshold for a serious health condition has been met. H1N1 is most likely to be severe for children, the elderly and those with compromised immune systems.

According to the Center for Disease Control, flu-related hospitalizations are very high compared to the average for this time of year – and the flu season is only beginning.

In order to be in compliance, every employer should follow the FMLA notification process whenever an employee is absent with H1N1 virus for several days. The employer can and should require certification of the employee’s or family member’s serious health condition.

Employees are also entitled to take unpaid, job-protected FMLA leave when an immediate family member has a serious health condition. So an employee whose spouse or parent has H1N1, and meets the definition (more…)

Reversing a recent trend to extend broader coverage to employees under FMLA, the 8^th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that while treatment for alcoholism is covered by FMLA, a five-day drinking binge is not.

In Scobey v. Nucor Steel-Arkansas, a steel mill employee was no-call, no-show on April 10. The following day the employee, Talmadge Scobey, spoke briefly to his supervisor on the phone. Scobey sounded intoxicated, and told the supervisor he was not coming to work because he had suffered a nervous breakdown. However, when the supervisor tried to get more information, Scobey hung up.

The employee was also absent on April 12, 13 and 14. On April 14, the employee again phoned the supervisor, saying that he wanted to get help. The employee was referred to the HR manager, but did not contact her until April 19. At that point, the employee was referred to Nucor Steel’s employee assistance program, and entered an inpatient alcohol treatment program.

The employee argued that the employer should have known that his absence was for an FMLA-related reason due to his statements on April 11 that he had “a nervous breakdown” and the very colorful expression he used to mean that he was intoxicated at the time.

While employers should still err on the side of caution when providing (more…)

A new law signed by President Barack Obama on October 28, 2009 expands FMLA for military families even more than the NDAA or National Defense Authorization Act of 2008.

This change in the law will require every employer to update the Military Caregiver poster, even if they do not have any employees who qualify.

The  National Defense Authorization Act for 2010 provides for two  major changes to current FMLA regulations: 

• Families of Armed Forces members on active duty are covered, not just family members of the National Guard and Reserve
•  Military caregiver leave is expanded to cover the families of some veterans 

It appears that these changes are retroactive, according to Matthew Effland, an Indianapolis attorney specializing in FMLA issues.

Active Duty Included

Under the new law, when a member of the Armed Forces is deployed to a foreign country, his or her spouse, son, daughter, parent, step-child, or step-parent can take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected FMLA leave for any “qualifying exigency.”

Many employers have already been granting this leave to military families, and not just the families of Reserve or National Guard members who are called to active duty. In fact, it is unclear why the U.S. Department of Labor interpreted the original law so narrowly in the final days of the second Bush administration.

Under the current regulations, qualifying exigencies include attending military-sponsored functions, making appropriate financial and legal arrangements, handling details of a short-notice deployment, attending counseling, and making alternate childcare arrangements. In addition, an employee can take up to 5 days of FMLA for rest and recreation or R&R under the law. The employee can also use FMLA up to 90 days following deployment for arrival ceremonies, post-deployment ceremonies and other military events.

Military Caregiver Leave Expanded to Veterans

The NDAA also permits an employee who is the son, daughter, spouse, or parent to take up to 26 weeks of unpaid, job-protected FMLA during a 12-month period to provide care for a service member who has been injured or contracted a disease in the line of duty.

This extended FMLA leave also applies to the injured soldier’s next-of-kin, regardless of the relationship. This means in some cases that an in-law, grandparent, sibling, aunt, uncle or cousin could qualify for military caregiver leave.

The new law permits the (more…)

Illinois Governor Pat Quinn recently signed three new employment bills into law. The laws address wage discrimination at the state level, and increase the rights of victims of domestic abuse.

Expanded Leave Rights

Every Illinois employer needs to be aware of an amendment to the Illinois Victims Economic Security and Safety Act. The new law requires employers to extend unpaid, job-protected leave to victims of domestic violence or sexual violence.

Under the new law, effective August 24, 2009, employers with 50 or more workers must provide up to 12 weeks of FMLA-type leave to employees who are victims of rape, sexual assault or another type of sexual violence. The law requires employers with 15 to 49 employees to provide  8 weeks of unpaid leave.

Employers must also extend the same benefits to victims of domestic violence of any kind.

This new law is notable because Illinois has no family leave law at the state level – so this is the state’s first intrusion into expanding FMLA to smaller employers. Currently, there is no Illinois law that requires an employer with 15 to 49 workers to provide leave for any reasons other than sexual violence or domestic violence.

New Illinois Discrimination Law

Under a new Illinois discrimination law, victims of stalkers, domestic violence and other crimes are protected from employment discrimination. The amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act prohibits the employer from discriminating against an employee who is protected by an order of protection or a similar order issued in anther state.

Under the law, which goes into effect on January 1, 2010, the employer cannot make employment decisions based entirely or in part on whether a worker is shielded by an order of protection.  For example, the employer could not refuse to hire Jane, a teacher, simply because she has an order of protection against her ex-husband Ted. (more…)