FMLA Eligibility

Rockie

I have an employee who will not have been employed for 12 months until July 23. She needs to go out on FMLA the first of July. She is not eligible the first of July, but would be eligible July 23. Would she qualify for any part of FMLA or how would this work?

Thanks.

Rockie

Please help me with this guys! Don't be shy!

Terry

Ok, I'll take a stab. My best guess is that she is not eligible for FMLA since she will not have completed the full year requirement at the time she will be off work.

NaeNae55

I'm no expert, but I think the employee will be eligible for FMLA on July 23rd. Between July 1st and the 23rd, it would all depend upon how much leave time she has available, and what your policies for non-FMLA leave are. How do you handle non-FMLA leave? I believe July 1st to 22nd should be handled that way, and then begin FMLA (assuming she is still off work) on 7/23. Unfortunately, this method could cause the employee to be allowed off more than 12 weeks. Anyone else want to comment?

Don D

I vote no. If the ee applies for FMLA for an event beginning on the day you say she needs to go out, she is not eligible for the reason you gave, she's not been there a year. If she re-applies at a later date, the date on which she might have otherwise been employed 12 months, she is still not eligible because it is the same event for which she went out on a date when she was not eligible. I'm counting on the rationale being that she must have met the eligibility requirements on the beginning date of the event for which she went out. Good question. Where's the lawyers when you need one??

awilliams

Here I am (a lawyer, that is). The qualifications for FMLA are that an employee work for the company for a full year (depending on you you calculate it, fiscal, calendar, or whatnot) and work at least 1,250 hours during that time. Rockie, your employee is not eligible for FMLA leave because she has not satisfied the tenure requirement of working for a full year. As stated in previous posts, you could offer her use of other leave time (such as vacation, sick leave, short-term disability)during the meantime. If she is still on your payroll(and counted as an employee)when she reaches the one-year mark, she will qualify IF she has worked 1,250 hours during that year. Take a look at our HR Special Report on FMLA Leave for more information.

Theresa Gegen TX

Also, note that the FMLA regulations require that you let the employee know fairly quickly (I believe it might be within 3 days of the request), whether or not she is eligible and why. I would review the regs, then inform the employee about her ineligibility for FMLA.

Good Luck!

moneyman

We had that situation about a year ago and was advised by our attorney that the employee could start her maternity leave by using her PTO. However, when that one year mark hit, the employee would qualify under FMLA guidelines (she had already worked more than 1250 hours). We had to face the possibility that the employee could be out for more than 12 weeks. Since the employe couldn't afford that much unpaid time, we did not have to face an "extended" leave.

njjel

May as well throw my two cents in here. Let's not forget that you CAN allow an employee more than the law provides for IF the company wishes to do so. However, you must also remember that once you do that for one employee you must do it for ALL.

SandiF

Does that mean then that she could have the time off before being eligible and then an additional 12 weeks? That does not seem fair. Or is it a total of 12 weeks allowed, but just the time from her eligibility date countng as FMLA? Which means that later the same year she could have the additional weeks for another FMLA??

moneyman

Fair or not, the guidelines that we were told to use (provided by our benefits attorney), gave the employee 12 weeks from the time she was eligible. We were told that we could not go back to "retro" the previous time taken because she was not elibible at that time. It did not matter how much time that we gave off prior to that 1 year eligibility date, what mattered was that once she was eligible, she was entitled to 12 weeks.

Don D

There's one way you could have avoided it and that would have been by having a company policy more generous than the federal requirement....more generous by not requiring the one year's employment. That way, if your policy was so written, she would have been eligible for 12 weeks without having been employed for the past year and once she had been out 12 weeks, that would be it. But, such a policy would have opened several other cans of 'worm precedents'.