Dixie Lee - come back - don't be afraid to state your opinion, have people disagree with you and not post again. Everyone new to the forum is a little put off by Don (maybe even by me or others) but the longer you're 'on' the more you will see that we are passionate people that care - it's just sometimes we take a tough love approach in certain circumstances. One thing I admire, and I believe others do as well, is to stick with your guns when you stick your neck out there.
'MAYBE people are put off by you' my patootie! The woman got put off by a collection of women she thought were men who were giving female comments on female problems. You are back on my A-List by the way. Don't get me started.
Cool - I'm on the "A" list - "A" must be for effort. Effort to try to let someone know it's okay to have extreme opinions & still let them know how I feel about you by referencing & applauding Marc's post about your professionalism & care of your employees. Thanks!
It is often difficult upon first post reading to determine when Don is pulling your leg and when he isn't. Mwild, I think you should have felt a definite tug on this one. Wow, the A list - you have been honored again.
Update: I requested that we be provided with a more definitive statement from the physician instead of simply, 'as needed'. What I got today is this note; "Employee may need to be absent from work partial days or periodically during the day to care for his family secondary to his wife's medical condition. This may be necessary for a number of years, dependant upon improvement of wife's condition."
It's signed by a nurse, I assume, 'for' the physician.
The employee's written addendum states, "I may need to leave work at most three days per month. We anticipate that this will continue for years. I will be needing to leave to care for my children. I will also need to help for administration of medication and physical movement since wife's condition can compromise her ability to move."
I'm not interested in splitting hairs. Neither am I wanting to approve leave that should not be. Are there any additional thoughts from you guys?
Curiouser and Curiouser. I am always afraid of setting precedent. This still looks a child care situation. The nurse's statement (by the way she could be a nurse practitioner)doesn't seem to indicate that he is needed to care for his wife. His statement says he is needed. My gut reaction is (although I sympathize with the man)to deny the FMLA.
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 11-19-03 AT 09:42AM (CST)[/font][br][br]So the medical note says the he will need to leave to care for the kids "secondary" to the wife's medical condition? What does that mean? Does that mean that the "primary" reason will be to care for the wife?
If that is the case I think I would be more inclined to grant it even though we all know it's bogus. I don't like to split hairs either, but lawyers sure do. Of course I've could have just read it wrong. If the "secondary" in the note is irrelavent then deny the leave. Seems odd that they would put the secondary reason and not the primary reason, but of course we know that the kids are the only reason. Sorry, I'm not much help. Good Luck Don.
Don - if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck - it's a duck. From the note, it sounds like it's a doctor's excuse for babysitting. I would deny. I would also give a heads up to our attorney & give them the run down in case things come up later.
Often the Right (meaning truth and justice)response is not the one that will guide the legal analysis. I would bet the lawyer types will say, give them the leave, the cost of litigation & exposure to the company greatly outweight the benefit the company receives from drawing a hard line.
I once worked for a company owned by a very agressive man. He kept a fund of money around that he called his "f*** you money" on the theory that he would rather spend the money on the lawyers than giving in to something he thought not right. He had enough money that he was a major client for a large law firm. Other lawyers would not go after him unless they had great cases cause they knew he would not settle, that cases would go all the way to decisions (read that to mean years and years) before anyone saw any money. He did not always win, but he always fought.
It will be interesting to see what happens in your case. What will the lawyers advise? You may be right, and I think you are, but you may not get the nod from legal.
I issued my decision to him today. I left the window open in my remarks to him; but told him that in all of his conversations and in the last two forms from the clinic as well as his own written form, the primary reason for the leave, as I view it, is childcare, which is not a qualifying reason for FMLA. Although his form does mention giving her medication, he told me yesterday that he supposes he can call her to be sure she is awake and he'll tell her to take her medication. I told him yesterday this is what the interractive process is for, to explore options in the intermittent discussion and now that that one is removed, perhaps, what's left? He asked if I were telling him he should go out and get another statement saying something different, removing the childcare issue and making it appear he is needed for her care. I told him that if he does that, it will call into question his credibility as well as the physician's and the whole process will be in doubt and no, I'm not telling you that at all. Although, if he does do that, I may have no option other than approval. Sorry for the lengthy response. Just want to be sure the answer is out there for those who were following this. He was floored to learn that babysitting was not covered and that FMLA would exhaust his vacation time. It appears he slipped under the radar on both of those last time he was approved (by a prior HR manager). I'm following written policy.
I think you made an excellent decision and backed it up well. I was a little iffy with the wording of the nurse's note, but you're right everything else points to babysitting. He sounds like the kind of guy that will try and get another note that says nothing about taking care of the kids. Didn't you mention before that his wife went to law school but didn't pass the bar exam? She might try and fight it legally, but they have nothing. This probably won't be the last of it for you, I'm sorry to say. Have a great weekend.
Your instincts were tuned in on this one. I think the interactive process you described really bolsters your case, especially when you document the EEs statement about getting another statement from the Dr. that would then make it OK. I also pictured the attorney wife in the background making sure hubby would come home and handle the kids and that it would be FML. I expect the new document will show up and you will get to have another session with the EE. Does he even feel guilty about trying to take advantage?
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 11-26-03 AT 04:02AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Guilty? An engineer? Who graduated from LSU?Married to an attorney? Guilty? Marc! Get a grip.
Thanks for the follow up, Don. I was wondering how this would pan out. Seems as if he was really surprised by your response, having been approved in the past. Amazing that he tried to get you to tell him to find a DR to lie (thats my interpretation of his reaction).
Its employees like this who cast negative opinions on the whole FMLA and ruin it for those who are legitimately in need of job protection. Thats really too bad.
Comments
ps - great post Marc - well said.
It's signed by a nurse, I assume, 'for' the physician.
The employee's written addendum states, "I may need to leave work at most three days per month. We anticipate that this will continue for years. I will be needing to leave to care for my children. I will also need to help for administration of medication and physical movement since wife's condition can compromise her ability to move."
I'm not interested in splitting hairs. Neither am I wanting to approve leave that should not be. Are there any additional thoughts from you guys?
If that is the case I think I would be more inclined to grant it even though we all know it's bogus. I don't like to split hairs either, but lawyers sure do. Of course I've could have just read it wrong.
If the "secondary" in the note is irrelavent then deny the leave.
Seems odd that they would put the secondary reason and not the primary reason, but of course we know that the kids are the only reason. Sorry, I'm not much help.
Good Luck Don.
I once worked for a company owned by a very agressive man. He kept a fund of money around that he called his "f*** you money" on the theory that he would rather spend the money on the lawyers than giving in to something he thought not right. He had enough money that he was a major client for a large law firm. Other lawyers would not go after him unless they had great cases cause they knew he would not settle, that cases would go all the way to decisions (read that to mean years and years) before anyone saw any money. He did not always win, but he always fought.
It will be interesting to see what happens in your case. What will the lawyers advise? You may be right, and I think you are, but you may not get the nod from legal.
He sounds like the kind of guy that will try and get another note that says nothing about taking care of the kids.
Didn't you mention before that his wife went to law school but didn't pass the bar exam? She might try and fight it legally, but they have nothing. This probably won't be the last of it for you, I'm sorry to say. Have a great weekend.
Its employees like this who cast negative opinions on the whole FMLA and ruin it for those who are legitimately in need of job protection. Thats really too bad.