Performance evaluation during intermitten FMLA

Searching for the right language to use on a performance evaluation for an employee who is on intermitten FMLA.
Anyone have any suggestions?

Comments

  • 20 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • Help me understand how the two relate.
  • During the intermitten leave the emp's performance has been sub par. We understand that and we are tempted to forgo an evaluation all together...
  • ARAINS: I concur, fore go the evaluation, unless the immediate supervisor feels that the employee is using his special leave, inappropriately. Day to day performance can and should be addressed with the individuals who are abusing their special situation.

    I do not believe, we professional HRs should coward down to a potential law suite. We the company, have a right to expect the scheduled working hours to be performed at a set standard and when that standard is not being met then we must tackle the monster right now and not later, when the opponent can score a touchdown.

    The employee is being done a disservice, if he/she does not know that the scheduled work outside of the intermittent leave schedule is not satisfactory. I have always practiced and taught leaders to get issues on top of the table and deal with them. It is an indicator of a "weak leader" to turn away from issues and let someone else handle it. It is easy to make sure the ee knows that the intermittant leave days are not part of the evaluation. Examples of poor performance are used that were or were not accomplished on the schedule work days. there being none, then the performance meets minimum standards and call it that.

    I recommend the supervisor face the enemy and bring him/her down, as scheduled. The failure to address the issues is also an ADA factor, by treating this employee differently and as "a disabled employee". I'm disabled, but I perform inspite of the pain and frustration of my personal sick inabilities. I would be more upset if my boss did not let me know when my performance was being supported by my special disability arrangements.

    PORK
  • Don't address the intermittent leave, it only opens the door that you are counting it against the ee. Base ratings and comments on the ee's performance while they are at work - leave everything else alone!
  • Exactly! You would be building a very strong case against yourself for FMLA retaliation if you so much as mention the intermittent leave on an evaluation. The only time, in my opinion, that FMLA should impact an evaluation at all is when you push the review out to compensate for a period of total absence so that you aren't evaluating someone during a period of time they weren't there.
  • Hold on there PoRk. On one hand you recommend not proceeding with the performance evaluation, then you go on at length about evaluating him and confronting his performance failures. Can you get off the fence please?
  • We have decided to place a statement in the employee's file that the evaluation will be completed at a later date, once they have returned to their normal schedule and duties.

    Thanks for your input.
  • LIVINDONSOUTH: You need to re-read the first paragraph. The words orient to the supervisors response. If the supervisor says the person is doing right then I concur. If the supervisor says the ee is abusing the system then read on for my advice. Riding the fence in our World of Work is an art form of compromize and influence, you or I get our position power by being able to make the important and right decision at the right moment in time. Reading the tea leaves is all part of our world. We stand our ground when positioned with all the facts and not just an emotional immediate reaction to any HR situation.

    A Blessed day and week-end for all!

    PORK
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 05-27-05 AT 09:17PM (CST)[/font][br][br]PoRK: Your posts make less and less sense. Reread your own post. You started off by recommending the review NOT be done. Then you spent several paragraphs recommending the review be done. Please get your act together before you launch out and post.

    "Riding the fence in our World of Work is an art form of compromize and influence, you or I get our position power by being able to make the important and right decision at the right moment in time. Reading the tea leaves is all part of our world. We stand our ground when positioned with all the facts and not just an emotional immediate reaction to any HR situation."

    I challenge anybody on the Forum, other than the Bacon Man, to attempt an explanation of the preceeding paragraph. . Can someone mail me a Spanish/Pork dictionary that might enable me to understand what this guy is talking about?

  • We have decided to place a statement in the employee's file that the evaluation will be completed at a later date, once they have returned to their normal schedule and duties.

    Thanks for your input.

    My evaluation of your decision is that you have indeed decided to discriminate against this employee for having taken FMLA. There is no other way to look at your decision. As a matter of law, when you treat an employee differently because he has exercised his FMLA rights, or you decide to not evaluate someone simply because they are on FMLA, you have violated federal law. It is clear to me that you are discriminating against an employee for having exercised his FMLA rights. The most ill-prepared of all lawyers will have you for lunch over this one. I hope your resume is polished up.
  • I also believe you should complete the evaluation...especially if its an annual evaluation. Think you potentially open up a can of worms if you don't. JMHO
  • This is an annual review. During this intermitten FMLA leave there have been performance issues. Our company understands that the ee's performance has been sub par due to health reasons that I won't go into. Why would you give the person a negative evaluation when you know what is going on. Isn't it better to wait a few months, once the ee is back on their feet and do the eval at that time?
  • Sorry to come across as the spelling/grammar police, but I can't watch this thread continue without clarifying: the type of leave mentioned here is INTERMITTENT, meaning "coming and going at intervals; not continuous."

    I agree with the posters who state the evaluation should be done just as it would have if the employee was not on FMLA.
  • Please excuse my spelling.

    This seems to be a topic of much contention...
  • I certainly agree that every ee deserves to receive feedback/review, whether it is positive or negative. I preach that very issue with managers all the time. Especially when they do not want to address a performance issue. This situation is different. The ee is not being negligent, they are most simply doing the best they can in a very difficult situation.

    I honestly don't believe that I have opened us up for a law suit.
    We are simply delaying the review. We are looking at the entire situation. We know why performance has been lacking, out of the individuals control.

    Perception around the water cooler is empatheic to the individual. I don't believe that other ee's are complaining about how we are handling the situation.

    Comments that I have heard indicate that they are glad that they work for a company that is willing to work with and help people when they are going through a very rough time.
  • IMHO it is bad practice to rely on water cooler advice when examing potential FMLA liability for your company. Will the people around the water cooler be willing to testify in a deposition? I doubt it.

    Treating someone differently on intermittent FMLA is not a good practice and will eventually expose your company to unnecessry liability.

    Disposing the advice of very smart and experienced HR professionals for back pats at the water cooler is a poor path to take. Good luck to you. I hope it turns out well.
  • Just to add to the advice that the review should take place. If reviews at your place are tied in to pay increases, the failure to give a review coupled with the lack of an opportunity to receive a pay increase WILL open up a potential retaliation complaint, and there will be good grounds for that complaint.
  • A Rains: My post, number 15, found its way to the trash heap, but I see you did respond to it. It is never a good idea to forgo an evaluation if your policy and practice call for them, unless, as I suggested, the employee has not worked a sufficient period of time to be reviewed.

    A much better way to handle this, in my opinion is this: In order to maintain the credibility and purity of your annual review process, conduct the review. If you so choose, handle the areas you suggest are medically driven with gentle comment or address them non-judgementally, but state a timetable for lifting that special dispensation. advise the employee that you are giving the annual review but will dispense with comment on certain areas which you feel will be improved once (whatever) changes.

    If you don't do this and send a signal to this employee, your other employees or someone else who wants to challenge your fairness later, you are setting yourself up for an unfortunate outcome, especially if the review is accompanied by a wage increase. You may, in the long run, be 'saying' to all that this job does not require acceptable performance if occupied by an incumbent with a medical problem(s). And you will certainly set the precedent that if one has a medical condition that precludes acceptable performance, then that level of performance expectation will be suspended for an undetermined time. And you WILL be challenged if you selectively apply this logic.

    The decision is certainly yours and the company's' however, now, I am left wondering why you bothered to ask for the opinions this group has to offer since you had your own answer up front. x:-)
  • Thank you for responding.
    It is difficult to explain the situation without disclosing protected information.

    From the beginning I was looking for the right language to place in the emp's file.

    The individual is protected while on FMLA.
    It has been intermittent. The individual knows that they have not been "performing" as they did before their leave began. Management knew that they would not be able to. We were willing to work with the person, knowing that once their status changed that they would be expected to return to their previous position with the same expectations.

    While on FMLA management didn't believe that it would be fair to this individual to give them poor ratings when it is due to their health...

    Thankfully there isn't any money involved at this time. Our increases happen at a different time.

    The review will be done just a few months later and I was only trying to find the right way to say that.

    I hope this finally makes sense.

    I do appreciate all of your input and I guess I just wasn't making myself clear.
  • "The individual is protected while on FMLA."

    One final comment. The individual only has job protection while on FMLA. There is no other protection granted by the Act. And, the employer is prohibited from treating him or her differently while in that status, including discrimination; including refusing to evaluate. Nobody here wants to hear anything personal about this individual and we certainly don't ask you to compromise his private information on the internet. But, my concern about why you posted to begin with, still exists. You had your answer before you ever keyed the Forum up. Good luck to both of you.
Sign In or Register to comment.