EAP hours paid or unpaid?

We have an EAP counselor/referal on staff. When an employee uses his services, should the time with the EAP staff person be considered work time or personal time off?
It is my understanding it can be either, we just need to have policy to support it.

What are other companies doing with this?

Comments

  • 12 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • While we do not maintain a counselor on staff we do provide an EAP service to the employees. If we are mandating attendance at the EAP as well as setting the time for the counseling then we typically pay. If we do not, we don't pay.

    For example, we had one situation where two employees weren't getting along and one requested that they attend some counseling to help the two of them work better together. We agreed and set up the sessions at our conference center, during their normal work hours. This was paid time.

    In another situation we had an EE test positive for alcohol while working and mandated he attend EAP sessions. This was scheduled by him and done outside of his normal hours. This was unpaid time.

    Hope this helps.
  • We never pay wages while employees are involved in personal EAP meetings, even if we insist on their involvement with the EAP, unless the ee is salaried exempt and hen we would require it be toward the end of the day or after hours.

    We would rather not deal with the likelihood of setting precedents, having the appearance of favoritism or invoking the perception of entitlement.

    We have set the program up, keep the relationship viable, pay the monthly service fees and bring the EAP personnel on site to speak to (paid) groups. Outside of that, it's up to the ee.
  • Okay, need some enlightenment.

    I thought company "had to pay" when attendance was a mandate, just as described in the above scenarios. Agree that personal EAP sessions are a different story, but if company has required/mandated that an employee attend counseling sessions during work hours for anger management, alcohol and drug abuse, etc. as a condition of their continued employment, then the employer must pay for that time off the job to attend.
  • Linda, it looks like in both instances you are mandating attendance? What's the difference?
  • Telling an employee that he must go and enroll himself in an employer sponsored EAP program as a condition of employment is not like telling an employee that he must attend a Saturday seminar, in my opinion. If it were, you would be required to pay the employee's hourly wage, plus overtime, for every hour of the six week program. That's absurd.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-27-05 AT 07:08AM (CST)[/font][br][br][font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-27-05 AT 07:07 AM (CST)[/font]

    Ok, Don, let's walk this through. I am seeking understanding from your point.

    Employer tells employee s/he must attend counseling for anger management. The sessions are from, let's say, 2-4 every day M-F. And, oh by the way, you (employee) must burn PTO or take time off without pay to attend these sessions. And, if you don't attend these sessions your employment will terminate.

    Now, my thoughts are, employer is really showing a lot of support to this employee with the problem. Not. Would it not be more beneficial to support the employee in such a situation? Look, employee, you have a problem. Company wants to help you so we are sending you to counseling at company expense. You must complete these sessions in order to keep your job. We're behind you in this so we are going to pay you your regular wages for time off the job to attend these sessions.

    Don't you think you would have a more loyal employee from this type of approach?

    This is my argument, Don, persuade me with yours.
  • I'm looking at this belatedly, and these are the guidelines we use:
    29 CFR 785.27
    "Attendance at lectures, meetings, training programs and similar activities need not be counted as working time if the following four criteria are met:
    (a) Attendance is outside of the employee's regular working hours; [and]
    (b) Attendance is in fact voluntary; [and]
    (c) The course, lecture, or meeting is not directly related to the employee's job; and
    (d) The employee does not perform any productive work during such attendance."
    Also - 29 CFR 785.28
    "Attendance is not voluntary, of course, if it is required by the employer. It is not voluntary in fact if the employee is given to understand or led to believe that his present working conditions or the continuance of his employment would be adversely affected by nonattendance."
    I.e., if you require, you pay, if you refer, you don't have to. That's not a policy; that's the law.
  • I don't agree with what you've said. I contend that you are stretching what you've quoted to fit the answer you seek. It isn't the law in this case. "Attendance", as cited in the law, means attending work, lectures, training sessions or meetings that are connected to the work and the business. Again, if you will look at this logically, assume I mandate a 30-45 day alcohol or drug cessation inpatient treatment program followed by regular three-a-week attendance at AA in order to keep your job. Do you really think I am going to pay you for all of that mandatory attendance. Of course not!

    Also, when we mandate connection with an EAP, we are not mandating attendance during any particular time period. We don't care when they attend or get scheduled, just do it. If they miss work in the process, they are not paid.

    To carry this point a step further; if I mandate that an employee report immediately for a random drug screen and it is at a time not on his shift, do you think I am going to pay him an hourly wage to sit at the clinic. No.
  • Backpedaling here...
    To address your examples - the 30-45 day inpatient treatment would be addressed by a leave policy - FMLA if certified, administrative if not. (Our policies generously provide paid FMLA leave for serious medical condition of employee.)
    Re the EAP appointment - if they are required to go as a condition of their job and the appointment is scheduled during work time, they get paid. EAP appt. as condition of continued employment is considered "meeting..directly related to the employee's job". They are also not required to go outside of working hours if the appointment(s) is a condition of employment. Appts. outside of working hours are not paid, but with the option we offer, it doesn't happen unless the appt. is voluntary.
    Re the request to report for an immediate random drug screen not during a shift - we wouldn't do it. Are you talking about calling someone at home to come in off the clock? I can see no reason for it. If the request is just before or just after work, employees are paid.

    By the way, just when did Don D re-emerge? Just couldn't stay away??? What's in a number anyway....


  • What's in a number? I don't know, but will ask a lady I know who just had her bust size increased. Random drug screens are frequently done outside of normal working hours, especially with over the road truckdrivers, hundreds of thousands of them. We shall agree to disagree. I will never pay for somebody to do what it takes to retain his employment. The company, in the present case, has already gone above and behond (as you saw posted on another thread under FMLA). Paying for that would only potentially encourage further abuse. These 'patients' are at liberty to schedule up to seven free counseling sessions that the company is already paying for. I didn't take him to raise.

    In the case of the inpatient treatment, it would be FMLA and we never pay wages during that.
  • Don D at 10,001 posts?

    Looks like a couple more got snuck in somehow.


  • There's a bug in the system, for sure. I think James is monkeying with stuff.
Sign In or Register to comment.