Exempt Employee Sick Day

TLC Shelly · March 2005

I know that if an exempt employee works even one hour they are to be paid for the whole day. What happens, however, when they show up for work obviously sick and are sent home before they even get to their work area? Are we under obligation to pay them because they showed up with good intentions and were prevented from working by a supervisor who didn't want the illness spread to the rest of the workforce?

MaryHR · March 2005

We pay them, but deduct the day from their sick leave.

TLC Shelly · March 2005

What if they have no time accrued. We have a new employee, less than one month on the job. She knew she was sick but didn't want to take the time off so soon on a new job.

Shadowfax · March 2005

Well, the new rule is that an employee need not be paid if absent 'for at least a full day' unless they have accrued pto etc - which says to me that in the case of an employee who has not accrued pto (your situation), the full day absence would not have to be paid. However, you have a slightly different set of facts in that the employee came in, as I understand it did not actualy work, before being sent home by the employer. My analysis: employee did not call in sick; employee appeared for work; employer refused the employee the opportunity to work; employee was not absent for at least a full day 'for personal reasons', so the personal time exemption does not apply; there being no exemption into which you fit with any real clarity: employee is entitled to be paid. Now, your potential liability may not be that severe, depending on how many employees you have in that classification and the potential loss of exempt status for each of them for the time period during which the improper deduction was made - you can decide that based on the numbers. But, employer chose the exempt status, presumably to take economic advantage of the status - employer is stuck with the disadvantages as well. Pay her.

MaryHR · March 2005

I agree with Shadowfox, since she showed up willing to work and er sent her home, she should be paid.

pork1 · April 2005

And so well written, I agree with ever word.

Pork

Don D · March 2005

I disagree with Shadow and Mary. Allowing the exempt employee to dictate to you in such instances effectively hands over control of the payroll process to the employee. I see nothing in the FLSA or its revisions addressing exempt employees who report to the facility having an entitlement to be paid because they drug in. If this were the case and I were laid up on drugs and crutches and had my wife drive me up here and I said "Here I Am", my employer would have to pay me. Send him home and do not pay him if he has no leave bank available and you don't have other safety net options for him.

jimbomt · March 2005

I was under the impression, even with the new rules, that if the employee was SICK you had to pay them even if they had no sick leave or PTO but did not have to pay them for a full day if the absence was due to personal reasons?

Nat · March 2005

I agree with you except I think the rules say that if the employee is sick but has worked any part of the workweek they must be paid for the whole week - sick accruals or not. Of course, if they have sick or PTO accruals you can pull from them. Yes, you can deduct a whole day for personal reasons.

FunHRBanker · March 2005

I have been told that you do not have to pay an exempt employee for any full day that he/she performs no work. Therefore if this person had called in sick, s/he would not be paid for the day because s/he performed no work. According to the story, the ee didn't work. From an er perspective I'd say don't pay, from a compasionate side, I'd say pay and deduct the day when it is earned.

Don D · March 2005

I think the actual rule is that if you HAVE a sick leave accrual procedure/policy, you may charge the person's absence to his sick leave (and pay him); however, if you have such a program and the person has no leave bank left, you do not have to pay for that day of absence.

Shadowfax · March 2005

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-29-05 AT 07:55AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Just to be a nit picker: if you have been told that you need not pay an exempt for any full day they did no work - you have not been told the whole truth. Your statement is true IF the reason they did no work were for personal reasons (including sick). If the reason no work was done was because the emp/er had no work, or would not let the ee work - then you do have to pay. Hence, the dilemma of the original post here.
BYW, it seems to me the leave bank issue really only matters for part day absences, since full day absences for personal need not be paid in any event.

TLC Shelly · March 2005

Don, this was my thinking also. I was not involved in making the decision, but was charged with justifying it once the employee complained. Finally was able to talk to our state DOL who read the regulation to me. When I tried to restate in English to make sure I interpreted correctly, she said "No, you don't have to pay."

Exempt Employee Sick Day

Comments