If your organization doesn’t have a use-it-or-lose-it leave policy in place, employees can easily stockpile huge blocks of vacation or personal leave. Then, if they become ill, they may try to use that time as a substitute for.
So, if an employee asks you to approve an especially long vacation, and you suspect the reason may be a covered condition under the, beware automatically rejecting the request.
Reason: You may risk an FMLA interference lawsuit. Plus, any subsequent discipline could be considered retaliation.
Recent case: Patrick Hurley suffered from depression and anxiety, but apparently kept a lid on the condition and didn’t use much vacation.
That changed when he began having severe panic attacks at work. He sent a request to the CEO asking to take most of the rest of the year off on vacation. He pointed out that he had accumulated several weeks of vacation.
The CEO denied his request and told him to report for a meeting. During the meeting, Hurley explained the time off was for medical reasons. The company terminated him.
Hurley sued, alleging both interference with hisand retaliation. He provided medical certification of his condition after the fact.
The court said his case could go forward, based largely on timing and the allegation that the CEO knew Hurley wanted to use his vacation for medical reasons. (Hurley v. Kent of Naples, No. 2:10-CV-334, MD FL, 2011)
Advice: Don’t fire someone who has just revealed the need to take time off for a medical condition unless the discharge reason is clearly unrelated to the request.
- The cure for FMLA pains ... a Cancun vacation?
- When FMLA and ADA could be factors, consider both laws before denying return to work
- How do we handle FMLA leave when the time off is less than our usual minimum?
- Extra leave under MPLA subject to employer approval
- FMLA leave expired? You don't have to reinstate