Question

1A-

An often litigated component of FMLA leaves is whether the employee provides adequate notice to the employer that FMLA leave is needed. Take a look at the White case in this chapter. Here the trial court and the appeals court disagreed on whether the employee provided adequate notice, based on whether the need for leave was foreseeable or not. The appeals court decided that it was not foreseeable; therefore the employee's notice was adequate.

After reading this case, do agree with the trial court's logic that the need for leave was foreseeable; therefore requiring more notice to the employer? Or do you agree with the appeals court?

2A-

Military leaves - and the subsequent return from military duty - often create difficult issues for employers in complying with the law. Even though the law is fairly straight-forward in what it requires, some employers find themselves in trouble when they interpret the law.

A good example is the Huhmann case. An employee returned from military leave, only to find that their bonus money was far less than what they felt they were entitled. The employer argued that the bonus was not seniority based; therefore it was not automatic for the employee to receive. The employer lost this argument and lost the case on appeal.

If you were advising an employer with employees in the military, how would you advise structuring a bonus pay plan to avoid liabilities like this case?

Answer 1

*****Dear Student, you are violating the Chegg Guidelines, by posting multiple questions in a single post. Please make a note that Revised Chegg Guidelines seriously restrict us in answering only one question! However, I've answered first question so that you would rate this answer positively. DO NOT VIOLATE Chegg guidelines as they may have a huge impact on your account in the future. So please understand and rate this answer with thumbs up kindly. It is a gesture that shows you support me. Thank you******

Family Medical Leave Act, 1993 (FMLA)

Under this act, an employee is entitled to leaves for “qualified medical and family reasons”.

An employer must adhere to provisions mentioned under this act while granting medical and parental leave to the employees.

Provision for notice under FMLA

An employee must provide sufficient and vital information or notice to the employer to qualify for the leave under FMLA. This is a necessary condition to be followed for taking unanticipated leave in case of sudden medical emergency.

The court found that the information provided by L did not reflect a serious medical condition and she provided no further information after resuming her duty on later date. The notice should “reasonably” provide facts to be eligible under FMLA. This was not seen in the case of L as she did not mention for the kind of illness of her mother.

Thus, the appeals court state that L might have provided the vital information.

The dissenting judge disagreed on the issue of inadequacy of the notice by stating that it is obvious that a person taken to hospital in an ambulance in emergency do require care. L also informed over the phone to her supervisor that her mother was in serious medical condition. Thus, the judge considered the notice as “might be sufficient” to qualify under FMLA.

The argument presented in favor “inadequacy” is more persuasive as even if it can be assumed that L’s mother require care and her leave is undisputed on the fact and cannot be so favored by the court. She did not inform further about her mother’s condition on the next day when she resumed her duty. She also did not mention about the kind of illness her mother was gone through at that time.

As per the facts, for a leave to be considered under FMLA, it cannot be simply based on “empathy”. It is understandable that patient require care under such circumstances but this mere fact cannot be qualified under FMLA.