Any FMLA experts out there?

[texmati]

I admit to not being 100% sharp this morning.

I took mat leave with my son from 9/22/09 to 1/13/10. That's more than 12 weeks. Because of my company's vacation rollover policiy, I took the first 8 weeks as paid FMLA, 3 weeks as vacation, and then another 4 weeks as 'FMLA' unpaid time.

I'm due with my next baby on 1/24/10. If I go earlier than the 13, am I not eligible for the FMLA time?

I"m still waiting for HR to get back to me, but as I seem to be the only pregnant employee out of thousands I think she's just going to make up whatever sounds good to her. I want to be able to push back if necessary.

[oaktreemama]

I believe it is every year. So if you went early they could certainly push back and would be within their rights to do so.

[liberal_chick]

I agree with PP, it is 12 weeks a year, but when do your years roll over? That is my question. My dad took a bunch of FMLA when my mother was in a car accident and his 12 weeks automatically renewed at the first of the year. If your company works off that model (and I have no idea if that is regulation or not), then you'd have another 12 weeks beginning 1/1/11 and you still have several weeks in 2010 available to you.

Did that make sense?

[bobandjess99]

It is up to your company to CHOOSE what method they will use to calculate the 12 month period , BUT, they are supposed to inform employees of what method they are using. This is something that SHOULD be in your employee manual/menefits manual/HR papers, etc. Here are the ways they can choose to do it:



Under FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act), if you are an “eligible” employee, you are entitled to as much as 12 weeks of leave for certain family and medical reasons during a 12-month period.


Question: How is the 12-month period calculated?

Here are four possible answers:

1.the calendar year;
2.any fixed 12-month “leave year,” such as a fiscal year, or a year starting on the employee’s “anniversary” date;
3.the 12-month period measured forward from the date any employee’s first FMLA leave begins; or
4.a “rolling” 12-month period measured backward from the date an employee uses FMLA leave.

[lucysmom]

Yes, what the PP said. (I'm a manager and have had to figure this out for our office.) If your company did not establish and give notice of the method they use to calculate the year, they likely will need to use the approach most favorable to you.

You can also consider, though, that if you have a right to vacation or sick time that renews or refreshes at the beginning of the year, you likely are entitled to use that apart from FMLA coverage. Are you in a union with a collective bargaining agreement; do you have an employment contract; is there an employee handbook? If any of those exist & establish that you get a new sick leave bank on Jan 1, for example, you should get to use it separate and apart from any FMLA coverage.

[lolar2]

I'm not familiar with "paid FMLA." Can someone explain please?

[texmati]

Unfortunately, maternity coverage is not spelled out at all in our companies policies. (I did complain about that last pregnancy.) All they've done is slap the FMLA policy up there.

By paid FMLA- what was explained to me is that I get 6/8 weeks of STD which is actually paid, because this is a medical event. But somehow, this also eats in to my FMLA time. (leave that I get without pay, but with my benefits and job gauranteed). Then I get the remainder of my FMLA balance, but I iwll not be paid at that time.

That's what I meant by paid/unpaid fmla.

[texmati]

Originally Posted by bobandjess99

It is up to your company to CHOOSE what method they will use to calculate the 12 month period , BUT, they are supposed to inform employees of what method they are using. This is something that SHOULD be in your employee manual/menefits manual/HR papers, etc. Here are the ways they can choose to do it:



Under FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act), if you are an “eligible” employee, you are entitled to as much as 12 weeks of leave for certain family and medical reasons during a 12-month period.


Question: How is the 12-month period calculated?

Here are four possible answers:

1.the calendar year;
2.any fixed 12-month “leave year,” such as a fiscal year, or a year starting on the employee’s “anniversary” date;
3.the 12-month period measured forward from the date any employee’s first FMLA leave begins; or
4.a “rolling” 12-month period measured backward from the date an employee uses FMLA leave.

Interesting... so this should be in my companies policies somewhere. I will do some digging.

[lolar2]

Originally Posted by texmati

Unfortunately, maternity coverage is not spelled out at all in our companies policies. (I did complain about that last pregnancy.) All they've done is slap the FMLA policy up there.

By paid FMLA- what was explained to me is that I get 6/8 weeks of STD which is actually paid, because this is a medical event. But somehow, this also eats in to my FMLA time. (leave that I get without pay, but with my benefits and job gauranteed). Then I get the remainder of my FMLA balance, but I iwll not be paid at that time.

That's what I meant by paid/unpaid fmla.

Look at questions 20 and 21 on this: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/fmlaada.html and also I saw some websites indicating that you have to have been notified in writing, ahead of time, that the STD would count towards FMLA. They can't do that retroactively.

[Ellien C]

Originally Posted by texmati

By paid FMLA- what was explained to me is that I get 6/8 weeks of STD which is actually paid, because this is a medical event. But somehow, this also eats in to my FMLA time. (leave that I get without pay, but with my benefits and job gauranteed). Then I get the remainder of my FMLA balance, but I iwll not be paid at that time.

That's what I meant by paid/unpaid fmla.

This sounds right to me but I'm by no means an expert. In my case my 6 week STD (short-term disability) ran concurrent with FMLA. In my case I was required to use 5 days vacation (so it was paid) then STD (8 weeks also paid). This 9 weeks paid time runs concurrent with FMLA. I could then take the remainder of my FMLA leave (3 weeks) unpaid or I could go back to work, which a lot of people at my company do.

[texmati]

So.... it looks like I"m screwed, (or screwed myself). So sometime after I complained to HR about the crummy documentation during last pregnancy, they put up new info about FMLA coverage. Here is the verbage:

About the 12 month period:

An eligible employee can take up to 12 weeks of leave under this policy during any
12-month period. The company will measure the 12-month period as a rolling 12-month period measured backward from the date an employee uses any leave under this policy.

Regarding the STD running concurrently.

Disability leave for the birth of the child and for an employee's serious health condition, including workers' compensation leave (to the extent that it qualifies), will be designated as FMLA leave and will run concurrently with FMLA leave. For example, if an employer provides six weeks of pregnancy disability leave, the six weeks can be designated as FMLA leave and counted toward the employee's 12 week entitlement. The employee may then be required to substitute accrued (or earned) paid leave as appropriate before being eligible for unpaid leave for what remains of the 12 week entitlement.

This is all different than what happened for me just a few months ago with my son. I did have the fmla and leave running concurrently, but I was able to take vacation in addition to that. (So was my coworker).

Does anyone know if there is a rule that I *have* to take fmla right after the birth of my child? If my husband can take fmla time to care for my kiddo weeks after delivery, why can't i? From reading the actual FMLA policy fact sheet, it seems like I should be able to take fmla just to care for my child.

And let's say I'm not FMLA eligible by the time of the birth-- they have to give me the 6 weeks STD, correct? by 6 weeks pp, I really should be eligible. What's to stop me from taking the FMLA at that point?

I wonder if this is why my usually friendly hr person was so hostile when I started asking questions around the time of my son's birth. I don't think they had the policies in place correctly.

[hildare]

from what i remember, they base the decision to give you fmla upon a doctor's signed statement. my particular ob was kind and worked with me, so i was able to use sick leave, and annual leave and then when i ran out of those, i submitted paperwork to begin counting down the fmla. they would have done them concurrently with the fmla otherwise.
if you have accrued vacation and/or sick leave, you could use that, and you don't have to tell them when the baby comes.. just have your forms filled out to begin the fmla the 13th so you are covered as the year has rolled over. i don't know if that's 'dishonest' but.. anyway.
congratulations, btw!

[CallMeMommy]

Originally Posted by texmati

So.... it looks like I"m screwed, (or screwed myself). So sometime after I complained to HR about the crummy documentation during last pregnancy, they put up new info about FMLA coverage. Here is the verbage:

About the 12 month period:
Regarding the STD running concurrently.
This is all different than what happened for me just a few months ago with my son. I did have the fmla and leave running concurrently, but I was able to take vacation in addition to that. (So was my coworker).

Does anyone know if there is a rule that I *have* to take fmla right after the birth of my child? If my husband can take fmla time to care for my kiddo weeks after delivery, why can't i? From reading the actual FMLA policy fact sheet, it seems like I should be able to take fmla just to care for my child.

And let's say I'm not FMLA eligible by the time of the birth-- they have to give me the 6 weeks STD, correct? by 6 weeks pp, I really should be eligible. What's to stop me from taking the FMLA at that point?

I wonder if this is why my usually friendly hr person was so hostile when I started asking questions around the time of my son's birth. I don't think they had the policies in place correctly.

My workplace has a policy that if you're gone more than 5 consecutive days you *have* to take FMLA. Make sure there's nothing like that where you work.

[madcap150]

I don't think you're screwed at all. If the company is measuring a rolling 12-month period backward from the date you use any leave, you will still have leave available, because you won't have used 12 weeks of leave during the previous 12 months. You are thinking that you have to have gone a full year WITHOUT using any leave, but that's not the case.

Let's say your baby comes January 5 and you start leave that day. In the previous 12 months, you have only used 5 days (so one week) of leave. You still have 11 weeks of leave left. The only way you would be screwed is if you needed leave before 9/22 of this year, because you had already used 12 weeks of FMLA between 9/22/09 and 9/22/10. Depending on when the baby comes, you might not end up with 12 full weeks, but you should still get FMLA.

[texmati]

Originally Posted by madcap150

I don't think you're screwed at all. If the company is measuring a rolling 12-month period backward from the date you use any leave, you will still have leave available, because you won't have used 12 weeks of leave during the previous 12 months. You are thinking that you have to have gone a full year WITHOUT using any leave, but that's not the case.

Let's say your baby comes January 5 and you start leave that day. In the previous 12 months, you have only used 5 days (so one week) of leave. You still have 11 weeks of leave left. The only way you would be screwed is if you needed leave before 9/22 of this year, because you had already used 12 weeks of FMLA between 9/22/09 and 9/22/10. Depending on when the baby comes, you might not end up with 12 full weeks, but you should still get FMLA.

You are so smart! I didn't think of it that way!

[madcap150]

Good, I'm glad it helped! It will be a bummer if you don't get the full 12 weeks because of date overlap, but much better than no leave at all.