Tag Archive for Labor & Industries

Ruling May Expand FMLA Protection

Some companies assume they can ignore the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) when it comes to employees who haven’t yet reached their anniversary dates. Yet that belief was directly overturned this month by the Eleventh Circuit, which covers Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.

Pereda v. Brookdale Senior Living Communities, Inc. addressed the question of whether a first-year employee – in other words, a worker who had not yet reached eligibility for FMLA leave – had job protection when she requested leave that would begin after she became eligible (i.e., her anniversary date).  The appeals court responded in the affirmative, giving protection from termination to a worker who did not technically meet the statute’s definition of an “eligible employee.” This decision makes the Eleventh Circuit the nation’s first to rule on the issue.

 

The plaintiff in Pereda began employment at Brookdale Senior Living Communities in October 2008. Then in June 2009 announced she was pregnant; at this time she also notified her employer that she planned to request FMLA leave after giving birth to her child in late November 2009.  Under the FMLA, an “eligible employee” must be employed for at least 12 months and complete at least 1,250 of service during the previous 12-month period.  The plaintiff had not yet gained the status of an “eligible employee” in June 2009 when she announced her intention to take FMLA leave later that year.  Nor was she an eligible employee in September 2009 when Brookdale managers fired her. But the appeals court re-interpreted the definition of “eligible employee,” reasoning that because the worker would have been an eligible employee at the time she had planned to take leave, she was protected from termination under the FMLA.  The court wrote that concluding otherwise “would violate the purposes for which the FMLA was enacted,” creating “a loophole . . . whereby an employer has total freedom to terminate an employee before she can ever become eligible.”

The Eleventh Circuit Court’s most persuasive reasoning, perhaps, appears when citing a section of FMLA that mandates “employees” (but not necessarily “eligible” employees) to provide their employers with a minimum of 30 days’ notice before taking anticipated leave based on an upcoming birth.  The court determined that an alternate decision in this case would entrap some employees in a lose-lose situation where they had to choose between complying with the notice requirement (but subjecting themselves to risk of retaliatory termination), or waiting for the anniversary date to arrive (but NOT complying with the notice requirement).

The expanded definition of “eligible employee” resulting from this case generates many unanswered questions about the circumstances under which employees are protected under FMLA.  Hunton Employment and Labor Perspectives imagined the following scenarios:

  • What if an 11-month employee says during Thanksgiving week that he is “leaning toward” having surgery on his trick knee after the New Year, likely keeping him on FMLA leave for a month or so?
  • What if a just-hired employee says in January of Year 1 that she and her husband have applied for adoption of a Russian child, a lengthy process that will, if they are approved (a questionable proposition), necessitate their going overseas for a couple of months in the middle of Year 2.  What if the individual had shared this during the pre-hire process?
  • What if an 11-month employee shares that she and her sister are deciding which of them will take three months off from work next year to care for their mother, who is scheduled at that time to move out of a nursing home?  What if the employer elects to terminate the employee the following week, and the mother dies the week after that?

If you or someone you know is the victim of wrongful termination, workplace discrimination, or retaliatory practices, contact a Seattle Employment Attorney for assistance with your case.  Our L&I attorneys also represent employees who seek workers compensation benefits or who need any other assistance with work injury claims through the Department of Labor and Industries.

Read here for more news on FMLA, sick leave and employment law.

Dead Doctor Dilemma Resolved by Workers’ Compensation Commission

Two weeks ago we reported the story of Arkansas worker Lauren Eason, who was denied a change of physician even though her doctor had died in December. Eason had already switched physicians earlier in the year, and Arkansas law does not allow patients with a workers compensation injury to change a second time. Therefore, after her newer doctor passed away, the Arkansas Workers Compensation Commission ruled that she would have to stick with that physician regardless of the bizarre circumstances.

This was yet another unfortunate case of unintended consequences: a law designed to restrict excessive “doctor shopping” had ensnared an unsuspecting worker with a legitimate injury and a legitimate cause for requesting a second transfer of care.

Originally, Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission CEO Alan McClain stated that administrative solutions were available for the worker, but projected that it could take 3 to 6 months to resolve the issue.

The case generated some heated discussion on the LinkedIn group Workers’ Compensation Roundtable. McClain responded to critics on the site to further clarify the issue and exonerate his agency. He wrote that the law may have prevented the Workers Compensation board from selecting an alternate physician, but “as long as the employer has not denied medical benefits then the injured employee is entitled to medical care, arranged and paid for by the employer/carrier, regardless of the agency’s administrative ability to select a treating physician.” While the meaning here was not entirely clear, McClain seemed to be suggesting that this law was not an obstacle for an uncontested claim. Some commentators speculated that there were additional circumstances affecting Eason’s injury claim since the denial from the state was so emphatic.

Nonetheless, the Arkansas WCC has followed up on the controversy with an advisory that covers the initial issue. On Monday, they issued AWCC ADVISORY 2012-1, which states:

“When the physician named in a Change of Physician Order by the AWCC has passed away while actively treating the claimant for a compensable injury (or prior to releasing the claimant from treatment) or is known to the Commission to no longer be in practice without having made adequate provisions for the continued treatment of the claimant’s compensable injury, the Change of Physician Order shall become null and void and shall no longer be considered the claimant’s one time change of physician.”

Such a case has yet to arise within Washington’s department of labor and industries; yet while it is unlikely that most injured workers will find themselves in such extraordinary circumstances, many do face insufficient injury benefits or medical coverage, a denied L&I claim, a requirement to undergo an independent medical examination, or simply need help navigating the complexities of their L&I claim. If you need assistance with any issue related to workers compensation benefits or your negotiations with the department labor and industries more generally, contact an L&I lawyer or Seattle Employment attorney today.

Injury Rates Improve for Washington State Workers

Survey results released by the Department of Labor & Industries show that job sites across Washington became safer in 2010, continuing a trend that started over a decade ago.  According to the Washington State Occupational Injury and Illness Survey, 5 out of every 100 full-time workers (including employees in both private and public sector industries) sustained a job-related injury or illness in 2010. This figure is down from the rate of 5.3 in 100 from 2009.

2010’s rate is the lowest recorded in Washington since 2003, when the injury rate stood at 6.9. 2003 was the year when L&I adopted the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), which is also used by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Within private industries themselves, Washington’s injury and illness rate is still above the average national rate. Injuries among Washington workers stood at 4.8 per 100 full-time employees in 2010, while the national rate was 3.5.

Nearly every major industry in Washington showed better numbers in 2010. Injury and illness rates among construction workers, for instance, fell from 8.2 per 100 in 2009 to 7.2 in 2010. Nursing and Residential Care Facilities experienced a decline of 11.4 injuries per 100 workers in 2009 to 9.4 injuries last year.

Another significant change in this latest survey was the occurrence of “serious injuries” – injuries severe enough to prevent a worker from performing their usual job duties. In 2010, half of workers who were injured or became ill were in need of time off or modified work duties during recovery. That rate represented a drop of a few percentage points from the 2009 rate.

If you have been injured at work or have developed a work-related illness and need help with your L&I Claim, contact a Washington Workers Compensation Lawyer for assistance with your case. Our attorneys also provide confidential legal advice and professional observers to accompany workers during the independent medical examination process.

 

 

Department of Labor Sets New Goal to Improve Employment for Americans with Disabilities

The U.S. Department of Labor has proposed a historic new rule that could require federal contractors and subcontractors to establish hiring goals that 7 percent of their workforce be people with disabilities. The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs is currently soliciting public comment on this proposal, and plans to publish responses in the forthcoming edition of the Federal Register.

The OFCCP’s prospective rule would bolster affirmative action requirements set forth in Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and obligate federal contractors / subcontractors to give equal employment opportunities to qualified workers with disabilities. The potential regulatory changes also include particular actions that contractors would be required to take in recruiting, training, record keeping and policy dissemination — much like those already required to foster workplace equality for minorities and women.

In an announcement released by the Labor Department, Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis stated that the proposed rule represents “one of the most significant advances in protecting the civil rights of workers with disabilities since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act. President Obama has demonstrated a commitment to people with disabilities. This proposed rule would help federal contractors better fulfill their legal responsibility to hire qualified workers with disabilities.”

While Section 503 policies have already been in place for decades, people with disabilities are presently experiencing an unemployment rate of 13 percent, which is one and a half times higher than those without disabilities. Even more alarming is the data released last week by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which confirms blatant disparities for working-age Americans with disabilities, with 79% completely outside the labor force, compared to 30% of those without disabilities.

“For nearly forty years, the rules have said that contractors simply need to make a ‘good faith’ effort to recruit and hire people with disabilities. Clearly, that’s not working,” said OFCCP Director Patricia A. Shiu. “Our proposal would define specific goals, require real accountability and provide the clearest possible guidance for employers seeking to comply with the law. What gets measured gets done. And we’re in the business of getting things done.”

Setting a 7% hiring goal for hiring Americans with disabilities provides a tool for contractors to assess the effectiveness of various affirmative action efforts. The proposed rule would also improve requirements for data research and documentation to enhance accountability. Additionally, it would institute annual self-reviews of employers’ outreach and recruitment efforts, and include a new requirement for contractors to post job openings to broader pools of qualified candidates.

Learn more about Disability Benefits through the Labor and Industries website.

If you believe you are the victim of employment discrimination, contact a Seattle employment attorney for help with your case. Emery Reddy also represents Washington workers with L&I claims and workers compensation claims.

States Shrink Workers’ Compensation Commissions

Labor & Industries claims continue to evolve across the States and a recent development in Michigan may signal an alarming trend in the downsizing of L & I Commissions that specialize in protecting injured worker rights in the face of business lobby interests.

Governor Rick Snyder pressed ahead in late May with his effort to trim State costs.  Among the many moves to downsize State bureaucracies and streamline government services and efficiency was the creation of the Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission.

According to Compnewsnetwork, “Gov. Snyder issued Executive Order 2011-6, which transfers the authorities and responsibilities of the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission and the Employment Security Board of Review to the new Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission.”

“With this reorganization, Michigan becomes a model of efficiency for appellate decisions in these two case areas,” Snyder said. “It provides greater flexibility in addressing fluctuating caseload levels and variations.”

The Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission will now consider appeals of decisions issued by magistrates and administrative law examiners, specifically in the realm of unemployment and workers’ compensation claims.

The most important, and perhaps most troubling, part of the creation of this new Commission, is that it takes on the workload that was previously performed by two separate Commissions: The Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission and the Employment Security Board of Review. Although our economy is slowly recovering, what is striking about this consolidation of Commissions is that it does not seem to acknowledge the massive increase in unemployment and workers’ compensation claims the recession has engendered.

Further, while the Executive Order issued by the Governor requires that the new appellate commissioners be evaluated under defined standards to ensure that appeals are handled in a timely, knowledgeable and appropriate manner, the Order also requires that the commissioners adhere to productivity and timeliness standards.  In short, the effort here is to move claims and reviews through the Commission quickly, and as such, the important scrutiny that each individual injured worker’s claim should receive might be compromised.

Every experienced Washington workers compensation attorney is watching these developments across the country to ensure that injured workers in this state will continue to receive all the protections afforded to them by constantly evolving Labor & Industries law. Injured workers should first seek medical attention, then seek out the advice of an experienced L & I attorney at Emery Reddy as they pursue their claim.