Family Medical Leave Act - Research Paper Example

? Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of the of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Outline I. Introduction  a. Family Medical Leave act designed for employees in need of leave for serious health related conditions. i. Employees have eligibility criteria for obtaining the leaves as per FMLA. ii. FMLA is advantageous for employees as it allows 12 week unpaid leave for needy employees. II. Discussion a. The act in question provides qualified employees with two sorts of job-ensured leave i. Regular Leave ii. Military Family Leave iii. Private and Public Sector Employees b. Significance, Function and Benefits i. To shun discrimination against female workers. ii. Employers must have 50 workers in their workplaces for implementing FMLA. iii. Leave must be approved for any worker that has worked at least 1250 hours in the previous 12 months. iv. The law requires that the employee should be restored to her previous status v. The aforesaid laws benefit a lot to those workers who qualify for leave. c. Court Rulings of FMLA i. case of Mitchell v. Chapman, USA (2003) ii. case of Darby v. Bratch (2002) iii. case of Cantley vs. Simmons (2002) iv. case of Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland (2010) III. Conclusion FMLA advantageous for employees as it allocates them their health care rights. Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Introduction The Family Medical Leave Act came into being in the year 1993 to strike a balance between the employers and the employees in a scenario where employees have to take extended medical leaves in a serious condition which includes pregnancy or to take of any family members. The aims of promulgation of mentioned law is to safeguard the interest of the employees. It does not relate to pay the employee during the said period provided the employee does not otherwise have vacation in store. The eligibility of employees can be mentioned as: He or She is in the employment of an organization at least for a period of one year (not consecutive); He or She has worked at least 1250 hours during a year before leaving the current employer. The 12-month period immediately concludes before the leave; He or she works at a location where at least 50 employees are working or it is within the ambit of 75 miles (Budd & Brey, 2003). There are many advantages of FMLA. 12 weeks unpaid leave on the forward mentioned situations are given such as for newborn child of the employee, for adoption or foster care, for serious health condition of immediate family member and medical leave provided employee is unable to work due to precarious health condition (Post & Siegel, 2003). Discussion The basic idea of introducing Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) is to provide assistance to employees in balancing their work and family life. The act in question provides qualified employees with two sorts of job-ensured leave a) regular leave and b) military family leave. The FMLA covers both private and public sector employers. FMLA leave in general considered unpaid leave. Historically, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) came into limelight twenty years back when Mr. Bill Clinton, the then President sent the bill to the competent legislative body for consideration (Aitchinson, 2003).  The said act turned into law on August 5, 1993, soon after the 103 congressmen voted in favor of it. This is binding on all employers having more than 50 employees. Later on it was amended in the initial phase of 2008 during the incumbency of President Bush. The National Defense Authorization Act replaced FMLA. In accordance with the mentioned act qualified workers can avail 26 weeks of leave for a spouse, child, parent or other dependent family member to take care of the injured person from the armed forces (Budd & Brey, 2003). Significance Before promulgation of cited Acts, which later on converted into laws, to shun discrimination against female workers in the case of newly have born child. At that time, only those workers got promotion and other benefits who had given up their desire for a family. Of course, this was quite against natural justice (Post & Siegel, 2003). Function The Family and Medical Leave Act is a federal mandate that requires employers of more than 50 workers to afoot the bill on any costs attached with qualifying unpaid leave by the employee. Leave must be approved for any worker that has worked at least 1250 hours in the previous 12 months and needs to have leaved if he or she is ill or injured, birth of a child or for an adopted child. The law requires that the employee should be restored to her previous status with same benefits as he or she was enjoying (Budd & Brey, 2003). Benefits The aforesaid laws benefit a lot to those workers who qualify for leave. This has created conducive environment for the employees. Moreover, employers also took a sigh of relief that their workers would work without mental stress any more (Aitchinson, 2003). Court Rulings There are numerous court rulings on the subject matter. Take the case of Rodney Harrell, wherein the union had paid the cost of suit to comply with the decision of competent court. In the case of split decision of certain federal courts, the apex court on June 28 declined to review the US Court of Appeals as far as the Sixth Circuit's decision is concerned. It was held by the superior judiciary that public sector workers cannot sue their immediate supervisors in the individual capacity for violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act. In this respect we may refer the case of Mitchell v. Chapman, USA (2003). In the case of Darby v. Bratch (2002), the federal 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that employee’s claim against her supervisor for violating the rights under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) can be entertained since Susan Darby returned to work after consumption of FMLA-protected leave. Keeping in view the above, her immediate boss told her that she would not be considered for promotion. The other view was that she should be terminated on having excessive unpaid leave. She applied for re employment but her request for the same was turned down. Darby had no other option but to file suit against her employer and supervisor since she had exercised her rights as enshrined in the FMLA. In this case, the competent court of law allowed Darby to pursue her claim against the individual supervisors. Take the example of Cantley vs. Simmons (2002) where in the competent jurisdiction held that a postal employee has every right to sue against her immediate boss under the aforesaid Act. The other courts are against of granting permission to sue by the individual against immediate supervisor. In the postal employee case, the defendants Postmaster General William J. Henderson and Carter's supervisor, Bryan K. Smith had prayed for dismissal of the case against them. In the case of Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland (2010), it was held that citizens have the option to sue if damages occur. This sovereign immunity means that, while state employees have the right to take the leave, if the state blocks their exercise of that right, their only recourse is to get a judgment to reverse the potential violation. The highlighted decision was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy and endorsed by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Samuel Alito; Justice Antonin Scalia. Conclusion The said Acts namely FMLA and the amended National Defense Authorization Act, definitely provide job protected leave and the employee cannot lay them off merely on his or her whims and fancies. Overall, the passed act is much more advantageous for employees working under employers as employees know about their medical rights. References Aitchison, W. (2003). The FMLA: Understanding the Family and Medical Leave Act. Labor Relations Info Service. Budd, J. W., & Brey, A. M. (2003). Unions And Family Leave Early Experience Under The Family And Medical Leave Act. Labor Studies Journal, 28(3), 85-105. Cantley v. Simmons, (S.D. W.Va. 2002) 179 F. Supp. 2d 654, 657-58 Coleman v. Md. Court of Appeals, (4th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 187 Darby v. Bratch, (8th Cir. 2002) 287 F.3d 673, 681 Mitchell v. Chapman, (6th Cir. 2003) 343 F.3d 811, 825-33 Post, R. C., & Siegel, R. B. (2003). Legislative Constitutionalism and Section Five Power: Policentric Interpretation of the Family and Medical Leave Act. Yale Law Journal, 1943-2059. Read More