Summary of Recent Changes to the FMLA Regulations
The Department of Labor’s new rules regarding the Family and
Medical Leave Act (FMLA) became effective January 16, 2009.
The following are highlights of the changes in the final
rules.
Military Family Leave
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 (NDAA)
amended the FMLA to provide two new leave entitlements:
-
Military Caregiver Leave (also known as covered service
member leave).
Under
the first of these new military family leave entitlements,
eligible employees who are family members of covered service
members are able to take up to 26 workweeks of leave in a
single 12-month period to care for a covered service member
with a serious illness or injury incurred in the line of
duty on active duty. This provision also extends FMLA
protection to additional family members (such as next of
kin) beyond those who may take FMLA leave for other
qualifying reasons.
-
Qualifying Exigency Leave.
The
second new military leave entitlement helps families of
members of the National Guard and Reserves manage their
affairs while the member is on active duty in support of a
contingency operation. This provision makes the normal 12
workweeks of FMLA job-protected leave available to eligible
employees with a covered military member serving in the
National Guard or Reserves to use for any qualifying
exigency arising out of the fact that a covered military
member is on active duty or called to active duty status in
support of a contingency operation. The department’s final
rule defines qualifying exigency by referring
to a number of broad categories for which employees can use
FMLA leave:
-
Short-notice deployment.
-
Military
events and related activities.
-
Child care and school activities.
-
Financial and legal arrangements.
-
Counseling.
-
Rest and recuperation.
-
Post-deployment activities.
-
Additional activities not encompassed in the other
categories, but agreed to by the employer and employee.
The final rule also includes two new Department of Labor
certification forms (Forms
WH-384 and
WH-385) that may be used by employees and employers to
facilitate the certification requirements for the use of
military family leave.
The
Ragsdale Decision/Penalties
The final rule includes a number of technical regulatory
changes to reflect current law following the U.S. Supreme
Court’s decision in
Ragsdale v. Wolverine Worldwide, Inc.,
533 U.S. 81 (2002), which invalidated a penalty
provision of the regulations. Ragsdale ruled that
the current regulation’s “categorical” penalty for failure
to appropriately designate FMLA leave — which in that case
would have required the employer to provide an additional 12
weeks of FMLA-protected leave after the 30 weeks of leave
the employee had already received — was inconsistent with
the statutory entitlement to only 12 weeks of FMLA leave and
contrary to the statute’s remedial requirement that an
employee demonstrate individual harm. Several other courts
have also invalidated similar categorical penalties in other
notice provisions of the current regulations. The final
rule therefore removes these categorical penalty provisions
and clarifies that where an employee suffers individualized
harm because the employer failed to follow the notification
rules, the employer may be liable.
Light Duty
Under the final rule, time spent performing “light duty”
work does not count against an employee’s FMLA leave
entitlement and that the employee’s right to restoration is
held in abeyance during the period of time the employee
performs light duty (or until the end of the applicable
12-month FMLA leave year). If an employee is voluntarily
performing a light duty assignment, the employee is not on
FMLA leave.
Waiver of Rights
The final rule codifies the department’s longstanding
position that employees may voluntarily settle or release
their FMLA claims without court or department approval.
Although this is not a change in the law, the clarification
is needed because a recent Fourth Circuit decision
interpreted the department’s regulations as prohibiting
employees from either prospectively or retroactively waiving
their rights. Prospective waivers of FMLA rights continue
to be prohibited under the final rule.
Serious Health Condition
The final rule retains the six individual definitions of
serious health condition while adding guidance on three
regulatory matters. One of the definitions of serious
health condition involves more than three consecutive, full
calendar days of incapacity plus two visits to a health care
provider. Because the current rule is open-ended, the Tenth
Circuit has held that the “two visits to a health care
provider” must occur within the more-than-three-days period
of incapacity.
Under the final rule, the two visits must occur within 30
days of the beginning of the period of incapacity and the
first visit to the health care provider must take place
within seven days of the first day of incapacity. A second
way to satisfy the definition of serious health condition
under the current regulations involves more than three
consecutive, full calendar days of incapacity plus a regimen
of continuing treatment. The final rule clarifies here also
that the first visit to the health care provider must take
place within seven days of the first day of incapacity.
Thirdly, the final rule defines periodic visits
for chronic serious health conditions as at least two visits
to a health care provider per year since that provision is
also open-ended in the current regulations and potentially
subjects employees to more stringent requirements by
employers.
Substitution of Paid Leave
FMLA leave is unpaid. However, the statute provides that
employees may take, or employers may require employees to
take, any accrued paid vacation, personal, family, or
medical or sick leave, as offered by their employer,
concurrently with any FMLA leave. This is called the
substitution of paid leave.
The current regulations apply different procedural
requirements to the use of vacation or personal leave than
to medical or sick leave. Complicating matters further, the
department has treated family leave differently than
vacation and personal leave. Accordingly, under the final
rule, all forms of paid leave offered by an employer will be
treated the same, regardless of the type of leave
substituted (including generic paid time off).
An employee electing to use any type of paid leave
concurrently with FMLA leave must follow the same terms and
conditions of the employer’s policy that apply to other
employees for the use of such leave. The employee is always
entitled to unpaid FMLA leave if the employee does not meet
the employer’s conditions for taking paid leave and the
employer may waive any procedural requirements for the
taking of any type of paid leave.
Perfect Attendance Awards
The final rule changes the treatment of perfect attendance
awards to allow employers to deny a perfect attendance award
to an employee who does not have perfect attendance because
of taking FMLA leave as long as it treats employees taking
non-FMLA leave in an identical way. This addresses the
unfairness perceived by employees and employers as a result
of requiring an employee to obtain a perfect attendance
award for a period during which the employee was absent from
the workplace on FMLA leave.
Employer Notice Obligations
The final rule consolidates all the employer notice
requirements into a “one-stop” section of the regulations
and reconciles some conflicting provisions and time periods
under the current regulations. Further, the final rule
clarifies and strengthens the employer notice requirements
in order to better inform employees and allow for a better
exchange of information between employers and employees.
Employers will be required to provide employees with all of
the following:
-
A general notice about the FMLA (through a poster, an
employee handbook, and upon hire).
-
An eligibility notice.
-
A rights and responsibilities notice.
-
A designation notice.
In order to ensure employers are able to better inform
employees under the new notice provisions, the final rule
extends the time for employers to provide various notices
from two business days to five business days.
Employee Notice
The final rule modifies the current provision that has been
interpreted to allow some employees to provide notice to an
employer of the need for FMLA leave up to two full business
days after an absence, even if they could have provided
notice more quickly. Lack of advance notice (such as before
the employee’s shift starts) for unscheduled absences is one
of the biggest disruptions employers point to as an
unintended consequence of the current regulations.
The final rule provides that an employee needing FMLA leave
must follow the employer’s usual and customary call-in
procedures for reporting an absence, absent unusual
circumstances. The final rule also highlights (without
changing) the existing consequences if an employee does not
provide proper notice of the need for FMLA leave.
Medical Certification Process
Content and Clarification
The final rule, which is the result of significant
stakeholder feedback (including a Fall 2007 meeting at the
department on medical certifications) recognizes the advent
of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
and the applicability of the HIPAA privacy rule to
communication between employers and employees’ health care
providers. Further, in response to specific concerns raised
by employees about medical privacy, the department has added
a requirement to the final rule that specifies that the
employer’s representative contacting the health care
provider must be a health care provider, human resource
professional, a leave administrator, or a management
official, but in no case may it be the employee’s direct
supervisor. In addition, employers may not ask health care
providers for additional information beyond that required by
the certification form. The final rule also improves the
exchange of medical information by updating the department’s
optional Form WH-380 to create separate forms for the
employee and covered family members and by allowing — but
not requiring — health care providers to provide a diagnosis
of the patient’s health condition as part of the
certification.
In addition, the final rule specifies that if an employer
deems a medical certification to be incomplete or
insufficient, the employer must specify in writing what
information is lacking, and give the employee seven calendar
days to cure the deficiency. These changes will improve
FMLA communications, protect the privacy of workers, and
help ensure that the employees who need leave will get it
and not be subject to repeated requests for additional
information or be denied FMLA leave on a technicality.
Timing
The final rule codifies a 2005 Department of Labor Wage and
Hour Opinion letter that stated that employers may request a
new medical certification each leave year for medical
conditions that last longer than one year.
The final rule also clarifies the applicable time period for
recertification. Under the current regulations, employers
may generally request a recertification no more often than
every 30 days and only in conjunction with an FMLA absence
unless a minimum duration of incapacity has been specified
in the certification, in which case recertification
generally may not be required until the duration specified
has passed. Because many stakeholders have indicated that
the current regulation is unclear as to the employer’s
ability to require recertification when the duration of a
condition is described as “lifetime” or “unknown,” the final
rule restructures and clarifies the regulatory requirements
for recertification. In all cases, the final rule allows an
employer to request recertification of an ongoing condition
every six months in conjunction with an absence.
Fitness-For-Duty Certifications
The current FMLA regulations allow employers to enforce
uniformly-applied policies or practices that require all
similarly-situated employees who take leave to provide a
certification that they are able to resume work. This is
called a fitness-for-duty certification. The
final rule makes two changes to the fitness-for-duty
certification process. First, an employer may require that
the certification specifically address the employee’s
ability to perform the essential functions of the employee’s
job. Second, where reasonable job safety concerns exist, an
employer may require a fitness-for-duty certification before
an employee may return to work when the employee takes
intermittent leave.
Mike Staebell of the Department of Labor and Doug Fulton of
the Brick law firm will each present information on the new
rules and the effect they will have on Employers during
their presentations at the 2009 Iowa Employment, Training
and Benefits Conference to be held on April 21st
in Altoona Iowa. Please see the conference page for more information.