preview

Family And Medical Leave Act (FMLA)

Good Essays

In 1993, Congress passed the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to provide a national policy that supports families in their efforts to strike an effective balance between work and home (“Wage and Hour Division (WHD)”, n.d.). Congress understood that there may come a time when an employee’s family member has a serious medical problem or a care giving need which requires that employee to take time off from work. A care giving need can also be the birth, adoption, or foster placement of a child.
Cherner (2008) asserts that the FMLA grants up to 12 weeks of leave during a 12-month period for a number of qualifying reasons mentioned previously as well as for an employee’s own serious health condition and certain "qualifying exigencies" related …show more content…

The government understood the difficulty of balancing work and childcare. As mentioned previously, FMLA permits mother to take medical leave for the period of time during which they are physically unable to work due to pregnancy, childbirth, recovery and related medical conditions. Additionally, both parents to take leave for the birth of a child, and for the placement of a child for adoption or foster. Thus, the leave allows the parents to bond with their child within one year of the child’s birth or placement. Nevertheless, according Gomby and Pei (2009), the two most important determinants of whether parents take leave are if the leave is paid and job-protected. Although FMLA provides job protection, it is unpaid, therefore many parents decide not to take it or may return to work earlier than they would have wanted to so they can support their …show more content…

Verizon Virginia Inc., 2011, plaintiff was fired in retaliation for his exercise of FMLA rights over a two day period when the employer had videotape evidence of the plaintiff driving, spending 30 minutes at the gym, renting videos and shopping. The employer concluded this activity was inconsistent with his claim that he had migraines on those days. Nevertheless, the plaintiff asserted that the employer’s reason for termination was a pretext for FMLA retaliation because it took the “extraordinary step” of placing him under surveillance, however the court ruled that the surveillance did not show that the employer’s reasons for terminating plaintiff were pretextual since the employer had hired private investigators at least five times in the past and the plaintiff did not prove that similarly situated employees were treated differently (Smith,

Get Access