How is the the Family and Medical Leave Act working?


The Virginian-Pilot
© July 14, 2007 | Last updated 11:49 PM Jul. 13



A. Generally well for workers who need time off to take care of a newborn or seriously ill relative.


B. Has created serious friction between employers and employees when it comes to occasional time off for recurring health problems.


C. Remains open to revision.


All are true, according to a new U.S. Labor Department report on the 14-year-old law.

The Family and Medical Leave Act allows workers to take off up to 12 unpaid weeks per year to deliver or care for a baby or tend to a sick relative. It also may be used for a "serious health condition" that keeps the employee from working. Time off may be taken in a single block or intermittently.



The law applies at most workplaces with at least 50 employees.

The Labor Department received more than 15,000 comments on the law's effects and summed up the results in the 162-page report, which blended praise and criticism.

"In the vast majority of cases," the report said, the law "is working as intended."

The report offered testimonials from workers who had been given time off to care for a husband wounded in Afghanistan, a stepfather recovering from heart surgery, a mother suffering from Alzheimer's.

A woman whose husband had Lou Gehrig's disease wrote: "Without the availability of FMLA I'm not certain of what would have happened to my family when my husband was diagnosed... 5 years ago. Thankfully it was there, so I could be with him as he was dying."

Latest Videos

William and Mary demonstrates new emergency alert system

Interview: Ex-SEAL is 'Lone Survivor' from Afghanistan battle

Raw Video:Grint Opens NYC 'Potter' Store

Family's Pet Tortoise Stolen, Tortured

Trucker Arrested, Possible Serial Killer

Dispatchers to Blame in Tahoe Fire Response?

Did Texting Lead to Cheerleaders' Deaths?


See the complete Pilot, exactly as in print
- View stories, photos and ads
- E-mail clippings
- Print copies
Log in or learn more


On the other hand, the report cited repeated frustration from employers, who believe too many workers are using intermittent leave "as a pretext to cover for their tardiness or to leave work early for reasons unrelated to a serious health condition."

Forty percent of human resource managers reported approving questionable requests because they felt the law gave them no choice, said a survey by the Society for Human Resource Management.

Many workplaces see a suspicious increase in requests on Fridays and Mondays, the start of hunting season or in summer, said Lisa Horn, manager of health care for the Alexendria-based society.

The report estimated between 6.1 million and 13 million Americans took advantage of the law in 2005, the last year for which data is available. Roughly a quarter take occasional leave, as opposed to in one block of time.

Business groups saw the Labor Department's interest as an opening to push for tighter regulations. The report, however, offered no hint as to whether it will propose changes.

Victoria A. Lipnic, an assistant secretary for labor, declined to say whether the agency would seek revisions or when it would decide.

"We wanted to see how the regulations have impacted the workplace - what is working, what is not working," Lipnic said. "That's the point where we are right now. I look forward to working with other policymakers and the stakeholders and see where we go from here."

Timothy McConville, an employment lawyer for the Norfolk firm of Willcox & Savage, which asked the government to tighten the rules, thinks the department isn't done with the subject. "I was encouraged by the admission that the regulations have contributed to some of the problems," he said. "You know what they say: Admission is the first step to recovery."

McConville added, "If I had to read the tea leaves, I'm focusing on that as a signal that they're going to do something. But I wouldn't go to the bank with that."

On the other side, Kate Kahan, an official with the National Partnership for Women & Families, which supports the law, said of the report: "It's potentially set the stage to make some changes, but it's unclear if there's inspiration to do that at this point in time."

Locally, Aquila Charles, 46, who suffers from lupus and arthritis, considers the law a godsend.

"Ever since the family leave act came in, if I was sick a day or two, I wouldn't have to worry about excessive absences," said Charles, a secretary at a retail store who lives in Virginia Beach. "Not everybody abuses it. People like me don't really need disability. All we need is a little job protection when we have those rough moments."

Northrop Grumman Newport News spokeswoman Jennifer Dellapenta said the company declined to discuss the law. At Norfolk Southern Corp., Cindy Earhart, the vice president of human resources, said in an e-mail that the Family and Medical Leave Act "has created new costs, administrative burdens and some legal issues."

One that frustrates Norfolk Southern, Earhart wrote, is confusion about how much information employers may request - for instance, if a worker suffers from a sleep disorder or seizures.

"We believe it is important that our medical director receives enough detail to determine the severity and chances of a recurrence of that condition so that employees do not jeopardize themselves, their co-workers or the public," Earhart said.

Partisans are continuing to press their views.

The Society for Human Resource Management, Horn said, wants the government to better define "serious health condition" and require a minimum time limit for leave taken intermittently.

Kahan said the partnership for women will continue rallying to maintain the rules. Even the report, she noted, could not estimate the extent of abuse.

"We feel protective of the FMLA because we know that the law is helpful to so many millions of families in this country," Kahan said.

If the Labor Department sought to tighten restrictions, it could issue a proposed revision and, after a 60 -day public-comment period, release a final revision, Lipnic said.

That would not need congressional approval, but, like much in Washington, it could get entangled in politics, said Marc Freedman, director of labor law policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Congress, for instance, could seek to stop funding for the department if it pursues the issue.

"We're waiting to see if they move forward," Freedman said, "and we're waiting to see if any voices on the other side start to develop momentum in the Congress to start to block them."

Philip Walzer, (757) 222-3864, phil.walzer@pilotonline.com
http://content.hamptonroads.com/stor...433&ran=114743