Employee Disability/FMLA/Not made aware of official policies

[pittguy578]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

Here is the situation. I went out from work due to a stress related disability back in December. I had exhausted all of my FMLA time in March, and I came back to work. I have not been doing well, and I have been struggling..and I am on an improvement plan right now. I am concerned about my job. I have always had a good record/high achiever-just the workload the last year or so has really taken a toll on me. I am not the only one suffering. Many people here cry on the way to work, etc. Plus I have been dealing with other situations in my family i.e. Alzheimer's since I have come back to work. I am really not well.

Here is my concern.
When I was toward the end of my disability claim/FMLA claim, I was not really well, but I felt forced to come back to work in order to preserve my job.
I had followed up with our official HR department asking about FMLA time and about my job status if I did not come back right then. I was never given a clear answer on that situation.

I recently discovered (actually yesterday) that our official policy (and I have found it in writing) is they would save someone's job for 9 months (beyond scope of FMLA) so I was in no danger of being terminated back in March despite the fact I had run out of FMLA time. No one had made me aware of that despite my numerous contacts/e-mails asking them about my job status. I could have used the extra time to get myself better. I feel the HR department breached it's duties by not informing me of that policy, and I was not as well as I could have been when I came back to work.

I am really concerned about keeping my job. I was still not better when I came back, and my focus was not what it should have been and it has led to problems. I feel that the HR department dropped the ball when not informing me of the fact I could have extra time, if needed, and forced me to come back when I was not well. I think they breached one of their duties in regards to keeping me informed of official policies when I had specifically inquired about job status/expiration of FMLA time. What course of action should I take to protect myself?

 

[Zigner]

"Policy" does not equal "law"

 

[pittguy578]

Policy does not equal law, but an employer has a duty to inform employees of official policies/procedures when asked about them. And from what I have read if am company has an official policy it becomes legally binding as it modifies the rights an employee has. That is why officicial policies/company guidelines are often cited in court cases. Also I believe the concept of detrimental reliance comes into play. I work for large insurance company and handle liabiliy cases.

 

[LillianX]

Policy does not equal law, but an employer has a duty to inform employees of official policies/procedures when asked about them. And from what I have read if am company has an official policy it becomes legally binding as it modifies the rights an employee has. That is why officicial policies/company guidelines are often cited in court cases. Also I believe the concept of detrimental reliance comes into play. I work for large insurance company and handle liabiliy cases.

So... if you have all of the answers, why are you here?

 

[mlane58]

Policy does not equal law, but an employer has a duty to inform employees of official policies/procedures when asked about them. And from what I have read if am company has an official policy it becomes legally binding as it modifies the rights an employee has. That is why officicial policies/company guidelines are often cited in court cases. Also I believe the concept of detrimental reliance comes into play. I work for large insurance company and handle liabiliy cases.

You have read wrong then. Show us where it states under Federal or PA law that an employer has a duty to inform the employee of any policy changes. Again you are incorrect that if a company has an official policy it becomes legally binding as it modifies the rights an employee has. Show us where it states this. And oh one last thing you are again wrong in your thinking that that is why officicial policies/company guidelines are often cited in court cases. No it isn't, they are cited to usually discredit the company as to why they didn't follow certain policies in any given situation.

 

[pittguy578]

You have read wrong then. Show us where it states under Federal or PA law that an employer has a duty to inform the employee of any policy changes. Again you are incorrect that if a company has an official policy it becomes legally binding as it modifies the rights an employee has. Show us where it states this. And oh one last thing you are again wrong in your thinking that that is why officicial policies/company guidelines are often cited in court cases. No it isn't, they are cited to usually discredit the company as to why they didn't follow certain policies in any given situation.

I didn't say policy changes. I said they have a duty to inform an employee of the official policy when asked specific questions.

So you are saying it is ok for them to misrepresent or fail to inform an employee of official company policy? They can't pick and choose who they choose to inform regarding a specific policy-they have to treat all employees equally.

The other concern of mine is detrimental reliance which potentially could lead to wrongful termination. I was not well when I came back to work, but I felt as if I had no choice or else I would lose my job. That was not the case, and I was in no danger of losing my job at the time. I could have had some extra time to get myself better so my performance would have been better and not be in the situation I am in now.

 

[ecmst12]

Despite the policy, they could still have legally terminated your employment when FMLA ran out. A policy is not a contract and they can change or ignore a policy at any time for any reason (other than discrimination due to race, gender, or other protected characteristic). They don’t even have to treat all employees exactly the same. Perhaps your position was such that they could not afford to leave it unfilled for an entire year. Perhaps your coworkers were too burdened in your absence.

 

[Beth3]

Policy does not equal law, but an employer has a duty to inform employees of official policies/procedures when asked about them. And from what I have read if am company has an official policy it becomes legally binding as it modifies the rights an employee has. That is why officicial policies/company guidelines are often cited in court cases. Also I believe the concept of detrimental reliance comes into play. I work for large insurance company and handle liabiliy cases.

An employer has no legal duty to inform employees of their policies other than those mandated by law - which is why I'm sure you have an employee handbook and/or a bulletin board with posters regarding the FMLA, unemployment, minimum wage, etc. Those are the only policies an employer is obligated to inform you about. (That said, I do think an employer should have a means of informing employees of company policies.)

An employer's voluntary policies are almost never legally binding. If you have a company policy manual or handbook, I expect it has at least several disclaimers in it stating that the employer reserves the right to change, eliminate or modify their polices at any time, with or without notice.

If you think you're entitled to move leave time under the company's policy, then discuss that with HR.

I see no detrimental reliance. You have not suffered any damages. You're back to work doing your regular job earning your customary wages. Your employer has satisfied their legal obligations to you under the FMLA.

 

[swalsh411]

So this "policy" was not in any of the material you had available to review, nor did HR discuss it with you. Doesn't sound like much of a "policy" to me. Rather it sounds like something that may be printed on a paper somewhere but nobody really follows. Where was this "policy" documented anyway?

It is entirely unreasonable to expect an employer to retain an employee who cannot work for a year due to medical issues.

Instead of trying to get money from your employer, you should consider yourself lucky that you haven't been fired due to these performance issues.

 

[Zigner]

I didn't say policy changes. I said they have a duty to inform an employee of the official policy when asked specific questions.

Wrong.

So you are saying it is ok for them to misrepresent or fail to inform an employee of official company policy?

Correct

They can't pick and choose who they choose to inform regarding a specific policy-they have to treat all employees equally.

Wrong

The other concern of mine is detrimental reliance which potentially could lead to wrongful termination. I was not well when I came back to work, but I felt as if I had no choice or else I would lose my job. That was not the case, and I was in no danger of losing my job at the time. I could have had some extra time to get myself better so my performance would have been better and not be in the situation I am in now.

They could have terminated you the day after you exceeded your FMLA allowance. This is a non-issue.

 

[pittguy578]

An employer's voluntary policies are almost never legally binding. If you have a company policy manual or handbook, I expect it has at least several disclaimers in it stating that the employer reserves the right to change, eliminate or modify their polices at any time, with or without notice.

We are part of a large corporation. This policy was on a PDF file that has no exceptions/exclusions on it and doesn't say it is subject to change. It specifically said 9 months is the time period that they would hold the job if you were out on disability.

I see no detrimental reliance. You have not suffered any damages. You're back to work doing your regular job earning your customary wages. Your employer has satisfied their legal obligations to you under the FMLA

The detrimental reliance would be me coming back before I am ready/healthy and my peformance has suffered as a result of that. If they would have informed me of the policy, I would have taken additional time to get myself better, but they failed to inform me of that when specifically asked. It would be one thing if they simply did not inform me, but I specifically asked them about job holding/FMLA time and the only thing they told me at the time was my FMLA time had run out and they did not inform be of this official policy which applies to every employee.

 

[Beth3]

The detrimental reliance would be me coming back before I am ready/healthy and my peformance has suffered as a result of that.

You're throwing legal terms around without understanding what they mean. You were not promised additional leave time by your employer, therefore you did not rely on any guarantees they made to you to your detriment. Nor have you suffered any monetary damages.

If you feel you may be able to take additional leave time under your employer's voluntary policy, then speak with HR. Your first post states you're still struggling with your current workload and stress. It appears you are still in need of and presumably eligible for more leave time from work.

 

[pittguy578]

The detrimental reliance would be me coming back before I am ready/healthy and my peformance has suffered as a result of that.

You're throwing legal terms around without understanding what they mean. You were not promised additional leave time by your employer, therefore you did not rely on any guarantees they made to you to your detriment. Nor have you suffered any monetary damages.

If you feel you may be able to take additional leave time under your employer's voluntary policy, then speak with HR. Your first post states you're still struggling with your current workload and stress. It appears you are still in need of and presumably eligible for more leave time from work.

Maybe I am using the term detrimental reliance loosely, but HR is the expert on company policies. As an expert, they have a greater duty to inform a line employee of all relevant employee policies/procedures. I was relying on the information they provided to me (or failed to provide) regarding my leave, and it has caused a negative situation at this point It potentially could cause a greater long-term negative situation if I do end up being terminated at a later date. If I had been informed of those policies when I had inquired about them, my actions would have been different, and I would not be in this situation. I had never had any prior performance issues prior to this situation-in fact I was a top performer. My peformance has not been a long-term issue.

 

[cbg]

I would agree that HR had a responsibility to explain the policy to you IF YOU HAD ASKED. But it is not and never was the responsibility of HR to try to second guess what employees need to know about what policies. They are not mind readers, nor do they have a crystal ball. If you contacted them and said you were returning to work at the end of your FMLA, they would have no reason to assume that you needed more time or that they should be telling you about alternate possibilites. If you had said you were not ready to return to work and asked about alternate possibilities, that would have been different. It is not their job to guess what you need. You said you were coming back to work - why should they second guess you?

 

[pittguy578]

I would agree that HR had a responsibility to explain the policy to you IF YOU HAD ASKED. But it is not and never was the responsibility of HR to try to second guess what employees need to know about what policies. They are not mind readers, nor do they have a crystal ball. If you contacted them and said you were returning to work at the end of your FMLA, they would have no reason to assume that you needed more time or that they should be telling you about alternate possibilites. If you had said you were not ready to return to work and asked about alternate possibilities, that would have been different. It is not their job to guess what you need. You said you were coming back to work - why should they second guess you?

Honestly that was not the case at all. They had known I was not well. I had advised them I was wondering how long job would be kept if I had not come back-they did not give me an answer other than my FMLA time had run out.
They were aware that basically I was coming back because I felt as if I had to come back-not because I was better. The disability company (who they own) was aware of my condition and was essentially recommending I not come back and they were also aware I was only coming back because I felt as if I had to in order to save my job.