Light Duty @ Work After Being Rear Ended

[tryingtoplease]

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

My 19 yo son was rear ended on 8/29. He went to our GP on 8/30 & was put on light duty for 2 weeks. He feels fine now, was scheduled to work today, showed up & was sent home by his manager, saying he needed a note from the GP stating it was okay to return to work. When he inquired about this yesterday with HR, they told him the light duty simply ended after 14 days. He doesn't want to ruffle any feathers at work, & technically will be paid for missed time at work by the at fault person's insurance co. I was just wondering what the professional opinion is on here. Thanks for any input.

 

[TheGeekess]

The forum eats posts when one previews. You can click edit and retype your post.

 

[ecmst12]

He should call his doctor and ask for the note.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

The company is not required to provide modified work. It appears they did so in deference to a good employee. His options appear to 1.Go back to work unrestricted. 2. Sit at home until he recovers, requesting his employer hold his job, or 3. File for CA disability and request his employer hold his job.

 

[ecmst12]

Since the previous post makes no sense, I suggest you ignore it. OP's son is no longer disabled, no longer requires light duty, and just needs to get a doctor's not releasing him to unrestricted duty, which is a normal and common requirement. He should be able to get the required note easily, by simply calling and asking for it.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Since the previous post makes no sense, I suggest you ignore it. OP's son is no longer disabled, no longer requires light duty, and just needs to get a doctor's not releasing him to unrestricted duty, which is a normal and common requirement. He should be able to get the required note easily, by simply calling and asking for it.

I guess we will find out who's interpretation is correct when OP comes back. You interpret it to mean he can go back to full duty immediately and just needs his doctors note. I interpret that he feels he needs to stay on light duty and the company will not allow it.

 

[TheGeekess]

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

My 19 yo son was rear ended on 8/29. He went to our GP on 8/30 & was put on light duty for 2 weeks. He feels fine now, was scheduled to work today, showed up & was sent home by his manager, saying he needed a note from the GP stating it was okay to return to work. When he inquired about this yesterday with HR, they told him the light duty simply ended after 14 days. He doesn't want to ruffle any feathers at work, & technically will be paid for missed time at work by the at fault person's insurance co. I was just wondering what the professional opinion is on here. Thanks for any input.

I guess we will find out who's interpretation is correct when OP comes back. You interpret it to mean he can go back to full duty immediately and just needs his doctors note. I interpret that he feels he needs to stay on light duty and the company will not allow it.

Alrighty then.

 

[ecmst12]

He was put on light duty for 2 weeks, a little more than 2 weeks ago, and he feels fine now. So, your "interpretation" is completely made up not having anything to do with what was actually posted.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

He was put on light duty for 2 weeks, a little more than 2 weeks ago, and he feels fine now. So, your "interpretation" is completely made up not having anything to do with what was actually posted.

I missed the feels fine part. Sorry.

 

[tryingtoplease]

Thanks!

Thanks for the opinions. He will call his doc on Monday. He had just started the job a week before the accident & checked yesterday with HR at his work (when he could have gotten the release) & was told he didn't need one. He loves the job (ahh to be 19 again) & was looking forward to his hours & work experience this weekend. Was just wondering if the note simply "expired" after 2 weeks or if he needed to be "released". I would assume that if he was still in pain, they would require that he get another restriction note from his dr. Oh well, thanks again & enjoy your evening.

 

[HighwayMan]

My 19 yo son was rear ended on 8/29. He went to our GP on 8/30 & was put on light duty for 2 weeks. He feels fine now, was scheduled to work today, showed up & was sent home by his manager, saying he needed a note from the GP stating it was okay to return to work. When he inquired about this yesterday with HR, they told him the light duty simply ended after 14 days. He doesn't want to ruffle any feathers at work, & technically will be paid for missed time at work by the at fault person's insurance co. I was just wondering what the professional opinion is on here. Thanks for any input.

This doesn't seem to appear to be a legal issue - it's a matter of company policy. They're trying to cover themselves. What does your son do at his job?

 

[tryingtoplease]

He's in "customer service". Did you read the part of my original post where I stated he had asked HR in advance & they said he did not need a release from his doctor? It would appear to be a matter of who's right, HR or his manager. I was just wondering if any professionals had an opinion. Thanks.

 

[cbg]

Professional HR person speaking:

This is not a matter of law. The law does not address light duty. The law does not address release notes from the doctor except in limited situations which do not apply here. This is entirely a matter of company policy. There is no one "right" answer - it's how the company chooses to address it. Nothing you have posted suggests that any laws have been violated, any protected rights stepped on, or that anyone has done anything "wrong". There are sixty-two possible ways to handle the situation and all of them are right.

 

[HighwayMan]

He's in "customer service".

So if one normally sits behind a desk what would "light duty" consist of?

Did you read the part of my original post where I stated he had asked HR in advance & they said he did not need a release from his doctor? It would appear to be a matter of who's right, HR or his manager.

That would be for the company president to decide. Perhaps the company has a policy and procedure manual of some sort that would address that. In any event, this is NOT a legal matter.

 

[tryingtoplease]

Thanks CBG. I was not in the least implying that any laws had been broken. I was just curious as to why he got 2 completely different answers (HR - no release needed, manager - release needed). Thought there might have been something I was unaware of that was the industry standard. I know the only way to find out is to ask them. I was hoping you would offer your opinion as I have been on here for 8 years & respect your input. Enjoy your day.