Medical Leave

clean hairy

Well-Known Member
So you were in Management?
Hourly Union have rights under the contract that Management does not.
If you were Management, might be you could go straight to an Attorney.
Might have been beneficial had you filed Unemployment, that would have helped document what happened.
Would not hurt to at least speak to a Labor Law Attorney at this point.
Considering who they would be going against, perhaps they would take a contingency for your case.
 

burrheadd

KING Of GIFS
Just so everyone is clear I was not union. Sorry if I’m posting in the wrong forum. Believe me I wasn’t trying to get out of work. I worked 10+ years without any issues. Just seeing if anyone knew of someone being brought back with their original hire date.

So, we’re you management or

A Scab?
 

john chesney

Well-Known Member
There likely wouldn't be any settlement in his case.
Well you might be surprised what picture a GOOD attorney can paint. I know one thing I would NEVER go down without a huge fight. I would exhaust every resource available to me and they know it. Maybe that’s why I’m still around.Under 6 months left and I’m out
 

Kae3106

Well-Known Member
So you were in Management?
Hourly Union have rights under the contract that Management does not.
If you were Management, might be you could go straight to an Attorney.
Might have been beneficial had you filed Unemployment, that would have helped document what happened.
Would not hurt to at least speak to a Labor Law Attorney at this point.
Considering who they would be going against, perhaps they would take a contingency for your case.

There are a lot of non-union hourly employees in various administrative jobs. Some business units are all non-union. Can't automatically assume non-union equals management.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
From the DOL website FAQ for FMLA:

"Q. Can I continue to use FMLA for leave due to my chronic serious health condition?

A. Under the regulations, employees continue to be able to use FMLA leave for any period of incapacity or treatment due to a chronic serious health condition. The regulations continue to define a chronic serious health condition as one that (1) requires “periodic visits” for treatment by a health care provider or nurse under the supervision of the health care provider, (2) continues over an extended period of time, and (3) may cause episodic rather than continuing periods of incapacity. The regulations clarify this definition by defining “periodic visits” as at least twice a year.

Q. Are there any changes to the definition of a serious health condition under the regulations?

A. A “serious health condition” is defined as an illness, injury, impairment, or physical or mental condition that involves inpatient care or continuing treatment by a health care provider. The “continuing treatment” test for a serious health condition under the regulations may be met through (1) a period of incapacity of more than three consecutive, full calendar days plus treatment by a health care provider twice, or once with a continuing regimen of treatment, (2) any period of incapacity related to pregnancy or for prenatal care, (3) any period of incapacity or treatment for a chronic serious health condition, (4) a period of incapacity for permanent or long-term conditions for which treatment may not be effective, or (5) any period of incapacity to receive multiple treatments (including recovery from those treatments) for restorative surgery, or for a condition which would likely result in an incapacity of more than three consecutive, full calendar days absent medical treatment.

The regulations specify that if an employee asserts a serious health condition under the requirement of a “period of incapacity of more than three consecutive, full calendar days and any subsequent treatment or period of incapacity relating to the same condition,” the employee’s first treatment visit (or only visit, if coupled with a regimen of continuing treatment) must take place within seven days of the first day of incapacity. Additionally, if an employee asserts that the condition involves “treatment two or more times,” the two visits to a health care provider must occur within 30 days of the first day of incapacity. Finally, the regulations define “periodic visits” for treatment of a chronic serious health condition as at least twice a year."

Without knowing all the details, seems like a stroke could meet the requirement of chronic serious health condition. You should definitely seek the advice of an actual lawyer rather than the assumptions of anyone on this forum.
 

Johney

Well-Known Member
Well you might be surprised what picture a GOOD attorney can paint. I know one thing I would NEVER go down without a huge fight. I would exhaust every resource available to me and they know it. Maybe that’s why I’m still around.Under 6 months left and I’m out
I understand what you're saying not many would go down without a fight, but this person didn't TRY to fight when they had a chance. Attorney's don't take client's on contingency when there is little or no chance of winning the case.
 

john chesney

Well-Known Member
I understand what you're saying not many would go down without a fight, but this person didn't TRY to fight when they had a chance. Attorney's don't take client's on contingency when there is little or no chance of winning the case.
I agree no good attorney is going to waste their time with a dead bang loser however there are medical conditions that can incapacitate someone from fighting at the time especially something proven mental,physical or both. Let’s face it we both have really no idea of the facts from a post on BC.I’m just saying I would gets all my facts together take this to a attorney that specializes in labor law and bounce it off him or her. It don’t cost you anything
 
Top