Child's Ear Infection

njjel

An ee has been out a day and a half once this week and is out again today and states that her 12 y.o. son has an ear infection and is being treated by the doctor. She has brought in a note (from his doctor stating that he has seen him (no diagnosis). She advised her manager that he "likes to swim so this will probably continue to be a problem". She has no accrued sick time left to use. I say it and future time related to this qualifies for intermittent FMLA as a visit to the doctor has taken place. The manager states she's playing a game and besides this isn't a serious health condition. Your thoughts?

deniseE

As with all FMLA situations...I'd give her the paperwork and see what the dr. says. the key here is that she be required to directly care for the kid.

But truthfully, I don't see this as serious health condition.

dchr9203

I would put her the hoops on FMLA, with formal notification, etc. It may help her think twice about abusing the system. A child's intermittent ear infection, and the fact that she casually assumes it will be a regular problem, is not a "serious health condition".

njjel

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 07-16-04 AT 10:01AM (CST)[/font][br][br]However, it is my understanding that if the doctor certifies it as a serious health condition, then the FMLA leave is valid. I've been told that whether we think a condition is "serious" isn't our shot to call but rather that of the doctor. Do you all agree? BTW I simply loathe FMLA! :-)

So let me pose my question in another manner. What would you do if you were in my shoes? This ee is so close to termination for poor attendance and lateness it isn't even funny. However, I don't want to terminate her and not be able to make it stick. (This is a union environment.)

deniseE

I agree that as HR staff we should definately avoid practicing medicine! This becomes part of the problem with certification...you'll see other threads on this where HR feels that there should be another way to handle the issue, even after a doctor certifies it.

The upside is that FMLA is limited to 12 weeks. Once you start the clock running the amount of available time is reduced. Unpaid leave is tough for most ee's.

Give her the papers, let the doctor decide. And any leave not covered by FMLA does fall under your regular attendance policy.

smaces_twin

An ear infection can absolutely fall under a serious health condition if it meets the requirements of absence plus treatment.

Tish

It is the physician who makes the determination is it is/isn't a serious health condition. As HR myconcern would be that I have followed all the steps to make sure (if she qualifies) that FML was offered and processed correctly. Leave the diagnosis to the doctor.

Don D

Too many things in the blender here. Her performance has no association with whether or not this should be approved FMLA. Don't try to mix those. The opinion of the supervisor that she's playing games has absolutely no value, even though it could be accurate. And, a doctor is not the one who approves or disapproves FMLA, you are. I agree that this can be and probably is a serious medical condition.

Because the child 'likes to swim' is irrelevant. Most children who develop ear infections from swimming 'like to swim'.

I think this is another classic example of an employer who wants suddenly to terminate someone who invokes FMLA and the employer wants to fiddle around with performance/attendance issues. BAD TIMING.