Calculating FMLA Time Using Rollback

H Anderson

We use the 12-month rollback method for calculating leave under the FMLA. We have an employee who took her full 12 weeks of leave under the FMLA and returned to work on October 30, 2002. She is now expecting another leave to start sometime in October 2003, so her new leave will start before the end of her 12-month rollback period. Does that mean she isn't eligible for any new FMLA time at all? Or does it mean she is just eligible for additional FMLA time that falls after the end of her 12-month period (i.e., leave that falls after October 30, 2003)?

LindaS

She would not be eligible for FMLA until she completed the year which would be October 30, 2003.

POPEYE

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with Linda S. The DOL description of the "Rolling Backward 12-month period" clearly states that it is from the date an employee uses any FMLA leave. Under these guidelines, assuming your EE took all 12 weeks consecutively, they would have leave time available in August. They would then pick up hours/days/weeks according to how they were used 12 months prior. Hope this helps.

Linda S - if I'm off base here, please let me know.

MedHRpro

Can I jump in? What if the FMLA was not taken consecutively 12 weeks. Say took about 8 weeks in Jan 2002, then 2-3 weeks in Aug 2002. Now requests another 2-4 week FMLA in May 2003. Would I start with the Jan 2002 FMLA leave date and roll forward thru Jan 2003?

HRAMERICA

The regs state that the employee is entitled to "a total of 12 workweeks of leave during any 12-month period." Therefore, if, for example, the employee's first day of FML occurred on January 15th, then that is the first date of the 12-month time period. Okay?

lorrie

I agree with HRAMERICA. Start the new clock on the first date leave was started on the previous year. If that employee took all 12 weeks together and it ended on 10-30, then it probably started around August 8. That is when their new 12 weeks of eligibility begins. (Or if they need to take leave starting on October 15, then they have 12 weeks from Oct. 15, 2003 - Oct. 15, 2004.)

H Anderson

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 05-15-03 AT 09:56AM (CST)[/font][p][font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 05-15-03 AT 09:55 AM (CST)[/font]

My assumption is that we could look at the 12-month rollback period immediately preceding the new leave, which would extend until her return on October 30, 2002. The question would be, if she goes out again on October 15, 2003, would she be entitled to another 12 weeks starting on October 30, 2003? Or none at all, since she did have FMLA fall during the rollback period?

Galestorm

There is a good example of the 12 month rolling back method of FMLA at [url]www.wimlaw.com/fmla.htm[/url]. I have been puzzled by this one as well, but this website helped me figure it out. Hope this helps! I used a search engine and put in FMLA, this was one of the sites I reviewed which seemed to simplify the method.

H Anderson

Thanks for the tip, Gale, but I couldn't get to that web site. Is there anything you could cut and paste from there?

Galestorm

I have cut and pasted the materials regarding the information you are requesting:




EXAMPLES: METHODS FOR CALCULATING 12-MONTH PERIOD

1. The calendar year: Ellen works for Amalgamated Consolidated, Inc., which has selected the calendar year method. Her son is born in September, 1996. She may take the last 12 weeks of 1996 and also the first 12 weeks of 1997 as FMLA leave, for a total of 24 weeks. She will have exhausted her leave entitlement until January 1, 1998.

2. Fixed 12-month "leave year:" Fred makes widgets for Widg-R-Us, which uses an employee's hiring anniversary date method. He was hired June 1, 1994. On February 1, 1996 he is stricken with a serious health condition. He may take 24 weeks of leave starting in March, 1996 (12 weeks for the year ending on his June 1 anniversary and 12 weeks for the following year). He will not be entitled to any more FMLA leave until after June 1, 1997.

3. 12-month period measured forward from date employee's first FMLA leave begins: Nancy has been working for Bilge Pumps Unlimited for three years when she requests FMLA leave to care for her aged father. Bilge measures forward from the date her leave begins, May 10, 1996. She may take 12 weeks leave before May 11, 1997. If she takes the full 12 weeks from May through August 11, 1996, she will not be entitled to any more FMLA leave until after August 12, 1997.

4. Rolling 12-month period: Charles, a longtime employee of Rent-a-Royal, takes 4 weeks of FMLA leave beginning February 1, 1996, 4 weeks beginning June 1, 1996, and 4 weeks beginning December 1, 1996. He is not entitled to any additional leave until February 1, 1997 when he will be entitled to up to 4 weeks of leave.

Under the fourth method, the "rolling" 12-month period, each time an employee takes FMLA leave the remaining leave entitlement would be any balance of the 12 weeks which has not been used during the immediately preceding 12 months. For example, if an employee has taken 8 weeks of leave during the past 12 months, an additional four weeks of leave could be taken. If an employee used 4 weeks beginning February 1, 1996, 4 weeks beginning June 1, 1996, and 4 weeks beginning December 1, 1996, the employee would not be entitled to any additional leave until February 1, 1997.

Don D

I STILL SAY THE SIMPLIST THING TO DO IS START THE 12 MONTH CLOCK ON THE FIRST DAY OF FMLA. DISREGARD WHETHER IT WAS TAKEN CONSECUTIVELY, SPORADICALLY, IN HALF DAYS OR WHOLE. JUST TRACK THE 12 WEEKS. THE ANNIVERSARY DATE OF THAT FIRST DAY OF LEAVE IS THE FIRST DAY AVAILABLE FOR FMLA DURING THE SUBSEQUENT 12 MONTH PERIOD. (UNLESS ONE WORKS FOR AMALGAMATED CONSOLIDATED).

LindaS

Let me apologize for my initial response. I read it too quickly and thought the first day TAKEN was October 30, 2002 which is why my response was what it was. That being said, I begin counting from the first day the time was taken and as of that date, whatever it is, the employee has 12 weeks. That also becomes their anniversary date when they have the 12 weeks renewed (just like Don stated).

Again, I apologize!

System

DON D..

In the 12 months measured forward..if employee has first FMLA 2-1-00, and may or may not exhaust all 12 weeks...and then has another FMLA 5-5-03. Do you keep the same period going forward (2-00/2-01..2-01/2-02..etc) or do you start a new 12 month priod 5-5-03/5-5-04 because there was such a gap in between? And is there a reg that speaks to that..or just what's been practiced?

Thanks for the insight...

Don D

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 05-16-03 AT 12:17PM (CST)[/font][p]I can't cite a reg section; but, if there has been an intervening passage of time sufficient to remove the tracking of anniversary date of first FMLA leave a year ago, then a new period begins with the inception of the first day of leave taken. i.e., if you were tracking 12 weeks which were ever taken and then the one year period expired also, you don't keep that one year period forever. Trash it. Time passes, then the whole calculation of 12 weeks and 1 year begins again the next time there is an FMLA event. The only value of the twelve-month anniversary date is to establish when the subsequent 12 weeks allowed can begin. Once that passes, forget that anniversary date.

/EDIT: Sorry, the word 'ever' should be 'never'. "12 weeks which were NEVER taken."

System

This is my 2nd attempt to ask question on this. If this shows up twice, I apologize.

Don In using the "12 month measured forward" method, ee begins FMLA 2-1-00 and may or may not use the full 12 weeks. Then he asks for FMLA 5-5-03.

Is the 12 month period a continuation from 2-1-00 (i.e. 2-1-00/2-01-01,2-1-01/
2-1-02 etc) or do you start again 5-5-03 to 5-5-04 because there's been so much time in between? And is there a reg on that..or just common practice?

Thanks for any input.