Birth of a Child

I have read and reread the regs. It says that a Cert. can be required for serious health conditions. The birth of a child is not included in that list. Therefore, EEs at our company are only required to fill out a short form giving 30 days notice and an estimate of the time they will be taking.

On the flip side, I've asked my husband to take 5 weeks off for the birth of our child this summer. His company has someone else administer their FMLA and he called them several weeks ago to give notice and was told:

1. It's too soon, wait until there is only a month to go. (Yes, because 2 months notice is just rude!)

2. He'll need something from my doctor.

I'm really interested to know what you all require. The regs say we can ask for a birth certificate, but no where does it say a cert.

Comments

  • 21 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • We require the FMLA paperwork from all employees regardless of whether it is their illness or an immediate family member. The birth of a child is considered a serious health condition. It is number 3 on page three of the certification of health care provider form. I am not sure what you mean by a the regs say we can ask for a birth certificate but not a cert. It is perfectly legal for your husbands company to be asking for the form and your company should as well.
  • Number 3 refers only to pregnancy. That is not the same thing as an individual taking time off to bond with a child, be it due to an actual birth or adoption. You may consider the delivery of a child (living or not) as a serious health condition of the mother. However, as it applies to the father, there is no serious health condition to consider. If he is not taking time off to care for the mother (that would probably only apply to the period where she would be considered disabled due to childbirth) then there is no serious health condition to condsider.

    Assume, for instance, that the parents aren't married. The father isn't eligable for FMLA for anything with regard to the mother, only the time he spends with the child after it is born.

    825.305 (a) An employer may require that an employee's leave to care for the employee's seriously-ill spouse, son, daughter, or parent, or due to the employee's own serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform one or more of the essential functions of the employee's position, be supported by a certification issued by the health care
    provider of the employee or the employee's ill family member.

    There is no mention of "birth of a child."


  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-05-04 AT 02:33PM (CST)[/font][br][br]It also refers to the time that you would be incapaciated after the actual delivery ( or "recovery therefrom". It also covers psychological comfort. Are you going back to work right after the baby is born?


  • We require employees to complete the same medical certification regardless of whether it is for a pregnancy or other serious health condition. Remember, time off work for reasons such as morning sickness are covered under FMLA although you may not be aware that the person is pregnant, as well as all physician visits.

    Regarding the notice, I provide the medical cert. to the female (or male) as soon as I am made aware of the situation. Upon receipt of the completed form I tell them that we (the employee and I) will meet approximately one month before the birth to discuss the time they plan to take off for the birth of the child. If something happens that the person goes out sooner than that, I adjust accordingly.

    This meeting also provides a time to discuss continuation of benefits, as well as the difference between WI and federal FMLA.
  • An employer can require medical certification for a serious health condition. A pregnancy falls under the definition of serious health condition [29 CFR 825.114(a)--a period of incapcity due to pregnancy (including severe morning sickness) or time needed for prenatal vsisits].

    However, the employer cannot require medical certification for leaves taken to care for a newborn [29 CFR 825.113(d)]. For purposes of confirming the family relationship an employer may require an employee to provide reasonable documentation or statement of the nature of the relationship. The regulations state that documentation "may take the form of a simple statement frmo the employee," a child's birth certificate, or a court document.
  • Sadly, it doesn't actually say they can't require it. I just spent 30 min. arguing with the DOL about this. You are exactly right about pregnancy vs. newborn bonding. The best argument I've been able to make is backed up by the law itself.

    SEC. 103. CERTIFICATION.
    (a) IN GENERAL.--An employer may require that a request for leave under subparagraph (C) or (D) of section 102(a)(1) be supported by a certification issued by the health care provider.............

    If you then refer back to SEC. 102:

    SEC. 102. LEAVE REQUIREMENT.
    (a) IN GENERAL.--
    (1) ENTITLEMENT TO LEAVE.--Subject to section 103, an eligible employee shall be entitled to a total of 12 workweeks of leave during any 12-month period for one or more of the following:
    (A) Because of the birth of a son or daughter of the employee and in order to care for such son or daughter.
    (B) Because of the placement of a son or daughter with the employee for adoption or foster care.
    (C) In order to care for the spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent, of the employee, if such spouse, son, daughter, or parent has a serious health condition.
    (D) Because of a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the functions of the position of such employee.


    It clearly only requires certification for C and D, which are serious health conditions.

    I realize this is not a big deal to most people, but why should employees be required to go through the hassle and inconvenience to utilize this kind of leave. Don't we have enough problems with intermittent leave?
  • Are you saying that it is a hassle for the employees to have to get paperwork filled out for bonding and for intermittent leave?
  • Bonding. Intermittent leave is an entirely different animal.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 04-06-04 AT 10:23AM (CST)[/font][br][br]
    >
    >I realize this is not a big deal to most people,
    >but why should employees be required to go
    >through the hassle and inconvenience to utilize
    >this kind of leave. Don't we have enough
    >problems with intermittent leave?
    This is a strange question for someone in HR to ask.



  • Why is this a strange question?
  • Most HR professionals that I know would say it is a burden on the EMPLOYER not the EMPLOYEE. I would say the employee has it relatively easy. They get a form filled out, keep all their benefits, get job protection and get to be out of work. The employer has to pay for their benefits, keep their job open and figure out a way to cover for that person while they are gone. To me that seems more difficult that getting a form filled out.
  • I'm merely trying to look at this from both perspectives. We aren't just HR professionals, but employees as well. I know there are plenty of those people who use all their paid time off and then take advantage of FMLA while keeping their jobs.

    I'm all for sticking to the letter of the law. All I'm saying is that I cannot find any letter of the law to support requiring an employee to have unnecessary paperwork filled out.
  • Part of our job is to protect the company. The way we do that is to do things consistently and have the paperwork to prove that. There have been numerous time when, for example, before I sent the papers, I knew the ee would get a FMLA leave.
    However, there is a real world out there that has forced us to require more paperwork than was needed in the past.
  • Requiring a male employee to provide SOME type of verification that there is going to be/has been a birth of a child and that they are claiming this is their child is NOT unnecessary paperwork. While I agree that the regs. do not require an actual medical certification, they do allow an employer to verify the father/child relationship. In most cases having the medical form completed is the easiest, since it provides HR with advance information regarding the expected delivery, etc. and allows the husband to take time off work for appts., etc.

    That being said, I have accepted several different types of information from males to verify their relationship to the child, especially when the parents aren't married. Birth certificate being one of these.
  • Thank you. I'm not saying there shouldn't be any verification of the request, just that it doesn't have to be from a health care provider.
  • If that is the policy at your husband's company, I would think that you as an HR professional would abide by it. DO you like it when the employees at your company or their spouses question your policies?

    Your doctor is filling out the form for your employer anyway, have him add your huband's name or give him a new first page with your husband's name and send the paperwork over.
  • The doctor is not filling out the form for my employer. My employer requires something different altogether.

    Do you think all people should act like sheep and refuse to question something for which there is no logical foundation?

    I had no idea that working in HR means you are disallowed from asking questions and pointing out inconsistences.
  • Do you think all people should act like sheep and refuse to question something for which there is no logical foundation?I had no idea that working in HR means you are disallowed from asking questions and pointing out inconsistences.

    Not at all and this issue is obviously important to you. It just appears to have expended a lot of your time and energy and makes you defensive. (my apologies if I misread) Your choice. Larry C. was speaking on another thread of things he had learned early in his career from others. ..one of things I was told was "Pick your battles". Too ME this is a mole hill not a mountain.

    Good luck and enjoy that baby!

  • >Do you think all people should act like sheep
    >and refuse to question something for which there
    >is no logical foundation?I had no idea that
    >working in HR means you are disallowed from
    >asking questions and pointing out
    >inconsistences.
    >
    >Not at all and this issue is obviously important
    >to you. It just appears to have expended a lot
    >of your time and energy and makes you
    >defensive. (my apologies if I misread) Your
    >choice. Larry C. was speaking on another thread
    >of things he had learned early in his career
    >from others. ..one of things I was told was
    >"Pick your battles". Too ME this is a mole hill
    >not a mountain.
    >
    >Good luck and enjoy that baby!



  • >The doctor is not filling out the form for my
    >employer. My employer requires something
    >different altogether.
    >
    >Do you think all people should act like sheep
    >and refuse to question something for which there
    >is no logical foundation?
    >
    >I had no idea that working in HR means you are
    >disallowed from asking questions and pointing
    >out inconsistences.


    You say that your company requires some different paperwork-do you not require a Certification of Health Care Provider (which is a pretty standard form). Are you saying that your husband's company requires something different then that form?

    I am not saying that being in HR disallows you from asking questions however, your husbands company is not asking for anything illegal, not all companies ask for exactly the same information, etc.

    As the previous poster pointed out, you are making way too much of an issue out of this. If I questioned everything that my husband's HR department does that is inconsisent with what my company does, I would drive myself crazy.

    Surely you have more important battles to fight.
  • Well 7+ years ago, and ignorant HR Leader told me..........."if the baby is born on Tuesday, you are expected back to work by the 6 am staff mtg on Wednesday". Honest to God, no joking. Now realize he was a moron, which I had already pointed out.........maybe that is why he took that stance. So I filled out the paperwork, my wife's doctors office filled part of it out stating yeah she was huge gonna pop soon and the suspected strongly it was mine....... and I faxed it to corporate HR. Then I called the female HR staff and relayed the quote............ my 4 weeks leave was approved and faxed back to me 30 seconds later.
    Our company policy was you had to take any paid time off first as part of the leave ie, vacation, which since we were opening a new plant was put on hold so I was estatic. The local plant was not notified of my request, corporate told me to just send it through them.
    I did point out to the HR moron and the plant mgr. that this was probably not going to reflect well..........and after some more wrestling the ended up giving me a weeks paid time off. I did not use the FMLA or my vacation and had it paid out when I resigned 3 months later.
    My $0.02 worth!
    DJ The Balloonman
Sign In or Register to comment.