Search results

duplicate post

Well, actually until you've worked 1,250 hours since you returned, assuming the company is using the "rolling year" method of determining eligibility.

I sit corrected on the circumstances under which the company can charge back the employer share of medical premiums incurred during FMLA leave. I'll remember next time. ;)

Then legally, your employment can be terminated. Because you were taking intermittent leave, I'm assuming you had kept up with the employee share of the medical, and now you're talking about the employer share? http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/1421.htm Doesn't mean they necessarily...

Darned New Hampshire which apparently doesn't know that "salaried" doesn't mean "exempt" in any other state.

I sit corrected.

There is, but that wouldn't help her either. Let's say they used the rolling method and let's say she had to go out today. That means 1,250 hours from 1/21/09 through 1/20/10. Sorry.

She meets the one year employment requirement. She does not meet the hours requirement. If they use a calendar year basis, she would have had to have worked 1,250 total hours from 1/1/09 to 1/19/09 and 10/09 through current. Even assuming 10/1/09 through 1/21/10, that would be only about 19...

How much FMLA time have you used?

And even if he had met the criteria for baby bonding leave under the FMLA, such time is at the approval of the employer.

The 9 months before they shut down for a year don't count for purposes of the hours requirement. OK, let me get the facts straight. She worked from when to when, was off from when to when, came back and has been working when to when.

Severance would be a "benefit", but it's not certain that such a statement constitutes a contractual obligation, at least in the case of severance. An attorney is your best bet; the devil is in the details.

Not union, I take it?

The employment agreement, assuming it was an enforceable contract, was your only legal saving grace. You're welcome to take it to a local attorney versed in employment law for review, but I wouldn't be terribly optimistic. Other than a contractual obligation, the employer is not required to...

The law says you only have to be employed one year total (breaks in service not considered). However, the law also says that the 1,250 hours worked must be within the immediately preceding 12 months (or whatever annual calculation basis the employer uses). The employment requirement is in...

If you are being sued, you need an attorney. Are you being sued for the company-paid portion or the employee-paid portion? If the latter, were you on unpaid status for any of the period in question or, if not, did the deductions not come out of your check? Certainly there has been some...

Fair? Probably not. Illegal? No.

In no state is the employer required to pay you any more than for what you have already worked. If you give a 2-week notice and they let you go immediately, you may be eligible for unemployment benefits for the length of the notice period, although there is a one-week waiting period in Texas...

If you tell the employer you are quitting for this reason, your chances for unemployment benefits basically go out the window. That's tax season, baby. ;) Is this a permanent position or one just for the tax season?

Discharged-can provide explanation at interview. Try that. You can bet that IF you put quit or laid off and the prospective employer contact this company for employment verification or a reference, they will say fired anyway. If they are honest in "why", most prospective employers will think...