publications full of ideas
Strict Enforcement of Attendance Procedures May Create Liability for Employers under FMLA

3.27.2017

Many employers include in their attendance policies a specific procedure by which employees must “call-in” to report an absence from work. Such policies typically impose disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment, when an employee fails to follow the employer’s procedure or is otherwise a “no-call, no-show.” The enforcement of such policies can, however, become problematic when the employee’s absence is due to a serious health condition which otherwise qualifies for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). A Massachusetts Federal District Court recently addressed this issue in the case of Boadi v. Center for Human Development, Inc. The facts presented in that case demonstrate the potential liability for employers under the FMLA that can arise from the rigid application of an attendance policy call-in rule.

During her employment with CHD, Boadi had a history of absenteeism and violations of the company’s attendance policy – including failure to follow the call-in procedure set forth in the policy. She received disciplinary warnings for those multiple violations. In April of 2013, she experienced an unexpected mental health condition for which she was hospitalized for over a week. Her son notified CHD that Boadi was in the hospital, which triggered CHD to prepare an FMLA leave packet. However, CHD terminated Boadi on April 21, 2013 because she violated CHD’s call-in policy by failing to personally contact her supervisors regarding her absence in a timely manner. Boadi subsequently filed suit against CHD alleging that the company interfered with her rights under the FMLA and other laws. CHD filed for summary judgment, arguing that Boadi was terminated for a reason unrelated to her request for FMLA leave; namely, that she had violated CHD’s neutral call-in procedure. The court denied that motion regarding the FMLA claim, holding that whether CHD’s application of its policy interfered with Boadi’s FMLA rights was a question of fact to be determined by a jury.

The law applicable to Boadi’s case is found in Department of Labor Regulations, 29 C.F.R. §825.303(c), which states: “… an employee must comply with the employer’s usual and customary notice and procedural requirements for requesting leave, absent unusual circumstances.” The Regulations further state that under such a procedure, an employee may be required to contact “a specific individual to request leave.” Applying these Regulations, the court determined that there was an issue of fact regarding whether “unusual circumstances” had prevented Boadi from complying with CHD’s call-in policy while she was hospitalized. CHD argued that Boadi could have called her supervisor from the hospital. However, the court noted Boadi’s allegations that she was unable to make that call herself due to her incapacity while in the hospital. Based upon these conflicting factual allegations, the court concluded that it could not grant summary judgment in favor of CHD.

The Boadi case reflects the tension that can arise between an employee’s FMLA leave rights and the employer’s right to establish procedural requirements for employees to give notice of absences. While DOL Regulations permit employers covered by the FMLA to establish such rules, their application should allow for consideration of “unusual circumstances” which might justify exceptions. Such flexibility may help to avoid liability under the FMLA. When in doubt, employers should consult with experienced employment counsel.

Physical Address: 301 S. College Street, Suite 2900, Charlotte, NC 28202

related information

what's new at the firm

Two Poyner Spruill Attorneys Help Work for Tomorrow through Mentor Program at UNC Law

2/20/2018

RALEIGH, NC – Founded in 2016, the McIntyre-Whichard Legal Fellows Program is now in its second year of existence at the University of North Carolina School of Law. The program was founded by two UNC Law School alums and is co-sponsored by the North Carolina Study Center and the UNC Christian Legal Society. The program is named after Poyner Spruill partner and former U.S. Congressman Mike McIntyre and former N.C. Supreme Court Justice Willis Whichard, who are both alums of the university and serve as program mentors.

Poyner Spruill Diversity Committee to host panel discussion with key leaders in the legal field to celebrate Black History Month

2/12/2018

The Poyner Spruill Diversity Committee is celebrating Black History Month by hosting an intimate panel discussion with key leaders who have been successful in the legal field.

Twenty-three Poyner Spruill Attorneys Honored by Super Lawyers in 2018

2/5/2018

RALEIGH, NC – Poyner Spruill is pleased to announce that 16 of its attorneys have been recognized as 2018 North Carolina Super Lawyers and 7 were named as 2018 North Carolina Rising Stars by North Carolina Super Lawyers Magazine.

Poyner Spruill’s Client Service & Strategy Manager to Present at the 2018 Festival of Legal Learning

1/23/2018

RALEIGH, NC – Poyner Spruill’s Manager of Client Service & Strategy, Brandi Hobbs, has been invited to present at the University of North Carolina School of Law’s 2018 Festival of Legal Learning. The festival will take place February 9-10 at The William & Ida Friday Continuing Education Center in Chapel Hill.

Poyner Spruill files amicus brief with U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of European business organizations

1/12/2018

RALEIGH, NC — Led by partner Saad Gul, the law firm of Poyner Spruill LLP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of five European business organizations, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a lower court’s ruling preventing officials from accessing specific private emails housed on a server in Ireland.