Most employers are aware of, and comply with, the requirement to include information about employees’ rights and obligations under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in employee handbooks or other written policy documents. However, employers often fail to take advantage of the opportunity to use written FMLA policies as a way to combat FMLA abuse.
Below is a list of seven provisions that employers should include in their FMLA policies if they are searching for tools to help limit such abuse.
- Require that all leave requests be in writing. All employees should be required to document their request for leave on a written request form and return that form to Human Resources unless there are unusual circumstances that prevent the employee from doing so. Requiring written leave requests helps ensure there is no misunderstanding about the type of leave being requested or the dates or circumstances giving rise to the need for leave. Requiring employees to put the leave request in writing also can make an employee think twice before making a fraudulent leave request.
- Require that FMLA leaves run concurrently with other types of paid and unpaid leave and require employees to substitute paid leave for unpaid leave, unless prohibited by state or local law. Although concurrent running of leave and substitution of paid leave provisions are subject to state and local laws, they are strong deterrents when it comes to curbing FMLA abuse. When employees know that they will have to use up their available paid leave time (i.e., vacation, sick time, personal leave, and so on) when taking FMLA leave, they are much less likely to use FMLA leave for illegitimate reasons. Additionally, if they do take FMLA leave, requiring concurrent running of leave and substitution of paid leave (when permissible) prevents employees from taking 12 weeks of unpaid FMLA leave followed by additional weeks of paid vacation or other time off.
- Inform employees that medical certifications and recertifications will be required. FMLA policies should describe when medical certifications and recertifications will be required and employers should make sure to require those certifications and recertifications whenever possible (i.e., for new leave requests, when the reason for leave changes, when leave is extended, when a new leave year starts, when the leave circumstances change, if there is a pattern of suspicious absences, if there is objective information that provides a reason to doubt the need for leave, and so on).
- Mandate strict compliance with call-in procedures. The FMLA regulations are clear that employees must comply with an employer’s “usual and customary” notice and call-in procedures, absent unusual circumstances. For example, an employer’s call-in procedures may indicate how much advance notice is required when reporting an absence, to whom the absence must be reported, what information must be provided regarding the absence, etc. Employees who do not comply with such procedures, and who do not have a justifiable excuse for failing to comply, may have their leave requests delayed or denied, so long as the call-in requirements are uniformly applied for other types of absences.
- Prohibit secondary employment while on leave. The FMLA regulations permit employers to have policies prohibiting outside or supplemental employment while on leave, so long as the policy is uniformly applied to all types of leave, not just FMLA leave. Courts have dismissed FMLA claims filed by employees who were found to be working at another job in violation of the employer’s policy prohibiting other employment while on leave.
- Require employees to sign a certification regarding their absences. The FMLA prohibits employers from asking for a medical certification or doctor’s note in connection with every FMLA absence unless the documentation is required by policy in order to use paid leave time that is being substituted for unpaid FMLA leave. However, employers may require employees to sign a personal certification or acknowledgment following each absence which confirms that the employee took the day off for a FMLA or other medical reason and acknowledges that the employee may be disciplined or terminated for providing false information to the employer. To avoid any claim that employees using FMLA leave are treated differently from other employees, the personal certification/acknowledgment should be required from all employees returning from any kind of medical leave (e.g., FMLA, worker’s compensation, ADA, personal illness, and so on).
- Inform employees that second and third opinions may be required. Because second and third opinions are always obtained at the expense of the employer, second and third opinions are usually reserved for situations in which the request for leave is unclear or suspect for some reason (e.g., conflicting information has been provided regarding the reason for leave, the certifying health professional is not an expert in the field, the amount of leave requested appears to be inconsistent with the reason for leave, and so on). However, informing an employee up front that second or third opinions may be required puts employees on notice that suspicious leave requests will not automatically be approved by the employer.
By working with employment counsel to incorporate these provisions into existing FMLA policies, employers can ensure that they are taking full advantage of the tools available to limit fraudulent FMLA requests and FMLA abuse.
면책 조항
이 블로그는 정보 제공의 목적으로만 Foley & Lardner LLP("Foley" 또는 "회사")에서 제공합니다. 고객을 대신하여 회사의 법적 입장을 전달하기 위한 것이 아니며 특정 법률 자문을 전달하기 위한 것도 아닙니다. 이 문서에 표현된 모든 의견이 반드시 Foley & Lardner LLP, 그 파트너 또는 고객의 견해를 반영하는 것은 아닙니다. 따라서 면허를 소지한 변호사의 조언 없이 이 정보에 따라 행동하지 마시기 바랍니다. 이 블로그는 변호사-고객 관계를 형성하기 위한 것이 아니며, 이 블로그를 수신한다고 해서 변호사-고객 관계가 성립되는 것도 아닙니다. 이 웹사이트를 통해 이메일, 블로그 게시물 또는 기타 방법으로 Foley와 소통하는 것은 어떠한 법적 문제에 대해서도 변호사-고객 관계를 형성하지 않습니다. 따라서 이 블로그를 통해 이메일, 블로그 게시물 또는 기타 방식으로 귀하가 Foley에게 전송하는 모든 커뮤니케이션 또는 자료는 기밀 또는 독점적인 것으로 취급되지 않습니다. 이 블로그의 정보는 "있는 그대로" 게시되며 완전성, 정확성, 최신성을 보장하지 않습니다. Foley는 사이트의 운영 또는 콘텐츠에 대해 명시적이든 묵시적이든 어떠한 종류의 진술이나 보증도 하지 않습니다. Foley는 상품성, 특정 목적에의 적합성, 소유권 및 비침해에 대한 묵시적 보증을 포함하여 법령, 법률, 상업적 사용 또는 기타에 따라 발생하는 모든 종류의 명시적 또는 묵시적 보증, 보증, 조건 및 진술을 명시적으로 부인합니다. 어떠한 경우에도 Foley 또는 그 파트너, 임원, 직원, 대리인 또는 계열사는 본 사이트(정보 및 기타 콘텐츠 포함) 또는 제3자 웹사이트 또는 그러한 웹사이트를 통해 액세스한 정보, 리소스 또는 자료의 생성, 사용 또는 의존으로 인해 발생하거나 그로 인해 발생하는 직접, 간접, 특별, 부수적, 징벌적 또는 결과적인 모든 청구, 손실 또는 손해에 대해 모든 법 이론(계약, 불법행위, 과실 또는 기타)에 따라 귀하 또는 다른 사람에게 직접 또는 간접적으로 책임지지 않습니다. 일부 관할권에서는 이 블로그의 콘텐츠가 변호사 광고로 간주될 수 있습니다. 해당되는 경우, 이전 결과가 유사한 결과를 보장하지 않는다는 점에 유의하시기 바랍니다. 사진은 극화 목적으로만 사용되었으며 모델이 포함될 수 있습니다. 유사성이 반드시 현재 고객, 파트너십 또는 직원 상태를 의미하지는 않습니다.
관련 인사이트
December 12, 2025
Health Care Law Today
Eleventh Circuit Hears Oral Argument in Landmark Constitutional Challenge to False Claims Act’s Qui Tam Provisions
On December 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral argument in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical…
2025년 12월 11일
폴리 뷰포인트
지식재산권 포트폴리오 관리에서의 반독점 위험 및 준수 전략
본 논문은 지식재산 포트폴리오 관리가 어떻게 혁신을 촉진함과 동시에 잠재적 위험을 제시할 수 있는지 분석한다.
2025년 12월 11일
폴리 뷰포인트
캘리포니아 대기질 관리국(CARB), SB 261 및 253 법안에 대한 규정안 발표
2025년 12월 9일, 캘리포니아 대기 자원 위원회(CARB)는 초기 규정을 위한 제안된 규제 문안을 발표했습니다…