FMLA leave: Did drunken calls qualify as sufficient notice?
October 26, 2009 by Christian SchappelPosted in: Employment law, FMLA, In this week's e-newsletter - benefits, Latest News & Views, Pay and benefits, What would you do?, Who won?
Would you have granted this worker, who was absent due to drunkenness, FMLA leave?
Here’s what happened:
A steel mill worker in Arkansas had been demoted after having four unexcused absences for drunkenness.
The man filed suit, claiming his employer violated the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) by demoting him.
He claimed that several phone calls he’d made to his supervisor during the four-day absence should’ve alerted the company to his need for FMLA leave.
The court’s decision
But a court said the calls merely put the employer “on notice that he was upset and intoxicated,” not suffering from a serious medical condition that would warrant an offer of FMLA leave.
Also, a judge said the company had no prior knowledge of the employee’s alcohol problem. And even if it had known of the worker’s problem, the FMLA only protects absences for alcohol treatment, not alcohol use.
Cite: Scobey v. Nucor Steel-Arkansas.
Tags: Arkansas, Family Medical Leave Act, FMLA, FMLA leave, Nucor Steel, Scobey
October 29th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Thank goodness they didn’t rule for the employee in this case. I can’t even imagine what the ramifications would be if employees could be excused from work for being inebriated!
October 29th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Wow, I wonder if I could get FMLA for a planned week of drunken debauchery. When I put in the request, how should it read? “Dear Sir, I will be way too intoxicated to remember where I work, so I repectfully request you grant me FMLA so I can nurse my hangover”.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
I am very thankful courts are beginning to recognize this type of foolish lawsuit. Companies lose millions of dollars a year on such craziness! Even though it is baseless, it still has to be defended. Worse yet, the workers who had remained on the job not only had to pick up his slack, but for no more compensation. Not to mention the fact that he could have caused an on the job injury had he shown up intoxicated which would have meant more money out of the company’s pocket. FMLA is not meant to cover someone’s lack of judgement. Kudos to the courts in this instance!