Lou Michels and Rod Satterwhite are partners in the Labor & Employment group at McGuireWoods LLP. Both handle employment litigation on behalf of employers, and advise companies on employment issues regularly.
posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 2:42 PM by Lou Michels

A Geographic Approach for Intermittent Leave

     The Family Medical Leave Act, one of my favorite topics, provides time off from work for an employee to deal with a serious medical condition.  A recent 5th Circuit decision points out that the FMLA provides for time off from work, and does not apply when an employee simply requests time off at work. 

     An employee being treated for diabetes developed a medical condition requiring frequent and unscheduled trips of varying duration to the bathroom while at work.  He creatively argued that his employer's failure to give him FMLA time for these bathroom breaks was a violation of the statute.  The 5th Circuit flushed this argument, finding first that the employee did not have a serious medical condition because he was not "incapacitated" for work, but instead was able to go to work on a regular basis.  In addition, the court did not accept the claim that the employee was asking for intermittent leave away from his place of work, but merely periodic time away from a desk during the work day.  As the court put it, the employee, "is asking for unfettered permission, while at work, to take necessary restroom breaks."  The court held that this did not constitute intermittent leave as defined or contemplated by the FMLA.  I wonder how this decision changes if the employee had gone out to use a bathroom in another building.

     The employee also hurt his case by refusing to cooperate with his employer when it asked for additional medical information in order to validate his request for bathroom time.  The court held that the FMLA as a statute requires cooperation from both employer and employee and a failure by the employee to cooperate with the employer's legitimate request prevents the employee from challenging the employer's refusal to certify absences as FMLA qualifying.

     Why this case was not brought as an Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") case, I don't know.  It seems to me that a medical condition requiring someone to make frequent and lengthy visits to the local water closet would at least arguably qualify as a disabling condition that could be accommodated.  In any event, the 5th Circuit's logic seems solid in holding that intermittent FMLA leaves are for absences away from the workplace.  How far away will be a matter for another appeal.

 

 

 

Comments

# re: A Geographic Approach for Intermittent Leave

Monday, May 08, 2006 5:47 PM by kent
The opinion says the ADA claim was "abandoned." My guess is that the guy figured he couldn't qualify as disabled under the ADA (e.g., an uncontrollable potty urge probably isn't a substantial limitation on any major life activity).

"On January 13, 2003, Mauder filed this lawsuit against Metro, asserting claims for violations of the American With Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the FMLA. On June 22, 2004, Metro filed a motion for summary judgment and, in his response to the motion, Mauder expressly abandoned his ADA claims."

# re: A Geographic Approach for Intermittent Leave

Tuesday, May 09, 2006 4:20 PM by Lou Michels
Right--and I wonder why he abandoned the claim--there are a number of cases I'm aware of involving ulcerative colitus, or similar conditions, where the courts have found that this type of uncontrollable bowel problem does interfere with a major life activity. Several, in fact. And based on what I read in the opinion, there seemed to be enough evidence that the treatment was giving him real problems. But perhaps the depositon and medical evidence wasn't as conclusive.