Topical FMLA Archive

Serious Health Condition

 Pregnancy -- Part-time schedule

• GUDENKAUF v. STAUFFER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., dba STAUFFER MAGAZINE GROUP, et al.
  U.S. District Court District of Kansas, 3 WH Cases2d 410, 2/13/1996, No. 94-4228-SAC
  
  Employer did not violate FMLA when it denied pregnant employee's request for part time work some two weeks prior to her delivery and when it subsequently terminated her, where she has not shown that she suffered from serious health condition that kept her from performing her job duties. Employee's deposition and affidavit that she could not work effectively are insufficient to support finding that she could not work for more than one-half day inasmuch as neither her obstetrician nor nurse practitioner corroborated her testimony that she had been directed or authorized to take leave for her pregnancy-related conditions. Obstetrician observed that her pregnancy was normal, that her complaints were not unusual or severe, and that he had not noted conditions that would have impaired her ability to work. Nurse practitioner did not consider employee's complaints significant enough to discuss with doctor for purposes of authorizing leave from work.

• HAEFLING v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.
  U.S. Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit, 5 WH Cases2d 193, 3/4/1999, No. 97-1658
  
  Final regulations issued by Department of Labor addressing meaning of phrase "serious health condition" under FMLA do not govern action brought by feeder driver alleging that his discharge for poor attendance violated the Act, where final regulations did not become effective until after driver's absences and resulting termination.

  Department of Labor's interim final rules defining "serious health condition" under FMLA should be read to require employee who seeks relief under act to establish period of incapacity that spans more than three consecutive calendar days. Even though interim rules do not require that the three days be consecutive, where (1) it is appropriate to refer to final regulations, which require period of incapacity to span "more than three consecutive calendar days," in interpreting interim final rules and (2) given that FMLA was designed to cover serious illnesses that last more than few days, it is hardly plausible that Congress intended to allow employees to piece together minor illnesses lasting only day or two to invoke act's protections.

  Feeder driver who was discharged for poor attendance did not suffer from "serious health condition" warranting protection under FMLA, where driver's own diary established that any period of incapacity that he suffered from neck injury never extended beyond three consecutive days. There is no indication neck injury required the driver to be absent from work for more than three consecutive days. Even if the driver could string together absences from work and absences from routine daily activities to establish period of incapacity, there is no evidence demonstrating that his neck injury resulted in inability to perform routine daily activities on days he was not scheduled to work.

  Feeder driver who was discharged for poor attendance did not suffer from "serious health condition" warranting protection under FMLA, where he failed to establish that his neck injury constituted chronic or long-term health condition requiring continuing treatment by health-care provider. Although driver testified that he visited doctor upon referral by his attorney and attended physical therapy sessions, there is no evidence that driver's condition required any medical treatment whatsoever. Driver did not submit affidavit from his own doctor or any other medical personnel demonstrating necessity of treatments he supposedly received.

• PENDARVIS v. XEROX CORPORATION
  U.S. District Court District of Columbia, 4 WH Cases2d 1024, 5/5/1998, No. 97-1512 (PLF)
  
  Employee's failure to provide evidence from health care provider that her morning sickness rendered her unable to perform functions of her job is not fatal to her FMLA claim, since neither the Act nor Department of Labor regulations require such evidence in cases of pregnancy-related morning sickness. Pregnancy is treated in regulations differently from other serious health conditions, and in absence of employer's request for medical certification, regulations that specifically address pregnancy and related conditions cannot be reconciled with requirement that pregnant employees always provide medical evidence that she is unable to work because of morning sickness.