Posted by HLL Admin

Since it was signed into law in 1993, the Family and Medical Leave Act has been a fixture of the employment law landscape. Under the law, employers must provide certain employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave each year. During this time, health benefits remain intact. 

This law has had a significant impact on the lives of workers. It also introduced extensive administrative and operational requirements for employers who risk fines, penalties, and lawsuits if they don’t comply with the law. 

Workers are informed of the law and how to make valid FMLA time-off requests. As long as employers approve valid requests, they are in compliance with the law, right? Well, not so fast. A recent court case highlights a potential danger for employers in how they communicate regarding FMLA benefits.

Watch What You Say, Write, or Imply About FMLA

Salvatore Ziccarelli worked for the Cook County Sheriff’s Office for 27 years as a correctional officer. During his nearly three decades on duty, Officer Ziccarelli developed various work-related health conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). As a result, he was familiar with his rights under FMLA and how to make a formal request to take a leave of absence.

In September 2016, Officer Ziccarelli asked the Sheriff’s Office FMLA benefits manager to use his remaining FMLA hours. He wanted to take some time off work to attend an intensive PTSD treatment program. This request would have maxed out his FMLA time for that year. However, the benefits manager’s response set off an entirely different sequence of events.

When Ziccarelli made his request, the benefits manager allegedly responded, “you’ve taken serious amounts of FMLA… don’t take any more FMLA. If you do so, you will be disciplined.” As a result, Officer Ziccarelli decided to retire from the Sheriff’s Department. He sued the benefits manager, County Sheriff, and the County, alleging he faced FMLA interference.

In Employment Law, Words and Actions Matter

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals is a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals that covers Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana. The case (Ziccarelli v. Dart) was decided on June 1st, 2022. 

Defendants argued that there was no way Officer Ziccarelli experienced FMLA interference because his FMLA leave request was not actually denied. However, the Court disagreed. In its decision, the Court states, “an employer can violate the FMLA by discouraging an employee from exercising rights under the FMLA without actually denying an FMLA leave request.”

In other words, even though Officer Ziccarelli was not prevented from requesting leave under the FMLA, the threat of discipline (however empty) was enough for the Court to consider this FMLA interference. The question of what constitutes interference is further clarified by this case. 

When it comes to FMLA, employers are judged on their actions and their attitudes. They must provide timely notice of eligibility as well as the operational framework to allow for FMLA requests. What company representatives say about FMLA matters too. Anything employers do or say to discourage the lawful use of FMLA may provide the basis for a claim of FMLA interference. 

As the Court’s opinion states, “Threatening to discipline an employee for seeking or using FMLA leave to which he is entitled clearly qualifies as interference with FMLA rights.” Your company must be aware of FMLA and how managers and HR professionals need to communicate about this law in order to remain in compliance. 

Hughes Lawyers represents employers in a variety of Employment Law matters, including the FMLA. If you or your company need help preventing, mitigating, or containing a complex legal issue, Hughes Lawyers can help. Contact us at any time so we can discuss your case and get to work.