当使用第三方管理员处理休假问题时，如FMLA, employers need to ensure proper coordination of their policies with the timing of responses by the third-party administrator. If not, it could leave the employer liable for either interference of FMLA or ADA violations.
举个例子——以……的情况为例 睡衣v. 宪章通信有限责任公司,. 第21-5073号(U.S. 第六巡回上诉法院，3/8/22). 宪章通信 hired Kelly Blanchet as a Direct Sales Representative (“DSR”) in July 2014. 作为DSR, Blanchet was responsible for selling Charter’s services door-to-door in residential neighborhoods. Blanchet quickly excelled in her role, receiving positive feedback from her closest supervisors.
During Blanchet’s employment, she became pregnant and requested maternity leave. 她申请并接受了Charter的标准产假, 短期伤残津贴, 家庭和医疗休假法案(FMLA)的福利将持续到9月4日, 2016. After giving birth to her child on July 11, 2016, Blanchet developed postpartum depression. 因为她的身体状况, Blanchet requested an accommodation of additional leave under the FMLA, 在她最初重返工作岗位的9月4日之后, 2016.
Charter使用第三方管理员处理所有休假请求. 当时, Sedgwick was the third party who administered disability leave for Charter and was primarily responsible for all direct communications with employees who requested leave. 所有员工, 布兰切特就是这样, were told clearly that they should not communicate directly and should only communicate with Sedgwick about their leaves – not Charter.
Blanchet first sought and was approved for FMLA leave until it was exhausted on September 30, 2016. Blanchet then obtained short-term disability leave until it was exhausted on January 8, 2017. Charter subsequently approved Blanchet for long-term disability leave through February 1, 2017, 作为ADA的便利条件.
然而, Sedgwick had a pattern and custom of having paperwork approvals delayed long after the initial verbal approval. 例如, Blanchet did not receive formal approval for her first request for disability leave until February 3, 2017, 两天后她就该回去工作了.
但布兰切特需要更多的休息时间. 2月3日, 2017, Sedgwick received a letter from Blanchet’s doctor which indicated that Blanchet’s return to work date was “unknown at this time” but that Charter should “expect April” as a timeframe for her to return to work. The letter also indicated that Blanchet “would not be capable of working from home or in any other setting due to her severe depression.”
Blanchet also contacted a Sedgwick representative because she was concerned that she had exhausted her FMLA benefits and did not know how that would impact her employment with the company. 布兰切特要求60天的宽限期, 从2017年2月到4月3日, 2017, 让自己有时间适应新的药物治疗. When Blanchet contacted the Sedgwick representative about this extension, the representative assured Blanchet “not to worry about [her] job” and that “they were [her] job protection.” After Blanchet followed up a few weeks later with a Sedgwick representative, 她得到保证说“一切都好”,” the representative “knew of no reason this [application] would not be approved,” and that Blanchet should be “receiving [her] approval letter for April 3, 2017.”
然而布兰切特被解雇了. She relied on that verbal approval for continued time off and continued her treatment with the psychiatrist. 3月9日, 2017, Blanchet received a termination letter from Charter stating that she was separated from the company “effective January 10, 2017.”
在收到这封解约信之前, no representative from Charter or Sedgwick contacted her to explain that her request for an accommodation was not reasonable. 除了, no representative from either Charter or Sedgwick requested additional medical records or reached out to inquire for more details on Blanchet’s condition.
Blanchet sued for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 初审法院以即决判决驳回了此案.S. 第六巡回上诉法院撤销并恢复了此案.
The Court went through an analysis to show that the direct proof of discrimination applied in this case. 查特认为，尽管布兰切特被认为是残疾人, the doctor’s note claiming to “expect April” for Blanchet’s return was too vague to constitute a definitive date and that neither the Charter HR manager nor Sedgwick were authorized to approve a terminated employee’s leave. 然而Charter的行动, 直接或通过其代理人塞奇威克, 给了布兰切特这样的印象:他的休假已经获准了. 塞奇威克告诉布兰切特，批准信马上就到了, Charter的人力资源经理说可以批准休假. 进一步, another HR representative said that the leave Blanchet requested could be “possible” for a Charter employee.
正如法院所说, “Charter’s fatal administrative mistakes and lack of clarity regarding Blanchet’s termination date thus raise genuine disputes of material fact as to whether a ‘reasonable accommodation’ was possible.”
The takeaway for HR is that the right hand should be coordinating with the left hand. 如果使用第三方管理员进行请假, make sure that the administrator is following the employer’s policy and is timely in all responses. 正如法院指出的, “查特从来没有直接和布兰切特说过话, decided to fire her before even telling her that the accommodation was unreasonable, and led Blanchet to believe that her accommodation would be approved. Charter cannot now use its failure to engage in the interactive process to argue that Blanchet’s proposed accommodation was unreasonable.”