To: Senior Vice-President of the Company
FROM: Director of Human Resources
DATE: October 20th, 2012
SUBJECT: Human Resources Analyze and Report
Per your request, the following memo addresses each situation. For each individual incident, I investigated the details of each situation and analyzed the federal act that may apply to the case.
The Law - Situation A is addressed by the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This act mandates that each company employee has the ability to take a minimum of 12 weeks, unpaid, leave of absence per calendar year. An employee can qualify for FMLA by working for 12 months, completing 1,250 hours of work within the previous 12 months, and working at location within the U.S. that employs 50 or more employees. FMLA can be used for a valid reason, such as the birth of a child, serious health condition, placement of child for adoption or foster care, and to provide healthcare to an immediate family member who is seriously ill. When an employee takes FMLA leave, the company is required to provided continued health care coverage and restore the employee's position or equivalent job with identical pay and benefits upon their return (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.).
Application of the Law - The employee requested FMLA leave to help with the premature birth of his twins. The leave was approved by the department manager. Now the employee is ready to return to work and has been approved to return to his previous job, with his previous pay rate. The employee also requests his 11 weeks of withheld salary be paid to him. The manager has denied this request based on FMLA, which states the 12-week leave is unpaid. If the employee has any accrued paid leave, this paid leave can be substituted and issued to the employee.
Was there a Violation - After reviewing the details of the case, the company did not violate the Family and Medical Leave Act. The employee was granted the 12-week, unpaid leave, granted his previous job and the same pay rate. The act strictly states the leave is unpaid and no violation has occurred on behalf of the employer.
The Law - The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) is the law that applies to Case B. The law protects workers and job seekers 40 years old or older from being discriminated against. Companies can not consider age when hiring, firing, promoting, training, developing, or granting benefits to employees (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.).
Application of the Law - A 68 year old employee with a performance evaluation of “above average” was denied a promotion. A 32 year old employee with a “adequate” performance evaluation was given the promotion. The performance evaluations do not show “good cause” in promoting the 32 year old employee. There is also no “Bona fide occupational qualifications” or “reasonable factors” for not promoting the 68 year old employee.
Was there a Violation - After reviewing all the facts of situation B, there was a clear violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act committed by the employer. The 68 year old employee should be have been promoted. There was no evidence presented that showed “good cause” for not promoting the 68 year old employee. The employee has the right to contact the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and file charges against the company. The EEOC will perform an investigation and may require the company to pay compensatory or punitive damages as well as promote the employee.
The Law - The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects individuals with a disability in the workplace. The ADA fights job discrimination practiced by private employers, state & local governments, employment agencies, and other labor organizations. This act also prohibits discrimination in State and local government run programs and activities. The U.S. Equal