News & Events Current
Issues FMLA
News Take
Action! Comments on FMLA
Changes
|
||
Sample Comments
To be Submitted to the Federal Register,
Protesting Proposed Changes
to FMLA Regulations
APWU members are encouraged to use portions or all of the samples below — or to write their own remarks — explaining why they oppose the new regulations. Please add examples from your own experience if they are relevant.
Additional Certification
|
I disagree with the proposed change to FMLA regulations that would permit employers to require workers to re-certify their serious medical conditions every six months, even if they have a life-long condition. (Current regulations say re-certification cannot be required until the period of treatment specified by a healthcare provider has passed, or once a year, whichever is less.)
The new regulations would pose an unreasonable burden on employees who suffer from long-term or chronic conditions, requiring them to make unnecessary visits to their doctor, and forcing them to pay for the extra visits.
Additional Information
I oppose the proposed rule that would allow employers to require additional medical information if they consider a doctor’s certification “insufficient.” Under the current rules, if workers submit medical certification, they are protected from invasive requests for further medical certification.
I believe many employers — including the U.S. Postal Service — would routinely declare certifications “insufficient,” and would deny workers leave under the FMLA or require them to make additional, unnecessary visits to their doctor. These additional visits would be costly and time-consuming for employees.
Birth of a Child
Under current rules, to justify FMLA leave for the birth of a child, employees must submit a birth certificate and a signed statement. The proposed new regulations would require that employees’ statements be sworn and/or notarized, and would require them to submit tax returns showing that they are claiming a deduction for the child. I oppose this insulting and offensive rule change.
Privacy
I object to several proposed regulations that would infringe on employees’ right to privacy and interfere in their relationships with their doctors.
Under current regulations, there is no place on FMLA forms for healthcare providers to report their diagnosis or prognosis when certifying employees for Family Medical leave; they must supply only the “medical facts” that justify the absence. New regulations would permit (but not require) healthcare providers to offer a diagnosis and/or prognosis.
I believe this new provision deprives workers of the right to keep their medical records private, and I am concerned that postal managers will continue to demand information until they receive a diagnosis and prognosis.
The proposed regulations also would end the requirement that employers get employees’ permission before contacting their healthcare provider to confirm the authenticity of a medical certification.
Another change would allow any employer representative to contact healthcare providers for the purpose of authenticating and clarifying medical certifications. Current regulations permit only employer healthcare providers to contact employees’ doctors. I believe the proposed rule would open employees’ medical information to scrutiny by non-professionals.
This proposed change also would mean that disputes over the certification of a medical condition would no longer be settled among healthcare professionals. Healthcare providers would have to justify their conclusions to employer representatives who have no medical training, or risk jeopardizing the employee’s leave.
I believe the right to medical privacy is inviolable, and I oppose any change that would compromise it.
Overtime Hours Charged to FMLA
Under current rules, U.S. Postal Service employees can be charged no more than 40 hours of leave per week. The proposed rules would allow management to charge employees with more than 40 hours leave if the employees were scheduled for overtime during a week in which they used FMLA leave. This change would force employees to use up their FMLA protection at a faster rate. The normal work week for a full-time worker is 40 hours; any rule that would charge more than the standard work-week is wrong and should not be adopted.
According to the new regulations, employees who work 40 hours per week but whose conditions prevent them from working overtime can be charged Family Medical leave for overtime hours they are unable to work. This change would force employees to use their FMLA protection even when they are working full time!
Printer-Friendly Page
