In the case of Hansler v. Lehigh Valley Hospital Network, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has renewed a warning to employers in other cases to be sure to allow an employee the opportunity to cure purported deficiencies in a medical certification submitted in support of FMLA leave, prior to denying the request for leave.
In Hansler, an employee requested FMLA leave due to a medical condition and provided her employer with a medical certification to support the request. The employee was then out of work for a number of days allegedly due to the symptoms of her medical condition, during which time the employer denied her request for FMLA leave.
The reason for denying the leave was that, given the description of the employee’s medical condition provided in the medical certification, the condition did not qualify as a serious health condition under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA.) The employer then terminated the employee for absenteeism and the employee sued for violation of her FMLA rights.
The Court explained that under the FMLA, an employee must give notice of the request for leave and that an employer may require employees to support such requests with a medical certification. For such a medical certification to be sufficient under the FLMA, is must state: “(1) the date on which the serious health condition began, (2) the probable duration of the condition, (3) relevant medical facts, (4) a statement that the employee is unable to perform the functions of her position, (5) the dates and duration of any planned medical treatment, and (6) the expected duration of the intermittent leave.”
While an employer may deny the requested leave if it finds that the medical certification is insufficient or incomplete, the regulations require that it first must notify the employee of the fact that the certification is incomplete or insufficient and allow the employee seven days to cure the deficiency. Only then may the employer properly deny the requested leave.
In addition, the Court clarified the application of the concept of a “negative certification”, which the Court notes is a judicially created concept that does not exist in the statute, where an employer denies the requested FMLA leave on the basis that the certification on its face does not support the need for leave. Normally, this is either because the certification fails to show that the employee will miss work due to the medical condition, or because it fails to show that the condition in question is a serious health condition and, thus, does not qualify for leave under the FMLA. While not squarely addressing this issue, the Court suggests that the concept of a negative certification is limited and the Court refused to apply it to the present case.
As a result, employers in Pennsylvania should be sure to notify an employee if a medical certification provided in support of FMLA leave is incomplete or insufficient, and allow him or her seven days to cure the deficiencies prior to acting on the request for FMLA leave.
The Eastern Pennsylvania Employment Log (EPELog) is a publication of the KingSpry Employment Law Practice Group. Jeffrey T. Tucker, Esquire, is our editor-in-chief. EPELog is meant to be informational and does not constitute legal advice.
