Workplace intimidation due to child's chronic health condition
My son has a chronic health condition. I was previously on intermittent FMLA but the company was recently acquired by a different company. When I approached HR about applying for FMLA, she asked if there was some way I could agree to an arrangement with my boss, like on the days I need to leave early to take my child to PT, Dr appointments, etc, could I skip lunch or stay late another day.
I was able to come up with such an agreement with my boss. However, recently we found out that along with his existing condition he also has a heart condition. I took off a day to take him to the cardiologist and upon returning to work, I was told by my supervisor to "watch my time" and that "complaints were made" by other employees. I came to find out that rather than being a complaint, someone was literally just asking where I was that day. I was so stressed out that week and upset as it was, and this just felt like my boss making a mountain of a mole hill to discourage me from taking more time off to deal with my son's health problems.
It feels very much like intimidation to me. How should i address this with my manager?
united-states stress
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
|
show 2 more comments
My son has a chronic health condition. I was previously on intermittent FMLA but the company was recently acquired by a different company. When I approached HR about applying for FMLA, she asked if there was some way I could agree to an arrangement with my boss, like on the days I need to leave early to take my child to PT, Dr appointments, etc, could I skip lunch or stay late another day.
I was able to come up with such an agreement with my boss. However, recently we found out that along with his existing condition he also has a heart condition. I took off a day to take him to the cardiologist and upon returning to work, I was told by my supervisor to "watch my time" and that "complaints were made" by other employees. I came to find out that rather than being a complaint, someone was literally just asking where I was that day. I was so stressed out that week and upset as it was, and this just felt like my boss making a mountain of a mole hill to discourage me from taking more time off to deal with my son's health problems.
It feels very much like intimidation to me. How should i address this with my manager?
united-states stress
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
Sorry you're going through this! Sometimes the best option is to find another company that's more supportive. At my company, my group's big on taking the time you need to take care of yourself and your loved one!
– jcmack
9 hours ago
1
Did you tell your supervisor beforehand that you were taking the day off, and why? If not, your co-workers and manager had every right to wonder why you weren't at work that day. (It's not obvious from your post whether your boss, manager, and supervisor are one, two or three different people, BTW)
– alephzero
8 hours ago
1
@ChrisMelville, Family Medical Leave Act-- It's a law in the USA that allows employees to take some leave from work if they have to temporarily attend to the medical needs of family (or themselves). The law has many conditions, but the intent is to keep employers threatening the employment of workers that are caregivers to immediate family. In the US, medical insurance is effectively tied to one's employment, so losing a job could mean loss of medical insurance for oneself and dependents.
– teego1967
7 hours ago
1
It's not clear to me whether your boss who came to the agreement, is the same person as your supervisor who told you to watch your time, or if that's the same person as your manager who you need to address this with. Are they one person, two people, or three people, and if so, do they all officially know about your agreement and that it's approved? If you took a day off, and your agreement is to make the time up in other ways so you aren't working less, what is your supervisor's problem with it now?
– TessellatingHeckler
7 hours ago
1
One option.... I had a baby and found work that enables me to spend most of my time at home rather than expect my old job to make provision for my personal issues. Actually I did this several babies ago.
– Kilisi
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
My son has a chronic health condition. I was previously on intermittent FMLA but the company was recently acquired by a different company. When I approached HR about applying for FMLA, she asked if there was some way I could agree to an arrangement with my boss, like on the days I need to leave early to take my child to PT, Dr appointments, etc, could I skip lunch or stay late another day.
I was able to come up with such an agreement with my boss. However, recently we found out that along with his existing condition he also has a heart condition. I took off a day to take him to the cardiologist and upon returning to work, I was told by my supervisor to "watch my time" and that "complaints were made" by other employees. I came to find out that rather than being a complaint, someone was literally just asking where I was that day. I was so stressed out that week and upset as it was, and this just felt like my boss making a mountain of a mole hill to discourage me from taking more time off to deal with my son's health problems.
It feels very much like intimidation to me. How should i address this with my manager?
united-states stress
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My son has a chronic health condition. I was previously on intermittent FMLA but the company was recently acquired by a different company. When I approached HR about applying for FMLA, she asked if there was some way I could agree to an arrangement with my boss, like on the days I need to leave early to take my child to PT, Dr appointments, etc, could I skip lunch or stay late another day.
I was able to come up with such an agreement with my boss. However, recently we found out that along with his existing condition he also has a heart condition. I took off a day to take him to the cardiologist and upon returning to work, I was told by my supervisor to "watch my time" and that "complaints were made" by other employees. I came to find out that rather than being a complaint, someone was literally just asking where I was that day. I was so stressed out that week and upset as it was, and this just felt like my boss making a mountain of a mole hill to discourage me from taking more time off to deal with my son's health problems.
It feels very much like intimidation to me. How should i address this with my manager?
united-states stress
united-states stress
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
edited 10 hours ago
Uciebila
978
978
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
asked 11 hours ago
Rebecca LyndsRebecca Lynds
18123
18123
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
Sorry you're going through this! Sometimes the best option is to find another company that's more supportive. At my company, my group's big on taking the time you need to take care of yourself and your loved one!
– jcmack
9 hours ago
1
Did you tell your supervisor beforehand that you were taking the day off, and why? If not, your co-workers and manager had every right to wonder why you weren't at work that day. (It's not obvious from your post whether your boss, manager, and supervisor are one, two or three different people, BTW)
– alephzero
8 hours ago
1
@ChrisMelville, Family Medical Leave Act-- It's a law in the USA that allows employees to take some leave from work if they have to temporarily attend to the medical needs of family (or themselves). The law has many conditions, but the intent is to keep employers threatening the employment of workers that are caregivers to immediate family. In the US, medical insurance is effectively tied to one's employment, so losing a job could mean loss of medical insurance for oneself and dependents.
– teego1967
7 hours ago
1
It's not clear to me whether your boss who came to the agreement, is the same person as your supervisor who told you to watch your time, or if that's the same person as your manager who you need to address this with. Are they one person, two people, or three people, and if so, do they all officially know about your agreement and that it's approved? If you took a day off, and your agreement is to make the time up in other ways so you aren't working less, what is your supervisor's problem with it now?
– TessellatingHeckler
7 hours ago
1
One option.... I had a baby and found work that enables me to spend most of my time at home rather than expect my old job to make provision for my personal issues. Actually I did this several babies ago.
– Kilisi
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1
Sorry you're going through this! Sometimes the best option is to find another company that's more supportive. At my company, my group's big on taking the time you need to take care of yourself and your loved one!
– jcmack
9 hours ago
1
Did you tell your supervisor beforehand that you were taking the day off, and why? If not, your co-workers and manager had every right to wonder why you weren't at work that day. (It's not obvious from your post whether your boss, manager, and supervisor are one, two or three different people, BTW)
– alephzero
8 hours ago
1
@ChrisMelville, Family Medical Leave Act-- It's a law in the USA that allows employees to take some leave from work if they have to temporarily attend to the medical needs of family (or themselves). The law has many conditions, but the intent is to keep employers threatening the employment of workers that are caregivers to immediate family. In the US, medical insurance is effectively tied to one's employment, so losing a job could mean loss of medical insurance for oneself and dependents.
– teego1967
7 hours ago
1
It's not clear to me whether your boss who came to the agreement, is the same person as your supervisor who told you to watch your time, or if that's the same person as your manager who you need to address this with. Are they one person, two people, or three people, and if so, do they all officially know about your agreement and that it's approved? If you took a day off, and your agreement is to make the time up in other ways so you aren't working less, what is your supervisor's problem with it now?
– TessellatingHeckler
7 hours ago
1
One option.... I had a baby and found work that enables me to spend most of my time at home rather than expect my old job to make provision for my personal issues. Actually I did this several babies ago.
– Kilisi
2 hours ago
1
1
Sorry you're going through this! Sometimes the best option is to find another company that's more supportive. At my company, my group's big on taking the time you need to take care of yourself and your loved one!
– jcmack
9 hours ago
Sorry you're going through this! Sometimes the best option is to find another company that's more supportive. At my company, my group's big on taking the time you need to take care of yourself and your loved one!
– jcmack
9 hours ago
1
1
Did you tell your supervisor beforehand that you were taking the day off, and why? If not, your co-workers and manager had every right to wonder why you weren't at work that day. (It's not obvious from your post whether your boss, manager, and supervisor are one, two or three different people, BTW)
– alephzero
8 hours ago
Did you tell your supervisor beforehand that you were taking the day off, and why? If not, your co-workers and manager had every right to wonder why you weren't at work that day. (It's not obvious from your post whether your boss, manager, and supervisor are one, two or three different people, BTW)
– alephzero
8 hours ago
1
1
@ChrisMelville, Family Medical Leave Act-- It's a law in the USA that allows employees to take some leave from work if they have to temporarily attend to the medical needs of family (or themselves). The law has many conditions, but the intent is to keep employers threatening the employment of workers that are caregivers to immediate family. In the US, medical insurance is effectively tied to one's employment, so losing a job could mean loss of medical insurance for oneself and dependents.
– teego1967
7 hours ago
@ChrisMelville, Family Medical Leave Act-- It's a law in the USA that allows employees to take some leave from work if they have to temporarily attend to the medical needs of family (or themselves). The law has many conditions, but the intent is to keep employers threatening the employment of workers that are caregivers to immediate family. In the US, medical insurance is effectively tied to one's employment, so losing a job could mean loss of medical insurance for oneself and dependents.
– teego1967
7 hours ago
1
1
It's not clear to me whether your boss who came to the agreement, is the same person as your supervisor who told you to watch your time, or if that's the same person as your manager who you need to address this with. Are they one person, two people, or three people, and if so, do they all officially know about your agreement and that it's approved? If you took a day off, and your agreement is to make the time up in other ways so you aren't working less, what is your supervisor's problem with it now?
– TessellatingHeckler
7 hours ago
It's not clear to me whether your boss who came to the agreement, is the same person as your supervisor who told you to watch your time, or if that's the same person as your manager who you need to address this with. Are they one person, two people, or three people, and if so, do they all officially know about your agreement and that it's approved? If you took a day off, and your agreement is to make the time up in other ways so you aren't working less, what is your supervisor's problem with it now?
– TessellatingHeckler
7 hours ago
1
1
One option.... I had a baby and found work that enables me to spend most of my time at home rather than expect my old job to make provision for my personal issues. Actually I did this several babies ago.
– Kilisi
2 hours ago
One option.... I had a baby and found work that enables me to spend most of my time at home rather than expect my old job to make provision for my personal issues. Actually I did this several babies ago.
– Kilisi
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
If you haven't already take a look at the FMLA FAQ. This is the law in the USA so the fact that the company has changed hands doesn't matter. Under qualifying conditions it says "to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent – but not a parent “in-law”) with a serious health condition" which would seem to apply.
You do need to qualify as far as number of hours worked, and the company isn't required to pay you for time you take, but they certainly aren't allowed to harass you.
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
21
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
3
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
4
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
add a comment |
It is not intimidation, but rather a mild warning that your pattern of absences has been noticed and is starting to cause issues. You should take that warning seriously and work with your manager to make sure that future absences are approved and that you are handling this inside of the process that your workplace
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
4
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
2
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
2
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f129548%2fworkplace-intimidation-due-to-childs-chronic-health-condition%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If you haven't already take a look at the FMLA FAQ. This is the law in the USA so the fact that the company has changed hands doesn't matter. Under qualifying conditions it says "to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent – but not a parent “in-law”) with a serious health condition" which would seem to apply.
You do need to qualify as far as number of hours worked, and the company isn't required to pay you for time you take, but they certainly aren't allowed to harass you.
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
21
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
3
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
4
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
add a comment |
If you haven't already take a look at the FMLA FAQ. This is the law in the USA so the fact that the company has changed hands doesn't matter. Under qualifying conditions it says "to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent – but not a parent “in-law”) with a serious health condition" which would seem to apply.
You do need to qualify as far as number of hours worked, and the company isn't required to pay you for time you take, but they certainly aren't allowed to harass you.
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
21
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
3
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
4
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
add a comment |
If you haven't already take a look at the FMLA FAQ. This is the law in the USA so the fact that the company has changed hands doesn't matter. Under qualifying conditions it says "to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent – but not a parent “in-law”) with a serious health condition" which would seem to apply.
You do need to qualify as far as number of hours worked, and the company isn't required to pay you for time you take, but they certainly aren't allowed to harass you.
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
If you haven't already take a look at the FMLA FAQ. This is the law in the USA so the fact that the company has changed hands doesn't matter. Under qualifying conditions it says "to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child, or parent – but not a parent “in-law”) with a serious health condition" which would seem to apply.
You do need to qualify as far as number of hours worked, and the company isn't required to pay you for time you take, but they certainly aren't allowed to harass you.
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
answered 10 hours ago
DaveGDaveG
1,170414
1,170414
21
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
3
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
4
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
add a comment |
21
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
3
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
4
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
21
21
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
I agree with this, but the OP indicated she has used FMLA in the past (as such, she is likely already familiar with the rules). The problem here is that new company's HR advised her against using FMLA and instead make an informal arrangement. She trusted them and then the boss used that trust against her by pressuring her about the day off. I think the best action for her now is to use FMLA for every incident going forward. That isn't necessarily going to protect her job, but it does give some recourse if things get ugly.
– teego1967
8 hours ago
3
3
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
@teego1967 I agree, I just wanted to make absolutely sure she was aware of her rights, and that any change in ownership didn't matter.
– DaveG
8 hours ago
4
4
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
@teego1967 HR department advises employee to not use a legally mandated protection that is good for the employee but bad for the company... what is novel here? FMLA exists basically to protect this employee from this bad HR department.
– trognanders
4 hours ago
add a comment |
It is not intimidation, but rather a mild warning that your pattern of absences has been noticed and is starting to cause issues. You should take that warning seriously and work with your manager to make sure that future absences are approved and that you are handling this inside of the process that your workplace
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
4
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
2
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
2
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
add a comment |
It is not intimidation, but rather a mild warning that your pattern of absences has been noticed and is starting to cause issues. You should take that warning seriously and work with your manager to make sure that future absences are approved and that you are handling this inside of the process that your workplace
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
4
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
2
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
2
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
add a comment |
It is not intimidation, but rather a mild warning that your pattern of absences has been noticed and is starting to cause issues. You should take that warning seriously and work with your manager to make sure that future absences are approved and that you are handling this inside of the process that your workplace
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
It is not intimidation, but rather a mild warning that your pattern of absences has been noticed and is starting to cause issues. You should take that warning seriously and work with your manager to make sure that future absences are approved and that you are handling this inside of the process that your workplace
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
answered 11 hours ago
IDrinkandIKnowThingsIDrinkandIKnowThings
44.7k15101192
44.7k15101192
4
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
2
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
2
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
add a comment |
4
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
2
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
2
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
4
4
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
What in the OP's post causes you to question that the OP hasn't taken the "mild warning" seriously and that she hasn't explicitly followed "the process" of the company by not taking the FMLA as the company counseled her to do?
– teego1967
3 hours ago
2
2
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
Why should she handle this within the process for her workplace? FMLA means she doesn't legally need to do that, she was just being nice doing so. At this point, I would recommend she stop being nice. If she's fired, she has a hell of a lawsuit she could file. One that they really can't defend against.
– user87779
2 hours ago
2
2
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
She has legal entitlements she has avoided using in good faith that the company would accept her needs. The company has now acted in bad faith by threatening her (use whatever euphemism you want). She needs to assert her legal rights again as they clearly intend to give her no support at all.
– StephenG
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Rebecca Lynds is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f129548%2fworkplace-intimidation-due-to-childs-chronic-health-condition%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Sorry you're going through this! Sometimes the best option is to find another company that's more supportive. At my company, my group's big on taking the time you need to take care of yourself and your loved one!
– jcmack
9 hours ago
1
Did you tell your supervisor beforehand that you were taking the day off, and why? If not, your co-workers and manager had every right to wonder why you weren't at work that day. (It's not obvious from your post whether your boss, manager, and supervisor are one, two or three different people, BTW)
– alephzero
8 hours ago
1
@ChrisMelville, Family Medical Leave Act-- It's a law in the USA that allows employees to take some leave from work if they have to temporarily attend to the medical needs of family (or themselves). The law has many conditions, but the intent is to keep employers threatening the employment of workers that are caregivers to immediate family. In the US, medical insurance is effectively tied to one's employment, so losing a job could mean loss of medical insurance for oneself and dependents.
– teego1967
7 hours ago
1
It's not clear to me whether your boss who came to the agreement, is the same person as your supervisor who told you to watch your time, or if that's the same person as your manager who you need to address this with. Are they one person, two people, or three people, and if so, do they all officially know about your agreement and that it's approved? If you took a day off, and your agreement is to make the time up in other ways so you aren't working less, what is your supervisor's problem with it now?
– TessellatingHeckler
7 hours ago
1
One option.... I had a baby and found work that enables me to spend most of my time at home rather than expect my old job to make provision for my personal issues. Actually I did this several babies ago.
– Kilisi
2 hours ago