Light duty questions

[NICKI312]

3 weeks ago I fell down the stairs in my house and I was out for 7 days with a doctors note saying that I could not work. I do mobile therapy so I am in a car all day but the organization that I work for also has a telephone crisis hotmline as well. I was given a note by my doctor htat I could go back to work with light duty which would mean doing the phones. The job titile is actually telephone and mobile crisis worker but it seems that when I was hired for my 1-9pm shift the phone worker (who has been there for 12 years) decided that she did not want to do mobiles so I have by default just been considered the mobile crisis worker. Last week my employeer accomodated my with a telephone shift that was 8:39-4:30. i took that shift letting them know that I was not happy with it because it was not my regular shift and I felt that I should be accomodated with phones on my shift. My rationale for this was becasue I have used up all of my combined time (all of our time is combined so you get 19 hours a month for whatever you want). I also stated that I didi not want to take the shift because if I had to go to doctors appointments that would be more time that I would have to take without pay either leaving early or coming in late. I went back to the doctor yesterday who stated that I was not getting better and if I wanted to go bakc to work I would have to have light duty indefinetly until i could getback in a car. I called my boss and he told me that they do not have light duty and the only reaason why he could give me a phone shift the week that I worked was becasue someone else had surgery so the morning person worked their shift and I was able to work for them. So his rationale at this int is that the morning person is coming back to their shift and he cannot make another employee change their shift to accommodate me. Then I asked him why the evening phone perosn cant work mobile and iI work the phones and he said no. THe dynamic behind that is the two people who do the phones at night do not like going out on mobiles and one lady has been there for 12 years and she is 67. He constantly reminds us that we are not a union shop so seniority should not be an issue if she has to do it. Then he say s that he cannot justify having four people on the morning shift. The bottom line behind that is the budget because they have been in a deficit for the last two years due to properly billing medicaid so when they were audited they owe money. So he says that he can only give me three days the following week and the other two days I will be out with no pay. I do not think that i am being treated fairly at this point and feel that I have no recourse at this point. I started workig there May 6, 2009 so I was told that i am not eleigible for short termidisability. I am on Vicodin, Flexeril and some other pain med with antinflammatory agent so I am in pain during the day becauase I cannot take my meds during the day at work. I am getting so depressed over this whole situation because I feel that I am being discriminated against and I was just wondering if I had any recourse to fight this. I cannot afford to loose 2 days pay this week and God knows what the following week will offer. I pay $600 a month on health insurance as it is so losing two days pay makes my paycheck something that I cannot live with . I am at a point where I feel like going back to my originial shift just to get money but I know that I will be suffering and will prolong my injury. I dont know where to turn at this point or what my rights are. I treid to look for my employee manual but it does not address this and I looked on the department of labor webiste but I am confused. Any help would be appreiciated.

[deb53]

Unfortunately since you were not injured at work and this is not a Workers Comp case, I am not sure if you have any recourse. I don't think the company is forced to offer you a position to accomodate your injury. If I were you I would call a lawyer. Most of them (or their legal assistants) will talk to you briefly by phone and let you know if you have a legal issue. Good luck and let us know how this works out for you.

Deb

[Executor]

As Deb says, since you were not hurt at work, the employer is not obligated to give you light duty work. If they don't have any light duty work, you could take sick leave or vacation time, but that's about it. The one thing the employer can't do is force you to your regular shift / work as it would be violating Dr's orders.

You are not being discriminated against and to be honest, if you saw a lawyer, it would probably cost you more money than what it's worth. Additionally, before you potentially interject a lawyer into the situation, I would think long and hard before doing so because at that point, you would probably be labeled a trouble maker, and it could really affect things down the road.

I know this is not what you want to hear, but just trying to help. This whole thing sucks and I'm sorry you're having to deal with it. Best of luck with this.

Regards,

Ex

[SpineAZ]

If the company/business is small (sounds like it may be) they don't have to take too many steps to accommodate anyone (different rules for different sized employers). Accommodations are only required when it is feasible for the company to do so - and it can not cause them undue financial harm (such as having 2 people on a job they normally have 1 person do).

So since they had someone on the phones already during your shift then if they only have one person on phones it would be logical that they could not accommodate your shift request. It would be nice if the employer would try to see if the person on the shift you want would be willing to change to day shift. But if he/she will not then they can possibly offer you a different shift (and it's possible the other person has family or personal issues that cause them to need the later shift). So when they offered you the different shift they probably did so thinking it would be a limited time arrangement. If you've now asked for a longer term period of accommodation and they don't have that type of work available then it is "acceptable" that they are unable to accommodate your needs.

Although they've told you that you are not eligible for Short Term Disability please ask them for a copy of the STD policy. In that policy booklet you'll want to look for something like "Eligibility Waiting Period". That is the period of time someone must work for the employer before becoming eligible for STD coverage. You'll also want to look for the definition of employee (this helps define which employees are covered, for example "all Full Time employees working 30+ hours per week"). {Unfortunately you would not be eligible for FMLA under any circumstances since you have not been working there for one full year}.

IF the STD Eligibility Waiting Period says you must be employed for 6 months, or longer, then it is correct you are not eligible. If it says 90 days and you've been there that long then you may be eligible. You do have a right to know how an employee qualifies for STD coverage and to see that documented. Sometimes these parameters are also mentioned in employee handbooks as well.

It seems like unfortunate circumstances that have led to you being unable to do your job and the company being unable to accommodate your needs. If you have to leave, do so on good terms and ask them to consider you for any future openings in your preferred shift.

I work for a very large company and right before I went out on STD I was trying to get my needs accommodated. Although they are a very large company, my position does require travel and there were no other positions available (only 3 people in my department in my state). So I fully expected they'd be unable to accommodate. And indeed after I was out of work for a while and the company continued to have some financial stress they told me that even if I could come back they'd be unable to accommodate my restrictions (they've since given my territory to two of the other offices to split). I didn't react with anger (they were surprised I think) because I knew they were having declining sales and financial stress - I'd always though I may be laid off anyway.

[NICKI312]

I spoke with my immediate boss this mroning and asked him to give me in writing our conversation on Sat. in regards to my schedule and why it could not be accommodated. He was shocked and stammered but said that he would do so. I then went through the employee manual to see if it address light duty and it did not so I asked to speak to the director of the program and asked him what the policy was in regards to light duty and he said that there was no policy. He asked if it was a personal thing and I quickly addressed that saying that I had no hard feelings towards my imemediate boss or him I know that it is just business. I satated that I just wanted further clarification on the policy and since there isn't one I wanted rationale on how they are making decision with no policy in place. I stated that I could not tell them how long I would be on lihgt duty but financially it is not in my best interest to get one day or work one week and say three dys the next week. Not only does it affect me financially it will also affect my insurance because part time people dont get insurance. I need to go to the doctor so my work shedule affects me in a number of different ways. I stated that I chose to talk in person about this because when I was called over the weekend there were to many emotions involved and i wanted to handle this issue professionally as i always do and he agreed that i always do. He stated that he was told by my immediate boss that he talked to everyone and no one was willing to change their schedule (my immediate boss told me he was not going to change anyones shcedules to accommodate me- big discrepency) He ssaid maybe I should ask some of my coworkers as they may do it for me if I asked instead of him or the other boss. I told him that I did not feel that I should run behind him and ask since he said that he did it (I dont think that he did) He stated that he just got an email on ADA on rFriday (how convienent) and he would look through it. He stated that he would call the central office and get more information on ADA and if they are obligated to accommodate me. i work for a large non for profit organization and the bottom line is the budget which was thrown in my face today. He stated that he cant see justifying four people on a shift that only has three and then paying someone overtime to work my shift. He stated that if it does in fact fall under ADA regs then he wil have to throw the budget out of the window and accom***te me. Later on that day my immediate boss pulled me to the side and stated that he hoped that i was not taking this whole thing personal (common thread in all the conversations) and I again told him no and reinforced that I did not bad mouth him to the director I just wanted further clarification on my rights. He stated that if I wanted to I could work extra hours on the days that he gives me to try to get 40 hours. he also said that thhe director gave him a copy of the ADA regs and he was going to take a loook at it. I feel that there is no difference with me working more hours to get to 40 hours a week or working 40 hours in 5 days a week? I am confused and feel that they are still playing games and are probablt scared that I will sue them. Everybody seems to be jumping threw hoops now. I am going to look on the ADA website to see what it actually says. I know that I may not come out on top here but I dont want to be pusched around either especially when this is a large organization and it has no policy in regards to this. I was very nice today and cordial so I dont know where they got the me taking it personal thing but I feel that was a ploy to use against me as someone else said to deam me as a problem employee. I will keep everyone posted. Thanks for all the advice and if there is anymore out there keep it coming.