Department of 劳动Doubles Down and Largely Reaffirms Limitations on FFCRA Leave, But Narrows Health Care Provider Exclusion

2020年9月14日 博客
作者: 凯莉·霍夫曼 丹尼尔·A·卡普兰 凯特琳·威廉姆斯 约翰·利奇菲尔德 费利西亚·奥'Connor
发布到: 冠状病毒资源中心:返回业务 劳动&就业法观点
正如我们 先前报告,于2020年8月3日,美国纽约南区地方法院(“the District Court”)删除了劳工部的四项规定’s (DOL) “Final Rule”关于《家庭第一份冠状病毒应对法》(“FFCRA”).  Last Friday, the DOL responded to 地方法院’通过对其中一些条款加倍加倍做出决定(附加解释旨在证明它们如先前所实施的那样合理)并修改其他条款。  The revised version of the 最终规则 将于2020年9月16日生效。 

1. DOL重申“Work Availability” Requirement, Meaning Employees Can Take FFCRA Leave 除非的y Would Otherwise Have Work to Do. 

The District Court had struck down the 最终规则’要求雇员无权享有带薪休假(至少在六个合格方案中的三个中),除非其雇主在他们请假时有工作要做。 但是,DOL坚持这一点“work availability” requirement. DOL澄清了该要求适用于 所有 six 离开-qualifying scenarios, 不ing that was its original intent and there is no statutory basis for treating some FFCRA reasons different than others. 并且,回应法院’对DOL的批评’s “barebones”对于要求的解释,DOL提供了以下更详细的理由: 

  • The FFCRA provides paid 离开 when employees 是 unable to work or 远程办公 “due to” or “because of” a qualifying reason—也就是说,他们不会错过工作 但对于 their FFCRA reason.
  • 与FMLA一致’s use of the term “leave,”如果雇主没有工作要供雇员做,则该雇员不参加“leave” under the FFCRA . 
  • FFCRA之一 ’这样做的目的是阻止可能患有COVID-19的员工上班并感染他人。 消除工作可用性要求不符合该目标。 
  • Removing the work-availability requirement would lead to the perverse result of some furloughed employees (who do 不 have an FFCRA reason) going unpaid, while other furloughed employees (who also happen to have an FFCRA reason) receive paid 离开. 

Though the DOL affirmed that the work-availability requirement applies, it also reminded employers that they cannot make work unavailable in an effort to deny or avoid providing FFCRA (paid) 离开 benefits. 

2. DOL重申Employer Consent Requirement for Intermittent Leave. 

The DOL also reaffirmed the 最终规则’s provision that employees cannot take 断断续续的 FFCRA 离开 without their employer’s consent. DOL再次针对此要求扩展了基础,并指出:

  • Congress did 不 address 断断续续的 离开 in the language of the FFCRA , but granted the DOL broad regulatory authority to ensure consistency with the FMLA.
  • The principle of avoiding undue disruption to business operations that exists with respect to use of FMLA 断断续续的 离开, therefore similarly applies to the use of 断断续续的 离开 under the FFCRA .  
  • The 最终规则’雇主同意的要求类似于FMLA’雇主同意的非病假要求(例如照顾新生儿或收养的孩子)。  
  • The 最终规则’雇主同意的间歇性休假要求与其定义有关“telework” as requiring employer permission; for example, employees ordered to self-quarantine cannot take 断断续续的 离开 unless the employer permits 远程办公. (Remember, 断断续续的 FFCRA 离开 is 不 所有 owed except to care for children whose school or childcare closed, unless the employee is permitted to 远程办公.)

The DOL clarified that employees 服用FFCRA 离开 on certain days 与孩子结盟’混合式面对面/虚拟教育 服用“intermittent” 离开. 因此,这种安排不需要雇主的同意。  

3. DOL阐明,员工必须提供文件证明休假“尽快”不必在请假之前。

The 最终规则 contains distinct provisions on 不ice of FFCRA 离开 and 文件资料 supporting FFCRA 离开.  The original 最终规则 required employees to submit supporting 文件资料 事前 to 服用离开, which 地方法院 deemed inconsistent with the FFCRA .  In the revised 最终规则, the DOL eliminated the advance 文件资料 mandate. 相反,可能要求员工提供文件“在切实可行的范围内尽快。” DOL还纠正了有关扩大家庭和病假(EFML)的通知时间不一致的问题。 所有这些的结果是: 

  • 对于紧急带薪病假(EPSL),无需提前通知。 仅在员工参加EPSL的第一个工作日(或其一部分)之后才需要发出通知。  After the first workday, it is reasonable to require 不ice 在切实可行的范围内尽快。 
  • For EFML, 不ice is required 在切实可行的范围内尽快。 如果可以预见对EFML的需求(例如,员工学习子女)’的学校将在停课之前关闭),那么通常在休假前提供通知是可行的。 
  • In 所有 cases, an employer may only require supporting 文件资料 在切实可行的范围内尽快。  According to the revised 最终规则, that will generally be when the employee provides 不ice. 

4. DOL缩小了“医疗保健机构” Who Employers May Exclude from FFCRA -Paid Leave. 

The FFCRA gives employers the option of denying paid 离开 to “医疗保健机构,” which the DOL’s 最终规则 had expansively defined to encompass, essentially, anyone in the health care field. 地方法院推翻了这个定义,将其定义为“超范围”。  In the revised 最终规则, the DOL has narrowed the definition to include only:

  • 符合FMLA规定的医疗保健提供者定义的员工, ,医生和其他进行医学诊断的人员;和
  • 受雇提供诊断,预防或治疗服务或提供服务的员工“提供病人护理所必需的其他服务,如果不提供,将会对病人护理产生不利影响”—例如洗澡,穿衣,用手喂食,采取生命体征,设置医疗设备以及运送患者和样品。 

修订后的《最终规则》提供了属于后一类员工的示例。 它包括护士,护士助理,医疗技术人员,以及直接提供诊断,预防,治疗或综合必要服务的任何其他人员。 它还包括在FMLA定义的医疗保健提供者或护士,护士助理,医疗技术人员和其他直接提供者的监督(或协助下)提供此类服务的人员。 最后,这一类别包括那些可能不与患者互动或向提供者报告但他们的服务与提供患者护理相结合并且是必需的人。 例如,处理诊断或治疗所需的测试结果(也许用于COVID-19测试)的实验室技术人员符合此定义。 相比之下,IT专业人员,维护人员,人力资源,食品服务人员,记录经理,顾问和开票人则没有。  

简而言之,DOL’狭义的定义超出了提供患者护理的许可范围,但根据员工的不同而有所限制’ specific duties.  Employers should 继续考虑 exclusions from FFCRA -paid 离开 on a case-by-case basis, now using the revised 最终规则’s framework.   

Companies in 所有 sectors of the economy continue to be impacted by COVID-19. 佛利 is here to help our clients effectively address the short- and long-term impacts on their business interests, operations, and objectives. 佛利 provides insights and strategies across multiple industries and disciplines to deliver timely perspectives on the wide range of legal and business challenges that companies face conducting business while dealing with the impact of the coronavirus. 点击这里 通过我们今天发表的重要出版物来保持最新和领先’的挑战和明天’的机会。要直接在收件箱中接收此内容, 点击这里 并提交表格。

 
该博客由Foley提供& Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is 不 meant to convey 该公司’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do 不 necessarily reflect the views of 佛利 & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do 不 act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is 不 intended to create, and receipt of it does 不 constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with 佛利 through this 网站 by email, blog post, or otherwise, does 不 create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to 佛利 through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will 不 be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is 不 guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. 佛利 makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. 佛利 expressly disclaims 所有 other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall 佛利 or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party 网站s or the information, resources or material accessed through any such 网站s. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please 不e that 事前 results do 不 guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs 是 for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do 不 necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

相关服务

见解

FedRAMP帮助安全的云部署!
2021年1月16日
互联网,IT& e-Discovery 博客
OCR HIPAA审计发现的关键发现和要点
2021年1月15日
今日卫生保健法
一项新议程:预计2021年美国环境政策将发生重大变化
2021年1月14日
2020选举资源中心
第14集:经济学101:了解反托拉斯和提供者交易的工具
2021年1月14日
今日卫生保健法
Telehealth21峰会虚拟会议
2021年3月23日至24日
虚拟会议
美国中风协会国际中风会议
2021年3月17-19日
虚拟会议
校园能源资产货币化
多个日期
网络研讨会系列
佛罗里达律师协会健康法科高级健康法主题与认证审查2021
2021年3月10日
网络研讨会