Fmla

[Full Throttle]

Client has 46 full/part time employees, six are on call, work sporadically at about 3 to 5 hours per month. My understanding of the 50 employee requirement is this meets the 50 employee test. Assuming 20 consecutive weeks.

A TPA is telling me the 50 employee requirement is based on full time equivalent employees. Everything I read online says that is not true. Can someone shed some light on this for me?

 

[DS4]

Client has 46 full/part time employees, six are on call, work sporadically at about 3 to 5 hours per month. My understanding of the 50 employee requirement is this meets the 50 employee test. Assuming 20 consecutive weeks.

A TPA is telling me the 50 employee requirement is based on full time equivalent employees. Everything I read online says that is not true. Can someone shed some light on this for me?

U.S. Department of Labor — Wage and Hour Division (WHD) — Federal vs. California Family and Medical Leave Laws

 

[leevena]

Client has 46 full/part time employees, six are on call, work sporadically at about 3 to 5 hours per month. My understanding of the 50 employee requirement is this meets the 50 employee test. Assuming 20 consecutive weeks.

A TPA is telling me the 50 employee requirement is based on full time equivalent employees. Everything I read online says that is not true. Can someone shed some light on this for me?

May not meet the threshold because of the part-timers. Any PT that works less than 1,250 hrs in last 12 months does not count towards the 50 needed. You can also discount workers who need time off to care for people with illness, but that may not be much. My guess is that with a total of 52 employees you may drop below based on the pt's.

 

[Full Throttle]

May not meet the threshold because of the part-timers. Any PT that works less than 1,250 hrs in last 12 months does not count towards the 50 needed. You can also discount workers who need time off to care for people with illness, but that may not be much. My guess is that with a total of 52 employees you may drop below based on the pt's.

Leevena,

I haven't seen anything stating this, do you happen to have a source? Everything I have seen says that all employees regardless of hours count toward the employer having to offer FMLA, but for an individual employee to qualify, the 1,250 hours matter.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

U.S. Department of Labor — Wage and Hour Division (WHD) — Federal vs. California Family and Medical Leave Laws

Thank you for the link, it has some good info on there. But it still doesn't answer my question, what is definition of an employee for getting to 50?

 

[somarco]

If Lee says it you can take it to the bank

 

[leevena]

Here you go.
U.S. Department of Labor - Wage and Hour Division (WHD) - The Family and Medical Leave Act

 

[Full Throttle]

Leevena,

I may be dense, I can not find the information in the link you provided. The question is whether the employer is subject to FMLA at all? If he is, then the 1250 hours requirement (along with others) are required for an employee to be eligible for FMLA. However, if the employer is not eligible at all, it's a mute point.

Here is a link I found that is the most detailed answer I have been able to find, however, I do not see a date on it or know if the laws have changed: LINK

If I understand page two correctly, all full and part time employees count as one employee who are "maintained on the payroll". They count even if they do not work any hours in a given week. I've heard conflicting things, but have yet to find something in writing that says otherwise.

 

[DS4]

EMPLOYEE ELIGIBILITY
To be eligible for FMLA benefits, an employee must:

• work for a covered employer;
• have worked for the employer for a total of 12 months;
• have worked at least 1,250 hours over the previous 12 months; and
• work at a location in the United States or in any territory or possession of the United States where at least 50 employees are employed by the employer within 75 miles.

While the 12 months of employment need not be consecutive, employment periods prior to a break in service of seven years or more need not be counted unless the break is occasioned by the employee’s fulfillment of his or her National Guard or Reserve military obligation (as protected under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)), or a written agreement, including a collective bargaining agreement, exists concerning the employer’s intention to rehire the employee after the break in service. See “FMLA Special Rules for Returning Reservists

 

[Full Throttle]

May not meet the threshold because of the part-timers. Any PT that works less than 1,250 hrs in last 12 months does not count towards the 50 needed. You can also discount workers who need time off to care for people with illness, but that may not be much. My guess is that with a total of 52 employees you may drop below based on the pt's.

I'll post this just in case anyone else runs into this issue. I did get final confirmation that the above is incorrect.

For Employer to Be Subjected to FMLA Rules-Need 50 Employees on the Payroll
All employees regardless of hours worked on the payroll in a given week count toward the FMLA requirement for an employer to be eligible for FMLA (50 employees requirement for the employer to be subjected to FMLA). In fact, even if a part-time employee does not work any hours in a given week, but they are still considered an employee, they count for the week toward the 50 employee requirement.

Separate Issue-Employee Eligibility
An employee still needs 1,250 hours/12 months to be eligible for benefits assuming the employer above is subject to FMLA at all.

Not trying to pick on anyone, just trying to clear the issue up in case someone else runs into the issue and finds this thread.

Disclaimer: I am not providing legal advice, do your own research and call a qualified attorney.

 

[leevena]

I'll post this just in case anyone else runs into this issue. I did get final confirmation that the above is incorrect.

For Employer to Be Subjected to FMLA Rules-Need 50 Employees on the Payroll
All employees regardless of hours worked on the payroll in a given week count toward the FMLA requirement for an employer to be eligible for FMLA (50 employees requirement for the employer to be subjected to FMLA). In fact, even if a part-time employee does not work any hours in a given week, but they are still considered an employee, they count for the week toward the 50 employee requirement.

Separate Issue-Employee Eligibility
An employee still needs 1,250 hours/12 months to be eligible for benefits assuming the employer above is subject to FMLA at all.

Not trying to pick on anyone, just trying to clear the issue up in case someone else runs into the issue and finds this thread.

Disclaimer: I am not providing legal advice, do your own research and call a qualified attorney.

No offense taken. I just went to DOL and re-read their definition of ee and you are correct, and I was wrong. Thanks for the help.