California Employment Law
Have California Employment Law Questions? Ask a Lawyer.
My LOA was FMLA protected (2 incidences) and I have now exhausted my 12 weeks protected leave. My medical condition is not a disability.
I am an exempt employee.
The situation is entirely unclear to me as I am informed that I have NOT been demoted and will retain my title as exec. director and pay rate but have been removed from my role and assigned to 2 projects for evalutation. Based on my interaction with the 8-10 people I would interact with during the project my performance improvement will be assessed (how and by whom has not be described).
I have argued that if the concern re my performance in the ED role is organization-wide as they claim I would be better off to retain my role and be evaluated on improvement in the ED role and not as a project manager. I believe the work entailed in the two projects are critical for the service line and that they intend to have me compete the work and then decide that my performance has not improved and fire me regardless of my performance.
What about "cruel and unusual" punishment (or whatever the legal term is) - is that an additional area to be considered?
The conflicting reason for their action, i.e., based on "availability' i.e., PT status versus based on incompetency is not clear. The written performance plan cites the latter and verbally they cite the former.
Is there justification for skipping the verbal step in the progressive disciplinary process and canceling my performance appraisal?
I was informed by HR that I my position was protected by FMLA/CFRA law if I RTW by 9/6/12. I returned on August 15, 2012 PT - 3 days per week re my doctors certificate. Does this meet the FMLA requirements if RTW is PT versus full time?
The notice of rights and obligations under FMLA/CFRA #9 state " if you are a "key" employee your right to reinstatement may be denied. The following conditions must apply for denial 1) you are a salaried employee who is the highest paid 10% of employees (possibly) 2) the refusal is necessary to prevent substantial and grievous economic injury to hospital operations (debatable) 3) you are provided with proper notification.
Do any of the above apply in my case given the organizations action?
Last question - would you advise me to meet with the CEO to discuss the situation (my VP will not confirm that she is aware of the action against me) at this stage or would it be in my interest to meet first with an attorney?
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).