In situation A, Employee A had worked for company X for two years, which made him eligible for the Family and Medical Leave. However, there was no violation of the Family and Medical Leave law because employer X obliged to the requirements of the FMLA to reinstate the employee back to the previous job and at the previous rate of pay, after his leave. This Act allows employees to take unpaid leave, which was the case with employee A and thus, he did not deserve to be paid the salary for the 11 weeks he was on leave.
The Family and Medical Leave Act (1993), permits entitled employees to take unpaid leave of up to twelve full weeks every year after a child is born or due to a serious sickness of the employee or a close family member. The law intended to extend employment protection to workers for specified medical and family reasons, and benefit employers by alleviating their employee’s family life, thus causing the employees to become more productive, and less abstracted at work.
To be eligible, workers need to work for a covered employer for twelve months, and applies to employers who have 50 or more employees. The law requires that after an employee comes back from FMLA leave, he or she should be reinstated to the same job he held before the leave. The law does not, however, entitle an employee to continue accruing seniority or other benefits when on unpaid FMLA leave, though, the employee deserves to be returned to employment at a similar level and with equal benefits as existed while the leave began.
Once an employee gets reinstated, his or her pay benefits must be restored, including salary or base wage and opportunities to earn bonuses, commissions and overtime, or any other extra compensation that the employee enjoyed prior to the FMLA leave, (Guerin, & England, 2012, p. 261). Nevertheless, the benefits would be subject to every change in benefit levels that may have affected the whole workforce. Such benefits include all benefits offered to...