publications full of ideas

U.S. Department of Labor Issues Opinion Letter Regarding FMLA and No-Fault Attendance Policies


Many employers utilize “no-fault” attendance polices, which provide that employees are subject to progressive discipline up to and including termination when they accumulate a specified number of absences within a certain period of time. For example, a no-fault policy might require termination of an employee who accumulates seven days of absence within a rolling twelve-month period. Of course, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) prohibits an employer from counting approved FMLA leave as an absence subject to adverse action under such policies. The question arises, however, whether the duration of the FMLA leave must be treated as “active service” within the time period that the policy measures absences subject to disciplinary action. On August 28, 2018, the U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, issued an opinion letter addressing this question.

The opinion letter concerns an employer no-fault attendance policy which subjected an employee to automatic discharge if he or she accrued eighteen absences (i.e., “points”) within a twelve-month period. The policy stated that points would remain on an employee’s record for twelve months of “active service” after the points were accrued, although the policy did not define the meaning of “active service.” In practice, the employer effectively “froze” the number of attendance points that the employee had accrued prior to the taking of FMLA leave. Consequently, his or her points accrued prior to leave would remain on the employees attendance record for perhaps more than twelve months, since the period of FMLA leave was not counted by the employer as active service. Significantly, this practice of treating FMLA leave as inactive service under the no-fault attendance policy was also extended to other types of leave such as workers’ compensation related absence.

Based upon the foregoing facts, the Department of Labor concluded that the employer’s no-fault attendance policy did not violate the FMLA. The DOL found that by not counting FMLA leave as active service, the employee neither lost a benefit that accrued prior to the taking of leave nor accrued any additional benefit to which he or she would not otherwise have been entitled. The DOL repeated its longstanding position that such practices do not violate the FMLA “as long as employees on equivalent types of leave receive the same treatment.”

Implicit in the opinion letter is the caveat that an employer’s ability to count absences accrued prior to an FMLA leave is not open-ended. The window of capturing such previously accrued absences should be no greater than the duration of the leave of absence itself. Thus, if an employer’s no-fault attendance policy counts absences during a rolling twelve-month period, that time period should be increased by no longer than the duration of the FMLA leave in order to determine which absences may be counted towards disciplinary action. For example, if under such a policy an employee is absent on January 1, 2018, and takes a three-month FMLA leave of absence later in 2018, the 1/1/18 absence should no longer be counted under the attendance policy after on or about March 31, 2019. Again, such a policy is permissible according to the DOL opinion letter, provided that the employer’s policy treats all types of leave as inactive service under the no-fault attendance policy.

Employers should note that, in addition to the FMLA, other laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, workers’ compensation statutes, state sick pay laws, and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act often come into play when dealing with employee attendance. These laws must therefore be taken into consideration when implementing and enforcing attendance policies in the workplace.

Physical Address: 301 S. College Street, Suite 2900, Charlotte, NC 28202 | © Poyner Spruill LLP. All rights reserved.

related information

what's new at the firm

Mayo named Client Choice Award winner in North Carolina


RALEIGH, N.C. — Poyner Spruill partner Kelsey Mayo has been named the 2019 Client Choice Award winner in the Employment & Benefits category for North Carolina.

Terminating Employment: Best Practices to Navigate the Termination Minefield


How an employer manages an employment termination is often the determinative factor in whether an employee sues for wrongful termination. This webinar discussion focuses upon best practices that should be used to minimize frequency of post-termination lawsuits, severance and release considerations, and essential planning and documentation for termination of an employee.

WEBINAR: The Regulators’ Update


Leadership of the N.C. Adult Care Licensure Section, along with members of the p.s. Health Law Team, will present an update on adult care home survey and regulatory issues, including new developments in regulatory interpretation and application during surveys by the Adult Care Licensure Section.

Poyner Spruill's Hobbs leading client relations presentation at UNC School of Law's Festival of Legal Learning


RALEIGH, N.C. — Poyner Spruill’s Brandi Hobbs will again be a featured speaker in the UNC School of Law’s Festival of Legal Learning. The two-day event offers attendees the chance to earn up to 12 CLE credits and will take place Friday and Saturday, Feb. 8-9, at The William & Ida Friday Continuing Education Center in Chapel Hill.

Twenty attorneys at Poyner Spruill honored in 2019 Super Lawyers list


RALEIGH, N.C. — Poyner Spruill LLP is pleased to announce 16 attorneys at the firm have been selected to the 2019 North Carolina Super Lawyers list. No more than 5 percent of the lawyers in North Carolina are selected.