Employee's Lack of Diligence in Obtaining Timely Medical Certification Destroys Her FMLA Claim
As a management side attorney, I love when FMLA cases provide real, practical takeaways for employers that help them better administer FMLA leave. Yesterday was one of those days, as a federal court took a plaintiff to task for: 1) failing to provide timely FMLA medical certification; and 2) failing to make a good faith effort to turn the certification in on time. In its decision, the court explained for employers the various ways the employee could have shown that she was attempting in good faith to return medical certification.
The Facts
Ronita Brookins was employed by Staples Contract & Commercial, Inc. to review customer orders for credit card fraud. Sadly, she also grappled with breast cancer. She beat the cancer the first time, but it returned several years later. During this later period, Brookins had a serious of suspect, unexcused absences that put her on the verge of termination. When Staples called the attendance problems to Brookins' attention, she informed the Company for the first time about the recurrence of the cancer and insisted that many of the absences were related to her treatment. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, Staples asked Brookins to provide medical certification, which was due back to Staples with 15 calendar days.
When Brookins didn't return the certification on time, Staples gave her another seven days. And another extension after that. About one month after Brookins should have returned the certification, Staples decided to convert her absences to unexcused leave and, as a result, it terminated her employment. Brookins later filed FMLA interference and retaliation claims.
The Ruling & Insights for Employers
Under the FMLA regulations, employers have the right to request and obtain complete and sufficient medical certification to support an absence due to an employee's alleged serious health condition. The employee's obligation to return this medical certification is fairly clear:
The employee must provide the requested certification to the employer within 15 calendar days after the employer’s request, unless it is not practicable under the particular circumstances to do so despite the employee’s diligent, good faith efforts. 29 C.F.R. § 825.305(b)
If the employee does not provide certification, the FMLA regulations allow the employer to deny FMLA coverage to the employee until the certification is provided. Thus, any absences in the interim are unexcused and could subject the employee to termination.
Here, Brookins blew the 15 day turnaround. So, she could save her FMLA claim only if she could establish that she was engaging in diligent, good faith efforts to return the certification on time.
Employers regularly ask me -- what precisely are diligent, good faith efforts? Let's start with what Brookins did here to obtain certification: she called her two primary physicians and asked them to complete the certification. When they flat out refused to complete the form, Brookins did nothing further to obtain certification. Literally nothing. Nada. This was hardly impressive to the court.
The Brookins court suggests what the employee could have done to show that she was engaging in diligent, good faith efforts to obtain complete and sufficient certification:
- When Brookins initially was rebuffed by these two physicians, she could have contacted them again, explaining the importance of completing the certification.
- She could have asked any one of three other additional specialists she visited with during her treatment to complete the form.
- She could have mailed the form to any of these doctors.
- She could have delivered the form in person to any of these doctors.
- Perhaps most significant to the court: she should have contacted her employer to explain her difficulties in obtaining timely certification and requested an extension before the 15-day deadline expired. (In her case, she didn't seek an extension until after the deadline passed.)
Because the court found that Brookins did not make diligent efforts to obtain certification, it dismissed her FMLA claims, finding that the exception to the 15-day rule did not apply. More importantly, the ruling gave employers a guide map when determining whether their own employee has engaged in "diligent, good faith efforts" to obtain certification. Brookins v. Staples Contract & Commercial, Inc. (pdf)
Cheesy moment alert: I must confess a moment of weakness here -- perhaps it's my Catholic guilt setting in a bit on Ash Wednesday, but I can't help but feel a bit for Ms. Brookins' situation, since it appears as though her primary care doctors' refusal to complete the form is what likely did her in. As she battled breast cancer for a second time and now was rebuffed by her two main doctors, obtaining medical certification had to be a low priority for her. Nevertheless, the FMLA rules apply to Brookins just as they do any other employee in far less empathetic situations.
And Brookins didn't follow the rules. As harsh as it may seem to some, it's the correct ruling.
Connect with me on LinkedIn


Comments (3)
Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the endChev - February 14, 2013 11:54 AM
I also agree with the Courts ruling. As a Leave Administrator, some employees get upset when they are denied FML. They believe a legitimate health condition allows them the right to FML. I explain my understanding of the legitimacy of their health condition and the need to have such condition supported by a health certificate. However, I'm still seen as the bad guy to whose whose requests are denied for failure to return a completed health certificare on time. I'm sorry but the the rules are the rules.
Anonymous - February 14, 2013 12:06 PM
Sad but true...In my observation, the process of completing these requests falls between the cracks far too often. I am not sure why the importance of supplying the legally required information simply doesn't matter to some. Not to mention it's the 'right thing to do'. You know the old saying "The squeaky wheel always gets the oil"? I make it very clear to my employees that, unfortunately (very unfortunately), despite whatever it is they are dealing with, chances are they will have to become "the squeaky wheel" in order to get the documents they need. It's shameful really; too bad our trusted leaders don't address the need to stop that vicious (and very wrong) circle.
Thank you for allowing me a moment on my soapbox.
Linda - February 15, 2013 12:56 PM
While the doctors refused to supply the information, it begs the question as to why. Most doctors understand the importance of completing the information and doing so in a timely manner, otherwise it could have a hugely negative impact on the patient. Following it through, if the patient looses employment, they could/will lose their benefit coverage, thereby perhaps not returning to the physician. I'm not sure physicians would willingly WANT to lose patients over something like this.
Therefore, my concern lies with WHY the doctors wouldn't complete the information. I'm certainly not calling this woman a liar, but if the doctors wouldn't complete the forms, maybe there was a reason WHY. Taking it even further, maybe there was a reason this woman did NOT follow through with making sure the paperwork was being completed. She didn't mail it, deliver it in person, NOR did she explain the significance. Somewhere along the way, she must have not really wanted this to go through. Before I get jumped on for saying it like that, if she really wanted it resolved, she would have taken the further actions.
All that being said, I hope her cancer goes into remission and she comes out on the positive side.