My wife works for the california superior court. She took the usual six weeks off and then took anothe 12 week leave. Her date to go back is the 16th. This is in writing signed by the head of HR. Last week she called HR and she was told that her date to go back was today, the 10th, because of a mistake they made. So today she called one of her supervisors(all of her other supervisors thought she would be coming back the 16th) and left a voice mail saying she would not be back until the 16th. So HR called us just now and they are mad at her that she didn't come in. They told her a bunch of illogical crap about how they can't know when the baby was born and her date to go back was just an "expected date of return." They got my wife to say that she is coming in tomorrow after the heavy guilt trip.

I'm not happy about this at all because she shouldn't be put through this. It is hard enough to go back to work after having a child. She is very upset over this. I would love to call those people to chew them out. They also said that if she didn't come in she would be marked down as missing work without pay. I guess that is bad once the next review comes around.

What are her rights here? Does she have any obligation to come in this week at all?

Was the baby born after June 5? If so, then she has the right to stay out until the 16th. If not, they have the right to make her come back.

The baby was born June 3rd. But they could make her go back now even if they put it in writing that her date to go back was the 16th and they gave her less then a weeks notice about this mistake?

It was a mistake, they can correct it.

Two quick observations here:

1) I didn't count the weeks on my calendar, but if the calculations in the earlier post are right, your wife has until the 14th to stay out, right? If so, then making her come back earlier when she doesn't want to can constitute interference with rights under the FMLA (and CFRA, I believe -- Megan, please correct me if I'm wrong).

2) Employees need to be careful when the exceed the amount of protected leave they have under a federal or state statute -- if you are allowed 12 weeks and you take longer than 12 weeks by even a few days, you may lose your right to be restored to your former job.

Cynthia

**The foregoing is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.**

If the letter was written before the baby was born, I wouldn't think it binding as the date of return was based on the date the baby was due, not born. You don't get leave based on the due date but the birth date.

It is unfortunate that she found out now that she is expected back so soon. Did she not verify when her return was to be until just now?

The baby was born late by a week or so. I'm not 100% sure but I do believe the paper was dated well after my son was born. And I don't think either of us expected to have to verify it. After all the paper was signed by the head of HR. Mean while she had been in touch with HR many times before this and they didn't bother telling her about this mistake until last week. All of her supervisors(who my wife had been in touch with) expected her back on the 16th.

Also, there is another issue. She had requested another 12 weeks off on the 27th of last month. This was over 2 weeks before the expect return date on the letter(the 16) but less then two weeks before her revised return date(the 10th) that she knew nothing of at the time. Her request was denied, no reason given. It could have been denied for any number of reasons but It looks like her request never had a chance because it was not made two weeks before the 10th. She had called last week to see if this was aproved, she was told it was denied and this is when she was told she would be expected back on the 10th.

So she was allowed to stay out until the 14th? She was most definitely told to come in today even after she told them that she did not want to.

BTW, she disappointedly returned to work today

If she already had all her time under FMLA and CFRA, which she has, her employer is not obligated in any way to give her another 12 weeks just because she asks for them.

I know that, but was it denied because she couldn't ask for it two weeks before a date she had no knowledge of? They didn't tell her why so we won't know either way. I'm just saying it is messed up.

It doesn't matter if that was the reason or not. She isn't legally entitled to the leave therefore it is entirely up to the employer. If they wanted to grant it they could have, no matter when she turned in the request. Obviously, they did not wish to do this. Why is immaterial.