My wife had a tubal pregnancy and nearly bleed to death. One more hour and she would have died. I did not get home until 4:15 a.m. and I called in to my work and told them I had not had any sleep and explained the situation. My job is very strenuous and requires me to lift over 100 pounds. With no sleep this would have caused danger to both myself and others. They said fine and when I went back to work the wrote me up and gave me 3 days off without pay. I was warned once more and I would be fired. I tried to take a sick day and they told me I didn't give them enough notice to take it. I explained it was an emergency and it didn't matter. Can they legally do this?

Possibly.

How long had you worked for that employer? How many employees does the employer have within 75 miles of your location? Had you worked no less than 1,000 hours in the past 12 months?

Possibly.

How long had you worked for that employer? How many employees does the employer have within 75 miles of your location? Had you worked no less than 1,000 hours in the past 12 months?

I think cbg meant 1,250 hours. ;)

No, I didn't. In WI it's 1,000 under state law.

No, I didn't. In WI it's 1,000 under state law.

Oops, sorry, I should have known that it wasn't a typo. My bad. :o

You say you offered to use a sick day and they told you that you didnt give them enough notice ? Uh since when do you know in advance that you are going to be sick ? True, in this case you werent the one that was sick but still, if you had been truly sick yourself they were basically telling you that you couldnt have called in sick ? In hindsight I would have just called in sick and left out why but then they would have caught you for lying if they had found out. Doesnt seem like a very compassionate workplace - hope your wife is ok now !

Hence the very reason so may employees are compelled to tell lies about PTO or UPTO. Being honest is, IMHO, a very positive attribute. Unfortunately jerks for employers can make an otherwise honest person stoop to the level of the jerk. Hopefully the OP qualifies for FMLA, applies for it and then if the eimployer fires him, sue the hell out of them. I would love for someone to explain to me why some employers are such asses about a person putting their family ahead of their workplace. Can anyone find any good reason that could justify the OP's employer's actions under these circumstances?


Now while I am on this rant can anyone explain to me why the FMLA only applies if you have been with the same employer for at least a year? For the life of me I can't understand how legislators didn't realize employees nor their familiy's get to choose when they have a serious medical condition. Maybe with the exception of childbirth and not always then. It simply does not make sense to me. Now if FMLA was PTO it would be understandable but as we all know it isn't so why the 1 year criteria? Does anyone know? And yes I am very serious not cracking wise.

I believe much of the reason for the one year rule was to avoid employees starting a new job knowing they need to be out for 3 months and binding the employer's hands so to speak. My employer does grant leave to those who have less than a year of service, but not all are able to do so when they bring a new employee on board. The whole law was a series of gives and takes and somewhere in the middle between what employers needed and employees wanted was what we are stuck with.

Thank you Elle that helps me get my head around it a little better. It would be nice if they could place an addendum that if it is a bona fide medical emergency than it would be allowed if shorter than a year. Refreshing to hear that your employer goes above and beyond. That's pretty darn hard to come by these days.

Thanks again.