Hi There.

I work for a large company in New Jersey and have been out sick with the flu for 2 days. I have not been to a doctor. However, when I called my place of work today, they told me that I need a doctor's note for the two days I was out.

I did not see anything in our employee handbook that states this and to my understanding, by law, a note was only required after 3 days. Please correct me if I am wrong though. Is this true or not?

Also, I am a part time employee with no paid sick days.

There is no law either way. If the company policy, which I agree should have been in the handbook, but it doesn't have to be, is that you need a doctor's note to return after 2 days, then that's what you need.

There is no law in any state that restricts an employer from requiring a doctor's note until the employee has been absent three days. With certain exceptions under FMLA, they can require a doctor's note for every absence regardless of length if they choose to.

can they change what is in the handbook , that this is the poilicy (3 Days) ,
and fire someone that did not officially know any changes happened .
i cant see how it is legal for a company to change there policy without prior notification and /or a written document stating , when from what date.

What exceptions exist regarding printed matter (policy) , and how does a company go about officially changing that pollicy , remember that we have all signed a contract and acceptence of the first original policy , and does not state anything about changes in policy .

We WHO have signed a contract? The OP didn't say anything about having an employment contract.

Are you hijacking this thread for your own purpose? I have heard that NJ law is more lenient in ruling that employee handbooks as enforceable contracts, but only a NJ attorney who has reviewed the document in question could give an educated opinion. Employee handbooks do not imply an enforceable contract on their face. And most decently written ones contain a disclaimer saying they do NOT, and also that management reserves the right to change policies contained therein at any time. In the majority of cases, an employee "signing" for an employee handbook means only that they have acknowledged its receipt.

any one that works should sign a contract which would include review and acknowledgment of any policy , rule and how they should change the rules , if you understand me :)

But there is no legal requirement that that be the case.

If every employee insisted on an employment contract, there would be a lot more unemployed people in this country.:rolleyes:

any one that works should sign a contract which would include review and acknowledgment of any policy , rule and how they should change the rules , if you understand me :)

Then the contract would require a forklift to move. If an employee had to agree to every policy there is and how that rule can be changed, no one would ever be employed. There are always going to be some rules you like and some you don't. Heck, my employees are on contract and we do negotiate the policies and there are still gripes.