i'm currently 5 1/2 months pregnant. in the beginning of my preg. i had to go out of work due to complications (By my Doctor) . i went out dec 17 2007 and returned feb 26 2008 ( Approx 10 weeks) due aug 8, 2008.i believed when i went out that i was on SHORT TERM DISABILITY while out i received STD. we have no HR Director at this time but when i returned i was told by my supervisor that it was considered FMLA and that i used 9 weeks of it and when i went out on Maternity leave that i would only have 3 weeks to take. is this correct ????i was never told that i was using FMLA. my doctor already said that i would be out for atleast 6 weeks when the baby is born... What should i do??? Also when i came back to work i was transferred to a different position doing more work for the same amount. when i asked about a pay increase i was told i had to wait about a month(which is now) and i would receive it with my yearly review. Is this fair???

If an employer, an employee, and a medical condition all qualify for FMLA, the employer is required by law to apply FMLA protections whether you ask for them or not. Whether you are or are not receiving STD benefits at the time does not affect this.

Pregnancy is covered by FMLA.

The longest your employer is required by law to hold your job is 12 weeks. If you use 9 weeks of FMLA before the birth, then you have only 3 weeks of protected time left after the birth. That doesn't mean that your employer will only allow you to take 3 weeks off, but it does mean that only 3 weeks are protected.

The law does not require that you receive an increase for additional duties at all. If they are offering you an increase at the time of the yearly review in a month, that is legal. You would have to prove that if you were not pregnant, you would have gotten the raise immediately, for this to be illegal.

The transfer upon returning from leave may have been improper unless that is something that would have happened anyway. You can't be transferred because you took leave but you can be transferred in spite of it.

thanks so much for the responses... but i have more

when i returned back to work they told me they were not required to hold my job after 12 weeks. so i asked them straight up would i have a job to cum back too and they told me i would have to call and c if the position was still available or reapply.

my big issue is that its unfair an i wasnt told that it was FMLA
i was informed by another site that the employer must notify you that u are taking fmla and that you have to have a doctor fill out those forms. my doctor only filled out STD forms that went to a seperate company.

y wasnt it just considered leave of abscense??? or just leave without pay my job has both

Your employer does have to notify you that the time counts as FMLA but as was upheld by the Supreme Court, the penalty for not letting you know in a timely manner is not that your employer must grant you additional leave. The law doesn't require any special form be completed in order for the leave to be deemed FMLA but employers have the option of requiring this. The key is that you are receiving all of the time due to you under the law, which it sounds like you will.

How would knowing the leave was designated as FMLA sooner have changed anything?

Once you have used 12 weeks in the year, you aren't guaranteed your old job back. If the company's policy is to treat each absence on a case by case basis, they may do so.