I have been employed full-time for more than one year with a company with more than 50 employees in the state of Nevada.

My girlfriend (we are not married) is due to give birth to our child in a few months. I would like to utilize my sick leave (under the auspices of FMLA) for 6 to 8 weeks after the baby is born. (I have more than enough sick leave on the books, plus some.) Alternatively, I would be willing to use part of my vacation time and part of my sick leave to take the time off. I am trying to avoid taking unpaid time off, as financially that would make things difficult.

Females in my department are allowed to use sick/vacation time following the birth of their children. I was told I would be allowed to take only 3 days of sick time or could take unpaid leave. Furthermore, I was told that I would not be approved for more than one week of vacation time.

I also learned that if my girlfriend has the baby via c-section, I could not even utilize sick time to care for her as she is not an "immediate relative" since we are not married (although married co-workers are allowed to use 6 weeks of sick time when their wives have c-sections).

I am really trying to figure out how I can stay home for a period of time (longer than 3 days!) after the birth of our child. Any suggestions?

As the father of the child, you are entitled to take up to 12 weeks of FMLA leave for the birth/care of your child.

Prior to the commencement of FMLA leave, an employee may elect to substitute earned vacation or personal time for otherwise unpaid FMLA leave. In order to use paid leave, employees must comply with the employer's normal paid leave policies. The use of paid sick leave can be used if the employee takes FMLA for a reason for which the employee could otherwise use sick days.

I am entitled to take up to 12 week of FMLA as UNPAID leave, correct? What I'm trying to figure out is how I can take PAID leave . . . specifically using my sick time.

Females in my department are allowed to use sick leave (up to 12 weeks if they have that much sick time accrued) after the birth of a child. Males are allowed to take 3 days.

I do have 6 weeks of vacation time on the books (which I am hesitant to completely use), but was told I would only be approved for one week of vacation.

So short of taking UNPAID FMLA leave, do I have any other options?

When males give birth, I'm sure they will be allowed to take up to six weeks of sick leave too.

There is nothing in the law that is going to force the employer to allow you to take paid leave.

Hey, hey, hey . . . I am not planning on giving birth any time soon, but I would like to be there for her and the new baby for the more than 3 days.

If, heaven forbid, she has to have a c-section, I am still only entitled to 3 days. It's her I feel bad for.

No one is saying you can't be with her. Only that you're not entitled by law to be paid for the time. You are free to take as much unpaid time as FMLA and your employer permit.

SHE'S not entitled by law to paid time off, either. There is nothing in either Federal or Nevada law entitling women to paid maternity leave or even disability benefits. If she's not entitled to it by law, when she's the one giving birth, why should you be?

In regards to Nevada, I found this:

Qualifying Reason for FMLA
* For birth of the employee's child and to care for the newborn child after birth, or placement of a child with the employee for adoption or foster care and to care for the child.

Pay Status
* The employee may elect to use accrued annual, sick or personal leave, in lieu of unpaid leave time for any FMLA-qualifying purpose.

If the birth of a child is a qualifying reason for FMLA and the employee may elect to use paid leave in lieu of unpaid leave, why couldn't he use annual or sick leave? If his wife was employed in Nevada, wouldn't she be able to use annual or sick leave as well after giving birth to a child?

If his wife was employed in Nevada, wouldn't she be able to use annual or sick leave as well after giving birth to a child?

If his employer has a policy that sick leave can only be used for the employee's illness, that's perfectly legal. In the case of the woman using sick leave, she would be recovering from giving birth and would be using her sick leave for her own illness.

This is the new FMLA poster & what it says regarding substitution of paid leave for unpaid leave:
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/fmla/finalrule/FMLAposter.pdf

This is what a HR "newsletter" I have says re paid/unpaid FMLA leave - new FMLA rules:
The FMLA requires only unpaid leave. However, an employee may choose, or an employer may require an employee, to use any accrued vacation days or unspecified PTO days during an unpaid FMLA leave. In addition, an employee can choose, or any employer can require an employee, to use accrued paid sick days during an unpaid FMLA leave, but only if the employee takes FMLA leave for a reason for which the employee could otherwise use sick days. For example, if the employer's policy allows use of accrued sick time only for the employee's own illness, then the employee may not use - nor may the employer require the employee to use -accrued paid sick time during a FMLA leave to care for a seriously ill parent for example. (per lawyer & HR Specialist)

per Alexander Hamilton Institute: (new FMLA) Substitution Of Paid Leave (§ 825.207)
The DOL now allows employers to apply their normal leave policies to the substitution of all types of paid leave for unpaid FMLA leave. Thus, if an employer's paid personal leave policy requires two days' notice for the use of personal leave, an employee seeking to substitute paid personal leave for unpaid FMLA leave would need to provide two days' notice.

The biggest change from a worker point of view concerns how and when employee give notice of taking FMLA leave. Before, employees had up to two days after an absence to notify employers they actually were taking FMLA leave. Now--absent an emergency or unusual circumstances--an employee needing FMLA leave must follow the employer’s usual and customary call-in procedures for reporting an absence. This applies to intermittent FMLA leaves as well as leaves for a block of time.

What this means is that the FMLA will not protect a worker from discipline for an absence unless the worker notifies the employer of the FMLA absence by following the usual call-in procedure for announcing a non-FMLA absence.

That's true. That's what the new FMLA poster says & the statute noted above (825.207).

In regards to Nevada, I found this:


Pay Status
* The employee may elect to use accrued annual, sick or personal leave, in lieu of unpaid leave time for any FMLA-qualifying purpose.

If the birth of a child is a qualifying reason for FMLA and the employee may elect to use paid leave in lieu of unpaid leave, why couldn't he use annual or sick leave? If his wife was employed in Nevada, wouldn't she be able to use annual or sick leave as well after giving birth to a child?
sses is that a Nevada statute? The FMLA does not have that wording. This is the commissioners website:
http://www.laborcommissioner.com/lawsandregs.htm. It may be out dated where is this wording you described?