Thanks for the info, specifically this part about the employer having to pay their share of the health premium. I've tried to find this "in the law" to share with my employer, but am unable. Do you have anything you could share?

* In DC an employer must continue to pay its typical portion of your health insurance premiums throughout your enire FMLA. (For me a total of 32 weeks).

Thank you so much for this info!!!

Bump.

Don't suppose anyone has info on VA and MD FMLAs and whether they are just the same as the federal or better?

For the San Francisco based employer - I was just talking to my Aunt who lives in CA, and the CA FMLA is also much more generous than the federal FMLA. I don't know about CA compared to DC, but you might get a better deal if your employer just applies the CA FMLA accross the board. Apparently, in CA you get 4 weeks leave PRE-birth, whether you have complications requiring bedrest or not. At least according to my Aunt (who is not a lawyer).

I am very glad to see this post. However, I am really sorry the OP had to pay a lawyer to give her this information. I work for the DC Office of Human Rights and our office enforces this law. Sadly many folks in the DC governement as well as private sector dont understand DCFMLA. I personally speak to probably 10 people mostly expecting moms about this a week!! Dont assume that your HR dept understands or knows about this law.Most employers are not happy about the extra time one gets in DC but its the law! Pls remember you can certainly use the DCOHR as a FREE reference for your questions. Our office is also the office where you can go to file a complaint if your rights are violated.

Probably true. While you're on federal FMLA, they can require that you pay your benefits.
On a similar note, to qualify for FMLA, you need to have worked for 12 mo. and 1250 hours in the 12 mo. period preceding the leave. You also need to work at a location that employs at least 50 employees in a 75 mile radius.

My HR dept told me I needed to take some of my accrued leave for part of the 16 weeks of family leave in order to keep my benefits during that time; otherwise, I'd have to pay for them the benefits our of pocket. Is this wrong?

Wow - this is GREAT information.

BUMP!

Anonymous wrote:Does the FMLA allow you to take 12 weeks every year, i.e. can you take 12 weeks in year 1 and 12 weeks in year 2 (so you could theoretically get a total of 24 weeks in 2 years)?

Because then the DCFMLA doesn't work out better, you get a maximum of 16 weeks in year 1 & 2.

Or am I not reading this right?

Also, do you have to work at your employer for 12 months AND have worked 1,000 hours or is it 12 months OR 1,000 hours, whichever you satisfy first?

National FMLA gives you up to 12 weeks per year (for combined medical and family leave), so yes - you can take 24 weeks in 2 years. However, DC FMLA is far superior -- you can take up to 32 weeks (16 med and 16 fam) every two years and you dont have to take part of that time in one year and part in the next. Due to the circumstances of my pregnancy I'm expecting to take 32 weeks this year. (I work in DC.) That means I don't get FMLA time next year, however.

RE: prerequisites to qualify for FMLA, I don't now the hour requirements but I know you have to be with the co or a byear to be eligable. Nationally your co eeds 50 employees. In DC your co needs 20. In other states there are sometimes lower headcount requireents too.

Does the FMLA allow you to take 12 weeks every year, i.e. can you take 12 weeks in year 1 and 12 weeks in year 2 (so you could theoretically get a total of 24 weeks in 2 years)?

Because then the DCFMLA doesn't work out better, you get a maximum of 16 weeks in year 1 & 2.

Or am I not reading this right?

Also, do you have to work at your employer for 12 months AND have worked 1,000 hours or is it 12 months OR 1,000 hours, whichever you satisfy first?

Anonymous wrote:It looks like from the link to the DC Bar page that an individual may not be able to take medical and family leave back to back. "If the employee takes more than sixteen weeks of protected leave or is unable to return to work after sixteen weeks of leave, the employer does not have an obligation under the DCFMLA to reinstate the employee." Did I read that wrongly?

I know this is misleading. I talked to my lawyer about this and she said this cited case law referring to an emplotee trying to take PTO after 16 weeks of fam or med leaave. That employee did not meet the requirements for both types of leave. But my lawyer confirmed that if you qualify for both types of leave you may take them back to back. She found language to confirm this for me.

It looks like from the link to the DC Bar page that an individual may not be able to take medical and family leave back to back. "If the employee takes more than sixteen weeks of protected leave or is unable to return to work after sixteen weeks of leave, the employer does not have an obligation under the DCFMLA to reinstate the employee." Did I read that wrongly?

Anonymous wrote:OP - I am very surprised that the folks in your HR dept. didn't go over this with you. Did you ask the HR personnel for clarification on FMLA (especially since DC is a little bit different than Federal)?

I know my HR point of contact was super helpful and sent me a certified letter outlining all the "entitlements", exactly what dates (pending the baby's birth) I would have to return, the dates I would be covered for, etc.

Nopoe. The handbook had it outlined incorrectly./ he were thankful that /I educated them on the law. Not really the way it's supposed to be but I'm just grateful for the policy.