THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, August 5, 1994 TAG: 9408050606
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DEBRA GORDON, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: Long : 126 lines
Sharla Cooper knew her fourth pregnancy would be high risk; she'd already miscarried three times. So when her doctor ordered her to bed for the duration of her pregnancy, she went.
She didn't worry about her job as a neonatal nurse practitioner at Community Hospital of the Roanoke Valley because she knew she could use the Family and Medical Leave Act. The act provides employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the birth, adoption or illness of a child, for their own illness or for the illness of a family member.
When the leave ran out, Cooper assumed that the hospital would extend it, as it had so often done in the past for other employees.
But on her 91st day away from work, she said, the hospital fired her.
Lucas Snipes, senior vice president of the corporation that owns the Roanoke hospital, says it was the family leave act that caused the company to change its leave policy. ``We did make a decision to simply say after 90 days that we will not guarantee a job. . . . In the past, it was handled differently in different situations.''
One year after it was hailed as a major milestone for employees trying to balance work and family concerns, the family leave act is being derided as a spineless law.
Critics say it has limited impact on most of the workers it was designed to cover and that in some cases - like Cooper's - it hurts employees more than it helps them.
Some employers have scrapped flexible leave policies that were based on employees' needs, substituting the standard 12-week limit required by the family leave act.
``I didn't understand that the act would give the employer the ability to decrease what they had previously been giving to people,'' Cooper said. ``Or that people would be losing their job over it. I really think it's hurting more people than it's helping.''
Employees and workplace analysts note that the law covers only half the nation's work force, and that many of those employees can't afford to take the unpaid leave it provides. Also, most employers affected by the law already offered similar or more generous leave provisions.
In general, says one labor analyst, the family leave act is ``like the Shakespeare play, `Much Ado About Nothing.' ''
``I think the way to describe it is as a major legislative nonevent,'' said Raymond L. Hilgert, a professor of management and industrial relations at Washington University in St. Louis. Hilgert researched the effects of the law in its first year, interviewing employers, labor law attorneys and officials at the Labor Department. He will publish the results of his survey this fall.
``As far as I can tell,'' he said of the law, ``it hasn't made that big a difference to the companies or the people using it.''
Hilgert also found evidence of employers reducing leave policies and substituting the less generous leave of the family leave act. One employer said that if an employee wanted to have an indefinite leave, the company ``could use the FMLA as a hammer'' to deny leave time beyond the required 12 weeks.
Locally, human resource professionals at several large employers, including Old Dominion University, Lillian Vernon Inc., Crestar Bank and Virginia Power, reported fewer than 3 percent of their employees used the act last year, primarily because the companies already had leave policies in place.
Colonna's Shipyard Inc., in Norfolk, with 350 employees, had ``less than a handful'' take the leave, said vice president Doug Forrest. ``This shipyard had a tradition of a family leave act in place; we're a family-oriented company. If someone needs a few weeks to take care of things and put things in order, we're very understanding of that. That's why this had virtually no impact.''
Bill Cooke, a senior service representative at Virginia Power in Williamsburg, took about two weeks' leave time under the act when his daughter was in a car accident. Even without the law, he says, he's certain the company would have allowed him the leave.
Some companies added the act to their existing leave policies, giving employees even more time off. At Crestar Bank, for instance, branch manager Amy Popp of Chesapeake had eight weeks' paid disability leave to use when she had a baby last winter. The bank did not apply that time to the family leave act, meaning she could have taken an additional 12 weeks.
But Popp took only four more weeks - enough, she said, to establish breast-feeding and then wean the baby.
But Donna Siller Haplea, supervisor of older adult services for Virginia Beach, says that if she had been unable to take the maternity leave allowed by the act - six weeks more than the city had allowed - she would have quit her job.
``I wouldn't have left my baby at six weeks. And I would have regretted that decision (quitting), because by three months I felt comfortable leaving him and I missed work and I was real glad to come back.''
Some companies have had no employees take advantage of the act.
``People here have to think about whether they can afford unpaid time off,'' says Fred DeLaCruz, Twin B Auto Parts vice president of finance and administration. ``We'd be more than happy to hold their position, but it really gets down to basic family economics.''
Which is why national advocacy groups like 9 to 5, National Association of Working Women, the Women's Legal Defense Fund and the Carnegie Corporation, are recommending that the law be expanded to include some paid leave.
9 to 5, in a study released last month, makes other recommendations. Among them:
Include smaller employers. Currently the act covers only those with 50 or more employees, meaning that about half of the nation's workers are excluded.
Lower the number of hours required for part-time employee coverage and adding prorated leave. Currently, employees must work at least 1,250 hours a year (about 25 weeks) to be covered.
Make the use of accrued paid leave voluntary rather than mandatory. Many companies require employees to use any paid vacation or sick leave as part of the 12 weeks the act requires.
The report also urges increased enforcement of the law and better training of employers and workers on its requirements.
``People don't understand how it works,'' said Cindia Cameron, 9 to 5's organizing director. ``Employers aren't doing a good enough job of explaining how it works.''
In its survey, the group found that 63 percent of those who had taken the leave reported problems with their employers; only 46 percent reported that information about the act was posted at their workplace, even though posting is required by law.
Nationally, the Department of Labor investigated 965 complaints related to the law. It resolved 90 percent of the violations by phone.
In most cases, a department spokeswoman said, educating the employer about the act's provisions was enough to bring the employer into compliance. ILLUSTRATION: Color photo
CHARLIE MEADS/Staff
Donna Siller Haplea, with son Scott, says if she had been unable to
take the time allowed by the family leave act - six weeks more than
her employer allowed - she would have quit her job.
by CNB