Labor and Employment Law
Ca. Labor & Emp't Rev. March 2014, Volume 28, No. 2
- Labor & Employment Law Section Executive Committee 2013-2014
- A Rose Is a Rose Is Not Retaliation: Why Requesting an Accommodation Should Not Be Considered “Protected Activity”
- Cases Pending Before the California Supreme Court
- Employment Law Case Notes
- From the Editors Editorial Policy
- Inside the Law Review
- Message From the Chair
- Nlra Case Notes
- Public Sector Case Notes
- Wage and Hour Update
- Waiving Arbitration Goodbye: When Does an Employer Waive the Right to Compel Arbitration, and Who Decides?
- MCLE Self-Study: the Intersection of No-Fault Attendance Policies and Leave Laws: Perils in Balancing Employee Rights With Employer Attendance Concerns
MCLE Self-Study: The Intersection of No-Fault Attendance Policies and Leave Laws: Perils in Balancing Employee Rights With Employer Attendance Concerns
By Carol Gillam
Carol Gillam practices plaintiff-side employment law and heads The Gillam Law Firm in Century City. She is an advisor to the Labor & Employment Law Section’s Executive Committee.
No-Fault Attendance Policies: The Appeal to Employers
In recent years, more and more employers have adopted "no-fault" attendance policies, lumping together time off for illness with vacations and other needs. For many, it was a response to the onerous logistics of leave management, and the inherent tension between employer and employee over intrusion into privacy rights. Such intrusion is necessary when employers require employees to detail reasons for their absences, and supervisors or human resources staff are called on to evaluate those reasons. Are the absences to be excused or unexcused? If unexcused, then typically progressive discipline follows for excessive absenteeism.