The Family Medical Leave Act, deals with the laws regarding “eligible” employees taking off up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave for their child's birth, adopting a child, taking care of an ill family member, or if they themselves have a serious health condition (Vikesland, 2006). In order to be considered an eligible employee, you must work for a company that employs at least fifty people, have worked there for a year and have worked a minimum of 1,250 hours in that year. “The employee also has the right to return to the same or equivalent position, pay, and benefits at the conclusion of their leave” (Vikesland, 2006).
The Family Medical Leave Act is not just to protect employees and look after their interests, but it is also to protect employers as well. If the employer is a public company they “are subject to provide FMLA regardless of the number of employees employed” (Vikesland, 2006). The employer can ask to see some kind of proof for an employee needing FMLA leave as well such as something from a doctor and can even halt an employee's leave until that proof is delivered to them. This is a way for an employer to make sure that leave is being given for good reason and that an employee is not taking advantage of the company. However, if the company is a private company and it falls below fifty employees while the one employee is on FMLA leave, “the leave has been granted...[and] the employer cannot alter the leave” (Vikesland, 2006).
Employee A was already granted FMLA leave to take care of his wife and new born child, therefore the question is not whether he was an eligible employee. The new manager is not trying to withhold Employee A's position, or the same salary as previously paid, but the question is whether the Employee is due the eleven weeks of salary while he was on leave. Technically the employee is not supposed to paid during FMLA leave. The “eligible” employees are allowed to have up to twelve weeks of leave, but it is unpaid. However, if the employee has sick time, or vacation leave they have not used then that pay could be applied to their FMLA time off. So, if employee A has stored paid sick, or vacation time, then the manager is required to pay him for the time that he has been gone. If employee A did not have any paid leave to take, then it is considered normal FMLA leave an the manager is not required to pay the employee for any time while gone. So, looking at the situation there has not been a violation of the FMLA.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act governs discrimination in the work place for people age forty and older. “Under the ADEA, it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of his/her age with respect to any term, condition, or privilege of employment, including hiring, firing, promotion, layoff, compensation, benefits, job assignments, and training” (EEOC, 2008). Because of companies wanting employees that were going to have longevity from their starting...