We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
Yesterday, the Connecticut Supreme Court issued its decision in
Velez v. Commissioner of Labor et al., SC 18683 & 18684,
holding the Connecticut Family and Medical Leave Act
("CTFMLA") applies only to employers with 75 or more
employees in Connecticut. Day Pitney LLP represented one of the two
defendants in the appeal.
The CTFMLA requires employers with 75 or more employees to provide
their eligible employees with a total of 16 workweeks of unpaid
family and medical leave during any 24-month period. An eligible
employee under the CTFMLA is one who has been employed for at least
12 months and for at least 1,000 hours during the prior 12 months.
In Velez, the Connecticut Supreme Court confirmed the CTFMLA
applies only to employers with 75 or more employees in Connecticut.
Accordingly, employers with 74 or fewer employees in Connecticut
are not required to provide their Connecticut employees with any
unpaid leave under the CTFMLA. Nor are they required to comply with
any other provisions of the CTFMLA. The decision is a victory for
employers, and one that makes sense in light of the difficulties
Connecticut employers may face in redistributing to other employees
the work of those on leave.
Connecticut employers, of course, may still be subject to the
federal Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA"). The FMLA
requires employers with 50 or more employees within a 75-mile
radius to provide their eligible employees with 12 workweeks of
unpaid family and medical leave during any 12-month period. An
eligible employee under the FMLA is one who has been employed for
at least 12 months and for at least 1,250 hours during the prior 12
months.
Employers with any questions about either the FMLA or the CTFMLA
can contact the attorneys listed in this Alert.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
A female employee traveling for her employer met a "friend" and at her motel room with him became "injured whilst engaging in sexual intercourse when a glass light fitting above the bed was pulled from its mount and fell on her."
The Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health & Human Services have issued new guidance on the content requirements for health plan summaries of benefits and coverage ("SBCs").
Groping, insulting, and threatening female employees has just resulted in an award by a federal jury in Tampa of $20.2 million in damages in an action which alleged a hostile work environment.
Issues After The Election
