Forums
Doctor's Note
Legal Forum
Doctor's Note
Discuss employment-law issues such as family leave, overtime, disabilities law, harassment, immigration and termination.
An employee recently missed a shift and called in to let us know. Employee was told to bring in a doctors note and he complied. The note was brought in next scheduled shift and was given to a shift su
1
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:DiscussionId36818
Forums » Topic Forums » Legal Forum » Doctor's Note
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 11/23/2010 12:29 PM EST
|
Posts: 4
First: 11/21/2010 Last: 11/23/2010 |
I agree. However, it was not my decision. The Assistant Manager was the one who suspended him after the supervisor called him about the incident. The employee himself was very calm, explaining that he was a Health Service Administration employee and that he knows medical records and their associated privacy laws (obviously not too well, citing HIPAA haha). The supervisor over reacted, thinking that since he told her not to, it was an act of insubordination, personal attack, etc. The employee notified me he has begun working for one of our competitors. Frankly, I can't blame him for quitting. The assistant manager seems to be on a bit of a power trip. I only wish I had more authority regarding employees, since he was one of our best. He also informed that he will not be seeking any legal actions, but will be calling in fake "to go orders" for quite some time haha. Thanks again for all of the info. Take care |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 11/23/2010 12:35 PM EST
|
|
Posts: 32
First: 11/16/2010 Last: 1/3/2011 |
Hi, moesmaster -
I'm sorry to hear the outcome wasn't more productive. I appreciate the difficult position you were in. It sounds like you did all you could under the circumstances. Best wishes for a Happy Thanksgiving. Debra |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 11/24/2010 5:17 AM EST
|
|
Posts: 544
First: 9/27/2004 Last: 9/13/2011 |
I understand the power-trip dynamic and how that plays out. I was very fortunate to have had a good boss to mentor me.
He used to tell me that there is always more than one solution to conflict and that the bosses job is to choose the responsible one - not the one with the least resistance and not the one that doesn't serve the needs of the organization. He said he would always backed my decisions, but he needed to trust in my ability to examine my motives. He really was a remarkable human being. |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 4/13/2011 11:59 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1
First: 4/13/2011 Last: 4/13/2011 |
There was a recent decision out of the 6th Circuit (Lee v. City of Columbus) that speaks to supervisors and doctors notes that you may want to review.
It supports the requirement and who can receive the note. Hope this helps. |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 4/26/2011 7:57 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 6
First: 6/2/2010 Last: 7/6/2011 |
What is being overlooked is the potential for a claim under ADA. If the information in the doctor's note could be used to identify a medical condition and an underlying disability, the employee could claim that any adverse action (tangible employment action) was based on his/her disability.
Doctor's notes are problematic since the employer does not control what information is provided. A Release to Return to Work form that does not ask for information that violates the ADA is a much better tool. |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 4/26/2011 9:14 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 12
First: 10/10/2000 Last: 6/1/2011 |
I saw a couple things pass by.
One was that the employee requested that the contents not be inspected by the supervisor. i.e. the supervisor was to act as a messenger. In the capacity of a messenger he did not have the right to inspect the note. Organization and policy could make it clear if the supervisor was acting or could/ should act as a messenger, manager or both. Punitive action when an employee reminds managers of verbal contracts or the law opens up another big tangle. Now that multiple individuals have seen the note from the doctor disclosure or communication of the information could generate another big tangle. Even when the employee does not get it exactly correct the punitive act may have trumped the issue of law that does not apply. The punitive action may force the personal info into a larger venue at which point a third expensive tangle may surface. As initially communicated here the supervisor clearly violated a verbal trust (and contract?) so things may go down hill from that point alone. Initial statements on this forum might support the verbal trust verbal contract point of view. A doctors note for a single day absence seems anomalous. If the policy is the more common three days then the supervisor that asked may have inserted himself in an issue outside of policy. I saw a comment that a "statement that the employee was fit to return to work" was a better document to ask for. If the supervisor was attempting to make a medical evaluation regarding fit to work -- was he attempting to play doctor? Medical professionals are licensed for a reason and if the effect was to "practice medicine without a license" other regulations may have been entangled. And since I am not an attorney or a doctor Pay attention there be dragons here. |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 4/26/2011 9:18 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 29
First: 6/9/2009 Last: 4/26/2011 |
Lee v. City of Columbus as of January 2010: The court ruled against the city in an argument about jury instructions involving retaliation. Thus, the defendant believes she was constructively discharged and the city has to defend a charge of retaliation.
âOn July 15, 2009, [this] Court issued its Opinion and Order (on these motions), holding that Directive 3.07 § III(H)(1)(c) violated the Rehabilitation Act and that it violated the City's employees' constitutional privacy rights enforced through Section 1983 ("Oder on Liability") and therefore, granted Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to the liability of the City of Columbus. (Doc. # 183.) The Court then issued a permanent injunction against the City's enforcement of Directive 3.07 § III(H)(1)(c). (Case No. 2:07-cv-1230, United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division, published September 4, 2009.) Directive 3.07 § III(H)(1)(c) required employees who were returning from sick leave to regular duty to provide a note from his or her attending physician to his or her immediate supervisor indicating the nature of the illness that caused the employee's absence;â otherwise known as the ârequirement.â It appears that this case (the court) does not support the requirement to provide medical information to your supervisor. |
|
|
Doctor's Note
posted at 4/26/2011 10:21 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 29
First: 6/9/2009 Last: 4/26/2011 |
Oops, after further research... Lee v. City of Columbus, February 2011: Court vacated the injunction on Directive 307; remands for an entry of judgement in favor of the city. Moreover, the court cited several cases for allowing the release of medical information. Thus, allowing (employers) to require employees returning from sick leave to provide 'a doctor's note.' |
Forums » Topic Forums » Legal Forum » Doctor's Note
