Department of Fair Employment & Housing v. Verizon California, Inc.

Good Law
108 Cal. App. 4th 160·133 Cal. Rptr. 2d 258·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 623·2003 Daily Journal DAR 4623·172 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2651
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 28, 2003G029912California4,971 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

I

Our state’s family leave act allows employees in firms over a certain size to have up to 12 weeks off a year to care for an immediate family member with a “serious health condition,” or simply because of the employee’s own serious health condition. The right is for time off without fear of losing one’s job, but not necessarily paid time off. The family leave act is quite explicit that, with one exception, an employer is not required to pay for time off for leave taken under the act.

The one exception is if the employee would have the right to be paid for the time anyway. If the employee has “accrued vacation leave or other accrued time off’ or “other paid . . . time off negotiated with the employer,” the employee may use that time for family leave, and get paid for it.* **

The present appeal involves a dispute as to whether an employee, being treated by a chiropractor for a bad back and having 300 hours sick leave, had the right to take the full 12 weeks of family leave with pay but without providing verification of injury from a medical specialist. Specifically, Denise Harris, an employee of what is now Verizon, requested family leave for low-back problems on an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.