Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2006

Chicago-Kent Law Review

FMLA

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Signed General Releases May Be Worth Less Than Employers Expected: Circuits Split On Whether Former Employee Can Sign Release, Reap Its Benefit, And Sue For Fmla Claim Anyway, Muniza Bawaney Dec 2006

Signed General Releases May Be Worth Less Than Employers Expected: Circuits Split On Whether Former Employee Can Sign Release, Reap Its Benefit, And Sue For Fmla Claim Anyway, Muniza Bawaney

Chicago-Kent Law Review

A circuit split has recently developed regarding the correct interpretation of 29 C.F.R. § 825.220(d), a regulation issued pursuant to the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, which states in pertinent part, "Employees cannot waive, nor may employers induce employees to waive, their rights under FMLA." The Fifth Circuit correctly concluded that 29 C.F.R. § 825.220(d) bars only the prospective waiver of substantive rights under the FMLA and does not reach the post-dispute release or settlement of FMLA claims. Subsequently, the Fourth Circuit alternatively concluded that § 825.220(d) prohibits the prospective and retrospective waiver or release of both the …


Application Of The Interference And Discrimination Provisions Of The Fmla Pursuant To Employment Termination Claims, Stacy A. Manning Apr 2006

Application Of The Interference And Discrimination Provisions Of The Fmla Pursuant To Employment Termination Claims, Stacy A. Manning

Chicago-Kent Law Review

When an individual suffers an adverse employment action, and as a result files a claim under the FMLA, the courts have failed to establish a clear standard for determining whether the discrimination provision or the interference provision is implicated. Inconsistencies in the application of these two FMLA provisions exist between district and circuit courts, within individual circuits, and among all of the circuit courts. Depending on which provision the court chooses to invoke, a different standard of analysis is applied. A court invoking the discrimination provision applies a three-step burden-shifting framework, whereas, a court invoking the interference provision uses a …