U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reverses previous decision in Harrell vs. USPS - USPS required employees who had taken leave for more than 21 days to submit much more information than a doctor’s note in order to return to work. Rodney Harrell refused to provide the detailed information requested (such as the nature and treatment of his illness and any medicines he was taking), and was ultimately terminated.

The  Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals initially decided this case July 19, 2005 (Rodney Harrell v. USPS; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ). However, USPS on Sept. 6 in the U.S. Court of Appeals filed a petition seeking to overturn the court’s decision that ” invalidated its return-to-work requirements for employees with absences of more than 21 days.” USPS requested “reconsideration and rehearing before the full Seventh Circuit Court, contending that a three-judge panel ‘erred’ in its July 19, 2005 decision overturning a Postal Service return-to-work policy. (see APWU: USPS Seeks to Thwart Landmark FMLA Ruling)

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals re-addressed the issue of return to work provisions [ELM 865.1 ]following a FMLA protected absence of 21 days or more. USPS argued (with support from Dept. of Labor) that “any return-to work certification requirements included in a collective bargaining agreement take precedence over the FMLA’s return-to-work provisions: (Under the FMLA, one section of the statute states that the law was not meant to supercede state or local laws or collective bargaining agreements).

  a uniformly applied practice or policy that requires each employee to receive certification from the health care provider of the employee that the employee is able to resume work, except that nothing in this paragraph shall supersede a valid State or local law or a collective bargaining agreement that governs the return to work of such employees.

DOL in a memorandum to the court wrote: “if return-to-work medical certification and fitness-for-duty examination provisions in the [employer’s] handbook and manual are a part of the CBA .  ., then these provisions would apply instead of FMLA’s return-to-work certification requirements.”

The court affirmed the district’s court ruling that USPS could impose stricter return-to-work provisions than those in FMLA. 

Harrell also alleged that the Postal Service interfered with his FMLA rights by failing to provide him with timely and sufficient notice of the requirements for returning to work and of the consequences for failing to comply with those requirements. The court ruled:…”even assuming that the Postal Service failed to provide adequate notice, Mr. Harrell was not harmed by this violation.”

The third issue of Harrell’s complaint: Contacting Employee’s Health Care Provider

“After Harrell refused to give his consent, “the postal nurse contacted his personal physician and requested additional medical information. The district court determined that this contact violated the FMLA, as provided in the statute’s accompanying regulations.

If an employee submits a complete certification signed by the health care provider, the employer may not request additional information from the employer’s health care provider.

The district court ruled that Mr.Harrell was not entitled to any damages on this claim because the violation caused him no injury: Dr. Smith’s office refused to release any medical information to the postal nurse absent Mr. Harrell’s consent. This conclusion is correct. Our review of the record also found no indication that any information obtained from the postal nurse’s contact with Dr. Smith’s office in any way compromised Mr. Harrell’s return-to-work status or was a factor in the Postal Service’s decision to terminate his employment.

Because Mr. Harrell was not harmed by the unauthorized contact with his physician, § 2617 provides him no remedy, including equitable relief, and the district court correctly granted the Postal Service summary judgment on this claim.”

Therefore the court affirmed the district court’s ruling in favor of USPS on all three of Rodney Harrell’s complaints. see full case (PDF)

 Related links:

 August 14, 2005 - Memo: USPS to Comply With FMLA Court Decision in Only Three States (pdf)- (source: USPS via APWU)