Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Department of Labor Adds Q&A to FFCRA Guidance: Provider & Emergency Responder Leave Exceptions

Client Alert
March 30, 2020

Employer Alert: Excluding healthcare providers and emergency responders from the mandatory paid leave provisions of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (“EFMLEA”), and the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (“EPSLA”).

On March 29, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) added additional Questions & Answers to its FFCRA guidance that address the healthcare provider and emergency responder leave exceptions under the EFMLEA and EPSLA.

As contained in the original language of the FFCRA, both EFMLEA (childcare leave) and EPSLA (paid sick leave) contain exceptions removing healthcare provider and emergency responder employees from these leave requirements, even if an employer has fewer than 500 employees. Specifically, if an employer, including a public-sector entity, employs a healthcare provider or an emergency responder, the employer is not required to pay such employee paid sick leave or expanded family and medical leave (childcare) on a case-by-case basis.

However, at the time of implementation, the FFCRA did not provide any guidance on who a healthcare provider included and other considerations that need to be made before excepting a healthcare provider under these leave protections.

In short, the definitions of healthcare provider and emergency responder are very broad and meant to be interpreted as such. In fact, a healthcare provider includes almost anyone who touches healthcare services. These employees who meet the definition of healthcare provider or emergency responder are excluded entirely from emergency paid leave, even paid sick leave if they have COVID-19. Reading between the lines, the laws are saying that all healthcare providers and emergency responders need to keep working as much as possible, but everyone else can stay home. The official guidance is as follows.

First, the DOL’s new guidance defines healthcare provider very broadly, but to include all of the following part-time, full-time, or “joint employer employees”:

  • Any person who is employed at:
    • A doctor’s office
    • Hospital
    • Healthcare center
    • Healthcare clinic
    • A post-secondary educational institution offering healthcare instruction
    • Medical school
    • Local health department or agency
    • Nursing facility
    • Retirement facility
    • Nursing home
    • Home healthcare provider
    • Any facility that performs laboratory or medical testing
    • Pharmacy
    • Any other similar institution, employer or entity

  • Any person who is employed by an entity that has a contract with any of the above institutions or entities to provide services to the institution/entity or to maintain the operation of the facility.

  • Any person who is employed by an entity that provides medical services, produces medical products, or is otherwise involved in the making of COVID-19 related medical equipment, tests, drugs, vaccines, diagnostic vehicles, or treatments.

  • Individuals that are determined by the highest official of a state to be necessary for the state’s response to COVID-19.

Second, the guidance defines an emergency responder as follows:

  • An employee (part-time, full-time, or “joint employer employee”) who is necessary for the provision of transport, care, healthcare, comfort, and nutrition of patients, or whose services are otherwise needed to limit the spread of COVID-19. This includes, but is not limited to:
    • Military/National Guard
    • Law enforcement officers
    • Correctional institution personnel
    • Fire fighters
    • Emergency medical services personnel
    • Physicians
    • Nurses
    • Public health personnel
    • Emergency medical technicians
    • Paramedics
    • Emergency management personnel
    • 911 Operators
    • Public works personnel
    • Persons with skills or training in operating specialized equipment or other skills needed to provide aid in a declared emergency

  • Emergency responder also includes individuals (part-time, full-time, or “joint employer employees”) who work for such facilities employing these above listed individuals and whose work is necessary to maintain the operation of the facility. This provision is different from the above under healthcare provider where a determination of necessity is not required, but it should be considered as a best practice.

  • Individuals that are determined by the highest official of a state to be an emergency responder necessary for the state’s response to COVID-19.

For official guidance, see https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/pandemic/ffcra-questions.

From the DOL’s guidance, it is clear that “healthcare provider” and “emergency responder” are to be interrupted broadly. However, the DOL does warn that employers are to have good judgment and sense when determining who can be excepted to help avoid the spread of COVID-19.

What This Means for Employers
If you have any employees who meet the definitions of “healthcare provider” or “emergency responder,” as these terms are broadly defined, you are not required to pay such employee paid sick leave under EPSLA or expanded family and medical leave under EFMLEA on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, if an employee meeting one of these above definitions requests paid leave, you should determine, on an individual basis, why the employee is being denied as a healthcare provider and/or emergency responder. Although this documentation is not required under the guidance, it is a best practice in the event an employee files a lawsuit or administrative charge seeking backpay under EFMLEA and/or EPSLA.

For questions, please contact Bryan Meek at bmeek@bmdllc.com, or any of the Employment and Labor team members at BMD. 

EPSLADOLDepartment of LaborFFCRAProvidersEmergency RespondersLeave ExceptionsBryan Meek
Client Alert

Employer Liability for COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects

June 9, 2021As employers encourage or require employees to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine, they should be aware of OSHA recording obligations and potential workers’ compensation liability. Though OSHA has yet to revise its COVID-19 guidance in response to the latest CDC recommendations, OSHA has revised its position regarding the recording of injury or illness resulting from the vaccine. Until now, OSHA required an employer to record an adverse reaction when the vaccine was required for employees and the injury or illness otherwise met the recording criteria (work-related, a new case, and meets one or more of the general recording criteria). OSHA has reversed course and announced that it will not require recording adverse reactions until at least May 2022, irrespective of whether the employer requires the vaccine as a condition of employment. In its revised COVID-19 FAQs, OSHA states:Client Alert

The New Rule 1.510 - Radical Change for Summary Judgement Procedure in Florida

June 8, 2021In civil litigation, where both sides participate actively, trial is usually required at the end of a long, expensive case to determine a winner and a loser. In federal and most state courts, however, there are a few procedural shortcuts by which parties can seek to prevail in advance of trial, saving time, money and annoyance. The most common of these is the “motion for summary judgment”: a request to the court by one side for judgment before trial, generally on the basis that the evidence available reflects that a win for that party is legally inevitable and thus required. Effective May 1, 2021, summary judgment procedure in Florida has radically changed.Client Alert

Vacating, Modifying or Correcting an Arbitration Award Under R.C. 2711.13: Three-Month Limitation Maximum; Not Guaranteed Amount of Time

June 8, 2021In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that neither R.C. 2711.09 nor R.C. 2711.13 requires a court to wait three months after an arbitration award is issued before confirming the award. R.C. 2711.13 provides that “after an award in an arbitration proceeding is made, any party to the arbitration may file a motion in the court of common pleas for an order vacating, modifying, or correcting the award.” Any such motion to vacate, modify, or correct an award “must be served upon the adverse party or his attorney within three months after the award is delivered to the parties in interest.” In BST Ohio Corporation et al. v. Wolgang, the Court held the three-month period set forth in R.C. 2711.13 is not a guaranteed time period in which to file a motion to vacate, modify, or correct an arbitration award. 2021-Ohio-1785.Client Alert

EEOC Provides Updated Guidance Regarding Employer COVID-19 Vaccine Policies

June 3, 2021On May 28, 2021, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission updated its guidance regarding employer COVID-19 vaccination policies. The new guidance provides much-needed clarification of expectations for employers seeking to promote workplace safety and prevent the spread of COVID-19, including discussion of mandatory vaccination policies, voluntary vaccination incentives, and accommodation of employees based on disability or sincerely held religious beliefs. The full text of the update is found in Section K of the EEOC’s COVID Q&A document. You can also learn more about these and other developments from BMD's Bryan Meek and Monica Andress through the Employment Law After Hours YouTube channel, available here.Client Alert

What Telemedical Barriers Practices Face and How They Can Manage Them

May 28, 2021The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to many businesses and industries having to rapidly adapt new practices in order to stay profitable, and the healthcare industry is no exception. Although telehealth tools and practices have existed and been used since the Vietnam War, the pandemic has caused many individual healthcare practices to heavily rely on telehealth as a large portion of their service mix in order to continue to provide care for patients. Because of this rapid adoption of telehealth practices in order to combat the restrictions of COVID-19, the telemedicine industry’s revenue has exploded in the last year. Experts predict that telehealth will continue to grow in use beyond the current pandemic, estimating the industry’s worth to be $25 billion by 2025. However, this rapid adoption of telehealth was prompted out of need and has not been without its own barriers that practices now face.
Older posts
Newer posts