Darkworker Supervisors Want Doctor’s Notes
February 2nd, 2009
Email this article to a friend
I know most people aren’t on board with the Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) yet, but how about taking some baby steps?
In a Washington Post job advice column, someone wrote in to ask what to do when your supervisor wants a doctor’s note every time:
“I have been certified for Family and Medical Leave Act time off for an ongoing problem that requires frequent tests and treatments (leaving an hour early twice a month, on average). My supervisor is not happy about this and is requiring me to submit proof that I attended the appointment and that I had the appointment…Should I just be grateful that I have FMLA and jump through these hoops, or should I start tracking this as a hostile work environment? It feels hostile.”
The supervisor isn’t happy about it? WTF? Does the supervisor think the employee is happy about having an ongoing medical problem that requires frequent tests and treatments? Should the employee have been more sensitive to the supervisor’s needs when choosing to have health problems?
And the supervisor wants two doctor’s notes per visit? Double WTF. Shouldn’t one note per visit be plenty? Does the employee really need to prove both that they had an appointment scheduled, and that they showed up? Does the supervisor really think the employee would schedule doctor’s appointments and not show up (and probably be charged anyway), just to get out of work? Or that they’d show up without a scheduled appointment, just to waste time?
The columnist’s advice was to just suck it up, and sadly I have to agree. Any action the employee took would do more harm than good. Technically the supervisor is free to make the employee jump through these hoops. They could probably require live streaming video of the appointments, if they wanted to.
At the same time, just because it’s not illegal doesn’t make it a good idea. Why does the supervisor think this is the best use of their time? Do they really keep a file of the employee’s doctor’s notes, and make sure that every appointment confirmation note is eventually paired with an appointment attendance note?
Who cares if someone leaves an hour early twice a month for medical reasons? I don’t know what the job is, but this time off can’t be that disruptive. And it’s more of a trust issue than anything else. The supervisor isn’t objecting to the doctor’s appointments so much as doubting that they’re taking place.
If an employee isn’t performing well, fire them. If they are, stay out of their way. Don’t make them write to the Washington Post to ask if they should start tracking their job as a hostile work environment. What does that do for morale, and therefore job performance?
Excessive enforcement of core hours is for darkworkers. Supervisors living in darkness, come back to the light!
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Thank you for the link love, and — wow, I love your new style! No wishy washy-ness here.
For the employee in the article, it is critical to understand that he (or she) is giving his power to others. First he gives it to his supervisor, then to someone is Washington Post. Until he claims his own power, he’d be pushed one way or the other whether he stays on this job or not, I guess. This may sound harsh, but it’s actually a good news — realize each one of us have the power to create.
Akemi – Yes to Me´s last blog post..What The Heaven Is Value?
February 3rd, 2009 at 3:37 am
Hi Hunter – I’m guessing the company has a set of “rules” the supervisor must abide by for when someone is on FMLA , and has to documentation each appointment. Although is is a pain in the butt, the employee is fortunate they’re on FMLA and can take the necessary time off for doctor’s appointments. Small companies do not have to provide FMLA benefits, so if a person is constantly missing work, they could be fired.
Being an employer, we’re too small to be affected by FMLA, but from what I’ve read it gets very complicated for all concerned, and at times is abused.
Barbara Swafford´s last blog post..SEO – Are We Getting It All Wrong
February 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 am
Yes, but who imposed the rules to begin with? Sorry, couldn’t help it. There might be another circumstance of abuse prior to this employee that triggered the requirement. Not that it is no different from requiring a pass to go off campus or something.
This goes back to the entire issue, as you noted, of employers feeling they “own” employees for x hours per day in exchange for a salary or hourly wage.
The other issue, and perhaps the elephant in pre-ROWE environments, is how much time is actually spent enforcing these and other seemingly trivial or Draconian measures vs. performing meaningful tasks. Methinks the H.R. industry might have some ‘splainin’ to do if someone actually took a global look at the function.
Betsy Wuebker´s last blog post..FINDING VALUE IN UNCERTAINTY
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
A lot depends on how high up in the hierarchy the person’s position is. Also, we don’t have to react as if the company is our adversary or read harassment into it where there may be none. Everyone has someone else to report to except the top woman (or guy). Perhaps they need the paperwork. How hard is it to ask for a note from a doctor?
I’m in somewhat the same position as the writer of that question. My attitude towards my employer is this: they not only comply with the FMLA, but they go beyond it in supporting me and helping me deal with my issues around work. For my part, I give them all the back-up they need or want to support their position with the main office, should they need to. It seems only fair. I don’t take an adversarial position or consider my company “the enemy” or my supervisors “darkworkers.”" I see them as people doing a job, same as me.
The request for a doctor’s note or every visit may be a bit excessive, but it may not. I wouldn’t necessarily see it as harassing or trying to make the person’s life miserable. People can and do abuse FMLA, treating it as carte blanche to take a zillion days off. Perhaps they suspect this of that person, rightly or wrongly, or perhaps they’re just keeping the situation honest.
Dot´s last blog post..Update on Redesign Progress
February 3rd, 2009 at 12:48 pm
I agree, I think this is a trust issue. I wonder what the track record of the employee (and employer for that matter) is.
On a separate note, Hunter I need your help. I know this is an easy CSS fix, but do not feel like searching for it. I see on your blog that when I highlight your text in the content area the background stays white and the text changes to blue.. I so want this..
Can you please tell me what the code is? I would owe you one..
Jim Gaudet´s last blog post..Hunting in Canada…
February 3rd, 2009 at 12:53 pm
@ Akemi, is this a new style? I didn’t realize that. I guess this is one of those cases where I think there’s a clear right answer. Good point about giving away his power.
@ Barbara, I didn’t mention this before, but it appears that these are the supervisor’s rules, not the company’s. The columnist asked whether the supervisor enforces these rules for everyone, or just this particular employee. I’d be curious to know that too.
I don’t know much about FMLA, but if it’s complicated, then why not skip it altogether? The employee should be able to say “I have to leave an hour early tomorrow for a doctor’s appointment, so I’ll come in an hour early to make up the time.”
@ Betsy, I figured you’d have an opinion on this! I think people need to take a look at that elephant. What’s more important: enforcing pointless rules, or getting useful work done? I agree there may have been a case of abuse that triggered the requirement, but I think the solution is to fire problem employees, instead of trying to control everyone with rules.
@ Dot, a few points:
- If the employee says it feels hostile, then that’s how it feels to them. Even if the supervisor is not intending to be hostile, that’s how it’s being perceived, and that’s a problem.
- The columnist said that FMLA only provides for unpaid leave. So if the employee is required to show 8 hours a day on a timesheet, they’d have to show up early that day, or use PTO.
- The supervisor isn’t just requiring a doctor’s note every time. They’re requiring two. They want proof that the appointment was made, and also proof that the employee showed up for the appointment. I didn’t mention this in the post, but the HR department said they didn’t understand why the supervisor required this.
- The supervisor doesn’t need the paperwork, as evidenced by HR’s confusion about why they’re asking for it. Is complying with this rule doable? Yes. Is it constructive? No. The supervisor could require just one note per visit (which should be more than enough), or God forbid, actually trust the employees. I called them a darkworker because they’re more interested in controlling people they don’t like than doing useful work.
February 3rd, 2009 at 1:07 pm
@ Jim, I’d be interested in the employee’s and supervisor’s track record too. I don’t think it really matters, but I’d like to know how the supervisor decided that this was a good rule.
Regarding the CSS, sorry, I don’t know. That wasn’t anything I did deliberately, and I don’t know what the code is. But check this out: the comments alternate their text selection behavior. At least that’s what I’m seeing. When I select Akemi’s comment, or Betsy’s, or yours, the text turns white and the background turns blue. On the others, the text turns blue and the background stays white.
February 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
It is weird, I think I will just scour your code and see if I can find it..
Jim Gaudet´s last blog post..Hunting in Canada…
February 5th, 2009 at 8:21 am
“Methinks the H.R. industry might have some ’splainin’ to do if someone actually took a global look at the function.”
@ Betsy – I think 60% of people in any office profession would have a hard time justifying thier job. Why else can major companies cut 40,000 people in a month and we as consumers see no real change in the service or product? Plus, every large company I have ever worked at and a few of the smaller ones, have tons of people doing useless jobs. Take healthcare for instance. If we took all the money used to prop up these giant insurance companies and spent it on actual healthcare, would it be more expensive than paying people $60k a year to monitor me to ensure I don’t abuse the system? I have no idea, but I bet it would be a very interesting study.
Chad @ sentient money´s last blog post..“TAKE THE PAIN!!!!”