Labor & Employment Developments Blog

Most employers understand that employees who take or formally request leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) are protected from retaliation. In a decision issued on May 14, 2026, the Sixth Circuit (covering Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee) clarified that those protections may begin even earlier. In Paris v. MacAllister Machinery Co., the Court held that an employee’s request for FMLA paperwork may constitute protected activity – even if the employee never completes or returns the paperwork.

On April 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking aimed at clarifying when multiple entities may be considered “joint employers” under federal wage and hour laws. If finalized, the rule would create a single, more uniform standard under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and align that analysis with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA), marking a significant step toward consistency across these statutes.

The United States Department of Labor (DOL) has resolved a long-standing and frequently litigated issue under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA): whether intermittent FMLA leave includes time spent traveling to and from approved medical appointments. In a January 2026 opinion letter, the DOL confirmed that such travel time is FMLA-protected. 

The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) continues to present difficult compliance issues for employers.  In this episode, four FMLA traps that may ensnare unwary employers are discussed, including:

1. FMLA Coverage Trap(s);
2. The Termination Upon Return From Leave Trap;
3. The Indefinite Intermittent Leave Trap; and
4. The Futile Leave Request Trap.

Listen in and find out how your business can avoid these traps.

You can listen here.

Documents referenced in this episode:

• DOL Opinion Letter (FMLA2023-1-A)
• Milman v. Fieger & Fieger P.C.

Determining how to reasonably accommodate an employee with a disability can be difficult for employers.  The Sixth Circuit’s decision in Kempter v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., et al. affirms common-sense law – namely, that in reasonably accommodating a disabled employee, employers are not required to convert temporary light-duty work into a full-time position, reassign a disabled employee to a position he/she is not qualified for, or which would displace another employee’s rights, or create a new position. 

In a ruling that bolsters employers’ established FMLA leave notice requirements, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the employer and upheld a former employee’s discharge for failure to follow the call-in requirements of his employer’s attendance policy in White v. Dana Light Axle Manufacturing, LLC.  The decision is assuring to employers who have established and adhere to FMLA leave policies that require employees follow specific procedures to notify their employers of their intent to take protected FMLA leave.

As most employers are aware, the definition of what constitutes a “disability” for purposes of providing a reasonable workplace accommodation was broadened significantly with the enactment of the Americans with Disability Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA). 

We have posted an alert regarding Ohio's new military leave law, which takes effect on July 2, 2010. An initial question that the new law raises is how it compares to and interacts with the FMLA’s provisions for military leave. At present, the answer is not clear but there are a couple of points worth noting.

Here is a scenario that I’ve seen many times:  An employee does something bad that will likely lead to termination; while the employer is investigating and deciding what to do next, the employee submits FMLA paperwork requesting leave. 

Maybe I’m a cynic but it’s possible that the employee doesn’t really need FMLA leave.