Everything posted by NVmomof4
Not to argue, but just to understand: A written adopted policy does not have to be legally followed? the organization can publish one policy and follow another practice? wow. Is this true for all actions? For example, if my policy says I will advertise all open positions for at least a week and I just hire someone I know for a job I just made up - is this legal as well? Thanks for indulging my questions...
Shouldn't an adopted policy be the last word, not the back of a timesheet from the 1980's? It's more an issue of following the policies passed, than it is that the leave policy itself is an issue. If this policy "changed" officially in 2012, what about those who did not get leave they were entitled to under the "new" policy? To add context, we are a 501c3 that receives federal funds...
My company has a practice of not allowing an employee to accrue sick leave in a month when that employee has used a sick day. Accrual is 1.5 days per month. So in effect, the employee uses 2.5 days of sick leave if one day is taken in a month. This is bad enough - but I guess companies can make up their leave policies? However, the official Employee Handbook, which on every page in a footer says "adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees, some date in 2012" says " accrual of 1.5 days per month for full time employees. No mention of not accruing if you use. So, this has been going on for 6 years....what is the company's obligation?