It is long past time to correct an oversight to Congressional intent in The Family and Medical Leave Act. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 allows for eligible employees to take job-protected, unpaid leave, or to substitute appropriate earned paid leave, for up to 12 workweeks in any 12 months, to care for a child, family member with a serious health condition or the employee’s own health which makes the employee unable to perform the functions of her or his job. Medical benefits continue while the employee is on FMLA and the employee has a right to return to the same position or a position with equivalent pay, benefits and working conditions upon conclusion of FMLA.
The clear intent of the Family and Medical Leave Act was to provide these 12 weeks of unpaid leave to an employee if they had worked 60% of a full time schedule over the previous 12 months. Based on the typical 40 hour, 9 – 5 work week, this 60% comes to 1,248 hours, which was rounded up to 1,250 hours.
1,250 Hours is Not an Adequate Number for Flight Attendants and Pilots
While 1,250 hours adequately reflects 60% of a full time schedule for the vast majority of employees in this country, that equation, based on the typical 40 hour, 9 – 5 work week, does not properly translate for flight attendants and pilots. Flight crew members are governed by the Railway Labor Act rather than the Fair Labor Standards Act which covers most 9-5 workers.
Some of the time between flights, such as on overnights/layovers away from home and family, is based on company scheduling requirements and needs but does not count towards crewmember time at work. Flight attendants and pilots can spend up to 4 – 5 days a week away from home and family due to the nature of their job, however all those hours will not count towards FML qualification.
Also, many airline crewmembers are on “reserve” status, which means that they have to stand-by to be called for duty if others fail to show for an assigned flight. They must be prepared to report for duty at any time. The company recognizes that they are “on duty” and guarantees a set number of hours for which they will be paid each month, whether the reserve actually flies and works an operating trip or not. However, for some airlines, only their actual time working flights counts towards their FML qualification, making it much harder for them to reach the 1,250 hour threshold.
As you can see, calculation of hours worked is unique in the airline industry and the requirement of 1,250 hours for qualification is not appropriate. Through strict interpretation of the law over the years, a large percentage of flight attendants have found themselves left out of the intent of the law and unable to qualify for the benefits of family and medical leave. This was clearly not the intent of Congress.
Congress Did Not Intend for Flight Attendants To Be Held to the 1,250 Hour Requirement
Congress was clear when it passed the original law that flight attendants were meant to be covered under the law and according to the legislation’s sponsors in the Congressional Record, they should not “be excluded from the bill’s protection simply because of their industry’s unusual time-keeping methods. Flight attendants and pilots who work the number of hours constituting half-time employment [later increased to 60%] during the previous 12 months as defined either by collective-bargaining agreement or by industry standard are fully entitled to family and medical leave under this bill. Senate report language accompanying the legislation also stated that the “minimum hours of service requirement is meant to be construed broadly…”
This intent has been ignored and HR 2744 and S 2059 will correct that oversight.
Over the years, unions representing flight attendants and pilots have been forced to negotiate with their employers for access to FMLA provisions. One of our unions succeeded in getting the threshold lowered by filing an arbitration case but it was lengthy and costly. At other carriers, airline management has recognized that the current interpretation of the law prevents many airline crew from qualifying for such leave and has agreed to a lower threshold. Current qualification hours for family and medical leave are a patchwork of inconsistent policies across the industry, dependent on the collective bargaining strength of the employees.
As airlines have come to demand greater concessions from their employees, we have found family and medical leave to be on the proverbial “chopping block.” There has been a concerted effort by airline management across the country to roll back our collective bargaining efforts and to go to the strict and incorrect interpretation of the law. We now have to choose at the bargaining table between improved wages and working conditions or to fight for a right to family and medical leave that is already enjoyed by everyone else in this country through the law.
HR 2744 and S 2059 would clarify the original law to bring it into line with the intent of Congress by considering the uniqueness of the calculation of work hours in the airline industry.
It provides a clarification to the original legislation that would make it possible for flight attendants and pilots to qualify for family and medical leave when they have fulfilled 60% of a full time schedule at their airline. Although a full time schedule varies by carrier, each carrier has established its own standard through a monthly guarantee. HR 2744 and S 2059 would set a threshold for crew members to qualify for FML. It is fair, reasonable, and achieves what was intended from the very beginning.
This clarification is urgently needed and we again urge you to stand with this nation’s flight attendants by co-sponsoring HR 2744 and S 2059.
For additional information, contact:
Shane Larson, Director of Government Affairs AFA-CWA
(202) 434-1573
slarson@afanet.org
