Question re: bedrest and FMLA

missnacholover · August 2014

I plan on maxing out my 12 weeks of FMLA once the baby is born.

If someone goes on bedrest before birth, does that time count towards the 12 weeks? Say for example you are on bedrest for 4 weeks before your baby is born, does that mean you can only take 8 weeks after?

What about STD?

Just wondering how it all works, just in case.

Dana633 · August 2014

I've been wondering the same thing! I have 1024 hours of short term and I have the FMLA maternity leave. I think I'll call our HR today to see if I was put on BR if STD would pay that. I'll let you know what I find out (just FYI).

missnacholover · August 2014

Yay, 'Merica.

My company did say they'd let me WFH as it got closer. I really want to ask if I can do that one day/week now but feel like it's way too early.

KatieOz920 · August 2014

I've been ordered on strict bed rest for pre-term labor

According to my companies HR department, if it's ordered by a doctor I may qualify for a seperate short term disability claim in addition to the short term disability I would get PP with the FMLA.

Dumbgurl04 · August 2014

I know with my work you just get 12 weeks of FMLA which I use for appointments so I don't have to rush plus my work has really stupid absenteeism rules that include leaving early so FMLA protects me from being written up. I know once I have the baby we have a different medical leave we go on. So if I did have to go on bed rest before baby is born I would just go on that.

But from my understanding you get 12 weeks of FMLA so if you use any before baby is due then whatever you have left after baby is born is what you have left. But I know at my work if I went on medical leave before my FMLA is up my medical leave eats up that FMLA so it would be gone. So it really just depends on your work place

mb314 · August 2014

I would check with your HR provider. In my state (TN), I think I was told that I would use FMLA if I went out before giving birth, but after birth, my state equavlent of FMLA would kick in, and then I would use that and have up to 16 weeks off after birth.

For STD, if you use some of the time before, you will have less time to use after the baby is born (it won't re-start). In fact, I think my STD says that I can't use more than 6 weeks within a year period.

ETA - I think my STD can be extended to 8 weeks. But I would check with your provider. Most policies have a limit for how much time you can use within a year (becuase it is supposed to be "short term". It's not "long term" disability, which is a separate policy)

missnacholover · August 2014

lissydee said:

FMLA and I think STD starts whenever your leave does. So if its before the birth for medical reasons, then thats when it begins.

See, I thought that if you went on STD for bedrest it was different than STD for delivery/recovery since they are two separate things? I don't know. But it makes sense that we only get 12 weeks of FMLA.

absolutelymaybe · August 2014

How it was explained to me was the STD covers whatever the doctor prescribes. So, if you are ordered on bed rest say 4 weeks before your delivery date, you will get paid whatever your STD covers (mine covers 60% of wages) and then once you deliver you will get another 6-8weeks of STD for the birth.

I don't qualify for FMLA since my company has less than so many workers in a certain area (I forgot the number) so I have no idea how it affects FMLA.

missnacholover · August 2014

lissydee said:

missnacholover said:

lissydee said:

FMLA and I think STD starts whenever your leave does. So if its before the birth for medical reasons, then thats when it begins.

See, I thought that if you went on STD for bedrest it was different than STD for delivery/recovery since they are two separate things? I don't know. But it makes sense that we only get 12 weeks of FMLA.

it was my understanding that its anything pregnancy & maternity related. Especially for FMLA (it applies to any type of medically need leave actually). But its always best to check with your HR rep.

It makes me mad. Our system is so effed up.

Celticlass6 · August 2014

I just spoke to my HR about this. I'd still check with yours to be sure about your state but this is what I was told:

- If I need to go on bed rest or not work prior to baby's birth, STD would kick in. So would FMLA.
- Once baby is born I'd then get "new" STD depending on if its a vaginal birth or c-section. My FMLA would still be counting down though.
- So essentially if I were to stop work 2 weeks before birth, I'd only have 10 weeks left of FMLA to stay home with baby.

Hope this helps!

missnacholover · August 2014

Celticlass6 said:

I just spoke to my HR about this. I'd still check with yours to be sure about your state but this is what I was told: - If I need to go on bed rest or not work prior to baby's birth, STD would kick in. So would FMLA. - Once baby is born I'd then get "new" STD depending on if its a vaginal birth or c-section. My FMLA would still be counting down though. - So essentially if I were to stop work 2 weeks before birth, I'd only have 10 weeks left of FMLA to stay home with baby. Hope this helps!

That's how I understood it too! I will have to make sure I ask HR. I'm going to have a phone call with them in the upcoming weeks.

It just sucks that if a woman is on bedrest for 10 weeks, she only gets 2 weeks after baby before her job is in jeopardy.

Celticlass6 · August 2014

missnacholover said:

Celticlass6 said:

I just spoke to my HR about this. I'd still check with yours to be sure about your state but this is what I was told:

- If I need to go on bed rest or not work prior to baby's birth, STD would kick in. So would FMLA.
- Once baby is born I'd then get "new" STD depending on if its a vaginal birth or c-section. My FMLA would still be counting down though.
- So essentially if I were to stop work 2 weeks before birth, I'd only have 10 weeks left of FMLA to stay home with baby.

Hope this helps!

That's how I understood it too! I will have to make sure I ask HR. I'm going to have a phone call with them in the upcoming weeks.

It just sucks that if a woman is on bedrest for 10 weeks, she only gets 2 weeks after baby before her job is in jeopardy.

I know! You'd hope the employer would be sympathetic, but I know not everyone would be that way.

mockingjay1 · August 2014

We don't have STD, but like other PPs have said FMLA starts with anything baby related (bed rest included), which is so crappy.

carcrashheart · August 2014

FMLA is just a policy to protect your job. They don't even have to give you back the exact same job upon your return-just something equivelant.

The reason for not being at work didn't really matter. It just matters that you are out. So the reasons changing don't matter or reset the amount of leave.

Also, just because you've used up your FMLA doesn't mean you can't work something out with the employer to stay out longer. Some employers are accommodating. My last employer didn't qualify for FMLA but they still let me go out on leave and held my job (which I didn't return to). I went out before giving birth (I was induced, failed, I stayed home to recover, then got induced and gave birth a few days later), which was early October and wasn't due to return until January 2. They were fine with that and didn't force me back sooner.

STD is to supplement lost income if you are out due for medical reasons. In these cases, it's for giving birth, but it isn't exclusive to that. So if you are out of work for bed rest, that's a medical reason.

I'm sorry everyone is so pouty that employers and the govt don't bow down and pay income and give time off indefinitely to those out for pregnancy and birth reasons. But I'm not on the train that thinks they should. This is why planning in advance and prior to getting pregnant is helpful. It's not up to anyone else to take care of us financially, that is on us. This is why I took out the hospitalization plan-to provide supplemental income since I knew I wasn't likely to work somewhere that had std for me. This time around is different since we have already learned to live on one income but the hospitalization will help with whatever the costs are for L&D.

If your employer is strict about returning once FMLA is up then using time off prior to giving birth as part of FMLA is ridiculous. I also left an employer with a crummy absentee policy because I knew we were going in to fertility treatments and I needed a little bit of flexibility or else I would end up fired as a result of my appts. When I found out I was pregnant I didn't take paid time off for my appts, that way my time off could be untouched and used exclusively for once I had given birth. Since I ended up out before I actually gave birth I ended up using part of that time off before DS was even born. I only had 15 days of pto so it didn't take long to use it up.

It helps to plan in advance when possible. I know it's not always possible, but waiting to figure it out three months before d day is a bit late, IMO. I guess it's the "silver lining" to having IF. We didn't get pregnant at random or by accident, so sadly we had a lot of time to plan. Though the new job wasn't planned far in advance. I started January 2, started a new cycle January 22, found out I was pregnant February 21. It was an employment change just in the knick of time.

missnacholover · August 2014

carcrashheart said:

FMLA is just a policy to protect your job. They don't even have to give you back the exact same job upon your return-just something equivelant. The reason for not being at work didn't really matter. It just matters that you are out. So the reasons changing don't matter or reset the amount of leave. Also, just because you've used up your FMLA doesn't mean you can't work something out with the employer to stay out longer. Some employers are accommodating. My last employer didn't qualify for FMLA but they still let me go out on leave and held my job (which I didn't return to). I went out before giving birth (I was induced, failed, I stayed home to recover, then got induced and gave birth a few days later), which was early October and wasn't due to return until January 2. They were fine with that and didn't force me back sooner. STD is to supplement lost income if you are out due for medical reasons. In these cases, it's for giving birth, but it isn't exclusive to that. So if you are out of work for bed rest, that's a medical reason. I'm sorry everyone is so pouty that employers and the govt don't bow down and pay income and give time off indefinitely to those out for pregnancy and birth reasons. But I'm not on the train that thinks they should. This is why planning in advance and prior to getting pregnant is helpful. It's not up to anyone else to take care of us financially, that is on us. This is why I took out the hospitalization plan-to provide supplemental income since I knew I wasn't likely to work somewhere that had std for me. This time around is different since we have already learned to live on one income but the hospitalization will help with whatever the costs are for L&D. If your employer is strict about returning once FMLA is up then using time off prior to giving birth as part of FMLA is ridiculous. I also left an employer with a crummy absentee policy because I knew we were going in to fertility treatments and I needed a little bit of flexibility or else I would end up fired as a result of my appts. When I found out I was pregnant I didn't take paid time off for my appts, that way my time off could be untouched and used exclusively for once I had given birth. Since I ended up out before I actually gave birth I ended up using part of that time off before DS was even born. I only had 15 days of pto so it didn't take long to use it up. It helps to plan in advance when possible. I know it's not always possible, but waiting to figure it out three months before d day is a bit late, IMO. I guess it's the "silver lining" to having IF. We didn't get pregnant at random or by accident, so sadly we had a lot of time to plan. Though the new job wasn't planned far in advance. I started January 2, started a new cycle January 22, found out I was pregnant February 21. It was an employment change just in the knick of time.

Yes, I know FMLA is to protect your position at the company (with an equivalent job) not your exact job.

I am not pouty. I think it's shitty that it's only 12 weeks and if you use some of that time prior to baby's arrival it counts towards that 12 weeks. I recognize that there are limits and obviously company's and organizations have to protect themselves and can't be giving out leave like candy. I understand that this is reality and the way things are, however for extreme circumstances in which a mom to be would be out for an extensive period of time before baby comes, yeah, maybe there should be something in place that regardless of time out prior to birth, women should get at least 6 weeks or so protection under FMLA after birth. I mean, most daycares don't even accept babies before 6 weeks, so WTF is a woman supposed to do if she has used 10 weeks of FMLA before birth and has to go back to work 2 weeks later? It would be a really crappy situation.

DH and I have been planning for this baby for quite a while, TYVM. I do not expect the government to "bow down and pay income and give time off indefinitely". WTF?

missnacholover · August 2014

I really don't appreciate being spoken to like I'm a fucking moron. I mean, FFS, it's not like I asked you to name my baby or if s/he was rockin' a peesh or peen.

snarkylibrarian · August 2014

I don't think that most of us mamas are wanting the government "to bow down and pay income and give us time indefinitely". Hell, for the majority of Americans, our leave is unpaid, except for STD, so no one is really taking care of us financially. Yes, some of the gripes are financial and about economic security and I personally think those are valid. But the biggest thing that I (and many other mamas I've talked to) worry about is having adequate time to BOND with the baby, establish a breastfeeding routine, etc.

My biggest fear is to be put on bedrest early and only get a short amount of time with my newborn, because I only have my job guaranteed for 12 weeks. Getting put on bedrest is the one thing you really can't plan for. I've gone the "responsible" route, saved up lots of money, saved up hundreds of vacation and sick hours and planned for baby before TTC, but hell yes I would be pissed if I got put on bedrest and only got to spend 4 or 6 weeks with baby. I don't think that being worried about and criticizing the U.S. not having family-friendly policies is unwarranted or "being pouty". It's a legitimate concern. We shouldn't have to choose between bonding with our babies and families during the first crucial months of our babies lives and our careers.

mockingjay1 · August 2014

carcrashheart said:

FMLA is just a policy to protect your job. They don't even have to give you back the exact same job upon your return-just something equivelant. The reason for not being at work didn't really matter. It just matters that you are out. So the reasons changing don't matter or reset the amount of leave. Also, just because you've used up your FMLA doesn't mean you can't work something out with the employer to stay out longer. Some employers are accommodating. My last employer didn't qualify for FMLA but they still let me go out on leave and held my job (which I didn't return to). I went out before giving birth (I was induced, failed, I stayed home to recover, then got induced and gave birth a few days later), which was early October and wasn't due to return until January 2. They were fine with that and didn't force me back sooner. STD is to supplement lost income if you are out due for medical reasons. In these cases, it's for giving birth, but it isn't exclusive to that. So if you are out of work for bed rest, that's a medical reason. I'm sorry everyone is so pouty that employers and the govt don't bow down and pay income and give time off indefinitely to those out for pregnancy and birth reasons. But I'm not on the train that thinks they should. This is why planning in advance and prior to getting pregnant is helpful. It's not up to anyone else to take care of us financially, that is on us. This is why I took out the hospitalization plan-to provide supplemental income since I knew I wasn't likely to work somewhere that had std for me. This time around is different since we have already learned to live on one income but the hospitalization will help with whatever the costs are for L&D. If your employer is strict about returning once FMLA is up then using time off prior to giving birth as part of FMLA is ridiculous. I also left an employer with a crummy absentee policy because I knew we were going in to fertility treatments and I needed a little bit of flexibility or else I would end up fired as a result of my appts. When I found out I was pregnant I didn't take paid time off for my appts, that way my time off could be untouched and used exclusively for once I had given birth. Since I ended up out before I actually gave birth I ended up using part of that time off before DS was even born. I only had 15 days of pto so it didn't take long to use it up. It helps to plan in advance when possible. I know it's not always possible, but waiting to figure it out three months before d day is a bit late, IMO. I guess it's the "silver lining" to having IF. We didn't get pregnant at random or by accident, so sadly we had a lot of time to plan. Though the new job wasn't planned far in advance. I started January 2, started a new cycle January 22, found out I was pregnant February 21. It was an employment change just in the knick of time.

WTF? No one here is asking for an unreasonable amount of time off. I don't think you can plan going on bed rest for 3 months or having a micro premie, etc. That's where things with FMLA/employers get sucky. My employer (a women's hospital by the way) is not very flexible at all with FMLA leave. We've had quite a few staff members on bed rest or with NICU babies and almost all of them were only allotted the 12 weeks total off work. A person should not be punished with little to no time with their baby at home because they were on bed rest to save their or their baby's life. They also shouldn't be punished because baby was delivered at 25 weeks.

Special circumstances happen, and thinking people should have "planned better" is ridiculous IMO. You can't plan for everything, and I think there should be special circumstances for extended bed rest/NICU stays. A person should not have to choose between their job and the well being of their newborn.

It sounds like you are lucky you were able to leave a job with a bad FMLA/absentee policy. Not every probably has the luxury to do so (a bad job is better than no job). You are coming off very judgmental and closed minded.

missnacholover · August 2014

snarkylibrarian said:

I don't think that most of us mamas are wanting the government "to bow down and pay income and give us time indefinitely". Hell, for the majority of Americans, our leave is unpaid, except for STD, so no one is really taking care of us financially. Yes, some of the gripes are financial and about economic security and I personally think those are valid. But the biggest thing that I (and many other mamas I've talked to) worry about is having adequate time to BOND with the baby, establish a breastfeeding routine, etc.

My biggest fear is to be put on bedrest early and only get a short amount of time with my newborn, because I only have my job guaranteed for 12 weeks. Getting put on bedrest is the one thing you really can't plan for. I've gone the "responsible" route, saved up lots of money, saved up hundreds of vacation and sick hours and planned for baby before TTC, but hell yes I would be pissed if I got put on bedrest and only got to spend 4 or 6 weeks with baby. I don't think that being worried about and criticizing the U.S. not having family-friendly policies is unwarranted or "being pouty". It's a legitimate concern. We shouldn't have to choose between bonding with our babies and families during the first crucial months of our babies lives and our careers.

Thank you! You said this much better than I did!

Dana633 · August 2014

@lissydee - I totally agree with you first off! Seems according to carcashheart, we should be able to plan for bed rest. And I'm assuming she means, your coworker should PLAN for cancer! We should now get extra hospitalization to cover time off for cancer treatments??? WTF!

missnacholover · August 2014

Dana633 said:

@lissydee - I totally agree with you first off! Seems according to carcashheart, we should be able to plan for bed rest. And I'm assuming she means, your coworker should PLAN for cancer! We should now get extra hospitalization to cover time off for cancer treatments??? WTF!

For serious. No one can plan for these things. Maternity leave with the expectation that all goes well and according to plan is one thing. But I think a 90 day bedrest or time off for cancer treatments would greatly fuck up anyone's finances.

KMW08 · August 2014

This is all I could think of after reading that post:

Dana633 · August 2014

@missnacholover - I spoke to my local HR as I said I would, I was told that because I was completely vested in the company and have the max 26 weeks short term disability, that my short term would cover bed rest. I hope you can get the answers you need.

Want a personalized experience?

Question re: bedrest and FMLA

Re: Question re: bedrest and FMLA

Choose Another Board

Search Boards