Tags: appointments, attorney, california, doctor, doctors, employees, employer, employment, labor, law, lawyer, leave, legal, necessary, sick, time, vacation

Doctor's Appointments - Use of Vacation Time vs. Sick Leave California

On Lawyer & Legal » Employment & Labor Law

1,948 words with 7 Comments; publish: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:02:00 GMT; (8002,604.49, « »)

Is it legal for an employer to require that their employees use vacation time (rather than sick leave) for necessary doctor's appointments?

And would there be any difference if the doctor's appointments were for self or a child, or if the appointments were for diagnosis/treatment of an illness vs. diagnosis/treatment of an injury (not worked-related)?

I would appreciate any specific legal references if available. Thanks for your assistance!

All Comments

Leave a comment...

  • 7 Comments
    • Thanks so much for your replies. I do appreciate your assistance.
      #1; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:15:00 GMT
    • Yup.

      It is legal simply because there is no law that says it isn't.

      #2; Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:05:00 GMT
    • If you live in San Fransisco (or have employees working there) review this http://www.sfgov.org/site/olse_index.asp?id=54150
      #3; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:40:00 GMT
    • Also note that in California, employees are allowed to use up to half of their sick time for the care of their sick dependents.

      Thanks. I did not know that. There is so much about that state's laws that I do not know and seriously hope the laws don't get transplanted here.

      Although there is a bill before our Legislature that would mandate paid sick leave. I don't think even California has that yet. (we won't either -- one sponsor, no co-sponsors, it will be killed in committee).

      #4; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:37:00 GMT
    • Like Jeff said.

      Some companies provide sick leave, but restrict the use of it to the employee's illness only. Absences for family illnesses need to come out of some other pot.

      That is purely up to the company and not yet regulated by law.

      I don't particularly agree that things should be structured that way, but it is legal.

      #5; Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:18:00 GMT
    • I don't think even California has that yet. (we won't either -- one sponsor, no co-sponsors, it will be killed in committee).

      Well, San Francisco has. :( :eek:

      http://www.employers.org/resources/pdf/Proposition%20F.pdf

      #6; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:42:00 GMT
    • Also note that in California, employees are allowed to use up to half of their sick time for the care of their sick dependents.
      #7; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:32:00 GMT