Individual Employment Law under Family And Friendly Right Coursework

Individual Employment Law under Family And Friendly Right - Coursework Example The same law applies to the case of Bruce who believes he has all the rights to take an emergency leave and still not face a disciplinary action. Bruce has the right to take care of his family. Being an employee of the Royal Mail for over fifteen years, his potential is worth being realized by the employer. The respective committee should not take his misfortunes, which rendered him to take an emergency leave as the root to any disciplinary actions against him. First, it should be understood that uncertainties can happen at any given point in life, which would certainly interfere with any person’s schedule of activities and their job as well. In this case, having to take his wife, Mary, to the hospital or even offer care to her, due to her serious illness, should not be mistaken for any other cause of the absence. Further, before leaving, he went ahead to leave a short notice about his intention to take the leave (Farnham 2000). The law provides for any employee, the right to get some time off or a leave, in the case of illnesses or the need to carry out other responsibilities, which may be proven crucial on the basis of such provisions. However, despite the given notice to his organization regarding his short leave, the best he could do was to consider the greater priority between the job, and taking care of the family emergency (Dale 2000). He could possibly have adjusted to the situation, since her mother, who would have accompanied his wife to the hospital, got ill. Since this happened, there was no option left for him but to take on the situation forgoing the time and the responsibilities he would have spent at work. However, the best thing for Bruce to do was to make adjustments regarding the laid down plans known to the employers. This he did by calling the line manager the soonest possible. However, the act on medical leave, gives an allowance for all eligible workers, to take a leave of up to twelve weeks every year, without any fears of discipl inary actions such as losing their jobs. This leave provision applies to those organizations with fifty employees or more, working within the same location of the employee seeking the leave. This may have been ignored, when the decision to punish Bruce for his change of plans by extending his leave, was taken. The leave also applies to those workers, who have spend more than twelve months with an employee, or at least twelve months; registered working hours of at least 1,250 hours a year, before the time of taking the leave according to Lewis (2008). Based on the Act provisions discussed through this source, Bruce is qualified for this leave, since he had been working with Royal Mail for over 15 years. The same act has its scope with which to protect. There are certain circumstances that are covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act. Beyond such circumstances, his employee could impose a penalty on the person taking his time off from work accordingly. Such circumstances include th e birth of a child or its adoption, the care of a child belonging to the employee, care for his or her spouse or parent. These have to be in a serious medical condition for the employee to deserve the leave. It could also be done if the employee has some serious medical c