Close X
Attorney Spotlight

What is Shannon Wiley looking forward to at this year's Asembia Specialty Pharmacy Summit? Find out more>


Close X


Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

Primary Care Providers Win Challenge of CMS Interpretation of Enhanced Payment Law

With the help and support of the Tennessee Medical Association, 21 Tennessee physicians of underserved communities joined together and retained Bass, Berry & Sims to file suit against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to stop improper collection efforts. Our team, led by David King, was successful in halting efforts to recoup TennCare payments that were used legitimately to expand services in communities that needed them. Read more

Tennessee Medical Association & Bass, Berry & Sims

Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Download the Healthcare Fraud & Abuse Review 2017, authored by Bass, Berry & Sims

The Healthcare Fraud & Abuse Review 2017 details all healthcare-related False Claims Act settlements from last year, organized by particular sectors of the healthcare industry. In addition to reviewing all healthcare fraud-related settlements, the Review includes updates on enforcement-related litigation involving the Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Statute, and looks at the continued implications from the government's focus on enforcement efforts involving individual actors in connection with civil and criminal healthcare fraud investigations.

Click here to download the Review.

Labor Talk Blog: EEOC Continues Aggressive Look at Employer Leave Policies


January 3, 2013

The EEOC recently announced two multi-million dollar settlements relating to the targeted employers leave of absence practices. In November, the EEOC announced a $4.5M settlement with Interstate Distributor Company, based on claims that the trucking company did not provide reasonable accommodation to scores of employees who were terminated upon exhausting available leave time. The EEOC claimed that the company's practice of automatically terminating employees after exhausting a set amount of leave without any interactive discussions with the employee, along with an alleged "no restrictions" policy violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Similarly, on December 18 (the same day that the EEOC announced its strategic plan), the EEOC announced a $2M settlement with Dillard's Inc. based on similar allegations. There, Dillard's was accused not only of having a practice of terminating employees after a specific period of leave but also of having a practice of seeking specific medical information from an employee seeking sick leave. According to the EEOC, these practices violated the ADA.

Again, as many savvy employers who have read similar posts before, employers should:

  • Eliminate any "automatic termination" language – and eliminate any such practice of automatically terminating – any employee based on the exhaustion a set amount of leave.
    • An employer must conduct a "case-by-case" analysis of the specifics of each employee's circumstances and must invite the employee into that process as part of an "interactive" discussion
    • Suggested language – "If at the end of the leave period the employee remains unable to return to his/her regular job even with reasonable accommodation, the employee and the employer will discuss what options may be available based on the employee's circumstances and the employer's operational needs."
  • Consider at least one "extension" of another period of leave

Note, however, that granting job-protected leave, under the FMLA or if required in your jurisdiction, under the ADA, that does not mean that the employer must "hold the job open." Rather, it means that whoever is hired to do the job (if a temporary employee or a contract worker), that person is in that role temporarily for a time, given that someone is on leave.

Related Professionals

Related Services


Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.