Consider a Resolution Regarding a Leave of Absence (This discussion will be closed to the public)

This meeting will be closed to the public as allowed by Minnesota Statute, section 13D.05, Subd. (a)(3)(4)

On Friday, January 4th, staff met with the employee currently out on an extended leave of absence to discuss the status of his/her serious medical condition as it relates to fitness for duty. The employee indicated the current status has not changed and he/she would not be considered “fit for duty”.

History of Leave:
1) Employee went out on FMLA on November 17, 2011; 2) was granted an extension of an additional 90-days leave by the City Administrator (as allowed by the Personnel Policy-Section 7.6); 3) the City Council authorized an initial 3-month leave of absence covering June, July, and August, 4) In August, the City Council authorized an additional 4-months leave covering September, October, November, and December; 5) the last action taken by the City Council extended the leave of absence through January; 6) the Personnel Committee discussion tonight - January 22, 2013.

Currently:
Contrary to staff’s hope, the employee did not reach a difinitive turning point that would allow the City to accurately predict the employee’s ability to return to work. Even so, it should be noted that City Council has the authority to authorize up to 12 months of leave under the Leave of Absence policy. This employee’s 12 month leave of absence period started in June, 2012 and can be authorized through May 31, 2013.

City’s Leave of Absence Policy:
The City Council may grant any regular employee a leave of absence without pay for a period not exceeding 90 calendar days except that it may extend such leaves to a maximum period of one year in case the employee is disabled or where extraordinary circumstances, in its judgment, warrant such extension. No vacation leave, sick leave, holiday leave or compensatory time off benefits shall be used or accrued during a leave of absence and the City will not contribute to insurance premiums. All accrued and unused paid leave will be paid to an employee prior to the employee commencing the leave of absence. In determining entitlement to seniority and seniority-based rights and benefits, the period of absence from employment due to a leave of absence constitutes a break in service. The City of Ramsey does not guarantee job restoration after a leave of absence.

1) To approve an additional leave of absence through May 31, 2013; the maximum amount of leave time allowed per the City’s Leave of Absence policy (creating step 7 in this employee’s leave history).

2) To approve a portion of the remaining allowable time and direct staff to bring this case back to the City Council to re-consider at a later date (creating a step 8 in this employee’s leave history).

3) To deny any additional leave of absense.

Pros:
Extension of the leave gives the employee hope of returning to work, with no additional direct cost for City to do so.

Cons:
Adds to the City’s personnel costs for staff to continue re-evaluating the situation.
The employee may not be able to meet the physical requirement for the job at the end of the LOA period
Prolongs the department’s staffing shortage, if postion is "held" for employee's return

To direct staff to discontinue any additional leave of absence time.

There is no funding required; there have been no expenses related to this employee since June 1, 2012.

Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution approving an additional leave of absence through May 31, 2013; the maximum amount of leave time allowed per the City’s Leave of Absence policy.