Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Need help with contract and Maternity Leave Finances

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Miss Bonnie MD
    replied








    I can see your employer requiring you meet the same productivity standard to get a bonus as if you didn’t miss any time.  However, what your post implies is that not only would you not get a bonus during the time you weren’t working, but that once you come back, you are not eligible for a bonus until a higher level of productivity than previously stipulated.  If this is correct, then this would be a breach of contract on your employer’ part.  I think it is absolutely essential to know what exactly your contract says regarding how your bonus is calculated.
    Click to expand…


    I don’t think it’s that (bolded).  The employer is just saying that she has to meet the same productivity standard as if she wasn’t out.  She is saying that because of that stipulation and the amount of time she is out, it will take her a long time to get a bonus again.  She believes that some sort of accommodation/adjustment should be made to the productivity standard because she is out.  That seems like something that could have been negotiated better perhaps and of course depends on the precise language of the contract.  But I don’t think the employer is doing anything egregious.  At worst, I’d say its an unfavorable deal.

    Standard disclaimer applies.

     
    Click to expand...


    I'm not sure if you're interpreting things correctly either, so let me try to be more clear: I'll put down some #s for illustration purposes too.

    Let's just say my leave fits exactly into Oct, Nov, Dec and I deliver exactly on Oct 1:

    Oct: this month is paid by the STD plan paid by my hospital

    Nov: 1/2 month is STD, the second 1/2 is my saved PTO

    Dec: I am UNPAID. And I actually have to send a check to pay for my insurances (health, dental, etc).

    I get that PTO should be counted as "time" that counts towards my base threshold. The question is:

    -does STD count?

    -does UNPAID time count? (this is the part I don't understand.....sure charge me OH, which would be 25K, not 50K)

    Another illustration:

    Let's say I need to bring in 50K a month to "make my base salary" of $300K per 12 month period  = $600K total collections to cover my base + overhead - I made them 50/50 for illustration purposes.

    Oct, Nov, Dec = 150K I need to bring in. They are saying I need to STILL make up thus 150K, even tho I am UNPAID for Dec. Now, is it clear why I am pissed? If they were paying my base salary during Dec, I totally agree with you - I'm still responsible for bringing in that 50K at some point.

    The incentive kicks in if I bring in more than 150K per quarter.

     

     

    Leave a comment:


  • q-school
    replied
    if you don't work (iow, while gone on leave), does someone else have to cover patients?  in other words, they will receive a bonus for work that you would normally be doing if you were there?  from an employer perspective, that converts work that would be normally covered by salary(for you) into bonus for someone else.  is it a salary or a draw?

    i understand why you don't like it, but i don't see it as clearly unfair.  just one way of doing business, as long as equally applied.  it seems just like part of the benefits package.

    i would be cautious about the suggestion to just leave early.  coming off an (understandable) absence of 3 months, leaving early is not going to be popular with  your colleagues or your employer.  depending on the specifics of your specialty of course.  and going forward you potentially have the issue of leaving early for doctors appointments, sick days, etc.

     

    congratulations by the way.



     

     

    Leave a comment:


  • ContractDiagnostics
    replied
    Typically depends on how it is worded for the 'base guarantee' or 'bonus' - you may need to still cross the threshold for the bonus, so the maternity leave would hinder your ability to earn a bonus...OR if there is no GUARANTEE it may be a little different structure.  You may need to lower your 'draw' - again depending on all how it is worded.  If you'd like to speak to someone here just let us know - you have our info!  - Jon w CDx

     

    ps. for the record - we have seen 'paid' maternity leave 2 times in over 4,500 contract reviews.  Not to rub it in but my wife (real estate exec) had 15 weeks of fully paid...then she bridged back remaining fully paid for the next 4 weeks.  Crazy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hatton
    replied
    Has anyone in the department used the short term disability and FMLA before?  How was their bonus effected?

    Leave a comment:


  • AR
    replied










    They are not paying me when I’m out. That’s the point
    Click to expand…


    I’m still confused. Once again, if I’m understanding you correctly, some is PTO.  It sounds like the way the system works every time you take PTO, you’re making up the deficit there.  It’s just a short time so it’s probably not that noticeable.  Clearly the PTO money comes from your employer, so they’re paying for that (as the always do).

    The rest comes from the short term disability?  Once again, if I’m understanding you correctly it comes from premiums that are paid by your employer.

    If they truly were giving you no income when you’re out and didn’t pay any premiums for disability, then I guess I would get where you’re coming from.

    Also, realize that actually buying a short term disability policy to cover things like this is actually more expensive than it would be if they just paid you the salary directly (if that was not the case, then the insurer would be losing money).  The reason they must buy the policy is because it turns an unpredictable potentially massive expense (if several employees go out simultaneously) and turns into a regular predictable one.  But make no mistake, they are paying your salary when you are out (for that part), it’s not as direct as you are accustomed to, so perhaps that’s why you may be disregarding it.

    I’m still not 100% sure if I’m interpreting everything correctly, but so far, all I see here at worst is that you may have negotiated a poor deal.  But I’m not even sure of that.
    Click to expand…


    I’m not sure how her employer calculates the required RVUs for base and incentive. But my employer takes our PTO into account when making the calculation so we are NOT expected to “make up the deficit” when we take time off. We literally get paid for not doing any work.

    The short term disability premium is paid for EVERY employee because it’s a benefit to everyone and they pay it regardless of whether that employee uses it. So the amount they spent on her individually for the premiums is significantly less than what they would pay in her salary while she was out on leave. So why should she have to work hours that the employer never paid her for? And I don’t see how legally they could try and recoup the cost of the premiums paid out for the employees that actually used the policy. That would be discrimination, right? It makes no difference to the employer when an employee uses it because the payout comes from the disability insurer, not the employer.

    Again, if she were to leave the position after the maternity leave was up, could her employer sue her for the income she was given during that time since she did not work? I think the answer is no and if that’s the case, why would she have to make up the time if she returns?

    Ultimately, I’d absolutely sit down with a lawyer and hash this all out but seriously I’ve never heard of an employer making any employee make up the hours they missed while on sick leave. And I help my patients get qualified for FMLA like several times a week, so I feel like I’ve been exposed to a lot of different employer policies. I’d love to hear the ultimate outcome, Bonnie, if you don’t mind sharing . . . once this is sorted out. I’m sorry about all the stress this is probably causing you in the meantime.

     
    Click to expand...


    Once, again, all of the following assumes I'm understanding this correctly.

    1. When I said "make up the deficit", what I meant was that there is no adjustment to the bonus threshold. If she takes a week off, she has one less week to hit the bonus threshold.  It sounds like she is so far over the threshold that a week or two of vacation will never take her under the bonus.  There is no literal making up of hours.

    2. I don't want to get into a long derail about the mechanics of group short-term disability policies.  The simplest way is to think of the employer as a black box that simply says when you go out on short-term disability, we will pay your salary.  From the employee's perspective it doesn't matter how they come up  with the money. That's the employer's problem. They could just self insure and pay out as needed (very large groups can afford to do this) or they can buy a group policy.  It doesn't matter how they choose to do it, they're paying for it.  Why should the employee's expectation be different based on how exactly the employer obtained the money?

    3. Like I said, this is super unclear, but describing this as the employer making the employee make up the hours they missed seems really weird to me.  No one is forcing her to work extra hours and her base is guaranteed.  Yeah, it's harder for her to hit the bonus than if she was not out for 12 wks.  But it sounds like even she agrees it should be a little harder (based on comments on understanding that there is overhead to be covered).  So it seems like the only point of disagreement is how much harder exactly it should be.  So at worst, it's a poorly negotiated contract.  I'd be very surprised if she had any sort of legal claim (obviously depends on what the contract says), but I too am interested in how this turns out.  Although, I'm still not quite sure I understand exactly what the problem is.

     

    Leave a comment:


  • wideopenspaces
    replied







    They are not paying me when I’m out. That’s the point
    Click to expand…


    I’m still confused. Once again, if I’m understanding you correctly, some is PTO.  It sounds like the way the system works every time you take PTO, you’re making up the deficit there.  It’s just a short time so it’s probably not that noticeable.  Clearly the PTO money comes from your employer, so they’re paying for that (as the always do).

    The rest comes from the short term disability?  Once again, if I’m understanding you correctly it comes from premiums that are paid by your employer.

    If they truly were giving you no income when you’re out and didn’t pay any premiums for disability, then I guess I would get where you’re coming from.

    Also, realize that actually buying a short term disability policy to cover things like this is actually more expensive than it would be if they just paid you the salary directly (if that was not the case, then the insurer would be losing money).  The reason they must buy the policy is because it turns an unpredictable potentially massive expense (if several employees go out simultaneously) and turns into a regular predictable one.  But make no mistake, they are paying your salary when you are out (for that part), it’s not as direct as you are accustomed to, so perhaps that’s why you may be disregarding it.

    I’m still not 100% sure if I’m interpreting everything correctly, but so far, all I see here at worst is that you may have negotiated a poor deal.  But I’m not even sure of that.
    Click to expand...


    I'm not sure how her employer calculates the required RVUs for base and incentive. But my employer takes our PTO into account when making the calculation so we are NOT expected to "make up the deficit" when we take time off. We literally get paid for not doing any work.

    The short term disability premium is paid for EVERY employee because it's a benefit to everyone and they pay it regardless of whether that employee uses it. So the amount they spent on her individually for the premiums is significantly less than what they would pay in her salary while she was out on leave. So why should she have to work hours that the employer never paid her for? And I don't see how legally they could try and recoup the cost of the premiums paid out for the employees that actually used the policy. That would be discrimination, right? It makes no difference to the employer when an employee uses it because the payout comes from the disability insurer, not the employer.

    Again, if she were to leave the position after the maternity leave was up, could her employer sue her for the income she was given during that time since she did not work? I think the answer is no and if that's the case, why would she have to make up the time if she returns?

    Ultimately, I'd absolutely sit down with a lawyer and hash this all out but seriously I've never heard of an employer making any employee make up the hours they missed while on sick leave. And I help my patients get qualified for FMLA like several times a week, so I feel like I've been exposed to a lot of different employer policies. I'd love to hear the ultimate outcome, Bonnie, if you don't mind sharing . . . once this is sorted out. I'm sorry about all the stress this is probably causing you in the meantime.

     

    Leave a comment:


  • AR
    replied




    I can see your employer requiring you meet the same productivity standard to get a bonus as if you didn’t miss any time.  However, what your post implies is that not only would you not get a bonus during the time you weren’t working, but that once you come back, you are not eligible for a bonus until a higher level of productivity than previously stipulated.  If this is correct, then this would be a breach of contract on your employer’ part.  I think it is absolutely essential to know what exactly your contract says regarding how your bonus is calculated.
    Click to expand...


    I don't think it's that (bolded).  The employer is just saying that she has to meet the same productivity standard as if she wasn't out.  She is saying that because of that stipulation and the amount of time she is out, it will take her a long time to get a bonus again.  She believes that some sort of accommodation/adjustment should be made to the productivity standard because she is out.  That seems like something that could have been negotiated better perhaps and of course depends on the precise language of the contract.  But I don't think the employer is doing anything egregious.  At worst, I'd say its an unfavorable deal.

    Standard disclaimer applies.

     

    Leave a comment:


  • AR
    replied




    They are not paying me when I’m out. That’s the point
    Click to expand...


    I'm still confused. Once again, if I'm understanding you correctly, some is PTO.  It sounds like the way the system works every time you take PTO, you're making up the deficit there.  It's just a short time so it's probably not that noticeable.  Clearly the PTO money comes from your employer, so they're paying for that (as the always do).

    The rest comes from the short term disability?  Once again, if I'm understanding you correctly it comes from premiums that are paid by your employer.

    If they truly were giving you no income when you're out and didn't pay any premiums for disability, then I guess I would get where you're coming from.

    Also, realize that actually buying a short term disability policy to cover things like this is actually more expensive than it would be if they just paid you the salary directly (if that was not the case, then the insurer would be losing money).  The reason they must buy the policy is because it turns an unpredictable potentially massive expense (if several employees go out simultaneously) and turns into a regular predictable one.  But make no mistake, they are paying your salary when you are out (for that part), it's not as direct as you are accustomed to, so perhaps that's why you may be disregarding it.

    I'm still not 100% sure if I'm interpreting everything correctly, but so far, all I see here at worst is that you may have negotiated a poor deal.  But I'm not even sure of that.

    Leave a comment:


  • pulmdoc
    replied
    I can see your employer requiring you meet the same productivity standard to get a bonus as if you didn't miss any time.  However, what your post implies is that not only would you not get a bonus during the time you weren't working, but that once you come back, you are not eligible for a bonus until a higher level of productivity than previously stipulated.  If this is correct, then this would be a breach of contract on your employer' part.  I think it is absolutely essential to know what exactly your contract says regarding how your bonus is calculated.

    Leave a comment:


  • Miss Bonnie MD
    replied
    They are not paying me when I'm out. That's the point

    Leave a comment:


  • jpa
    replied
    I suppose that if the bonus is definitely unobtainable, I would consider hitting the bare minimum $$ generated required by contract. Just say "if you're not going to let me reasonably hit a bonus, I'll ease back into work by leaving at 2pm every day" or something similar.

    Leave a comment:


  • wideopenspaces
    replied













    This doesn’t make sense to me for several reasons. When you normally take PTO do you have to make up your salary?

    If you are being paid by a disability plan, you by definition can’t work during that time so I’m not sure how it would be legal for them to have you make up that time.

    And even the last 2 weeks of unpaid leave seems like your base salary just goes to zero during that time so it should again be taken care of.

    I just don’t understand how they could force you to work and not pay you for it.

    You are using FMLA time to cover all this, correct? I have never in my life heard of an employer making an employee make up their FMLA time. I knew maternity leave was crappy, but this is the worst I’ve ever heard.

    At my institution we get 6 weeks paid parental leave, then another 6 weeks that is paid if you have enough sick and vacation time to cover it. Otherwise it is unpaid. Then after my 12 weeks I cut my FTE to 0.25 and so my salary was dropped accordingly and I was no longer eligible for benefits, including any incentive pay. But there was no talk of making up the time I was off. Just seems crazy to me.
    Click to expand…


    I am making these numbers up for illustration purposes:

    The way our pay/incentive is structured is our base is X, and anything above 2x per quarter is paid out as bonus. So we bonus quarterly.

    They are saying I need to make up the 2x not generated during my 12 weeks off to bonus again.
    Click to expand…


    So for example, normally your threshold is 10 RVU to get a base salary. If you produce over 20 RVU, you get paid extra. When you come back from leave, they expect you to produce 40 RVU to get beyond your base salary. Right? So you are being expected to do work for which you are not being paid. I don’t understand how this can be legal.

    What would happen if you had a good quarter and you got incentive pay for producing 25 RVU and the next quarter you only produced 5 RVU for some reason. Would they make you pay back the first quarter incentive pay? Or would you be expected to produce 35 in the third quarter before getting the incentive pay again? At my job, each quarter is independent. The slate is wiped clean after each quarter, there is no cumulative tally. If you hit the threshold one quarter, great! You get extra pay. If you don’t the next, you don’t get the pay, but the deficit doesn’t carry over.

    Frankly, if my employer was telling me this and a contract lawyer told me this was perfectly legal, I’d be looking for another job. This is crazy.
    Click to expand…


    Well bolded is not exactly true, arguably she was paid for that work in advance.

    Furthermore, it would be odd if it were illegal.  What prevents the employer for just offering a contract where it takes 40 RVU to get over the same base.  It’s a worse deal, for sure.  IANAL, but for a salaried professional, I think just about any deal is legal (it’s not like we’re flirting with minimum wage violations here).

    I am also not clear on whether it’s a clean slate every quarter or if deficits are carried over in perpetuity.  The former system favors the employee while the latter favors the employer.  I wouldn’t say that either is inherently unfair.  And the latter is certainly not crazy.  For example, in the case of a solo private practitioner, that is the precise reality of their situation.

    Standard disclaimer (above assumes I understand everything correctly) applies.
    Click to expand...


    Ah, but she wasn't paid for the work in advance. Her dept is not paying her during her leave. She will get some income, but it will come from 1) short term disability payout, 2) 2 weeks of PTO. The rest is unpaid. So they are asking her to do work for which they are not paying her.

    And I agree it wouldn't be an issue if she had a pre existing contract that said she must work 40 rvu before getting incentive pay. But her current contract says she must only work 20 RVU in order to get it *and it may be prorated* (meaning that if her work effort is zero, pay is zero). So what they are telling her seems illegal to me . . . like breach of contract. If she quit after her 3 months of maternity leave, would they try to come after her and say she owed them 20 rvu's before she could go?

    Leave a comment:


  • The White Coat Investor
    replied




    I am expecting and my due date is mid October. I am planning on taking 12 weeks off. I work for a large hospital system. There is 6 (vaginal) or 8 (c-s) weeks of paid leave at my base salary (this is paid out by a short term disability plan paid for by the hospital), I have 2 weeks of saved vacation. The rest will be unpaid – about 4 weeks.

    I was just informed (after going back and forth with HR and my dept business admin) that despite me not getting paid by the dept (besides 2 weeks PTO) – I am STILL responsible for “making” my salary. I am paid a base salary and anything over the base threshold (let’s say for illustration purposes I need to make double my base) – I get paid out as bonus pay.

    So they are telling me that I am STILL responsible for bringing in TWICE my base for that 12 week period. This means I need to make up twice my base when I return from maternity leave before I make incentive. I re-read my contract and it does not say this anywhere and it actually says my base salary can be “pro-rated as appropriate.” I have re-emailed HR and my business admin.

     

    1) Is this possible?

    2) I emailed HR and my business admin again, saying this does not make sense to me and it is NOT in the contract. Next steps? Who to escalate after?

    3) Should I speak to a lawyer???
    Click to expand...


    Ooohhh...that's dirty. Do they have any idea who they're dealing with?

    Leave a comment:


  • AR
    replied




    You nailed it wideopenspaces.

    Now id be ok with having to make up some of it since there is still overhead whether I am there or not but that’s nowhere near double my base salary
    Click to expand...


    From their perspective, the salary that they pay you while you are out is overhead. And we know from the contract structure what it takes for them to cover overhead: double base.

    Standard disclaimer applies.

    Leave a comment:


  • AR
    replied










    This doesn’t make sense to me for several reasons. When you normally take PTO do you have to make up your salary?

    If you are being paid by a disability plan, you by definition can’t work during that time so I’m not sure how it would be legal for them to have you make up that time.

    And even the last 2 weeks of unpaid leave seems like your base salary just goes to zero during that time so it should again be taken care of.

    I just don’t understand how they could force you to work and not pay you for it.

    You are using FMLA time to cover all this, correct? I have never in my life heard of an employer making an employee make up their FMLA time. I knew maternity leave was crappy, but this is the worst I’ve ever heard.

    At my institution we get 6 weeks paid parental leave, then another 6 weeks that is paid if you have enough sick and vacation time to cover it. Otherwise it is unpaid. Then after my 12 weeks I cut my FTE to 0.25 and so my salary was dropped accordingly and I was no longer eligible for benefits, including any incentive pay. But there was no talk of making up the time I was off. Just seems crazy to me.
    Click to expand…


    I am making these numbers up for illustration purposes:

    The way our pay/incentive is structured is our base is X, and anything above 2x per quarter is paid out as bonus. So we bonus quarterly.

    They are saying I need to make up the 2x not generated during my 12 weeks off to bonus again.
    Click to expand…


    So for example, normally your threshold is 10 RVU to get a base salary. If you produce over 20 RVU, you get paid extra. When you come back from leave, they expect you to produce 40 RVU to get beyond your base salary. Right? So you are being expected to do work for which you are not being paid. I don’t understand how this can be legal.

    What would happen if you had a good quarter and you got incentive pay for producing 25 RVU and the next quarter you only produced 5 RVU for some reason. Would they make you pay back the first quarter incentive pay? Or would you be expected to produce 35 in the third quarter before getting the incentive pay again? At my job, each quarter is independent. The slate is wiped clean after each quarter, there is no cumulative tally. If you hit the threshold one quarter, great! You get extra pay. If you don’t the next, you don’t get the pay, but the deficit doesn’t carry over.

    Frankly, if my employer was telling me this and a contract lawyer told me this was perfectly legal, I’d be looking for another job. This is crazy.
    Click to expand...


    Well bolded is not exactly true, arguably she was paid for that work in advance.

    Furthermore, it would be odd if it were illegal.  What prevents the employer for just offering a contract where it takes 40 RVU to get over the same base.  It's a worse deal, for sure.  IANAL, but for a salaried professional, I think just about any deal is legal (it's not like we're flirting with minimum wage violations here).

    I am also not clear on whether it's a clean slate every quarter or if deficits are carried over in perpetuity.  The former system favors the employee while the latter favors the employer.  I wouldn't say that either is inherently unfair.  And the latter is certainly not crazy.  For example, in the case of a solo private practitioner, that is the precise reality of their situation.

    Standard disclaimer (above assumes I understand everything correctly) applies.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X