Why paid administrative leave

The Ninth Circuit concluded that, under some circumstances, placement on administrative leave can constitute an adverse employment action. The Ninth Circuit reasoned that to constitute an adverse employment action, the retaliation need not be severe or of a certain kind. The Ninth Circuit held that if Dahlia could prove these effects, he could prove he suffered an adverse employment action because these effects and the general stigma from being put on administrative leave likely deter employees from engaging in protected activity.

Ultimately, Dahlia does not hold that paid administrative leave must always constitute an adverse employment action, rather it provides a short and under-developed conclusion that paid administrative leave, by itself, may constitute an adverse employment action in some situations.

The California Court of Appeal, in Horsford v. In Horsford , a police officer was placed on paid administrative leave because of a claim that he was mentally unstable. After he was cleared to return to work by two psychologists, he was still not allowed to return to his position as an officer.

In assessing whether the officer suffered an adverse employment action to prove a discrimination charge, the Court of Appeal noted the jury was entitled to collectively consider the alleged discriminatory acts. The Court of Appeal found that an officer who is removed from a highly desirable position and placed on paid administrative leave for months suffered an adverse employment action because a jury could find that the leave was unjustified and may have resulted from racial animus.

In Whitehall v. County of San Bernardino , the Fourth District Court of Appeal addressed whether paid administrative leave could constitute an adverse employment action. The deputy director of CFA allegedly instructed Whitehall to withhold certain photographs and to provide altered ones. Whitehall learned CFS never provided a complete police report to the court, so she gave the assigned deputy county counsel a computer disk containing all photographs obtained from police. In addition, CFS fired Eric for allegedly exaggerating the condition of the house and reporting the smell of methamphetamine despite the fact that the social worker who assisted him during the initial response corroborated his version of events.

Concerned about her potential liability for withholding evidence and providing altered photographs to the court and counsel, Whitehall met with an attorney to discuss her situation. The attorney drafted a declaration for Whitehall and Whitehall, Eric, and the social worker who had assisted Eric during the initial response filed a motion informing the juvenile court that CFS had perpetrated a fraud upon the court. After Whitehall was on administrative leave for approximately two months, which included two hearings, the County decided to terminate Whitehall for violating the confidentiality policy.

Whitehall filed a complaint against the County and CFS based on whistleblower liability and retaliation. Essentially, Whitehall turns on the whistleblower statute, Labor Code section Rather, the Whitehall decision merely establishes that paid administrative leave may constitute an adverse employment action in certain circumstances.

Furthermore, the court in Whitehall reiterated that adverse employment claims remain inherently fact-specific. Quoting Yanowitz v.

Accordingly, although an adverse employment action must materially affect the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment to be actionable, the determination of whether a particular action or course of conduct rises to the level of actionable conduct should take into the account the unique circumstances of the affected employee as well as the workplace context of the claims.

This assumption changed post -Dahlia. Even though an employee receives full pay and benefits during paid administrative leave, when looking at the totality of the circumstances, a court may find the secondary effects that come as a natural result of being away from the workplace deter an employee from engaging in protected activity and constitute adverse employment action.

However, these cases continue to leave open questions. When does paid administrative leave cross over to an adverse employment action? What if the employer places the employee on paid administrative leave but allows the employee to take a promotional examination when the opportunity arises? What if the employer agrees to set a practice where employees on paid administrative leave will receive holiday pay while on leave?

If paid administrative leave can be an adverse employment action, then employees placed on paid administrative leave who file a discrimination or retaliation lawsuit against an employer have added leverage in proving their case or negotiating a settlement. This creates tricky situations for employers who must now assess the risk in placing an employee on paid administrative leave. Example 1 : A Police Department suspects that a police officer violated a direct order from a sergeant to stay out of the downtown area during his shift and not get involved with a particular group of suspected gang members.

The Department wants to conduct an internal affairs investigation and place him on paid administrative leave during the investigation. Should the Department place the police officer on paid administrative leave? Please enable scripts and reload this page. Policies Administrative Leave Policy. Reuse Permissions. Download: Administrative Leave Policy.

Objective An employee may be placed on an administrative leave, with or without notice, to permit [Company Name] to review or investigate circumstances including dishonesty, theft or misappropriation of company funds or property, violence on the job, gross safety, negligence or acts endangering others, insubordination or any other conduct that warrants removing the employee from the worksite.

Procedures Management, in consultation with human resources HR , may place an employee on administrative leave for periods not to exceed 15 calendar days to review or investigate actions in breach of the above-stated guidelines. Employee Conduct Investigations. You have successfully saved this page as a bookmark. OK My Bookmarks. Please confirm that you want to proceed with deleting bookmark.

Delete Cancel. A paid administrative leave allows the employee to continue receiving a salary and benefits while the matter is under review. Sick leave is an employer-funded benefit that an employee earns on the basis of hours of service. The specific terms and conditions under which an employee accrues sick leave, and the manner in which the sick leave may be used, are determined by the terms of employment or a collective bargaining agreement.

Often, sick leave can be used for a personal or dependent family member illness, medical appointments, substance abuse treatment, bereavement and adoption, as noted by the U. Department of Commerce. In fact, many employers require employees on administrative leave to call in to their supervisor each morning to confirm they are available to work.

Being placed on administrative leave can be a stressful and confusing situation for an employee. Many employees want to challenge the reason for being placed on administrative leave because it can seem like their employer is taking an adverse employment action against them. Coworkers may even believe the employee has already been fired, thereby harming the employees reputation in the workplace. For many years courts routinely held that putting an employee on paid administrative leave could not constitute an adverse employment action to give rise to a discrimination or retaliation claim.

However, whether or not administrative leave is an adverse employment action is no longer clear.