Originally Posted by
rickair7777
That's exactly what I said, they can ask for a note but cannot ask for the medical details.
The PPM says "may require"...that's just there to scare you into thinking that you'll have to:
1) go to the doctor and
2) get a note with the medical details.
They're trying to discourage "sickacations" with scare tactics. Putting that in the PPM does NOT violate any law...they have to actually act on it to get in trouble.
But just because the PPM says "may require" does not mean their lawyers will actually let the CP's inquire into your medical history. Worst case you'll have to get a note saying you need X number of days off, and that's all it will say.
And what I said was as it relates to SKYW. With a CBA there is the opportunity to give and take things that may not be in line with labor law. The airlines with CBAs and the Dr. note thing is a negotiated item, lacking a CBA, labor law/case law will dictate how the employer operates. My point was and still is, as it relates to SKYW, the PPM directly is contradictory to case law as are more than a few other points, what they have going for them is that even the government has few data points as to how the RLA, Federal Labor Law, State Labor Law apply to a non CBA controlled airline labor group. With very little precedent established with regards to the unique situation of non CBA airline employees, they are free to do almost whatever they want. That's why the F/As lost the last lawsuit.
Do the DD research, read the case and decision, very interesting stuff. When individuals stand up to the behemoth, with sound legal basis they will win, not that DD "won", but he did prevail.
"Sickations" are already addressed in 3006.6 4(D).