- Email: [email protected]
The Family and Medical Leave Act Should Be Applicable to All Radiologists and Radiation Oncologists
OPINION
The Family and Medical Leave Act Should Be Applicable to All Radiologists and Radiation Oncologists Elizabeth Kagan Arleo, MD, Julia R. Fielding, MD, Johnson B. Lightfoote, MD, MBA, William Shields, JD, LLM, Edward I. Bluth, MD, Katarzyna J. Macura, MD, PhD As most members are aware, radiology has failed to attract women and other minority medical students into its residency programs in the same percentages as medical schools and other competing specialties. One reason for this may be the need for more flexible scheduling than some groups currently provide. This factor has been recognized by the federal government in all areas of employment, including medicine. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 [1] requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for n
n
n
n
n
the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within 1 year of birth; the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within 1 year of placement; care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition; a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job; any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is
n
a covered military member on “covered active duty”; and leave to care for a covered service member with a serious injury or illness (military caregiver leave).
This federal law applies to both female and male employees who have worked at least 1,250 hours during the previous 12 months (“eligible employees”). Additionally, the US Department of Labor has ruled that residents and fellows can qualify under the Family and Medical Leave Act after they have worked for 12 months and completed the requisite number of hours [2,3]. Current ACR policy states, “The ACR supports the development of family leave policies in radiology facilities consistent with federal and state laws; 2001, amended 2011 (Res. 47-i).” Therefore, the ACR Commission for Women and General Diversity and the ACR Commission on Human Resources believe that, when feasible, academic radiology and radiation oncology departments, as well as private practice radiology and radiation oncology groups, should consider providing the aforementioned family leave benefits to all of their eligible female and
ª 2015 American College of Radiology 1546-1440/15/$36.00 n http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2015.04.013
male employees, including residents, whether or not they are required to do so by federal law (in the case of smaller groups with fewer than 50 employees). There are ethical and social, political and economic reasons for this. For more than a generation, family and medical leave has become a core element of corporate and employment practices in all industrialized democracies. Although the United States is far behind other high-income countries in terms of the level of support provided, it nevertheless recognizes the value of supporting families that accrues directly to employees, employers, and the workforce overall. Specifically in radiology, with the goal of Imaging 3.0 to enable “radiologists to take a leadership role in shaping America’s future health care system” [4], we can help do so by providing all members of our teams (female and male) with family leave. In doing so, our practices become more inclusive and more productive, and they enjoy the benefits of radiologists who are respected by, valued by their radiologic enterprises, and hence committed to their radiologic enterprises; ultimately, this may translate into improved patient care as well. President Obama himself
1125
has demonstrated a renewed interest in leave policies, arguing in his 2015 State of the Union address that “it’s time we stop treating child care as a side issue, or a women’s issue, and treat it like the national economic priority that it is for all of us” [5]. Our commissions similarly declare that family leave is a national professional priority. Because many practices and academic departments have not yet enacted family leave policies [6], our commissions
propose that members seek financially feasible methods of providing family medical leave to all eligible diagnostic radiologists, radiation oncologists, interventional radiologists, nuclear medicine physicians, and medical physicists, including residents, via written, accessible leave policies consonant with federal law and modern employment practices.
2.
3. 4.
5.
6.
REFERENCES 1. US Department of Labor. Leave benefits: family & medical leave. Available at: http://
www.dol.gov/dol/topic/benefits-leave/fmla. htm. Accessed May 6, 2015. Mayo Foundation v United States, 09-837. Supreme Court of the United States (2011). Towney D. Labor and employment law, 15th ed. Mason, OH: Southwestern; 2013:33. American College of Radiology. Imaging 3.0. Available at: http://www.acr.org/Advocacy/ Economics-Health-Policy/Imaging-3. Accessed January 21, 2015. Miller CC. Obama says family leave is an economic necessity, not just a women’s issue. The New York Times January 21, 2015. Heilbrun ME, Bender CE, Truong HB, Bluth EI. Health issues and the practicing radiologist: defining concepts and developing recommendations for leave options and policies. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10:695-701.
Elizabeth Kagan Arleo, MD, is from New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell, New York, New York. Julia R. Fielding, MD, is from the Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina. Johnson B. Lightfoote, MD, MBA, is from the Department of Radiology, Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center. Edward I. Bluth, MD, is from Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, Louisiana. Katarzyna J. Macura, MD, PhD, is from The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University. William Shields, JD, LLM, CAE General Counsel, American College of Radiology. The authors have no conflicts of interest related to the material discussed in this article. Elizabeth Kagan Arleo, MD: New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell, 425 East 61st Street, 9th Floor, New York, NY 10065; e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected].
1126
Journal of the American College of Radiology Volume 12 n Number 10 n October 2015
The Family and Medical Leave Act Should Be Applicable to All Radiologists and Radiation Oncologists Elizabeth Kagan Arleo, MD, Julia R. Fielding, MD, Johnson B. Lightfoote, MD, MBA, William Shields, JD, LLM, Edward I. Bluth, MD, Katarzyna J. Macura, MD, PhD As most members are aware, radiology has failed to attract women and other minority medical students into its residency programs in the same percentages as medical schools and other competing specialties. One reason for this may be the need for more flexible scheduling than some groups currently provide. This factor has been recognized by the federal government in all areas of employment, including medicine. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 [1] requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for n
n
n
n
n
the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within 1 year of birth; the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within 1 year of placement; care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition; a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job; any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is
n
a covered military member on “covered active duty”; and leave to care for a covered service member with a serious injury or illness (military caregiver leave).
This federal law applies to both female and male employees who have worked at least 1,250 hours during the previous 12 months (“eligible employees”). Additionally, the US Department of Labor has ruled that residents and fellows can qualify under the Family and Medical Leave Act after they have worked for 12 months and completed the requisite number of hours [2,3]. Current ACR policy states, “The ACR supports the development of family leave policies in radiology facilities consistent with federal and state laws; 2001, amended 2011 (Res. 47-i).” Therefore, the ACR Commission for Women and General Diversity and the ACR Commission on Human Resources believe that, when feasible, academic radiology and radiation oncology departments, as well as private practice radiology and radiation oncology groups, should consider providing the aforementioned family leave benefits to all of their eligible female and
ª 2015 American College of Radiology 1546-1440/15/$36.00 n http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2015.04.013
male employees, including residents, whether or not they are required to do so by federal law (in the case of smaller groups with fewer than 50 employees). There are ethical and social, political and economic reasons for this. For more than a generation, family and medical leave has become a core element of corporate and employment practices in all industrialized democracies. Although the United States is far behind other high-income countries in terms of the level of support provided, it nevertheless recognizes the value of supporting families that accrues directly to employees, employers, and the workforce overall. Specifically in radiology, with the goal of Imaging 3.0 to enable “radiologists to take a leadership role in shaping America’s future health care system” [4], we can help do so by providing all members of our teams (female and male) with family leave. In doing so, our practices become more inclusive and more productive, and they enjoy the benefits of radiologists who are respected by, valued by their radiologic enterprises, and hence committed to their radiologic enterprises; ultimately, this may translate into improved patient care as well. President Obama himself
1125
has demonstrated a renewed interest in leave policies, arguing in his 2015 State of the Union address that “it’s time we stop treating child care as a side issue, or a women’s issue, and treat it like the national economic priority that it is for all of us” [5]. Our commissions similarly declare that family leave is a national professional priority. Because many practices and academic departments have not yet enacted family leave policies [6], our commissions
propose that members seek financially feasible methods of providing family medical leave to all eligible diagnostic radiologists, radiation oncologists, interventional radiologists, nuclear medicine physicians, and medical physicists, including residents, via written, accessible leave policies consonant with federal law and modern employment practices.
2.
3. 4.
5.
6.
REFERENCES 1. US Department of Labor. Leave benefits: family & medical leave. Available at: http://
www.dol.gov/dol/topic/benefits-leave/fmla. htm. Accessed May 6, 2015. Mayo Foundation v United States, 09-837. Supreme Court of the United States (2011). Towney D. Labor and employment law, 15th ed. Mason, OH: Southwestern; 2013:33. American College of Radiology. Imaging 3.0. Available at: http://www.acr.org/Advocacy/ Economics-Health-Policy/Imaging-3. Accessed January 21, 2015. Miller CC. Obama says family leave is an economic necessity, not just a women’s issue. The New York Times January 21, 2015. Heilbrun ME, Bender CE, Truong HB, Bluth EI. Health issues and the practicing radiologist: defining concepts and developing recommendations for leave options and policies. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10:695-701.
Elizabeth Kagan Arleo, MD, is from New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell, New York, New York. Julia R. Fielding, MD, is from the Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina. Johnson B. Lightfoote, MD, MBA, is from the Department of Radiology, Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center. Edward I. Bluth, MD, is from Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, Louisiana. Katarzyna J. Macura, MD, PhD, is from The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University. William Shields, JD, LLM, CAE General Counsel, American College of Radiology. The authors have no conflicts of interest related to the material discussed in this article. Elizabeth Kagan Arleo, MD: New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell, 425 East 61st Street, 9th Floor, New York, NY 10065; e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected].
1126
Journal of the American College of Radiology Volume 12 n Number 10 n October 2015