Anchorage Daily News

Q. Despite the fact that our employees know our company hovers on the brink of layoffs, one of my key employees made a bizarre request, telling me I needed to pay for her weight-reduction surgery.

I thought she was joking until she delivered her punch line. She said a local orthopedic surgeon tells her she needs back surgery based on a fall she took in our parking lot last winter, and the surgery won't succeed unless she loses a significant amount of weight.

Since when did this become my problem? I feel for her, I really do, but I'm not responsible for her eating habits. When I told her this, she started to cry and told me she'd checked with our insurance company and they consider it non-reimbursable elective surgery, and thus, she expects our company to pay.

Is this totally crazy or does the workers' compensation angle force me to pay?

A. In late 2008, Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act which took effect Jan. 1. This law broadens conditions, such as obesity, that can be considered a disability warranting employer accommodation. Given recent statistics documenting that about 20 percent of our country's adults qualify as obese, many employers may confront the challenge you face.

According to attorney Rick Gikas, courts in a "string of cases across the country," including Indiana, Ohio, California, Oregon, Florida and South Dakota, have ordered employers to pay for weight-loss surgery. Last month, after a pizza shop employee who weighed 340 pounds hurt his back when accidentally struck by a freezer door, an Indiana court ruled that his employer needed to pay for the employee's weight-loss surgery to ensure the success of his back operation. According to the court, the employee's weight and a work accident combined to create a single injury requiring employer coverage.

In short, you could be on the hook.

Q. I've heard our receptionist plans to go to the Department of Labor because we didn't pay her 30 minutes of overtime. She stayed this amount of time after work chatting with a drop-in visitor.

I didn't authorize this time nor would I have wanted her to stay after work. In fact, I've told her many times that when visitors come, she needs to greet them, get them coffee and get back to work. Instead, whenever visitors arrive, she wastes time chit-chatting because she enjoys these diversionary breaks. The idea that I would pay her time and a half to chit-chat totally fries me. and when I saw it on her time sheet I reminded her I'd specifically e-mailed her that I expected a late customer and that she could leave the door unlocked and depart when her shift ended. She got a snooty look on her face and said, "Oh I couldn't have done that, it would have been rude."

Do I really have to pay her for a decision she made to stay late and fool around?

A. You two had a control battle and you lost the first round. Don't lose the next. Pay her.

Employers take a huge risk if they don't pay employees overtime even when the employees extend their work day without prior authorization. Even though she stayed late without your permission, she remained on your work site and can make the case she thought she was doing her job. By denying her overtime, you give her the opportunity to use the Department of Labor to help her recover the wages she believes you owe her.

You don't need to let this occur again. If you instruct your receptionist to greet customers and then return to her other work and she persists in chatting, she is insubordinate. For this, you can discipline her up to and including termination, particularly if you have an organizational policy requiring pre-authorization.

Lynne Curry is a local management trainer, consultant and syndicated columnist. Her advice and opinion column appears every other Monday. Questions for her column may be faxed to her at 258-2157 or mailed to her c/o Anchorage Daily News, P.O. Box 149001, Anchorage 99514-9001. Her e-mail is lynne@thegrowthcompany.com.

ADVERTISEMENT