Editor,
UNM staff should carefully consider remaining in the catastrophic-leave program. Recently, a UNM employee whom I supervise was involved in a serious accident that required a three-week hospital stay. This employee's annual and sick leave banks were quickly depleted, and he filed for catastrophic leave. The request was initially denied. The response from Human Resources and Employee Occupational Health was that, "the criteria has been set for us to not approve anyone whose condition is not 'acutely life threatening.'" The UNM catastrophic-leave policy (UNMBPPM 3430) gives an example of a qualifying serious debilitating illness as "treatment with a connection to an overnight stay in a hospital."
After an uphill battle, this catastrophic-leave request was finally approved for one month. UNM HR's explanation of the original refusal was that they did not have enough information from the provider to approve the catastrophic-leave request. The provider was not contacted, as the policy requires in cases of catastrophic-leave declination.
This employee was thankfully able to sufficiently recover to return home to continue convalescing. The employee was not able to return to work immediately after the hospital stay. When a renewal request was filed, it too was declined because, though the employee was still recovering, the situation was no longer "acutely life threatening." Because the employee used all of his sick and annual leave before being eligible for catastrophic leave, he was on leave without pay for the remainder of his recovery.
As a supervisor, I am embarrassed that this could happen to a loyal and dedicated employee who does not abuse leave. I am dismayed at HR's responses and lack of customer service. As I moved up the chain of command in search of answers, I was constantly met with resistance and a lack of responsibility and empathy for the employee's situation. "I'm just the messenger," was a frequent response.
In the few cases at HR and EOH where I found answers, I was told that people had abused the catastrophic-leave program in the past and the pendulum has swung the other direction - legitimate cases were being denied. I suspect this is directly related to the solvency issues this program is experiencing.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
I urge HR and the UNM administration to refine this policy. At the least, the definition of a catastrophic illness should be defined so staff members have a clear expectation of what is covered when they are automatically enrolled in this program.
The catastrophic-leave policy is misleading employees into "donating" leave to participate in a program where they could experience a denial because of a vague policy definition of what constitutes a catastrophic illness.
I urge employees who are considering remaining in this program to contact HR and ask what types of catastrophic illnesses are covered. Use specific examples like open-heart surgery. I think you'll be surprised by their answers.
Jonathan Sibray
UNM staff
