Frequently Asked Questions

No. The Wording Risk Checker provides objective communication compliance guidance and highlights potential retaliation, ADA, and FMLA wording risks based on standard US employment laws. It does not constitute legal representation or advice, and should not replace your corporate legal counsel or certified HR consultants.

We use a structured AI prompt and scenario taxonomy to parse phrasing. The checker looks for temporal proximity, statements linking protected leave or accommodations to negative team impacts, performance criticism mixed with protected status, and aggressive tones that could be interpreted as retaliatory evidence.

We use HTTPS in transit and account-scoped records. Scans may be saved for history, review records, exports, and audit trails. We do not use submitted text to train public AI models, and we recommend removing names, medical details, and other identifying personal data before scanning.

It is custom-built for HR Generalists, People Managers, and Employment Consultants. HR teams use it to audit drafts sent by managers, while managers use it directly to write objective, professional attendance and performance documentation.

All users get 3 free scans per day without an account. You can upgrade to a paid plan at any time via the billing area to get higher monthly scan ranges, saved history, exports, review workflows, and advanced policy grounding.

SMB plans can use custom policy grounding for internal handbook text. Union-specific, state-specific, or high-stakes employment decisions should still be reviewed by your HR or legal team.

All payments and subscriptions are processed securely via Stripe. We never see or store your credit card details. We offer a transparent 14-day refund window for subscription upgrades. You can cancel or manage your plan instantly via the Stripe customer portal.

Dev Mode is a local developer environment configuration that allows product managers and developers to preview all user and administrative features without setting up identity servers. No real authentication credentials are saved or transmitted in this mode.

Under standard Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) compliance rules, any manager wording that connects protected medical leave to negative business outcomes can trigger retaliation claims. High-risk phrases include referencing an employee's FMLA leave when discussing team performance, criticizing their attendance as a 'morale issue' when those absences are medically protected, or warning them that their schedule unpredictability is making it hard to trust them. These off-the-cuff comments are often interpreted by courts as direct evidence of retaliatory animus. Instead of using subjective labels, managers should document the specific operational needs and expectations during the hours the employee is scheduled to work.

When an employee requests an accommodation for a medical condition under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the employer must engage in and document the interactive process. This documentation should be entirely objective and record the date of the request, the specific job essential functions discussed, the accommodations explored, and any agreed-upon solutions or trial periods. It is critical to avoid subjective notes that express frustration, question the legitimacy of the medical restriction, or label the employee as 'difficult' or 'demanding'. All accommodation records must be kept in a secure file separate from the employee's standard performance folder.

In retaliation claims filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, courts apply the 'but-for' causation standard. This legal test requires the employee to prove that the adverse employment action—such as a demotion, suspension, or termination—would not have occurred 'but for' the fact that they engaged in protected activity, such as reporting harassment or requesting an accommodation. Employers defend against this by presenting clear, objective, and contemporaneous documentation of performance or conduct issues that existed prior to or independent of the protected activity, demonstrating that the same disciplinary action would have been taken regardless of the protected event.

Yes, a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) can be classified as an adverse employment action and used as evidence of retaliation if it is issued shortly after an employee engages in protected activity. If a manager places an employee on a PIP referencing vague, subjective criteria like 'poor attitude' or 'lack of engagement' immediately after the employee returns from FMLA leave or reports a safety concern, the timing and subjective nature of the PIP create a high risk of being seen as a pretext for retaliation. To prevent this, PIPs must rely strictly on verifiable performance metrics, show consistent application of team policies, and be vetted by HR.

Under federal laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), protected activity includes any action an employee takes to oppose discrimination, participate in an employment dispute investigation, or exercise their statutory rights. Examples include requesting a disability accommodation, taking protected FMLA leave, filing a harassment complaint, reporting wage violations, or cooperating as a witness in an HR investigation. Employers are prohibited from taking adverse actions against employees for engaging in these activities, and any close temporal proximity between the activity and discipline requires documented business justification.

While the Wording Risk Checker is grounded primarily in federal standards like the FMLA, ADA, and Title VII, it also flags risk signals that apply under state-specific laws, such as California's CFRA or New York's Paid Family Leave. Many state-level regulations impose stricter standards on employers regarding leave interference and retaliatory actions. If your business operates in states with enhanced employee protections, our tool helps ensure your documentation remains neutral and factual, which is the safest practice under all jurisdictions. For high-stakes decisions, we recommend consulting qualified local employment counsel.

Yes. Many managers believe that informal coaching notes, emails, Slack messages, or personal notebooks are private and do not carry legal consequences. In reality, any written or digital record related to employee performance can be subpoenaed and introduced as evidence in court or during an agency investigation. A quick, frustrated Slack message complaining about an employee's medical absences can be just as damaging to a company's defense as an official warning letter. This is why it is essential to train all supervisors to maintain the same objective, professional standard in every communication medium.

FMLA leave interference occurs when an employer denies, restrains, or discourages an employee from exercising their right to take protected medical leave. Examples include demanding they work during leave, delaying approval, or making negative comments about the request. Leave retaliation, on the other hand, occurs when an employer takes adverse action against an employee (such as a demotion, negative performance review, or termination) because they exercised their FMLA rights. Both claims carry severe legal penalties and are commonly proven using manager emails or text messages as primary evidence.

For organizations on our SMB and Enterprise tiers, our platform can ingest your specific corporate policies, collective bargaining agreements, and employee handbooks. The compliance checker then reviews your manager drafts not only against federal and state laws, but also against your internal company guidelines. This ensures that managers do not issue warnings that violate internal progressive discipline steps or misrepresent company-specific leave benefits. This grounding maintains communication consistency across large management teams, reducing coordination gaps between frontline supervisors and HR.

When documenting attendance gaps, managers must stick to objective, policy-based facts. The warning should list the exact dates of the unscheduled absences, the company policy that was violated, and the expected standard going forward. It is crucial to exclude any speculation about the employee's health, references to their personal life, or accusations of leave abuse. If the manager suspects that some of the absences may be due to a medical condition or protected leave, they must coordinate with HR to initiate the FMLA or ADA accommodation process rather than addressing it as a disciplinary matter.