HR Management & Compliance

Proposed Law Would Institute Paid Family/Medical Leave

Congress has proposed a bill that would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave each year to qualifying workers for the birth or adoption of a new child, the serious illness of an immediate family member, a worker’s own medical condition, and/or for specific military caregiving and leave purposes.

The Family and Medical Insurance Leave Act of 2013, or the FAMILY Act, would cover workers in all companies, no matter their size and be funded by employee and employer payroll contributions of two-tenths of one percent each, or about $1.50 per week for a typical worker. Workers would be eligible to collect benefits equal to 66 percent of their typical monthly wages, with a capped monthly maximum amount of $1,000 per week.

Unlike the Family and Medical Leave Act, which is only available based on the size of the employer, FAMILY Act benefits would be available to every individual who is: (1) insured for Social Security Disability Insurance when the SSDI application is filed; (2) has earned any income from employment or self-employment in the 12 months before applying for benefits; and (3) is/was engaged in qualified caregiving.

Five states — California, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island — and Puerto Rico currently have temporary disability insurance programs such as that which the Family Act contemplates.

According to research by the National Partnership for Women and Families, more small employers say that they support family and medical leave insurance than oppose it. Currently only 12 percent of U.S. workers have access to paid family leave through their employers, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“This solution seems like a win-win,” says Jon Hyman, a partner at Kohrman Jackson & Krantz. “The United States remains the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee working mothers paid time off after childbirth. This legislation would bring us up to par with the rest of the civilized world without imposing a significant monetary penalty on employers.”

The House bill (H.R. 3712) is sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., introduced the Senate version (S. 1810), which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *