Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: Paid Family Leave Policy (Vermont)


As with many employment and labor law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  

This is one to keep an eye on.


Recently, Democratic lawmakers in Vermont introduced a bill in the State Legislature which would expand the family leave policy in the state and allow employees to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave per year for childbirth, serious illness, or to care for an aging parent.  (The current family leave plan in Vermont provides for about 4.6 weeks of leave.)  Of course the question that follows is always, 'ok, how are you going to pay for it?'  And that is perhaps where this proposal gets a bit contentious.  Under the current proposal, there would be a .93% mandatory payroll tax on employees in Vermont.  Note, the .93% could be adjusted each year but would be capped at 1%.  As well, employers could voluntarily cover some of that payroll tax if they chose to, but it would not be a requirement.

Under this proposal, workers who took the paid family leave would be entitled to receive their normal weekly income capped at twice the state livable wage (approximately $1,042.00/week).  It goes without saying that providing up to 12 weeks of paid family leave would put Vermont at the forefront as a trailblazer on the issue (as this proposal would provide nearly four more weeks of leave than any other state).

That is not to say there will not be a fight to get this proposal passed.  While family advocacy groups, the Vermont AARP, and some Vermont businesses (with approximately 47% of businesses in the state backing paid family leave) support the proposal, the Republican Governor, Phil Scott, has argued that the bill would ultimately cost workers in the state money and hinder growth.  In fact, a recent analysis has shown that the expanded family leave plan would cost Vermont $2.5 million in new technology to implement the bill as well as costs to make up for employees taking the additional time off.  As a result, the Governor has indicated he would veto the bill if it reached his desk.

Last Friday, the Vermont House Committee on General Housing and Military Affairs votes in favor of the bill by a 7 - 4 vote.  The Vermont House Committee on Ways and Means is to take up the issue next.  This bill has a ways to go still, as the House Speaker Mitzi Johnson indicated the bill is not a priority this year.  Rather, the plan would be to approve the bill and advance it out of the Hoise so that the Senate could consider it next year.  Perhaps it is true that good things really do take time...



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more