Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: Paid Leave Edition


This week, I came across several great articles on paid leave.  Given this is an election year, it has become a major talking point among many candidates (mostly those on the Democratic side that is).  What better time to highlight the issue then now, right?  I would suggest readers start with The Baltimore Sun article which breaks down the attempts to get paid parental leave off the ground across the U.S. (with many failures and false starts along the way).  Then, move on and check out the articles comparing where several of the Presidential candidates stand on the matter.  Worthwhile to see where things might go, depending upon who is elected later this year.

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.


Is Paid Parental Leave About to Make Major Strides?

The Baltimore Sun has a fascinating look at the possibility of paid parental leave becoming a reality sooner rather than later.  For those interested in how paid parental leave has developed over recent years (albeit, rather slowly), the article does a good job breaking down how paid parental leave has been slow to catch on, but might be well on its way to gaining steam around the country.  Well worth a read for those interested in the background of attempts to get paid parental leave policies off the ground in the U.S.


New York City Mayor de Blasio Signs New Paid Parental Leave into Law

Earlier this month, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio signed an order that will provide paid parental leave to nearly 20,000 New York City employees.  Under the order, these employees will be provided with six weeks of paid time off for maternity, paternity, adoption, or foster care leave at 100% of salary.  Note, as The Brooklyn Reader points out, the policy went into effect December 22, 2015.  Under the policy, the six weeks of leave must be taken within 24 weeks of the qualifying birth, adoption, or foster care.  This is quite a development on the parental leave front!  It will be interesting to see if other cities follow New York City's lead...



The Huffington Post has a good article that points out the minor differences between the paid leave policies proposed by Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.  (Note, both candidates support paid leave to allow employees to take time off, with pay, to care for a newborn or sick relative.)  Of note, the bill currently pending on Capitol Hill (and co-sponsored by Sanders) would impose a small payroll tax of 0.4 percent (split evenly among employers and employees) to finance the replacement wages that workers would get.  Clinton's proposal would instead impose a new tax on the wealthiest Americans to finance the replacement wages.



Ohio Governor John Kasich, who is running as a Republican candidate for President, recently stated his belief that it should be up to employers to decide if they will allow their employees to take paid family leave.  Instead, Kasich proposed the focus should be on helping women work from home or simply to stay at home and care for children.  This is a sharp contrast from the position of Clinton and Sanders who have proposed that the government should ensure that all employees be allowed to take paid leave.



CNN noted that as of now, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who is also running as a Republican candidate for President, is the only Republican candidate to offer any proposal on paid leave.  Under Rubio's plan, employers would be offered a 25% non-refundable tax credit if they offered their employees between four and twelve weeks of paid family leave to new parents, those caring for sick family members, and families of members in the military.  Under the proposal, pay would be capped at $4,000.00 per employee per year.  Might this be Senator Rubio's attempt to move more towards the center of the aisle and make a play for independents...assuming he gets the Republican nomination?

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