Skip to main content

Updated: Workflex in the 21st Century Act Continues To Work Its Way Through Congress



This morning, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce is set to hold another hearing on the Workflex in the 21st Century Act (H.R. 4219 (115)).  Readers might recall that last year, I highlighted this bill, sponsored by California Republican Representative Mimi Walters (and co-sponsored by Washington Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers and New York Republican Representative Elise Stefanik).  For those needing a refresher, the Act would exempt companies from state and local paid leave laws if these companies met minimum federal paid leave standards and flexible work requirements.  This bill is considered a "first of its kind" in so much that it would combine guaranteed paid leave and increased workplace flexibility under one piece of legislation.

As for the specifics of the paid leave portion of the bill:

  • Paid leave would be extended to all full time and part time employees.
  • Employees could accrue leave over the course of a plan year or employers could choose to offer a leave lump sum amount at the start of the plan year.
  • New employees would be subject to restrictions on the use of leave during the first 90 days of employment.
  • Paid leave would be scaled to the size of the employer's workforce and the tenure of employees.
  • Employers, rather than taxpayers, would pay the cost of the paid leave

As for the specifics of the flexible work (a/k/a workflex) portion of the bill:

  • To be eligible for a workflex arrangement, an employee would have to be employed for at least 12 months by the employer and would have to have worked at least 1,000 hours during the previous 12 months.
  • Employers would be required to offer at least one of the following workflex arrangements to eligible employees:  compressed work schedule, biweekly work program, telecommuting program, job sharing program, flexible scheduling, or a predictable schedule.

While many Republicans and business groups have started to rally around the Act, there has been some resistance against it.  For instance, late last year, the National Women's Law Center wrote a letter to Congress and criticized the Act as harming families by allowing employers to "circumvent state and local laws designed to protect working people."  In particular, the group characterized the Act as unjustly allowing employers to decide when and whether workers would be allowed to use paid time off and to decide what constituted "predictable" or "flexible" schedules.  While this bill is still in the early stages of working its way through Congress, it will be one to keep an eye on going forward (as other paid leave legislation looks to gain a foothold).


For a copy of the Workflex in the 21st Century Act:  https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4219

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,...
Post a Comment
Read more

Senator Bernie Sanders To Introduce Bill Requiring Large Corporations To Pay For Federal Assistance Programs

Next week, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is set to introduce legislation which would require large employers such as Walmart, Amazon, and McDonald's to fully cover the cost of food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, and other federal assistance programs that their employees receive.  Senator Sanders has stated that the goal is to force these large employers to pay their employees a living wage and cut back on the nearly $150 billion in taxpayer dollars that go toward funding these federal programs every year. As for the specifics, a 100% tax on government benefits received would be imposed on government benefits received by workers at companies with 500 or more employees.  For instance, if a Walmart employee received $500 in food stamps, Walmart would be taxed $500. To call this proposed legislation groundbreaking would be an understatement.  I would expect that Senator Sanders, an Independent that caucuses with Democrats, is going to face an uphill battle gett...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more