Opinion 1: Family Leave Bill Hurts Businesses, Employees
By Jonathan M. Dennehy
Special to the Worcester Business Journal
Both houses of the legislature are currently processing bills that would create the Paid Family Leave Act for Massachusetts employees (Senate Bill 114 and House Bill 1779). The Federal Medical Leave Act (FMLA) already provides for unpaid but protected employee leave for serious family medical situations. The Massachusetts proposal would allow a Massachusetts employee to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave for a personal serious health condition or to care for a spouse, child or parent.
The paid leave would be funded by employee contributions equal to 0.1 percent of that employee's wages, up to a maximum of $120 per employee annually. The employee contributions would be made via employer payroll deductions into the "Strong Families Trust Fund," administered by the state treasurer. Only employees who are Massachusetts residents would be eligible to receive "wage replacement stipends" of up to 80 percent of his or her weekly pay up to $750 per week. Companies who employ fewer than six employees would be exempt from the provisions of this proposed act.
There are many reasons why this proposal is not only detrimental to Massachusetts businesses but also the employees that they employ:
• There is no guarantee that the commonwealth will not require employer contributions to this fund.
• The loss of even one employee for up to 12 weeks would have an extremely disruptive effect on the company's ability to run efficiently. There is no limit under the law as to how many of a company's employees could be out on paid leave at any given time. Also, there has been no consideration by the legislature of the added costs associated with replacing employees on leave (increased wages, training, etc.).
• The working family person who is hurt the most by paid family leave is the small business owner who is not eligible for wage replacement stipends.
• What will prevent the Legislature from dipping into the "Strong Families Trust Fund" in times of economic crises? If the "fund" does not survive, how will the state address the demands of employees, who feel entitled to a paid 12-week leave?
A stable and growing economy is the first safety net that should be protected in order to make sure that working families are not adversely impacted by the rising costs of mortgages, home heating fuel, gas and electricity. The Paid Family Leave Act would increase costs of doing business for companies in Massachusetts and would therefore benefit neither employers nor employees.
Jonathan M. Dennehy is an attorney who practices law in Leominster. He is a member of the government affairs committee of the North Central Massachusetts Chamber of Commerce, and recently testified against the Massachusetts Paid Family Leave Bill before the Joint Committees of Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities and the Committee on Labor and Workforce Development.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments