A federal review of the country’s primary employee time-off law
could be a prelude to expanding leave policy or curbing it, depending on whether
proponents or critics are doing the analysis.
On December 1, the Department of Labor officially solicited
public comment on the Family and Medical Leave Act. Responses will be collected
until February 2.
The law, which went into effect in 1993, grants employees at
companies with 50 or more workers 12 weeks of unpaid leave in a 12-month period
to deal with the birth or adoption of a child or a serious medical condition of
their own or of a close family member.
Since its inception, the measure has generated many court
cases involving the definition of a serious illness, sufficient notice and a
host of other issues.
The Labor Department estimates 76.1 million workers were
eligible for FMLA leave in 2005 and that 6.1 million took leave under the law,
with 1.5 million of them using it intermittently.
The timing of the regulatory review, which has been on the
department’s agenda for many years, is suspicious to one expert.
“This is being done as a preamble to expanding FMLA,” says
Vicki Schweitzer, senior vice president for Aon Consulting’s health and
productivity practice.
Democratic majorities in Congress are likely to call for
modernizing the law so that it extends to more family members and to advance
proposals for paid leave, Schweitzer says.
Before expansion occurs, the regulatory review can modify
aspects of the act that have been vexing business—like intermittent leave.
An advocate, however, intends to resist corporate efforts to
trim the law. “We’re going to do our best to make sure there aren’t any cutbacks
to FMLA,” says Deven McGraw, COO of the National Partnership for Women and
Families.
For instance, McGraw warns against changing intermittent
leave so that it can only be taken in one-day increments. That might mean that a
two-hour chemotherapy session costs a worker a day of leave.
That kind of FMLA reform might not occur. The Labor
Department is asking for feedback on the law; it is not yet proposing new rules.
When the department modified overtime pay regulations earlier
in the Bush administration, the exercise took a year and a half. That process
began with a proposed rule change. The FMLA review is starting one step prior to
that point, with a request for information on the current law.
“At some point, a Department of Labor will have to do some
kind of regulatory cleanup,” says Victoria Lipnic, assistant secretary of labor
for employment standards. She says she can’t predict whether the current
department will change FMLA regulations.
As the process continues, the business community won’t clamor
to eliminate FMLA, says Jim Brown, vice president of FMLASource at ComPsych, a
Chicago-based provider of employee assistance programs.
“People are struggling with administering FMLA,” he says.
“We’d like to see some clarification.”
When a company has to scramble to cover an unexpected
absence, it usually has to pay overtime or hire a temp. But FMLA costs are hard
to determine.
In 2000, companies seemed to be sanguine about intermittent
leave, with 81 percent saying that it had no impact on productivity and 93
percent asserting that it didn’t affect profits, according to a survey that year
by Westat, a statistical survey research organization.
Sometimes, businesses are more generous with leave than the
FMLA dictates. A survey of 241 benefits managers, public employers and
professional service providers by the International Foundation of Employee
Benefit Plans found that 25 percent of organizations allow paid leave for the
care of a domestic partner and 23 percent for a grandparent or
sibling.
“Everybody’s definition of family is starting to change,”
says Julie Stich, senior information specialist for the organization. “You take
care of the people who you consider important to you.”
—Mark Schoeff Jr.