Dodd Introduces Bill to Expand Job Leave
By Paul Ziobro
Washington – Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) introduced legislation Wednesday that would qualify 240,000 more Connecticut workers for leaves of absences under his proposed Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act.
Brian Petranella, president of Local 371, United Food Commercial Workers in Westport, said he respects the underlying ideas of family values in the original Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and looks forward to seeing more workers taking days off to care for themselves or a family member.
“The fear of losing your job is the biggest fear in the world, and I think this just puts to rest some people who are concerned about whether or not they have to opt to take care of somebody or take care of themselves,” Petranella said.
Ten years ago Wednesday, Dodd stood alongside President Bill Clinton as he signed into law the FMLA, which made employees eligible for 12 weeks of unpaid leave with job protection, he said. More than 35 million Americans have taken leave under the act, and Dodd said he wants to expand the program to include an additional 13 million workers.
“I’m here today to use this as a launching pad, as well as to take this concept of family medical leave to another level that we think it should be going,” Dodd said at a news conference in the Capitol.
Under his proposal, employees working for companies with 25 or more workers—rather than 50 or more under the original act–would become eligible for leaves, according to Dodd’s office. It also would provide leaves of absence for employees suffering domestic violence and for workers caring for family members who are addressing domestic violence problems or its effects.
The bill would create a $400 million pilot program to help states design ways to offer six weeks of partial or full paid leave, which would count toward the FMLA-allowed 12 weeks, for eligible employees.
Opponents of the original legislation said that before Congress considers expanding FMLA, it should address what they describe as a loophole concerning how serious a health condition must be to qualify an employee for medical leave.
One such opponent, Deanna Gelak, executive director of the Virginia-based FMLA Technical Corrections Coalition, said the Labor Department issued two conflicting reports on whether the common cold, flu and non-migraine headaches qualified.
“We would just be hopeful that instead of expanding the act at this point that some practical changes could be made so that it effectively serves the workers it was designed to protect,” Gelak said.
Petranella said that about 10 percent of the 13,000 workers in Connecticut, Western Massachusetts and Vermont that his union represents use FMLA to take time off for medical or family reasons. He said no employers have criticized the law for harming business.
“I have never heard from one employer saying that it’s burdensome and that it hurts the company,” Petranella said. “That tells you about how good it is.”
Dodd said his colleagues in Congress take extensive leaves of absence from their duties to spend time with a family member dealing with a medical problem, and other citizens should be able to do likewise without fear of repercussion from their employer.
“If they didn’t take off to be with them, the political indictment would probably cost them their seats,” he said. “It is politically unacceptable for a Democrat or Republican to abandon their families during times like these. Why should the standard be any different for the average citizen?”
Published in The Hour, in Connecticut.
