Beyond FMLA: Making the Case for State-Level Paid Family Leave, the Path to Policy Adoption

The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was established in 1993, and while limited in scope, it is the only national policy in place to support individuals that need to take time away from work to care for a sick family member. Paid Family Leave, a state-level mechanism of FMLA, creates a safety net to support these workers. Despite its potential impact, such programs currently exist in only 6 states and the District of Columbia. Further, even within these states, individuals are often unaware of the policy's existence. A systematic review of peer reviewed literature from 1994-2019 explores the predictors of the adoption and implementation of state-level Paid Family Leave and public awareness of Paid Family Leave programs in these states. This presentation will explore these findings and their implications on future state level adoption, implementation and awareness of Paid Family Leave.

Employment concerns experienced by ovarian cancer patients and caregivers.

69 Background: Our aim was to obtain patient input on the impact of cancer treatment on employment. Methods: We recruited patients with ovarian cancer receiving systemic therapy who screened positive for financial distress using Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity <26. Participants completed a 45-minute interview with 2 interviewers on their costs of care, including employment concerns. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded by 3 analysts using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Of 22 participants, 86% were <65 years old and 28% were on curative intent treatment. There were 18 with currently evaluable interviews. Themes are shown in the table. Conclusions: Cancer care has a negative impact on patient and caregiver work productivity, income, and employer benefits. Incorporating resources to navigate workplace factors, such as Family Medical Leave Act benefits and negotiating accommodations with an employer, could improve care delivery. [Table: see text]

Analysis of Pregnancy Anti-Discrimination Policy in Kentucky: Application of Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework

While several federal laws including the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Family Medical Leave Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act provide some freedom from discrimination due to pregnancy and breastfeeding-related conditions, many pregnant workers in Kentucky were not covered under these existing laws. The intent of Senate Bill 18, the Kentucky Pregnant Workers Act, was to provide clarity to employers about the protections afforded to pregnant workers by law as well as the need for employers to provide the same level of accommodations for pregnant workers that are available for those who are disabled. Similar bills had been filed during the 2015 to 2018 legislative sessions, and in 2019, Senate Bill 18 passed 87-5 and was signed by the Governor on April 9, 2019. The purpose of this article is to analyze a pregnancy anti-discrimination bill that passed during the 2019 Kentucky General Assembly utilizing Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework. This article also contains multiple policy alternatives, interest group involvement related to pregnancy anti-discrimination policy, unintended consequences of policy implementation as well as potential issues with enforcement of the Kentucky Pregnant Workers Act.

Expanding paid sick leave programs in the wake of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic is having a profound effect on the U.S. workforce. Employers are struggling to make workforce decisions with the added constraint of preventing further spread of the virus, including the number of employees needed to operate at less-than-capacity and the number of employees that can work from home. Existing company policies and employment contracts may not effectively address employees’ personal experience with a situation like COVID-19, which may include a medical diagnosis of the virus, the need to quarantine due to exposure to another infected person, or the need to care for a child whose school or daycare is shut down due to the pandemic. In this paper, we explore the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for employers providing paid sick leave and paid family medical leave. Employers are facing a growing number of lawsuits alleging noncompliance with the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). Paid sick leave mandates may be increasing employers’ exposure to employment practices liability insurance (EPLI), thus further complicating the legal considerations for employers as they navigate evolving guidelines for employee safety in the midst of a pandemic.

Parental Leave for Residents at Programs Affiliated With the Top 50 Medical Schools

ABSTRACT Background Of the top 15 medical schools with affiliated graduate medical education (GME) programs, 8 offer paid parental leave, with an average duration of 6.6 weeks. It is not known how other GME programs approach parental leave. Objective We searched for the parental leave policies for residents in programs affiliated with the top 50 medical schools. Methods In 2019, we identified the top 50 medical schools designated by US News & World Report in the research and primary care categories (totaling 59 schools), and identified the associated GME programs. For each school, we accessed its website and searched for “GME Policies and Procedures” to find language related to maternity, paternity, or parental leave, or the Family Medical Leave Act. If unavailable, we e-mailed the GME office to identify the policy. Results Of 59 schools, 25 (42%) described paid parental leave policies with an average of 5.1 weeks paid leave; 11 of those (44%) offer ≤ 4 weeks paid parental leave. Twenty-five of 59 (42%) programs did not have paid parental leave, but 13 of these specify that residents can use sick or vacation time to pay for part of their parental leave. Finally, 13 of 59 (22%) offered state mandated partial paid leave. One school did not have any description of parental leave. Conclusions While paid parental leave for residents has been adopted by many of the GME programs affiliated with the top 50 medical schools, it is not yet a standard benefit offered to the majority of residents.