State House committee considers paid family leave bill
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - A day after a Senate committee approved a measure to repeal an as-of-yet unfunded law giving parents five weeks of paid time off to be with a new child, a House committee on Tuesday heard arguments on why that same program should be expanded.
Paid family leave was approved by the Legislature in 2007, and was supposed to start paying benefits of up to $250 a week starting in October 2009. But without an agreed-upon funding source, the Legislature has postponed its implementation twice.
The House Committee on Labor & Workforce Development on Tuesday held a public hearing on the bill that would expand the underlying measure to include caring for a family member or an employee's own disability. The bill, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Tami Green of Lakewood, would expand the weekly benefit from a flat rate to a percentage of the employee's wages, up to $1,000 per week. The measure also would expand the time allowed from five weeks to 12 weeks. California and New Jersey have similar laws.
Green called family leave "a practical solution."
"It will promote strong families and a secure middle class," she told the committee, noting that it could mean fewer families would be forced to go on public assistance.
"In the long term it will save us money," she said.
The program would be paid for with a 0.2 percent payroll tax on both employees and employers starting in 2014 that would increase in 2016 to 0.4 percent of wages. Benefits would start in January 2015.
"It's a well-meaning bill, but quite honestly, I can tell you most of the businesses cannot afford this piece of legislation," said Gary Smith, executive director of the Independent Business Association.
Smith said that businesses that could afford to implement such a program can already do so on their own, and that there shouldn't be a state mandate on others who can't.
"This law is not needed," he said.
A similar companion bill has been introduced in the Senate, but the committee that it has been referred to approved a bill on Monday that would repeal the underlying law.
Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee has said he's not in support of repealing the law, but hasn't taken a position on the expansion bill.
A repeal of the state paid-leave law would have no impact on federal leave laws. Under federal law, paid leave is not required, but businesses with 50 or more employees must give workers up to 12 weeks of medical leave per year for themselves or to take care of a new child or ailing relative.
The state law requires the paid leave be taken concurrently with the federal leave.
___
The measures to expand paid family leave are House Bill 1457 and Senate Bill 5292. The measure to repeal the underlying law is Senate Bill 5159.
Paid family leave was approved by the Legislature in 2007, and was supposed to start paying benefits of up to $250 a week starting in October 2009. But without an agreed-upon funding source, the Legislature has postponed its implementation twice.
The House Committee on Labor & Workforce Development on Tuesday held a public hearing on the bill that would expand the underlying measure to include caring for a family member or an employee's own disability. The bill, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Tami Green of Lakewood, would expand the weekly benefit from a flat rate to a percentage of the employee's wages, up to $1,000 per week. The measure also would expand the time allowed from five weeks to 12 weeks. California and New Jersey have similar laws.
Green called family leave "a practical solution."
"It will promote strong families and a secure middle class," she told the committee, noting that it could mean fewer families would be forced to go on public assistance.
"In the long term it will save us money," she said.
The program would be paid for with a 0.2 percent payroll tax on both employees and employers starting in 2014 that would increase in 2016 to 0.4 percent of wages. Benefits would start in January 2015.
"It's a well-meaning bill, but quite honestly, I can tell you most of the businesses cannot afford this piece of legislation," said Gary Smith, executive director of the Independent Business Association.
Smith said that businesses that could afford to implement such a program can already do so on their own, and that there shouldn't be a state mandate on others who can't.
"This law is not needed," he said.
A similar companion bill has been introduced in the Senate, but the committee that it has been referred to approved a bill on Monday that would repeal the underlying law.
Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee has said he's not in support of repealing the law, but hasn't taken a position on the expansion bill.
A repeal of the state paid-leave law would have no impact on federal leave laws. Under federal law, paid leave is not required, but businesses with 50 or more employees must give workers up to 12 weeks of medical leave per year for themselves or to take care of a new child or ailing relative.
The state law requires the paid leave be taken concurrently with the federal leave.
___
The measures to expand paid family leave are House Bill 1457 and Senate Bill 5292. The measure to repeal the underlying law is Senate Bill 5159.
what part of UNFUNDED dont THEY UNDERSTAND!! I GUESS THEY HAVE A MONEY TREE.
Paid family leave? May i ask who is going to pay for this?Â
Why dont they BALLANCE THE BUDGET in stead of adding to it and stop taxing!!Thats what obama is doing trying to do other thinga like gun controol and not
Â
 BALLANCE THE BUDGET!!! CUT CUT NOT TAX AND SPEND
Half the population is already receiving some form of socialism bennies ---- and my paycheck has gone way down! FREAKING TIRED OF IT.
More taxes more taxes more taxes. That is all they think about. They put an income tax in, sure it is less than one percent, but once that tax is in place it will only go up and it will go up. It will never go down and never go away. Stop spending my money for me, stop making businesses pay even more in taxes. I have 3 siblings, mom didn't get a government handout for having us and our family did just fine. Yes it is a government handout. You start paying in .02 of your payroll, then 9 months later have a kid, get the original plan of 250 a week (it will be higher under the new one I am sure). So if you make $40k a year, you paid in $128.57 and get back $1250.00 hmmm.. where exactly does the rest come from?
I am a proud Democrat but we don't need more programs and taxes at this time. Enact this and their will be 100's more government employees to manage it. Stop this madness and clean things up first for cryin' out loud!
@Hagar You might have to turn in your card for saying that :P
@Nitroxman Boy did I get grief for having Obama and McKenna stickers on my truck! I thought most people would be understanding but everybody I talked to about had disparaging things to say.
"there"Â Sure wish "their" were an edit feature on this forum!
Sure wish there WAS an edit feature on this forum! (Thanks Wifey!)
""It will promote strong families and a secure middle class," she told the committee, noting that it could mean fewer families would be forced to go on public assistance."
Â
And how is this not public assistance?
Â
@Nic Stevens Its not public assistance because YOU pay into it through that payroll tax. Its like Social Security and Medicare. Its a paid-for benefit.
 @EMDF9A  @Nic And the employer, per each employee.Â
""It will promote strong families and a secure middle class,"
Â
It will also promote company exodus to states like Texas, that's what it will promote.
Â
People who vote "D" need to have their heads examined.
 @James127 Washington is going the way of California. Bankruptcy.
Â
But I dont feel sorry for them. Those idiots keep voting the same people back in.
This family leave sounds really great but where in hell is the money coming from? More or higher taxes? A new tax? higher property taxes? Maybe hang a new tax on employers? It has to come from some where because this state like many is in a huge budget shortfall and they don't have enough money to restock the toilet paper. These nicey nicey plans sound great on paper till it comes time to fund them. How about we chip away at the politicians for the money???
This is crazy, look at all the reasons somepne can take FMLA currently. Now they want to pay people for not going to work. How about giving them a choice to use the benifets provided (if any) and then going back to work. If they choose to stay home let them quit and give the job to someone that wants and needs it. Where will this stop!!!!! When are we all going to get to the point where we vote these people out of office and try to find someone that will turn this mess around. Better yet why dont the people pushing this through the Senate pay for it. How about they take a cut in pay and medical benifits to pay for this. I bet if we put our hands as far into their pockets like they do to us it wouuld be a differebnt story. Lets see how well they operate on a salery like most of us do. Â
What's the definition of incompetence? Â State legislatures, (R) and (D) alike. Â
Fiscal responsibility guys. Â We can't afford the programs we have!
How about adequately funding education first! Â Wasn't that a WSSC mandate? Â
come on the budget is so blown out and they want to add the tax payers monies so some one can take time off paid to play w/family, that's what evenings and weekends are for, NO!
Not only will people not be producing, they will be paid from some magic fund being amassed by a workforce that is going to be missing. So good luck with that small business!
Â
Be careful Dems, you are going to make abortion obsolete, as everyone scrambles to find babies and sick relatives to cash in on!
Â
My sister-in-law is having her third child, so she can continue and grow her government assistance. She told me she wants five children. I can think of no better incentive for her to follow through on that promise.
Â
Here is a thought. If you want kids, save up that money, so I don't have to pay for it the rest of my career. If you can't afford children, don't have them or wait until you can. I saved up and paid thousands of dollars last year for mine.
 @paddy:Â
While I agree with you about planning ahead, sometimes you get "unexpected surprises".Â
Â
My son was technically a "contraception failure" (I was on the pill & had been for YEARS), but I did not love him any less. But that put a great deal of strain on our "family", my "X" became more & more abusive, and ultimately I left him - becoming a single Mom.Â
Â
I did my best on one income (mine) whiule trying to get child support started through the courts - it took some time, but once everything was done, it was finally received via payroll deduction from his emplyer. While waiting, though, I had "public aid" in the form of medical coverage for my son through DSHS (while waiting for all the legal stuff to be done to put him on his Dad's insurance).Â
Â
So, sometimes it is necessary for someone to apply for & receive assistance. I do not think they should be on it for multiple children & a generation or two, but as a short-term "help" it can be invaluable.
 @LocalLady  @paddy: Your case seems like a valid example of a case in which social assistance is valid. However, bringing forth a bill to expand a program that was voted out the previous day is wasteful and unnecessary.
Humm, another walk out to the money tree and all is well...
More time off after birth = better family foundation/relationships. Â Just take a quick glance around the world, compare some of their maternity leave with ours. Â The U.S. is a disgrace to families. Â Most 1st world countries have 6+ months off for taking care of your newborn. Â In fact, last I read the U.S. is somewhere below the 50th worst maternity leave compared to all other countries, far worse than most 3rd world countries. Â
Â
And we wonder why we have so much crime and children lacking responsibility. Â
 @Landshark That is why most the countries in the world engaging in Socialism and social engineering are going broke. We will be next.
 @Landshark It's ridiculous to claim that our crime issues are a result of parents not spending a few months home after birth. I'd be willing to bet the following areas are contributing to crime more. This country is trillions of dollars in debt, has cut education funding down to levels we have never witnessed, is on the verge of going bankrupt from the high costs of medical care, thousands of troops are coming back with PTSD and aren't getting the help they need, and we are still looking for ways to spend more money in other areas.
Â
If a few months off sends someone into severe poverty, they should consider holding off on kids for a few more years until one parent is making enough or both parents can put enough money aside.
@Landshark it's the husband's responsibility to figure out a way around that. and if you don't have a husband, don't get pregnant! laws like this is the reason why we have so much children lacks sense of responsibility.
More idiot legislation to drive prices up.
I would prefer this not be mandated by the government. This would be covered under the voluntary short term disability plans already offered by a large number of companies. For those that work for a company that doesn't offer it, they should be able to purchase their own short term disability. This covers the person for more than just a pregnancy or new baby. This way, it is the person's choice if they want this and then the rest of us aren't stuck paying the bill.
ABOUT TIME!!! Did it have to take this long??? Find the provider and let's go!
Wow Jay Enslee must have fixed our budget and found a few trucks full of cash behind the mansion. Â I really want to send in an IOU for my taxes saying I had a budget short fall and can't pay. But if I did they would deliver and fit new bracelets and have a car for me.
So, it was approved in 2007, but yet has to be funded and therefore yet to be implemented?...and here we are voting on whether or not it should be renewed or expanded? Why are we wasting the tax dollars (of our elected officials hours) on this?
Â
Anyone else think our government seems to be frantically chasing it's tail?
 @aintno1special Agreed. Not to mention the billion+ dollar shortfalls this state has been in over the last half decade. How about we invest in education, so would be parents can earn enough to put some money aside on their own. I'm sick of having to import the workforce because people here aren't educated well enough or cut their education short by popping out children before they can sustain themselves.
Just leads to more inflation for the rest of us. You think the companies are going to pick up the tab for this? Nope they'll just raise their prices to pay for it.
 @Blindman Agreed and very good point. Increased prices will be a double tax. This will be more expensive than a simple .04 tax. There are definitely hidden costs.