Family Leave Meant a Strong Start for My Son, My Family and Me

Published on June 15, 2013 in David Uy. 2 Comments

Father's Day 2013

Guest post for the National Partnership for Women & Families. Cross-posted from MomsRising.

Eight years ago, our first son was born. Like many, I found becoming a parent to be an amazing, life-changing experience. I was humbled by the realities of this new responsibility and overwhelmed by the love that I had to give.

Nine months of anticipation only partially prepare you for parenthood. Before the birth of your child, you simply do not understand that unconditional connection that you will feel to this new person. With every passing day, you realize how delicate and critical a time it is for your baby’s life —how little milestones are shaping everything to come.

For me and my wife, access to family leave was critical during this time. Unlike the majority of new mothers and fathers in the United States, my wife was able to take paid time off of work to recover from pregnancy and care for our son. And when she returned to her job, I was able to take leave to care for and bond with him for several months. This meant that our son spent the critical early months of his life fully in our care.

Even today, many see fathers taking parental leave as unconventional or unnecessary, but I sincerely hope that one day that changes. I look back at that time as one of the best decisions I ever made – and I feel fortunate to have been able to make it. It was a rare and precious time that brought me closer to my son and set the stage for a lifetime of involvement in his life.

It is important for new dads to know that, just like new moms, they are guaranteed up to 12 weeks of job-protected, unpaid parental leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to care for a newborn – or after placement of a child for adoption or foster care – if they work for an employer with 50 or more employees, and if they work at least 1,250 hours in the year. Some states offer even broader protections.

Unfortunately, many new moms and dads do not qualify for FMLA leave. And many workers who are entitled to leave under the FMLA cannot afford to take the unpaid leave it provides. It is shocking that there is no federal law that guarantees new moms and dads the paid time they need. No new parent should have to choose between giving their child a healthy and loving start and the job they need to make ends meet.

I was lucky to be able to spend these months with my new son. Life moves so quickly today. Children grow up fast. I will treasure that time, and I will better appreciate the moments ahead because of the strong start that we had.

Bookmark and Share

New Preemption Law in Florida Strengthens Imperative for National Paid Sick Days Standard

Published on June 14, 2013 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Florida Governor Rick Scott handed the organized business lobby a victory today, and the losers are workers, local governments and the fundamental principle of democracy in Florida. The law he signed prohibits all localities in the state from establishing paid sick days standards. The governor’s refusal to prioritize the will or well-being of the people makes the Sunshine State the most recent victim of an underhanded and coordinated effort to harm workers and thwart the democratic process. Similar bills or laws now exist in at least 13 states.

That these so-called “preemption” laws are advancing at a time when support for paid sick days is strong and growing is no coincidence – and it only strengthens our commitment to expanding access to this basic right. America’s workers and families want and need paid sick days and other family friendly workplace standards that enable them to meet the demands of job and family without sacrificing their health or economic security. Laws like this one only make the need for national standards, like the Healthy Families Act, stronger.

Read more on the preemption trend generated by paid sick days opponents here.

Bookmark and Share

The Equal Pay Act Turns 50: The Times They’ve Been a-Changin’

Published on June 10, 2013 in Debra Ness and Workplace Fairness. 0 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

1963 was a year of great change for our country. Martin Luther King, Jr., said the words “I Have A Dream,” President John F. Kennedy and civil rights activist Medgar Evers were assassinated, Betty Friedan’s Feminine Mystique first hit bookstore shelves and the Equal Pay Act was signed into law. It was recently called “the year everything happened,” and it laid the groundwork for much of the progress we have seen since.

As Bob Dylan said in his now iconic song, which debuted as 1963 came to a close, “The times they were a-changin’.” And, in many ways, they did.

But despite the events and developments of 1963 and the tremendous progress we have seen since, at least one thing has remained frustratingly constant: the existence of a punishing gender-based wage gap, fueled by antiquated notions about women in the workplace and loopholes in existing law.

In 1963, when the Equal Pay Act was passed to promote equal pay for equal work, women made up one-third of the workforce and were paid just 59 cents for every dollar paid to men. Fifty years later, nearly half of workers are women, and women are the primary breadwinners in 40 percent of households with children.

Yet women today are paid only 77 cents for every dollar paid to men, or more than $11,000 less each year. The wage gap for women of color is even worse: African American women and Latinas are paid just 64 and 55 cents, respectively, for every dollar paid to white, non-Hispanic men. And the gap exists in every corner of the country, regardless of geography, occupation, education or work patterns.

Women’s wages are essential to families’ financial security. But with the wage gap closing at a rate of less than half a cent per year, women’s wages will not soon catch up to men’s.

That is why the National Partnership for Women & Families has been working for years to advance measures that would help close the wage gap and ensure women are paid fairly, such as the Paycheck Fairness Act. It would close loopholes in the Equal Pay Act, help to break harmful patterns of pay discrimination and strengthen workplace protections for women.

We are also among the leaders of a coalition that is calling for action at the state and federal levels to address practices that contribute to the wage gap, including: pay discrimination, when women are paid and/or promoted less than their male counterparts; segregation of women into jobs that pay lower wages; retaliation against workers who discuss their pay; discrimination based on pregnancy or caregiver responsibilities; and wage theft, when employers do not pay workers for all of their time on the job, force them to work off the clock, or deny workers the overtime pay they deserve.

This 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act is a stark reminder that, five decades later, women and their families are still losing critical income to the gender-based wage gap. But fortunately, there is hope.

Things have changed in important and helpful ways since 1963: There are now more women than ever before in Congress. Challenges for women in the workplace are a part of the national dialogue like never before. And there are generations of women, young and old, who care about these issues – and who have innovative technologies to help spread the word and make sure women’s voices are heard.

1963 was a year of enormous change, but change needs to continue if we are to finally realize the promise of the Equal Pay Act and bring our workplace policies up to date. It is time to make the gender-based wage gap a thing of the past. Women and men, employers and lawmakers, should use this anniversary to commit to advancing the measures that will close the wage gap once and for all. That is the change today’s families need.

Bookmark and Share

A Day of Action on Fair Pay

Published on June 7, 2013 in National Partnership Staff and Workplace Fairness. 0 Comments

A Day of Action on Fair Pay

Monday marks the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act – a 1963 law aimed at closing the gap between the wages of men and women. But, despite this landmark law, a significant gender-based wage gap persists. That’s why the National Partnership joined with allies on Capitol Hill this week to call on members of Congress to advance the vision of the Equal Pay Act by prioritizing passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act this year.

The day kicked off with a press conference hosted by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D – Calif.). It featured Representatives Rosa DeLauro (D – Conn.), Joyce Beatty (D – Ohio), Joaquín Castro (D – Texas) and members of our fair pay coalition. Following the press conference, staff from coalition organizations, volunteers and their children took the call for fair pay and the Paycheck Fairness Act straight to congressional offices.

Check out a few photos from the day below, and then show your solidarity and support for fair pay by sharing our fair pay image (right) and adding an “I [heart] Equal Pay” ribbon to your profile here.

LEFT: Leader Pelosi holds up a photo from the day President Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act in 1963, at a press conference marking the 50th anniversary of the law and highlighting the need to strengthen it with legislation like the Paycheck Fairness Act.

RIGHT: A team of staff and volunteers poses for a photo after visiting members of Congress and urging them to support the Paycheck Fairness Act.

Bookmark and Share

A Family Friendly America Must Eradicate Discrimination Against LGBT Workers

Published on June 4, 2013 in Vicki Shabo, Work & Family and Workplace Fairness. 0 Comments

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

At the National Partnership, we have been working for more than 40 years to make the country’s workplaces more fair and family friendly. That’s why we were proud to partner with a strong coalition of policy experts, business advocates and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) organizations today to release A Broken Bargain: Discrimination, Fewer Benefits and More Taxes for LGBT Workers. The groundbreaking report takes a close look at how discrimination and a lack of access to basic benefits and family friendly policies harm LGBT workers and their families.

As the report explains, LGBT workers are critical to the financial security of families and our nation. There are an estimated 5.4 million LGBT workers in this country, and more than one-third of LGBT adults have a child. Yet no federal law provides protections to LGBT people in the workplace, and LGBT workers are routinely denied family health, spousal retirement and death and disability benefits.

In other words, across the country, LGBT workers are putting in the same hours on the job and making the same contributions toward health and other benefits. Yet they, their spouses, their partners and their children are routinely denied the protections their co-workers take for granted. This is blatant discrimination, and it plagues too many of our nation’s workplaces.

LGBT workers also do not qualify for unpaid, job-protected leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The law provides critical time off when serious personal or family medical needs arise, but more than 40 percent of working people in this country do not have access to its protections. The National Partnership has long advocated for an expansion of the law to cover more workers – including LGBT families – who need leave for more reasons. This new report shows just how important that is.

A Broken Bargain makes a powerful case that there is much more to be done to ensure that all people can provide for their families without suffering discrimination, unequal treatment or inadequate workplace support. The nation has come a long way in providing greater workplace protections against discrimination based on sex, national origin, religion, ethnicity and disability, but we still need to update and strengthen anti-discrimination laws. Ensuring protections based on sexual orientation is essential.

As this new report shows and millions of families know firsthand, we cannot talk about our path to a truly family friendly America without including LGBT workers and their families. Every employer and member of Congress should take a close look at this report, ask if they are part of the problem, and commit to being part of the solution.

Bookmark and Share

Messages That Matter This Mother’s Day

Published on May 12, 2013 in Debra Ness, Work & Family and Workplace Fairness. 0 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from the Huffington Post.

“For everything you’ve taught me…” “For always being there…” “For all the sacrifices you’ve made… thanks, Mom.” These and messages like them are what mothers across the country will be reading in greeting cards and hearing from loved ones this weekend. But, for mothers who hold jobs, one reality is missing from these heartfelt sentiments. Where is the card that says thanks “For being a working mother in a country that rarely provides you the support you need and deserve”?

Women make up nearly half of the workforce in the United States today, and most families need two incomes to make ends meet. Women are breadwinners in two-thirds of households, and we continue to be the primary caregivers for our families. Yet the country is woefully behind in enacting policies that help women be the responsible employees and mothers they desperately want to be. And women, families, businesses and our economy suffer as a result.

With national dialogue around books like Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In, policy changes at Yahoo! and momentum for family friendly policies at the state and city levels, we are — fortunately — seeing some of the workplace issues that matter to women and mothers break through. But attention has largely been focused on a small and elite segment of the workforce, and it has not translated into broad-based federal level progress on policies that would help.

So, this Mother’s Day, we at the National Partnership for Women & Families are thinking about some new messages of gratitude for America’s mothers — ones that better reflect the tremendous achievement it is to be one today:

“For providing for your family even though you take home less than men… thanks, Mom.” Women in nearly every corner of the country are still paid less than men — even when occupation and education level are accounted for. That’s why we need the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would combat harmful discriminatory pay practices in our nation’s workplaces.

“For doing your best in a country where women are still fired or forced out of their jobs for becoming pregnant… thanks, Mom.” Six in 10 women who give birth in a one-year period also work during that time, yet pregnant workers are still forced out of the workplace by employers that refuse to provide them reasonable accommodations — like carrying a water bottle – that would allow them to continue working. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act would help to prevent this blatant discrimination.

“For caring and providing for your family even though you do not have the right to earn a single paid sick day… thanks, Mom.” When they get the flu or a child gets strep throat, more than 40 million workers in this country have to choose between health and a paycheck because they cannot earn paid sick days. These workers, including millions who are mothers, need the national paid sick days standard the Healthy Families Act would provide.

“For having a child in the only highly industrialized nation that does not guarantee you any paid time off to do so… thanks, Mom.” As a new infographic from the National Partnership illustrates, the United States is one of only a handful of nations that does not guarantee paid leave for new mothers. Just 11 percent of private sector workers have access to paid family leave and only 40 percent of the workforce is eligible for paid medical leave. It is past time for a national paid leave insurance program.

These messages — and they really only scratch the surface of the challenges America’s working mothers face — illustrate the incredible strength and resilience of mothers who hold jobs in this country. But they also reveal a stark and unacceptable reality: We are far from ensuring mothers the equality, fair treatment and support they deserve.

Fortunately, some states are doing better. Last year, the National Partnership released a report, Expecting Better, detailing the laws some states have enacted to fill the gaps in national standards. We know that at least eight states require some employers to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers. And we are seeing incredible momentum around and support for paid sick days policies. Just this week, the New York City Council approved a measure to guarantee nearly one million workers the right to earn paid sick days. This historic achievement builds on the success of paid sick days laws that already exist in Connecticut, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Seattle and, soon, Portland, Oregon.

But a patchwork of policies is not the solution working mothers need — or deserve. Just think: Would members of Congress be willing to send these messages to their mothers? Then why aren’t proposals like the Paycheck Fairness Act, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, the Healthy Families Act and a national paid family and medical leave insurance program among their highest priorities?

This Mother’s Day, let’s think about the real messages we’re sending mothers by failing to establish the family friendly workplace standards they need. And let’s insist that lawmakers do something about it.

Bookmark and Share

Paid Sick Days Opponents Continue to Hide Behind Preemption

Published on May 10, 2013 in Vicki Shabo and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

Last month, I wrote about a disturbing trend: States are passing “preemption” laws that prohibit a growing number of cities and counties from adopting their own paid sick days standards. Sadly, these misguided attacks on local democracy have been spreading rapidly, as legislators put the interests of the national big business lobby ahead of the interests of their constituents. Now, there are paid sick days preemption bills or laws in 13 states.

This trend is no coincidence. In fact, it is a well-coordinated effort to thwart paid sick days bills just as momentum for this common sense policy continues to build. We know that the National Restaurant Association circulated a draft preemption bill at a 2011 meeting of the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Since then, the association and other groups have been working behind the scenes to advance very similar bills.

Take the case of Florida. Eighty percent of Floridians say that workers should be able to earn paid sick days, and six in 10 want localities to be able to make their own laws. But Florida legislators refuse to listen to voters. Instead, big business associations and local power players like Disney and Darden Restaurants have convinced them to shut down local governments’ ability to pass their own paid sick days standards. It is shameful that the same state legislators who claim to be for “local government” are pushing through a policy that essentially ties its hands.

Michigan’s battle against preemption is also ongoing. As Working America points out, legislators in the state who have railed against “big government intrusion” have changed their tune to fulfill the wishes of the business lobby. As in Florida, Michigan voters say that workers should be able to earn paid sick days. They know that if Michigan’s preemption bill passes, it will be families – like the moms who make up the local advocacy group Mothering Justice and their kids – who will suffer most.

This same pattern is repeating itself across the country: Louisiana. Mississippi. Kansas. Tennessee. Arizona. A preemption bill is introduced – usually by a legislator who is an ALEC member, and usually with the support of the big business lobby – and then it’s fast-tracked through the legislature and quietly signed by the governor. In these five states, the new laws preempt not only paid sick days, but also local minimum wage and other ordinances proven to improve workers’ lives.

The bill in Arizona – now law – is particularly disturbing. In 2006, Arizona voters passed a statewide ballot measure forbidding the legislature from doing exactly what it just did: preempting local wage and benefits standards. According to the state constitution, the legislature must meet certain strict requirements to overturn a voter-approved measure. It hasn’t done so, making the preemption bill illegal and open to litigation. Arizonans can thank legislators like the sponsor of the bill, Rep. Thomas Forese (an ALEC member), for the costly lawsuit that will almost certainly be filed.

The Indiana bill is also troubling. In addition to preempting workers’ rights, it may overturn local anti-discrimination ordinances meant to protect the right of LGBT individuals to keep their jobs.

The other states considering preemption legislation are Alabama and South Carolina. The South Carolina bill was introduced by an ALEC Task Force chair, Rep. William Sandifer, and is being pushed through quickly and under the radar, leaving concerned advocates little time to speak out.

Washington and Oklahoma also considered preemption bills in 2013, but those bills have not passed.

Almost all of these preemption bills have been pushed through quietly, without the knowledge of activists or legislators who might ask questions about their provenance and usefulness. But, as the intent of the big business lobby becomes clearer, and as it becomes more obvious that these bills have nothing to do with the well-being of states or their residents, sponsors will surely have a tougher time defending their attempts to usurp power from the people to whom it truly belongs: voters.

Bookmark and Share

New York City Council Paves the Way for One Million Workers to Earn Paid Sick Days

Published on May 8, 2013 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

In a major victory in the effort to increase access to paid sick days, the New York City Council has passed a measure that would guarantee approximately one million workers the right to earn the paid sick time they need. This is a momentous achievement for a strong and dedicated coalition that has been working for more than four years to bring paid sick days to our nation’s most populous city.

The bill now goes to Mayor Bloomberg who has the opportunity to support working families and promote the city’s health by signing it into law. There is no excuse for him not to do so: The bill has the support of the majority of New Yorkers, the speaker and the City Council; and paid sick days have been shown to benefit workers, businesses, public health and local economies.

With this historic step forward in New York City, there is now undeniable momentum for paid sick days across the country. From San Francisco to Washington, D.C., Seattle, Connecticut and, soon, Portland, Oregon, workers, businesses, advocates and lawmakers have come together to enact this common sense policy. And campaigns in support of similar measures exist in nearly 20 other states and cities.

It is time for members of Congress to recognize the growing need and demand for paid sick days by advancing a federal standard like the Healthy Families Act. The bill has already been introduced in Congress, and 86 percent of voters say they support the national paid sick days standard it would provide. It would go a long way toward making the nation truly family friendly.

Congratulations to the strong coalition that made this victory in New York City possible today. Soon, the city will be a true national leader on this issue.

Bookmark and Share

Keeping “Wellness” from Turning into Discrimination

Published on May 8, 2013 in Health Care, Judith Lichtman, Reform and Workplace Fairness. 0 Comments

Judith L. Lichtman, Senior Advisor

Today, I had the honor of testifying before the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on a topic of critical importance to our nation’s workers: employer wellness programs. These programs can offer women and families meaningful avenues for improving and maintaining their health. And, as part of the Affordable Care Act, employers will soon have new incentives to establish them. But they can also open doors to discrimination.

Employer wellness programs are aimed at promoting healthier lifestyles and improving health outcomes by encouraging health-related activities like signing up for gym memberships, taking health education classes, getting health risk assessments and more. They come in two basic forms: “participatory” wellness programs, which are available to employees regardless of a person’s health; and “health-contingent” wellness programs, which are tied to certain health benchmarks or targets. It’s the latter that cause concern.

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to individual health, wellness and life circumstances, and employer wellness programs must reflect that. That’s why they should be voluntary, carefully designed, and not tied to health indicators. Groups like women, older adults and racial minorities experience significant health disparities. Tying wellness program penalties to their health situations can cause them disproportionate harm and, as I argued today, violate nondiscrimination laws.

Health-contingent wellness programs that increase health care costs for certain workers aren’t about wellness; they are about shifting costs to working people, especially those with health problems. And there’s no scientific evidence that shows they do anything to improve health outcomes. That’s why the National Partnership is recommending that the EEOC:

  1. Issue specific and thorough guidance to employers to inform them of best practices in designing and implementing wellness programs, as well as potential legal implications;
  2. Engage in outreach and education to employers to help ensure compliance with nondiscrimination laws;
  3. Enforce the law by challenging employer wellness programs that are discriminatory; and
  4. Work with other agencies – including the Departments of Treasury, Labor, Justice and Health and Human Services, and the Office of Personnel Management – to provide the assistance employers need to prevent discrimination in the implementation and regulation of employer wellness programs.

At the National Partnership, we know that access to affordable, quality health care is essential for women and families. We also know the importance of ensuring people can work free from discrimination. Today, I made clear that, with proper oversight, wellness programs can do both: They can help women and families achieve meaningful improvements in their health, without running afoul of our nation’s civil rights laws. We will do all we can to ensure this happens.

You can read my full written testimony here.

Bookmark and Share

Mothers, Working Families Aren’t Fooled

Published on May 6, 2013 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from the Huffington Post.

Working people today face serious challenges when it comes to managing job and family: Nearly 40 percent of workers in the private sector — and more than 80 percent of those who are low-wage workers — cannot earn a single paid sick day. Forty percent of all workers have no access to even unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act when serious personal or family medical needs arise. And many struggle with unpredictable schedules or fear that taking time off will cost them the jobs they desperately need.

So why are some members of Congress wasting time on a bill that would make things even worse for many of these families? It’s a sad indicator of just how disconnected the majority leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives is from the realities of life for America’s families today.

The bill is H.R. 1406 – the misnamed Working Families Flexibility Act — and the House will consider it this week. H.R. 1406 pretends to offer workers the time off they need to meet health and family obligations, but in reality it would mean a pay cut for workers with no guarantee they can take time off when they need it most.

The idea seems simple enough: Hourly, non-exempt workers who work more than 40 hours a week would be able to bank extra hours as “comp time” — rather than time-and-a-half overtime pay — to be used later. The catch is that employees are paid nothing at the time they work the extra hours and employers decide when and if employees can use the comp time they earned. Employers can deny requests to use comp time if they decide it would be disruptive, or they can simply wipe out the banked time by paying workers the equivalent in wages even when a worker has been counting on the time to care for a new baby or an ill loved one. In short, it’s a smoke-and-mirrors attempt to undermine 75-year-old wage and hour protections guaranteed by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

People should not have to work more than 40 hours a week and forgo pay in order to earn time to recover from illness or care for loved ones — and this is just one of the numerous ways in which H.R. 1406 would harm America’s families and workplace culture.

Yet House leaders pushing the bill are claiming it’s the path to a more family friendly nation and the answer to working families’ problems. That’s absurd. And it adds insult to injury that the House is considering this legislation just before Mother’s Day — and proponents are holding it up as measure that would help mothers. This is blatantly dishonest, and women know better.

In fact, H.R. 1406 would disproportionately hurt women and mothers. Two-thirds of women are now breadwinners for their households, and they remain the primary caregivers for their families. They need predictable, stable schedules to ensure that their children are well-cared for and their families’ needs are met. Women are also more likely than men to work in low-wage jobs, so they can least afford to forgo pay. And what’s worse, under H.R. 1406, employers can deny them the comp time they’ve earned when they need to stay home with a sick child, attend a parent-teacher conference or help an aging parent.

If House leaders were serious about ensuring more family friendly workplaces, they would advance proposals that will actually help like the Healthy Families Act, which would establish a national paid sick days standard, the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would help combat pay discrimination, the Fair Minimum Wage Act, and measures that will expand the Family and Medical Leave Act and establish a paid family and medical leave insurance program. These are the advances working families truly need. They are popular, common sense proposals that don’t force workers into choosing between time and money, and they recognize that working families’ financially security depends on both.

The National Partnership has fought for more than 40 years for a country where no worker has to choose between job and family. We call on every member of the House to vote against H.R. 1406. We commend the representatives who have already spoken out against it, and all those who refuse to be fooled by this bill.

The fact that the House is wasting time on a harmful measure like H.R. 1406 when badly needed, time-tested proposals are on the table makes it clear that too many of our leaders are more concerned with making it look like they are doing something to address the needs of families when, in reality, their proposals will make life worse. We must demand better and work together for the policies working families need to thrive.

Bookmark and Share