Archive for the 'Work & Family' Category

New Study Documents Troubling Trends in Retail Industry

Published on January 24, 2012 in Vicki Shabo and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

Retail is the nation’s second-largest sector and one of the fastest-growing industries in the country. We all depend on it – and on the retail workers that help us every day by ringing up our purchases, stocking store shelves and greeting us as we enter our favorite stores. It also plays an important role in our economy. Yet, according to a new study from the Retail Action Project and City University of New York’s Murphy Institute, workers in the retail industry too often face poverty wages, few benefits and unpredictable schedules – with significant disparities by gender and race.

The study, Discounted Jobs: How Retailers Sell Workers Short, is the result of a direct survey of frontline retail workers. It looks at responses from hundreds of non-union workers in New York City who work at large retail stories and national chains, ranging from high-end fashion to off-brand clothing retailers.

According to the study, average wages among retail workers are 52 percent lower than the citywide average in New York – and there are significant gaps for women and workers of color. The median wage among hourly workers is $9.50. For women, it’s only $9.00, compared to $10.13 for men. And for African Americans and Latinos, the median wage is $10.00 and $9.00, respectively, compared to $10.50 for whites.

Low wages can have a significant impact on the economic security and well-being of these workers and their families, especially when nearly 60 percent of retail workers are not full time and half say they need more hours. Just as threatening is a widespread failure to provide basic workplace protections like paid sick days, paid time off and access to health insurance.

The study found that only 44 percent of retail workers have paid sick days – and only about half of those workers have ever used a paid sick day for fear of employer retaliation or job loss. Just 46 percent have any paid time off. And 71 percent don’t receive health insurance through their retail job. In general, the study found that full-time workers are more likely to have access to these policies but, again, women and workers of color are less likely to be hired full time.

Scheduling is yet another challenge for these workers as they try to be loyal, available employees while caring for their children and families. Only 17 percent have a set schedule. More than half know their schedules only a week in advance. More than 40 percent must be on call, and almost half say their schedules change without their consent. Here, too, the problem is worse for workers of color. Unpredictable, erratic schedules often affect workers’ child care obligations, pursuit of education, ability to make medical appointments and more.

These findings are beyond troubling for working families and for our economy. As the report concludes, “The retail workforce is at a crossroads that mirrors the broader trends in the national economy… Implementing straightforward and sensible policies, such as a living wage and paid sick days legislation, would create a baseline for dignified work.”

At the National Partnership, we couldn’t agree more. These policies are common-sense prescriptions for retail workers – and all workers who struggle to provide for their families with low wages and few benefits. That’s why federal paid sick days and paid leave standards, fair pay and workplace flexibility are so important. We hope this report will be a wake-up call for all employers and legislators who need to make these policies a priority.

 

New Study Makes a Strong Case for a National Paid Leave Policy

Published on January 19, 2012 in Vicki Shabo and Work & Family. 1 Comment

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

At a time when working families are struggling, the economy is in trouble, and the need for family friendly workplace policies is high, a groundbreaking new study demonstrates that paid leave is good for working families, businesses and our economy. Pay Matters: The Positive Economic Impacts of Paid Family Leave for Families, Businesses and the Public makes a strong case for the national paid leave standard the country needs.

This new study was conducted by the Center for Women and Work at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, and commissioned by the National Partnership with generous support from the Rockefeller Foundation. The study looks at how access to paid leave affects workers’ labor force participation, wages and reliance on public assistance. And the findings are striking, particularly for women.

According to the new study, after a child’s birth, women who take paid leave are more likely than those who take no leave to be working nine to 12 months after the child’s birth. And those women who take paid leave for 30 days or longer are more likely to see wage increases in the year after a child’s birth. Mothers’ increased attachment to the workforce and rise in income can have a lasting effect on their families’ financial health, especially in the nearly two-thirds of U.S. households where women are their families’ sole or co-breadwinners.

Additionally, and particularly important during tough economic times, the study reveals that, with controls for other relevant factors, both women and men who take paid leave are significantly less likely to rely on public assistance or food stamps after a child’s birth. At a time when governments are struggling with deficits and working families are struggling to stay afloat, this is an incredibly important finding. It shows that giving workers’ access to paid leave can save precious government and taxpayer resources while giving families the stability they desperately need.

Pay Matters makes clear that access to leave is important for working families, businesses and the public – and that the difference between paid and unpaid leave is significant. Sadly, only about one in 10 workers in the United States has access to paid family leave through their employer, and fewer than two in five have access to personal medical leave through employer-provided short-term disability insurance. A handful of states – California, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island – provide for personal medical leave with some wage replacement. And only California and New Jersey have implemented paid family leave programs.

What these states have done is an important first step, but the vast majority of workers are still struggling without any paid leave. These are new mothers and fathers who can’t bond with their new children, adult children who can’t assist their ill elderly parents, pregnant women who lose their life savings when they are put on bed rest, and more.

As the report recommends, it’s time for a national standard – not a patchwork of policies. That’s why we are so pleased that members of Congress are working on a proposal that would guarantee paid leave on the national level. It’s badly needed, it’s sound policy and it’s cost-efficient. It’s also the right thing to do for working families, for businesses and for our economy.

We hope and expect that this study, and those that follow, will make the case for a national paid leave policy clear to all legislators. There couldn’t be a better time to make it a priority.

Read the full report here.

Supreme Court to Decide State Workers’ Rights Under FMLA

Published on January 11, 2012 in Judges & Supreme Court, Sarah Crawford, Work & Family and Workplace Fairness. 0 Comments

Director of Workplace Fairness

Cross-posted from the American Constitution Society.

The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing oral argument today in Coleman v. Maryland Court of Appeals – a case that could erode the right of millions of state workers to take job-protected, unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) when faced with a serious illness.

The FMLA set an important family and medical leave standard that guarantees eligible workers – both women and men – up to 12 weeks of job-protected, unpaid leave to recover from a serious illness or medical condition, including pregnancy or childbirth, or to care for a newborn, a newly adopted child or a seriously ill family member. The FMLA offered leave on a gender-neutral basis rather than creating a special right to self-care leave for medical illness surrounding pregnancy, in part to avoid creating perverse incentives for further discrimination against women.

Since its enactment 18 years ago, workers have used the FMLA more than 100 million times. The law has helped workers disabled by pregnancy or recovering from childbirth, workers with new babies and dying parents, workers who have had heart attacks and hysterectomies – in short, workers for whom job-protected leave is of critical importance. An adverse decision from the Supreme Court could put access to FMLA self-care leave at risk for millions of state workers. At stake is their fundamental right to take time off to address their own serious medical needs, including pregnancy and childbirth.

Petitioner Daniel Coleman was working for a Maryland court when his doctor ordered bed rest due to serious illness. Within hours of requesting medical leave, Coleman was fired. He then filed a lawsuit alleging a violation of the FMLA. Contrary to the plain language of the statute, the lower courts ruled that the state of Maryland could not be sued for monetary damages under the FMLA’s self-care provision.

The Supreme Court is now poised to decide whether Congress validly abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity by acting to address unconstitutional discrimination.

In point of fact, when the legislation was being considered, Congress collected an enormous amount of evidence demonstrating clearly that outdated workplace policies and practices denied women equal employment opportunity, including discriminatory policies and practices by state governments. Congress found that women continued to face persistent sex discrimination relating to pregnancy and childbirth. Thus, Congress enacted the FMLA pursuant to its power to address unconstitutional discrimination under section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Joined by a broad coalition of civil rights groups, workers’ rights groups, and labor organizations, the National Partnership for Women & Families filed an amicus brief urging the Court to uphold the plain language of the FMLA, which established critical leave rights for state workers. Like private employers, states must be held accountable when they violate their employees’ rights to self-care leave.

Notably, the Supreme Court already has established that state workers can sue their employers for monetary damages for violations of the family-care provision of the FMLA. In the 2003 case of Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs, the Court ruled that Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity pursuant to its Fourteenth Amendment authority with respect to the FMLA’s family-care provision. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Rehnquist concluded that Congress clearly intended to protect state workers from sex discrimination by providing job-protected leave to care for a family member. Indeed, the Court got it right in the Hibbs case, and the same analysis applies under the self-care provision at issue in the Coleman case.

The millions of state workers who are struggling with their own medical illness or who may face a serious illness in the future have to fervently hope that the Court gets it right again. Those workers have a tremendous amount at stake in this case.

Toward a More Family Friendly Nation

Published on January 4, 2012 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 1 Comment

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

It’s not literally the 99 percent versus the privileged few, but it’s one of the most noteworthy divides I have seen.

Most of us who earn paid sick time cannot imagine that any workers in this country do not.

[Cross-posted from The Huffington Post]

And tens of millions of workers who toil for years — caring for kids, the elderly or the infirm; cooking food or delivering it to our tables; cleaning cars, homes or streets; guarding our factories and office buildings — cannot imagine being able to stay home with strep or stomach flu, or to care for a sick child, without losing a day’s pay or possibly their job.

Yet in terms of economic security, a chasm divides those two Americas.

One is filled with people with some measure of job and economic security and usually health insurance of some kind. The other is filled with people who find the deck stacked against them every time illness strikes or health needs arise.

That is why Sunday, January 1, 2012, was such an important day. It marked not only the beginning of a new year but, let’s hope, a new era when paid sick days will become the norm for all workers in this country.

For sure we will see progress in Connecticut, because lawmakers there listened to their constituents instead of the business lobby and enacted a law guaranteeing many workers the right to earn paid sick time. It is the country’s first statewide paid sick days measure, and it took effect on Sunday. Seattle also passed a paid sick days law this year, the nation’s third city to put such a standard in place.

January 1, 2012, is the day when hundreds of thousands of workers in Connecticut finally gained the right to earn job-protected paid sick days. It’s a huge step, and long overdue. The new law will help those workers, their families, the public’s health and the state. But perhaps even more important, Connecticut’s experience will add to the growing body of evidence that paid sick days are good for businesses and economies as well. Studies show that San Francisco’s law, the nation’s first, is working well for businesses as well as workers.

But as 2012 begins, more than 40 million workers in the United States cannot earn a single paid sick day. Low-wage, women and Latino workers are disproportionately affected.

Several cities and states are considering paid sick days measures, but the battle against a relentless, well-funded business lobby is tough everywhere.

So let’s keep our eyes on Connecticut, where a recent poll by Hart Research Associates found that voters look favorably on lawmakers who supported the new law. An overwhelming majority identify paid sick days as central to families’ economic security. They are poised to reward legislators who voted for the law, the poll found.

Let’s tip our hats to Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy and to all the lawmakers there and in Seattle who, in 2011, said “no” to the business lobby and “yes” to refusing to force hardworking families to make impossible choices when illness strikes.

Let’s all pay attention to this issue in 2012, an election year when we take measure of our status, refine our values, and decide the kind of country we want to be.

If we do that, we can make this year’s victories a real turning point, rather than an anomaly at this time when workers seem to lose more often than they win.

By making paid sick time a priority for all workers, we can close one painful divide and give all hardworking people the chance to earn a few days off to recover when illness strikes or a family member needs care. It’s time.

Congress Must Protect the Lifeline Women and Families Depend On

Published on December 8, 2011 in Vicki Shabo and Work & Family. 1 Comment

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

Some things are simply unthinkable. Congress failing to protect the basic benefits that are keeping women and families afloat is one of them.

If lawmakers fail to extend unemployment benefits by December 31st, families around the country will be devastated. More people will lose their homes; more children will be hungry; and more parents will be unable to clothe and care for themselves and their kids this winter. In January alone, nearly two million unemployed workers will stop receiving critical support. At least six million people will be cut off during 2012, including people in more than 20 states who are currently eligible to receive unemployment insurance because they are caring for an ill family member. A bad situation will get appreciably worse. And the road to recovery from this recession will be even longer and more arduous.

Women in particular will suffer. Women are now the sole or co-breadwinners in the majority of U.S. households, so it is especially alarming that the unemployment rate among women who maintain (or head) families is at 12 percent. Some five million women over age 20 are currently unemployed. And many of those who are employed are one sick day or one child’s illness away from being unemployed because they don’t have job-protected paid sick days or paid leave to meet their families’ inevitable health needs.

How do we stabilize and support these women and their families? It starts with extending unemployment benefits. The Census Bureau reports that unemployment benefits kept more than three million families from falling into poverty in 2010. When it takes unemployed workers an average of 8 months to find a job in this economy, letting this critical support expire would be irresponsible – and unforgivable. It would undoubtedly hurt women and families, and it would hurt our economy.

Helping working families and the nation recover starts with the extension of these benefits. But it is also essential that we create jobs and establish workplace standards like paid sick days and paid leave that allow workers to keep the jobs they have, particularly when illness strikes. We simply cannot afford to force working mothers and fathers to make impossible choices between job and family when they get strep, a child has the flu or a spouse is injured.

Congressional action to support families by extending unemployment benefits in tough times is not new, and it is far from rare. Lawmakers have taken this step routinely over the last 50 years whenever the unemployment rate was above 7.2 percent. And it’s higher than that now. Passing this important measure shouldn’t be the subject of debate, it shouldn’t become yet another political football, and it shouldn’t come down to the wire.

Let’s all tell lawmakers: Extend unemployment benefits, and adopt basic standards that let workers care for their families while holding their jobs. Women and families are counting on them to do that now.

Paid Sick Days: Healthier Families, More Than $1 Billion in Savings

Published on November 17, 2011 in Vicki Shabo and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

Health reform has underscored the imperative to increase access to health care, improve quality and reduce costs. According to a thought-provoking new report released by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) this week, paid sick days can – and should – play a significant role in reaching these goals.

Paid Sick Days and Health: Cost Savings from Reduced Emergency Room Visits finds that, regardless of workers’ access to health insurance, there are undeniable connections between the ways in which private sector workers use the health care system and whether they have access to paid sick days. And these connections can result in significant costs for working families’ health, their financial security and the effectiveness of the system overall.

Currently, more than 40 percent of the private sector workforce – and more than 80 percent of the lowest-wage workers – don’t have paid sick days. These workers often can’t afford to lose income or risk their jobs by taking unpaid time off to get the medical care they need. They are left with no choice but to use expensive emergency rooms to get primary care for themselves or their families during non-work hours, or to delay getting care until their health problems worsen and they need care for more severe conditions – at even greater costs.

IWPR’s findings demonstrate that the barrier that prevents workers without paid sick days from getting timely, affordable care is a huge and costly problem for workers, their families and our nation. According to the report, workers with paid sick days are less likely than those without to use hospital emergency rooms or to delay care for themselves or family members. They also report better health. The analysis reveals that if all workers had paid sick days, 1.3 million emergency room visits could be prevented each year. The country would save an astounding $1.1 billion in health care costs annually. And more than $500 million of these savings would be to public programs like the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Medicare and Medicaid.

Emergency room use is a significant source of rising health care costs, according to the report. In fact, emergency room use has risen 30 percent in the last decade. Controlling these costs could benefit our health care system in important ways. And, as IWPR concludes, increasing workers’ access to paid sick days is a “low-cost route to reining in emergency department costs – while simultaneously improving health.” In other words, paid sick days are a win-win.

With this new report, IWPR has pinpointed a modest, common sense way to increase access to health care and reduce costs. Congress should take note of the new data and the growing support for paid sick days in states and cities across the country and move quickly to pass the Healthy Families Act. By doing so, it will increase access to paid sick days, promote the health of working families and save money for taxpayers and the government. There couldn’t be a better time to take this essential step.

Read the full Institute for Women’s Policy Research report here.

Gaps in Access to Paid Leave are Significant, Sustained – and Unacceptable

Published on November 15, 2011 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 1 Comment

Debra Ness, President

The Census Bureau released a report last week that every family and every lawmaker should note. Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns of First-Time Mothers: 1961–2008 builds on data collected over the past 40 years, adding new data from 2006 to 2008, to offer a new look at how families in this country are managing work when babies are born.

The results are striking. The report finds that use of paid leave among first-time mothers has been largely stagnant for nearly a decade. From 2006 to 2008, more than half of first-time mothers either quit their jobs or took unpaid leave. Some women are financially secure enough to quit their jobs to spend more time with their babies without falling into poverty or enduring hardship – but for most women, quitting a job or taking unpaid leave means risking their families’ economic security.

What is especially striking about the new data is the stark divide based on socioeconomic status. The new report finds that two-thirds of first-time mothers with bachelor’s degrees or higher (66 percent) take paid leave, compared to only one in five mothers without high school diplomas (19 percent).

We know from working on this issue for years that working moms who don’t take paid leave aren’t ignoring the option to do so; they simply have no access to paid leave. In fact, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ National Compensation Survey reports that a mere 11 percent of working people in this country have access to paid leave through their employers, and fewer than 40 percent have access to employer-provided short-term disability insurance.

Context is important here. The new Census data goes through 2008 – so it does not cover the recession and jobless recovery the last few years have brought. The cutbacks and job insecurity most families are experiencing now aren’t reflected. Since the recession hit, more women are working part time. The new Census report tells us that only 21 percent of part-time working mothers take paid leave, compared to 56 percent of those who work full time. So women who used to have paid leave in their full-time jobs may have lost it altogether when they transitioned to part-time work.

This report is one more reminder that our workplace policies are not advancing to meet the needs of 21st century workers. Access to paid leave is a fundamental workplace policy guaranteed in every developed country except the United States. It’s time to change that.

Women who take paid leave work longer into their pregnancies and return to work sooner. That’s good for families’ short- and long-term economic security, good for businesses and good for our economy.

Now more than ever, it’s time for Congress to adopt the national paid leave standard the country needs.

Getting Back on Track with Family Friendly Policies

Published on October 31, 2011 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 1 Comment

Debra Ness, President

Cross-posted from Huffington Post.

As National Work and Family Month drew to a close this time last year, working families were hopeful that the upcoming election would mean that the economy would turn around, families would regain control of their finances and economic security, and the country would finally get back on track after a crippling recession.

Sadly, we ended up with a deadlocked Congress, and legislators at every level who are determined to undermine the social safety net and basic workplace rights that are the fabric of our nation — and central to the economic security of families. The result has been workers continuing to struggle to hold onto their jobs, keep their homes, put food on the table and care for their families, including children and elderly relatives.

The past year has been hard for many working families, but it has also provided some promising and hopeful victories. Some family friendly policies, like paid sick days, have weathered the storm and will soon be available to hundreds of thousands more working people, helping them meet their families’ health needs while protecting their economic security.

Connecticut made history in June by becoming the first state to pass a paid sick days law that gives workers the right to earn job-protected paid sick days to use to recover from illness or to care for a sick child or family member. Soon after, the Seattle City Council followed suit by passing a similar law that resulted from an unprecedented collaboration between workers, forward-thinking businesses and advocates. And in Philadelphia, the City Council has taken a significant step toward ensuring workers in the city have the basic right to earn paid sick time.

So this year we have seen great momentum and support for at least one common sense, modest policy that can make a tremendous difference for working families. Other family friendly policies are already on the books in other states. Just in time for National Work and Family month, the National Partnership has launched a comprehensive database that makes it easier to identify all of these existing work and family policies. Check it out at www.nationalpartnership.org/wfdb.

This new work and family database makes clear that lawmakers around the country recognize the need for and benefits of policies that ensure working people can be good workers and good family members. But if our country is ever going to demonstrate that it truly values families, and if we are serious about getting the country and economy back on track, then we need national work and family policy standards.

More than 40 percent of the private-sector workforce doesn’t have a single paid sick day. Only 11 percent have paid family leave through their employers, and fewer than 40 percent have paid medical leave through employer-provided short-term disability insurance. The United States is the only developed country that does not guarantee workers paid leave.

It is time for the nation’s policies to catch up with the rest of the world, and with the needs of 21st century families. To start, we need a national paid sick days standard and national paid family and medical leave.

This year, we have seen that progress is possible, even in difficult economic and political times. The momentum must continue so that families and the country can get back on track.

Workplace Support a Critical Step toward Eliminating Poverty

Published on October 28, 2011 in Vicki Shabo and Work & Family. 1 Comment

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

One of the biggest threats to the well-being of our nation’s women and families is poverty. Right now, more than 46 million Americans live below the poverty line, which is a little more than $22,000 for a family of four. And with high unemployment, job scarcity and insecurity, and increasing prices for basic necessities, millions more find themselves on the brink every day.

To address this growing poverty problem, Half in Ten – an exciting project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the Coalition on Human Needs, and The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights – released a new report this week on where the country stands in key areas affecting families’ economic security, and where we need to go to cut poverty in half in the next 10 years.

The report, Restoring Shared Prosperity Strategies to Cut Poverty and Expand Economic Growth, focuses on the importance of creating good jobs, strengthening families and promoting economic security. It sends a powerful message about what the nation’s families need. And we couldn’t agree more.

At the National Partnership, we know that quality jobs that offer fair pay and paid sick days are critical to the economic well-being of families, so we were pleased to see that access to these basic workplace standards are among the benchmarks used in the report to measure the nation’s progress. In fact, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, Center for American Progress President John Podesta and Half in Ten Director Melissa Boteach all identified access to paid sick leave as a key indicator of poverty reduction at the report’s launch event.

For families already on the brink of poverty, a few paid sick days can have devastating consequences. And low-income working parents are much less likely than parents with incomes over 200 percent of the poverty line to have any form of paid leave.

As National Partnership President Debra L. Ness said:

“Basic workplace supports like paid sick days, paid leave and flexibility allow working people to keep their jobs while providing for their families – ultimately enabling them to lift themselves out of poverty or prevent it altogether. There could not be a better time to implement the report’s recommendations and reduce barriers to employment and job security. We applaud Half in Ten for prioritizing these policies and raising awareness of the immense challenges facing working people and their families.”

The policy prescriptions outlined in Half in Ten’s new report are critical to ensuring America’s families can live free from poverty – and standards like paid sick days, paid family and medical leave, and fair pay can immediately alleviate some of the challenges faced by millions. We look forward to next steps and supporting the campaign as it continues.

To read the full report and state fact sheets, visit http://halfinten.org/indicators/resources.

Dispatches from Denver

Published on October 13, 2011 in National Partnership Staff and Work & Family. 2 Comments
PSD Logo

Paid Sick Days on the Ballot in Denver

This year, we have achieved significant victories in our work to ensure more working people have the right to earn paid sick days. From Seattle to Connecticut, paid sick days standards have gained support and momentum. Now, one state and three cities guarantee workers this basic right. This November, the city of Denver could become the fourth.

On November 1st, Denver voters will consider a city ballot initiative that would let workers earn paid sick days to use when they or a family member is ill. Right now, more than 100,000 workers in Denver – 40 percent of workers and 72 percent of food service workers – don’t have access to a single paid sick day. When illness strikes, they must choose between a paycheck and their health, their families’ health and the public health. This initiative could help prevent these impossible choices.

Unfortunately, all of the great success and momentum around paid sick days has garnered much attention from opponents. And Denver is their next target. The business lobby and others are determined to defeat common sense paid sick days measures. Major national and local groups have poured money into advertisements and other scare tactics designed to convince Denver voters and local businesses to oppose paid sick days.

But we know the truth: Paid sick days are good for everyone. San Francisco has had a paid sick days law since 2006, and two-thirds of businesses there now say they support the law. They overwhelmingly report that their profits have not declined since its enactment. More importantly, most workers in the city say they have benefited from the paid sick days law. It has given those who need paid sick days the most – including parents and workers with chronic conditions – the time they need to care for their health and the health of their children.

This election, Denver workers and the community have the opportunity to reap these same benefits and improve the health and quality of life for families in the city by approving the proposed paid sick days standard. Denver families deserve it, and voters deserve the right to know all of the facts about the difference paid sick days can make in people’s lives.

NP Denver TeamThat’s why the National Partnership is headed to Denver – to volunteer with the tireless workers and activists who have come together in the Campaign for a Healthy Denver, and to support their effort to inform voters about the need for paid sick days. We will report from the front lines about our work, and we hope you will share our stories and spread the word about this critically important initiative. With wealthy opponents gearing up, we know this will be an uphill battle. We are hopeful that hard work, determination and common sense will prevail.

To follow our updates, check out PaidSickDays.org. We look forward to connecting with you there!

Sincerely,

The National Partnership Team in Denver
Rachel, Helen, Katie and Sara