Bush to Repeal Rule Providing Unemployment Pay to Parents on Family Leave
Despite his campaign promises proclaiming support for “family values,” Bush earlier this month announced his intention to repeal the Birth and Adoption Unemployment Compensation Rule which provides unemployment pay for workers on leave to care for a new child. Judith L. Lichtman, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families told the New York Times, “It’s just a slap in the face to working people…All this regulation did was, for the first time, give states the option to use” unemployment insurance to compensate parents on unpaid family leave.
The Labor Department insists that the rule—approved by former President Bill Clinton in June 2000—must be repealed because it burdens states, already suffering low unemployment funds during the economic recession. However, to date no state has even exercised the option because many are amidst legislative efforts to implement the program. The repeal “reflects profound mistrust of states to make wise choices” in managing their unemployment pay programs, said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, according to the Associated Press.
California is the first state in the nation to enact a comprehensive paid family leave plan –albeit one that is not paid via unemployment insurance. Five other states offer a form of paid leave called temporary disability insurance and at least 24 states allow public employees to use sick leave to care for sick family members, while three states require private employers to do so for their employees, according to the National Partnership for Women & Families.
The United States is one of few developed nations that does not offer some form of paid parental leave—the US enacted the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in 1993, which requires unpaid leave for workers. Approximately 127 countries offer compensation to parents, while many others have passed similar laws to compensate workers who need time off because of family emergencies. “We as a nation love to talk about ourselves as a family-friendly nation, but when it comes to having the policies in place to live up to that we often fall short,” Lichtman told the Los Angeles Times.
Media Resources: Associated Press 12/3/02; NY Times 12/3/02; NOW 12/9/02; National Partnership for Women and Families 12/3/02; Feminist Daily News Wire
10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1.
The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case.
UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
10/29/2014 North Dakota Supreme Court Upholds Abortion Restrictions - The North Dakota Supreme Court yesterday upheld a set of misguided restrictions on medication abortion, allowing what is effectively a ban on early, non-surgical abortions in the state to go into effect immediately.
The decision overturned a lower court order finding the law, known as HB 1297, unconstitutional and permanently blocking its enforcement. . . .