Family and Medical Leave Act: A Decade of Impact and Reform

Introduction

Before the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was signed into law in 1993, the United States was among the few industrialized nations with no such legislation in place. Employees had to make do with piecemeal legislation — such as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act — or with leaves won through union contracts or policies offered by more enlightened employers.

The FMLA, however, was a controversial piece of legislation. On one side, employers decried the effects the law was expected to have on their businesses. Many employees and union members, on the other hand, found the FMLA not comprehensive enough and the leave process too complicated.

A decade after its enactment, this paper evaluates the accomplishments of the FMLA. The first part gives an overview of FMLA benefits and traces the history of the legislation. The second part examines how employees, employers, and small business owners perceived the law. The third part looks at the real effects the FMLA has had on employees and businesses, based on surveys commissioned by the Department of Labor in 2000. Drawing on that survey, the paper identifies problem areas and difficulties with the current law. Finally, the paper considers the various solutions offered to address these problems — ranging from a greater emphasis on workers' compensation to state-based initiatives.

Overview of FMLA Benefits and Eligibility

Under the FMLA, all covered employers are required to grant their eligible employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in a 12-month period. Employees may take leave for four main reasons. First, an employee may use FMLA leave to give birth or to care for a newborn child. Second, employees may take leave to adopt a child, receive a foster child, or care for a newly placed child. Third, an employee may take leave to care for a sick family member — meaning a spouse, child, or parent. Finally, the FMLA allows employees who are themselves ill and unable to work an extended leave period (Jenero and Ketay).

To be covered under the law, an employer must belong to one of two categories. All public agencies — including schools and state, local, and federal employers — are automatically covered. In addition, private-sector employers with at least 50 full-time daily workers are also required to abide by the FMLA's provisions (Jenero and Ketay).

To be eligible for extended leave, an employee must work for a covered employer, must have worked for that employer for at least 12 months encompassing a minimum of 1,250 hours during the previous 12 months, and must be stationed in the United States or a U.S. territory or possession where at least 50 other employees are located (Jenero and Ketay).

Because FMLA leave may be confused with other leave benefits, Department of Labor regulations place on employers the responsibility of informing workers about the FMLA. Employers are therefore mandated to notify employees when future absences will count toward FMLA-protected leave (Sayeed).

The FMLA is one of the most important pieces of labor legislation ever enacted in the United States. Although its policies requiring unpaid leave were modest compared to those in other industrialized nations, the law had the widespread support of powerful unions such as the AFL-CIO (Schwartz 9).

Legislative History of the FMLA

Despite that broad union support, enactment came only after eight years of Congressional debate. Congress voted on the issue 13 times, and President George H. W. Bush vetoed the bill twice. The FMLA was passed again by Congress in February 1993 and signed into federal law later that year by President Clinton (Schwartz 15).

In many ways, the FMLA is a piece of legislation that specifically targets the dual caregiving and economic roles of men and women, and the difficulty many people face in balancing work and family.

The seeds for the law were sown in California in 1984, when a court struck down a state law mandating maternity leave as discriminatory to men. When Democrats approached women's groups for help in reinstating the law, the National Partnership for Women and Families instead proposed a broader leave policy that would address a wider range of work and family issues for both men and women. The early drafts of the FMLA closely resembled the version that would be enacted eight years later (Asher and Lenhoff).

Advocates of women's rights and civil rights took up the issue, pointing to the inadequacy of maternity leave. There was no national policy for maternity leave, leaving the jobs of pregnant women at the discretion of their employers. Critics also noted that focusing on maternity laws failed to address the need for protected time off for a variety of reasons beyond childbirth. Furthermore, men and fathers were recognized as an important part of early parenting (Asher and Lenhoff).

Advocates and supportive lawmakers began lobbying for a national family and medical leave law that was both comprehensive and gender-neutral. Activists and grassroots organizations joined the Family and Medical Leave Coalition, beginning with feminist and children's rights groups. The Coalition was soon joined by labor unions, the American Association of Retired Persons, various disability advocates, and representatives of religious organizations such as the U.S. Catholic Conference and Hadassah (Asher and Lenhoff).

The diversity of these organizations undercut claims that the FMLA was a left-wing, anti-business attack on family values. The various representatives successfully raised bipartisan support in Congress and argued their case effectively during hearings and in the media (Asher and Lenhoff).

The Coalition, however, faced stiff opposition, mostly from business representatives. Groups such as the Society for Human Resource Management, the National Federation of Independent Business, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce all argued that the law undermined the independence and authority of businesses. Many small business representatives feared that even unpaid leave would promote high absenteeism and cause significant loss of profit (Zall). Still others attacked the law because it facilitated women's entry into the workforce, encouraging them to stray from traditional, family-oriented roles (Asher and Lenhoff).

Conclusion

The Family and Medical Leave Act is an important piece of legislation for worker rights. It also has important implications for the changing nature of families and the ways in which men and women balance work and family life. It is no coincidence that the FMLA was passed during a period of heightened awareness of these issues.