No Major Burden Seen in Family-Leave Laws

Contrary to the fears of major business groups, the majority of employers in four states with family-leave laws were able to comply without significant problems or expense, according to a survey released Wednesday.

In one of the most extensive studies of its kind, the Families and Work Institute, a nonprofit New York research group, refuted the arguments of business groups, which have long opposed government-mandated family-leave policies as being too costly or complicated to implement. The report is sure to be used as ammunition by groups that are seeking the passage of family-leave bills pending before Congress and in various state legislatures, including California’s.

The three-year survey, which looked only at childbirth- and adoption-leave policies, reported that only 9% of companies in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island and Oregon had difficulty in complying with the leave laws, which generally entitle workers to return to their jobs after taking time off without pay to care for family members. The majority saw no increases in their training, administrative and insurance costs.

“I think the study removed the arguments that (family leave) is going to be a huge problem,” said Ellen Galinsky, co-president of the Families and Work Institute.

But business groups were not persuaded.

“We think it’s a great leave policy and encourage employers to do it when they possibly can,” said Damon Tobias, manager of human resource policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But “we are philosophically opposed to mandated benefits . . . that are totally private-sector arrangements.”

Terry Hill, spokesman for the National Federation of Independent Business, a group of small-business owners, said most employers already offer different versions of family leave, making legislation unnecessary. In fact, the Families and Work Institute survey showed that 83% of employers already gave job-guaranteed leaves to new mothers before the state laws were passed.

Women are eligible for paid pregnancy disability leave under state and federal laws. In California, women are eligible for a four-month pregnancy leave without fear of losing their job. However, it is often open to question whether men are eligible for time off to tend to newborns. Also, workers who want leave to tend to ill or elderly family members are often left without government protection.

Opponents of family-leave laws argue that the measures might lead some companies to cut back on other employee benefits and the hiring of young women and low-skilled workers. Many fear companies would have to spend more to train temporary workers who were filling in for employees on leave.

But many firms in the four states encountered no such problems. At the Portland, Ore., division of Boeing, the aerospace giant said the workload of employees on family leave was often split up among remaining workers.

“Our workers are cross-trained . . . and we have the opportunity to move them to cover more than one area,” said Sharon Birge, supervisor of employee services. “We have not had any particular difficulty with that policy.”

Seventeen states now have family-leave laws on their books, and another 13 states are now considering such legislation. In California, a bill that would permit workers up to four months of unpaid family leave was passed by the state Assembly last week.

On the federal level, two different family-leave bills have been introduced before Congress. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1991, which would entitle workers to 12 weeks of unpaid leave and require employers to continue health insurance coverage, is similar to a bill that was vetoed last year by President Bush as being too restrictive for business.

Under the American Family Protection Act of 1991, meanwhile, workers would have up to six years of unpaid leave and preferential treatment when re-applying for employment. Employers, however, would not be required to rehire workers once they return from family leave.

Besides growing government pressure, businesses are under competitive pressure to adopt family leave and other benefits that allow workers greater flexibility to handle their personal lives. Such benefits have become more important tools used to attract and retain skilled and educated workers, said Daniel Dreyer, a research analyst at the Conference Board, a business research group.

“A lot of companies did it because it was a good benefit to offer and it was wonderful public relations,” Dreyer said. “Now, work and family policy is a business issue because of corporate competitiveness.”

Family-Leave Costs Here are results of a survey of firms in states requiring family leave--Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin--and how costs were affected.

Change in Costs Significant Some No Type of Cost Increase Increase Increase Administration 6% 39% 55% Unemployment Insurance 2% 17% 81% Health Insurance 0% 27% 73%

Source: Families and Work Institute