Jottings By An Employer's Lawyer

Monday, October 20, 2003

Update on FMLA Expansion Contained In Senate Version of Iraq Supplemental Funding Bill


Although just posted on Friday, the link to the amendment offered by Senator Feingold is already out of date. Here is anotherlink that will hopefully last longer.

In case it doesn't, here is the text of the amendment which was adopted by the Senate last Thursday evening without a roll call vote:

SA 1852. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. DAYTON, and Mrs. MURRAY) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1689, making emergency supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan security and reconstruction for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes; as follows:


On page 38, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following new title:

TITLE III--LEAVE FOR MILITARY FAMILIES

SEC. 3001. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Military Families Leave Act of 2003''.

SEC. 3002. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LEAVE.

(a) ENTITLEMENT TO LEAVE.--Section 102(a) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2612(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(3) ENTITLEMENT TO LEAVE DUE TO FAMILY MEMBER'S ACTIVE DUTY.--

``(A) IN GENERAL.--Subject to section 103(f), an eligible employee shall be entitled to a total of 12 workweeks of leave during any 12-month period because a spouse, son, daughter, or parent of the employee is a member of the Armed Forces--

``(i) on active duty in support of a contingency operation; or

``(ii) notified of an impending call or order to active duty in support of a contingency operation.

``(B) CONDITIONS AND TIME FOR TAKING LEAVE.--An eligible employee shall be entitled to take leave under subparagraph (A)--

``(i) while the employee's spouse, son, daughter, or parent (referred to in the subparagraph as the `family member') is on active duty in support of a contingency operation, and, if the family member is a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces, beginning when such family member receives notification of an impending call or order to active duty in support of a contingency operation; and

``(ii) only for issues relating to or resulting from such family member's--

``(I) service on active duty in support of a contingency operation; and

``(II) if a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces--

``(aa) receipt of notification of an impending call or order to active duty in support of a contingency operation; and

``(bb) service on active duty in support of such operation.

``(4) LIMITATION.--No employee may take more than a total of 12 workweeks of leave under paragraphs (1) and (3) during any 12-month period.''.

(b) SCHEDULE.--Section 102(b)(1) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 2612(b)(1)) is amended by inserting after the second sentence the following: ``Leave under subsection (a)(3) may be taken intermittently or on a reduced leave schedule.''.

(c) SUBSTITUTION OF PAID LEAVE.--Section 102(d)(2)(A) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 2612(d)(2)(A)) is amended by inserting ``or subsection (a)(3)'' after ``subsection (a)(1)''.

(d) NOTICE.--Section 102(e) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 2612(e)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(3) NOTICE FOR LEAVE DUE TO FAMILY MEMBER'S ACTIVE DUTY.--An employee who intends to take leave under subsection (a)(3) shall provide such notice to the employer as is practicable.''.

(e) CERTIFICATION.--Section 103 of such Act (29 U.S.C. 2613) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(f) CERTIFICATION FOR LEAVE DUE TO FAMILY MEMBER'S ACTIVE DUTY.--An employer may require that a request for leave under section 102(a)(3) be supported by a certification issued at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe.''.

There is a similar version for civil service workers. Although one publication has said Senator Feingold said this only impacts families of reserve units, I think as written it could be subject to a broader reading depending on the definition of 'contingency operation.' Hopefully, that issue will be straightened out in a conference committee, along with the important question of whether this is the right way to deal with an amendment to the FMLA when there are a number of issues that should be addressed about the legislation.

Labels:


Comments: Post a Comment
Links to this post

An Affiliate of the Law.com Network


From the Law.com Newswire

[about RSS] Law.com Privacy Policy
Google
WWW Jottings