Every night, Synda Henderson can hear her husband, Kevin, reading and singing to their daughter. Bedtime is special daddy time for 2-year-old Aleda Rose.
“She just lights up,” Synda Henderson said. “They’re very connected.”
That special bond began at birth. Using the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, the couple took time off from their jobs not only in August 2003, when Aleda was born, but again last year following the birth of their son, Wil Henry, in November. Dan Bates / The Herald
Couples such as the Hendersons praise the law for the time it allows them to have with their children, but the legislation has come under increasing scrutiny nationally. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, along with some individual businesses such as Hallmark Cards and Southwest Airlines, are urging changes.
Since Synda Henderson nursed both infants, she said her husband didn’t have the time other dads spend with their children while bottle feeding. But the extra time he took off for family leave, especially after the birth of their daughter, “has definitely paid off,” she said.
“We have our routines that work really well,” Kevin Henderson said. “We read a book every night.”
The Family and Medical Leave Act, passed in 1993, guarantees many employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave during any 12-month period for the birth or adoption of a child, to care for an immediate family member with a serious health condition, or to take time off when they are unable to work because of a serious health condition.
There’s no doubt that millions of people have used the law for legitimate purposes, said Michael Eastman, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s director of labor policy. But the law has serious problems, he said, which is why modifying some of its regulations is the organization’s top regulatory priority.
The law covers businesses with 50 or more employees. Its record-keeping provisions alone can be tough on smaller businesses of 50 to 200 employees, he said.
“What is the definition of a serious health condition? That’s issue No. 1,” Eastman said. Businesses have reported employees trying to use the law for conditions as common as a broken big toe or the flu, he said.
A small but significant number of employees have used the law to get around attendance problems at work, he said. Record-keeping and administration can be burdensome, and the law can be hard to understand.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has been asking the Department of Labor to modify its regulations since January 2003. Congress has had nine hearings on the topic, Eastman said, but has taken no action.
For Kevin Henderson, who works in the Snohomish Health District’s communicable disease program, the law allowed him three months of leave from his job when his daughter was born and 10 weeks of leave following his son’s birth.
Not all was unpaid. Accrued sick leave and vacation time allowed him to take three months of paid leave after the birth of his daughter and about five weeks of leave following his son’s birth.
His wife took three months off from her job as a case manager in the county’s Division of Long Term Care and Aging following the birth of each of her children.
None of the leave she took following the birth of her first child was paid. Two of her 12 weeks of leave were paid following her son’s birth.
Planning ahead and budgeting helped the couple get through their unpaid leaves when family income was reduced.
Mark Mahnkey, who lives near Snohomish, said from his experience as a former business owner the family leave act can cause problems both for employers and fellow employees.
Mahnkey was the owner of retail stores before the law went into effect. “I would have been in deep doo-doo,” he said, trying to manage his stores under the law and having to pay other employees overtime to help cover a worker on leave.
The required paperwork can be complicated and hard to understand, he said. “Employees don’t understand it. Employers don’t. There’s a lot of ins and outs.
“Sometimes it is a worthy thing,” he said. “But everybody else gets stuck doing the work.”
Eventually, employers face having to hire help to fill the holes.
While co-workers were happy about the birth of his kids, Kevin Henderson said he understands they likely were thinking: “And now I’m left holding the bag for the next three months.”
“I felt a sense of guilt,” he said.
“I don’t have a profound answer to it. It does put employers into an uncomfortable position, and co-workers as well.”
Judy Neumann of Everett, who works at the Boeing Co., said there’s been a lot of talk about misuse of the law. “But the process I had to go through, I don’t know how you can misuse it,” she said.
Neumann said she has used the leave to help care for her husband, who has a chronic lung disease. A doctor had to sign off on the paperwork, explaining the medical condition, she said.
“You have to jump through a lot of hoops to get family leave,” she said. “In the end , it pays off.”
Without family leave, “if I had used all my vacation and sick leave, there’s a possibility I could have lost my job,” she said. “It’s been a lifesaver for me.”
Twelve years after the law was passed and 10 years after its regulations were approved, experience shows that the parts of the law dealing with leave for newborns or newly adopted children “seems to be working fairly well,” said Eastman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
“We’re not talking about repealing the act or taking away time to spend with family members,” he said. “We’d like people to take a close look at this. This is a serious problem that needs to be resolved.”
Reporter Sharon Salyer: 425-339-3486 or salyer@heraldnet.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
