Oppose HB 1213 – Changes to Washington’s Paid Family and Medical Leave

Lakewood Chamber of Commerce
Board of Directors Policy Position
Opposes HB 1213 – Changes to Washington’s Paid Family and Medical Leave
January 28, 2025

HB 1213 proposes significant changes to Washington’s Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) law that would impose substantial administrative and operational burdens on employers, particularly small businesses and local governments, while providing limited additional benefits to employees. These changes threaten to undermine the delicate balance between employee protections and workplace flexibility, which is critical for businesses and public-sector employers to thrive.

Key Concerns:

1. Reduced Flexibility for Employers, Especially Small Businesses:
Under current law, small employers (fewer than 50 employees) are exempt from providing employment protections for PFML leave, acknowledging their limited capacity to hold positions open for extended periods. HB 1213 would eliminate this exemption, requiring all employers to provide job protection after just 90 days of employment, regardless of employer size. Countless small businesses will struggle to meet this requirement, risking disruptions to critical operations and services.

2. Administrative Complexity in Leave Coordination:
The bill introduces new rules requiring employers to track and provide detailed written notices to employees about how federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and state PFML leaves interact. While this aims to disincentivize “stacking” of leave (using FMLA and PFML consecutively to extend total protected time off), it adds significant administrative complexity for employers. For small businesses and local governments with limited to no HR resources, this complexity will be difficult to manage effectively.

3. Unnecessary Expansion of Employment Protections:
Currently, PFML employment protections apply only to employees who meet reasonable thresholds: working for a company with 50+ employees, at least 12 months of employment, and 1,250 hours worked. HB 1213 removes these thresholds, granting protections after just 90 days. However, research shows no meaningful difference in reemployment rates between workers with and without these protections. This suggests the change would add burdens on employers without substantially improving outcomes for workers.

4. Potential for Increased Costs and Strain on Employers:
Expanding employment protections ties employers’ obligation to continue health insurance to the new job protection rules. This could impose significant costs on small employers and public-sector organizations that already face tight budgets, especially in cases where long-term leave is taken.

Recommendations:
* Maintain the existing PFML employment protection thresholds, which strike a reasonable balance between supporting employees and ensuring small employers and local governments can operate effectively.

* Encourage better alignment of federal FMLA and state PFML laws without imposing additional administrative burdens on employers. Clearer guidance, rather than expanded mandates, would be more effective in addressing leave coordination challenges.

* Preserve the exemption for small employers, recognizing their unique operational challenges and the disproportionate impact of extended leave requirements on their workforce.

Conclusion:
HB 1213 imposes significant burdens on employers, particularly small businesses and local governments, while offering limited additional benefits to employees. It disrupts the careful balance between worker protections and operational flexibility, creating unnecessary complexity and potential costs. Policymakers should focus on refining PFML to ensure it is fair, effective, and manageable for all stakeholders. For these reasons, we strongly oppose HB 1213 and urge legislators to reject this proposal.