A previous version of this story said that benefits would be paid out to employees working at companies with eight or more employees, but under the bill in its form as of Jan. 19, the benefit would actually extend to employees at all companies.

A bill that could make paid family leave a reality for Washington residents was heard at a House Workplace and Labor Standards committee Thursday morning.

Business leaders came out in support and opposition to the legislation, some arguing the bill could simplify family leave laws across the state while injecting confidence into the economy, while others suggested the burden would be too great on smaller businesses.

“A framework for family leave insurance was enacted in 2007. That has not been implemented,” said committee staff Joan Elgee.

Now lawmakers are working on two bills, in both the House and Senate, that would fund the program. The House legislation, HB 1116, heard Thursday, is scheduled for an executive session on Jan. 23. The Senate bill, SB 5032, was introduced but has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.

Testimony

Lelach Rave, representing the Washington State Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, supported the bill, in part because she said it promoted better health for families and children.

“I want to let you know the science is really clear. Providing paid leave to parents improves child and family health and families’ financial security,” Rave said. “Paid leave policies lead to better health in numerous ways. Mothers breast feed longer. The most common reason I hear in my practice for a woman to stop breast feeding sooner than she would like or even not take up breast feeding at all, is a concern about returning to work sooner than she might want.”

Rave also said that paid leave helps families take time to immunize their children, not depend on government assistance and even helps children recover when they are hospitalized.

“When children are hospitalized a parent’s presence promotes recovery,” she said.

Sarah Bird, CEO of a Seattle business with about 160 employees, MOZ, said this bill would help her company pay for benefits they already have.

“We do have, at MOZ, generous paid leave policies right now,” she said. “Regardless, I am here today to urge you, please pass this bill because this bill, number one, it makes it much more affordable for me to provide the kind of benefits I want for my team and I think that they deserve…Second it’s very easy to administer these kind of benefits under this bill. I love that it borrows paradigms that my business is already very well familiar with…Three, I think that passing this bill today will help us avoid a patchwork of laws from cities and…counties that may try to do their own thing. And as an employer I got to tell you, please help simplicity.”

Critics of the bill testified that the legislation didn’t take small businesses into account and could possibly slow the growth of the economy, with paired with other policies rolling out, like the rising minimum wage and paid sick leave.

Bob Battles, Government Affairs Director, for the Association of Washington Business, said he wanted to work toward paid family leave, but that the bill as presented didn’t offer enough of an exemption for small businesses.

“Consider that every time we add another cost on employers: the small biz employer the large biz employer,” he said, telling lawmakers at the hearing he wanted to look at the big picture. “These employers have just been hit with again a workers’ compensation increases, they’ve just been hit with a minimum wage increase from $9.46 to $11 and in the next couple years it will be $13.50.” He also pointed to the paid sick leave set to be implemented in 2018.

That burden, he said, needs to be considered as the bill is discussed.

Mark Streuli, associate director of government relations for the Washington Farm Bureau, testifying in opposition to the bill, said the profit margins in agriculture are far too tight to allow for this type of bill.

“Obviously, employees are important to agriculture and many of the farmers out there work out options with their employees. It’s quite often verbal or on a handshake arrangement,” he said at the hearing. “But the cost, with the tight margins, the costs are concerning. And we’re just unable to support it at this time.”

How the legislation would function if passed

The legislation would grant employees who are taking leave to care for a new child, care for a family member during an illness or to take time for their own medical issues, to get paid for a period of up to six months.

The financing of the leave is through employer and employee contributions, and is based on wage, as opposed to a flat rate, according to the bill analysis.

The percentage of wage an individual would receive would adjust depending on their wage, with a $1000 cap.

Here’s text from the bill analysis breaking down what an employee could expect to get paid:

• If the individual’s average weekly wage is 50 percent or less of the state average weekly wage ($1082 for 2015), the benefit is 90 percent of the individual’s average weekly wage.

• If the individual’s average weekly wage is more than 50 percent of the state average weekly wage, the benefit is 90 percent of the individual’s average weekly wage up to 50 percent of the state average weekly wage, and 50 percent of the individual’s average weekly wage that is greater than the state average weekly wage.

The employer and employee would pay into this benefit. An employee would need to work 340 hours to be eligible for the benefit.

Erin Fenner: erin@washingtonstatewire.com, @erinfenner

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.