ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, May 12, 1996 TAG: 9605100010
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: 2 EDITION: METRO
REMEMBER the ``sky is falling'' predictions before the Family and Medical Leave Act was enacted in 1993? Business lobbyists warned it would amount to a hidden tax on employers, disrupt business operations and reduce productivity.
Partly because President Clinton made it one of his first priorities after taking office, Congress passed the family-leave law anyway. And - guess what - the sky didn't fall.
A bipartisan commission set up to track the legislation's impact recently reported that the law is helping workers as was intended - and isn't causing undue hardships for their employers.
Between 1.5 million and 3 million Americans took unpaid leaves between January 1994 and July 1995 - less than 4 percent of the eligible workers.
Ninety percent of employers reported no change or only small increases in their costs related to benefits, hiring, etc., and 86 percent of employers said the law has had no noticeable effect on business productivity.
The family-leave law remains one of the few pro-family and pro-worker actions taken by Congress in recent years. Clearly, it was and is needed. Workers ought to be able to take time off, unpaid, to care for a newborn baby or a family member in a medical emergency - without facing the prospect of losing their jobs.
Though the report didn't say so, we suspect the law may have saved businesses money. Every time they have to hire and train a replacement worker for one let go, there's a cost involved. And studies have shown that workers are more productive and more loyal when their employers demonstrate a concern for family situations.
Coming as it does during debate over raising the minimum wage, the report on the family-leave law should serve as timely reminder to Congress: Worst-case scenarios and actual impacts aren't always the same.
LENGTH: Short : 42 linesby CNB