Assignment 3 Persuasive Paper Part 1: A Problem Exist 131627

17assignment 3 Persuasive Paper Part 1: A Problem Existsrunning Heade

Assignment 3: Persuasive Paper Part 1: A Problem Exists Angela Watson Professor Michael White English 215- Research and Writing February 6, 2017 Positive Changes: The Family and Medical Leave Act We all have to support ourselves, regardless how we accomplish the task. Some people get federal and local funding through Social Security or Military retirement. But, most of us, no matter what age group we fall in; having a job is how we survive. A lot of us have some health problem or is a caregiver to someone with health problems. Employers are not so forgiving when it comes to missing a lot of days from work.

So, what can we do about having to take off from work for health reasons? The answer is The Family and Medical Leave Act. This law helps working families protect their jobs and income while out on medical leave. The leave entitles qualifying employees to take twelve weeks of medical leave for caring for family members and themselves. Great job to the United States Congress!

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) is a good start to establishing a sound family and medical leave policy for employees. The FMLA was created to benefit employees needing to take leave due to medical reasons for themselves or family members. Many people lost their jobs because they had to stay home with a loved one who was sick. Fathers were often unable to spend more than a day or two with their newborns, fearing they might lose income and employment. Something had to be done to protect workers’ jobs.

However, there are rules and regulations associated with the law, and the FMLA requires revision due to bias, unclear standards, and lack of paid leave. The history of the FMLA began with the Women’s Legal Defense Fund in the 1980s, now known as The National Partnership for Women & Families, which drafted the initial legislation. In 1991 and 1992, President George H. W. Bush vetoed the bill, preventing it from helping millions of Americans. It was eventually signed into law by President Bill Clinton in January 1993.

The first issue with the current policy concerns bias in eligibility requirements. Private-sector employees are covered only if they work for a company with 50 or more employees over at least 20 weeks in the preceding year. In contrast, government and public employees have different, less restrictive eligibility standards. Additionally, the law excludes family members such as grandparents, grandchildren, and in-laws from qualifying for leave unless they meet specific criteria. Thus, many people are left out of the law’s protections.

The second problem relates to the definition of a “serious health condition” and the ambiguity in regulations and medical certification forms. The forms that healthcare providers fill out are often complex and confusing for the average employee to understand. Furthermore, standards such as “50 employees within a 75-mile radius” are vague and open to interpretation, complicating eligibility verification. These unclear standards hinder equal access to leave benefits across different employment sectors.

The third significant issue is the lack of paid leave under the FMLA. The law provides unpaid leave but does not offer any funding or wage replacement for employees during their leave. Workers are often forced to use their accrued sick or vacation time, which may be insufficient or unavailable, especially for part-time workers or those with irregular hours. Regulations require employees to meet 1,250 hours worked in the past year, which disadvantages part-time workers, many of whom are women seeking to balance childcare and employment. Such unpaid leave can result in financial hardship and increased reliance on government assistance programs such as food stamps and welfare, which burdens the community and government resources.

While the FMLA represents a positive development in supporting working families, significant gaps remain. Revisions are necessary to ensure the law is equitable, accessible, and straightforward. Standardizing eligibility regardless of company size or sector, simplifying the certification process, and implementing paid leave options are essential steps. Some states have established paid family leave programs that could serve as models for federal policy (Ludden, 2013). Broadening the definition of family to include broader household members such as grandparents, grandchildren, and in-laws ensures that caregiving responsibilities are adequately recognized.

In conclusion, the FMLA has paved the way for better employee protections concerning family and medical leave, but it requires reform to address bias, ambiguity, and financial barriers. Aligning regulations to be more inclusive and straightforward not only benefits employees but also reduces community reliance on assistance programs and promotes workplace productivity. Political will and public support are crucial to enacting these changes, ultimately fostering a more equitable work environment for all Americans.

Paper For Above instruction

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was enacted in 1993 to provide job protection for employees needing to take leave for family or medical reasons. While it marked a significant step toward supporting working families, several limitations have hindered its effectiveness and equity. This paper examines the current issues within the law, emphasizing the need for comprehensive reform to ensure broader access, clarity, and paid leave provisions.

Initially, the FMLA was designed to help employees balance work and family responsibilities without fear of losing their jobs. It allows eligible workers to take up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave for childbirth, adoption, personal health issues, or caring for a family member with a serious health condition. Despite this, the law's eligibility requirements inherently favor larger employers and exclude many part-time and public-sector employees. Private employers must have at least 50 employees, working for at least 20 weeks in the previous year, to be covered. Conversely, federal employees are protected regardless of the size of their agency, creating inconsistency and perceived bias that disadvantages certain workers (Bell & Lenhoff, n.d.).

Moreover, the law defines a “serious health condition” through criteria that are often complex and confusing. Healthcare providers must complete medical certification forms, which are not always user-friendly or straightforward, leading to delays and misunderstandings. For example, standards such as “50 employees within a 75-mile radius” are vague and open to interpretation, causing uncertainty among employers and employees alike (Bell & Lenhoff, n.d.). Establishing a more transparent, simplified process is essential for ensuring equitable access to leave benefits across diverse workplaces and communities.

The most pressing concern remains the absence of paid leave. The FMLA mandates unpaid leave, offering no wages or financial support during the leave period. Employees are often forced to use accrued sick or vacation days, which may be insufficient or unavailable for part-time or low-income workers, many of whom are women balancing employment with caregiving duties. This unpaid leave framework results in economic hardship for families, leading many to rely on government assistance programs such as food stamps and welfare, thereby increasing societal costs and community reliance on public resources (Ludden, 2013). The lack of paid leave disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, exacerbating economic inequality.

Reforming the FMLA to address these issues involves several key measures. First, expanding eligibility to include all workers, regardless of company size or employment sector, would make leave protections more equitable. Second, creating a clear and simplified certification process would reduce confusion and administrative delays. Third, states that have implemented paid family leave programs demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of subsidizing family leave through government funding (Dwoskin & Squire, 2010). Adopting similar models nationally could ensure workers receive income replacement during leave, reducing financial strain and promoting workforce stability.

Furthermore, broadening the definition of family to include grandparents, grandchildren, in-laws, and other household members recognizes the diverse caregiving roles in modern families. These reforms would reflect current social realities and ensure that the law adequately supports caregiving obligations across different household structures (National Partnership for Women & Families, 2016). Achieving these changes requires political will and public advocacy, but the potential benefits—enhanced economic security for families, improved health outcomes, and increased workplace productivity—are substantial.

Ultimately, the FMLA’s legacy as a foundational workers’ rights law can be strengthened through meaningful reforms. Making leave protections more universal, transparent, and paid aligns with evolving family dynamics and workforce needs. Such efforts would promote fairness, reduce dependency on public assistance, and foster a more inclusive economic environment. Given the importance of supporting working families in today’s society, these reforms are not just necessary but urgent.

References

• Bell, L., & Lenhoff, D. R. (n.d.). Government support for working families and for communities: Retrieved from National Partnership for Women & Families
• Cadrain, D. (2009). Leave law spurs policy changes. HR Magazine, 54(3), 47-48.
• Dwoskin, L. B., & Squire, M. B. (2010). FMLA boot camp: Regulatory and case law developments under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Labor Law Journal, 61(1), 37-51.
• Ludden, J. (2013, February 5). FMLA: A no-really working for many employees. NPR.
• National Partnership for Women & Families. (2016). Updating the Family and Medical Leave Act. Retrieved from https://www.nationalpartnership.org