State Sen. George Borrello (R-Sunset Bay) is discussing changes to the state's paid family leave program, which would affect businesses but not people employed by the state. It does not affect.
Last June, state Sen. George Borrello happily voted in favor of a bill that would ban racial discrimination in the administration of the state's paid family leave law.
His vote changed this week.
While Borrello's views on discrimination haven't changed, state Sen. Andrew Gounardes (D-Brooklyn)'s proposal has.
“We previously voted for this bill and it passed unanimously,” Borrero said. “But this particular version changes so fundamentally that it adds a private right of action. To me, that's a game changer in this bill. I think employees have a right to address this.” We believe that we should. Adding this would be very difficult right now because it would be costly. It would add to the cost of doing business here in New York, which is already an expensive place to do business. Sho.”
S.1027B amends Section 120 of the State Workers' Compensation Act, removing the requirement that an employee must request return to work before filing a complaint of unlawful discrimination, and Discriminatory practices against employees by claiming or attempting to claim wages are prohibited. family vacation. It also allows workers to sue private companies for violations of the law.
“But I would also like to point out that this rule does not apply to civil servants,” Borrero said. “We do this often in this chamber. We say, 'If you're an employer, this is what you should do.' Here's how you should treat your employees. ” But we always exclude the government from that, which I think is problematic, and we do it again here. This bill does not apply to civil servants. However, it would give private sector employees the right of private action. That's why I vote against it. ”
No one else spoke in defense of the bill on the Senate floor. In his legislative justification, Gounardes wrote that the paid family leave law's provisions dealing with discrimination are too weak.Compensation under workers' compensation
Section 120 of the Act does not allow employers to discriminate against employees who request or use paid family leave. Under Section 203-b of the Workers' Compensation Act, employers are required to reinstate employees who have taken paid family leave to their previous jobs or comparable positions with similar pay and benefits. Masu. If an employee feels that she has been treated unfairly when returning from paid family leave, she can apply for reinstatement on Form PFL-DC-119 and wait 30 days for a response. If the employee does not receive a response or is dissatisfied with the response, Mr. Gounardo filed a second form alleging discrimination/retaliation, Form PFL-DC-120, under the Workers' Compensation Act. It says you can wait 45 days for your case to be heard by a judge. If awarded, the employee may be entitled to reinstatement, unpaid wages, and attorney's fees. Employers may pay fines of up to $500.
Gounardes wrote that many attorneys do not handle retaliation claims related to family leave because there is no formal remedy outside of the workers' compensation system. He also said that asking workers to return to work before filing a discrimination complaint leaves many workers open to behavior such as on-site insults, jokes, harsh feedback, and exclusion from projects they were working on before their leave. He said it means being exposed. so-called discrimination and retaliation.
“When it first drafted these provisions in 2016, the Legislature was very clear that it intended to prohibit all forms of paid parental leave discrimination, but in reality these provisions were intended to prohibit people who actually quit their jobs. We are only handing out justice (and there will likely be retaliation) (and what we faced was a major factor in their decision to leave) and somehow we are willing to give it back,” Gounardes said. wrote. “This bill corrects both of the above problems by creating a private right of action, separate from the Workers' Compensation Commission, for violations of WCL § 120 and § 203-b. We also make clear that employees should not be required to return to work before seeking redress through the WCB or civil court.”
