TRENTON - Much of the debate over proposals to create a paid family leave system in New Jersey center on business objections to such policy. Disruption and financial cost are among the most frequently cited objections, as seen in statements from the New Jersey Business and Industry Association saying "the cost to business, especially small business, will be astronomical," and "This will disrupt virtually every workplace in New Jersey."

In fact, paid family leave could just as easily be seen as an opportunity for New Jersey:

• Costs would be shared by all workers and all employees: Providing benefits through Unemployment or Temporary Disability, as is proposed by recently introduced legislation would subsidize the cost of paid leave to small business.
• The cost of replacing a worker who took leave would be offset by the probability that an employee not granted leave might still choose to quit, forcing the employer to bear the greater cost of recruiting and training a permanent new employee.
• Benefits provided by large and small companies would be more equal. Now most small businesses can't afford the same types of benefits as large corporations.

These are among the findings in Perspective on Family Leave, a New Jersey Policy Perspective report by Senior Policy Analyst Mary E. Forsberg. It is the first in a series offering facts, analysis and commentary that challenge conventional wisdom and help frame debate on important issues facing New Jersey. The report notes that the task of balancing work and family today is harder than ever. In 1999, 72 percent of mothers with children under 18 were working, compared to only 27 percent in 1955. And of today's working mothers, almost 65 percent have children under 6. As the report notes, "Public policy must play a role in helping to resolve this situation. The issue is too big for people to solve on their own."

New Jersey is one of at least 18 states where paid family leave legislation has been introduced. Two of them - California and New Hampshire - have conducted studies on how much such leave would cost. California found it would cost at most 88 cents a week per employee to expand the state's Temporary Disability program to cover family leave. In New Hampshire, with no temporary disability program, it would cost $1.83 a week.

Like California, Hawaii, New York and Rhode Island, New Jersey already provides temporary state benefits to employees who become disabled due to injury or illness outside the workplace. The benefits are funded by mandatory contributions from workers and employers, meaning there already is a mechanism by which paid family leave benefits could be funded.

While neither the US government nor any state currently gives paid leave to workers who need time off to care for a new baby or a sick family member, this country is a distinct exception. Among industrial countries today, only the US, New Zealand and Australia offer no paid legislated maternity leave. Such leave has been available in most European countries since early in the 20th Century.

Indeed, while they are not required to do so, many employers in the US do offer paid leave as a benefit-but it's highly selective. Professional, technical, clerical and sales employees were three times more likely than blue collar and service employees to participate in a paid family leave program, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. Someone most likely to get paid leave is a salaried male with relatively high education and income, working in a company of 50 or more employees, taking time off to deal with his own health problems. The person least likely is a young woman who, arguably, needs it most: paid hourly, earning less than $20,000 a year in the service sector.

The report points out that this situation occurs at a time when chief executives at more than 200 US companies have annual pay packages over $20 million, and when the average CEO makes 475 times more than the average blue collar worker. As Perspective on Family Leave points out, "many who find nothing to object to in these pay packages still oppose extending benefits to some of the neediest workers in our society - on grounds that it would be too expensive."

The report notes that, over the years, business opposition to reforms that today are considered mainstream echoed charges being made today against paid family leave. Indeed, the National Association of Manufacturers in the 1930s argued against unemployment insurance as "ultimate socialistic control of life and industry." As the report points out, such rhetoric so clearly fails the test of time that business today should drop its knee-jerk opposition and "help in the societal challenge of figuring out how to help employees balance work and family life."

New Jersey Policy Perspective is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization based in Trenton that conducts research on state issues.

TAX REFORM

WORK & WAGES

BUDGET & FISCAL POLICY

TRANSIT ISSUES

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

VOTING & GOVT REFORM

© 2008 New Jersey Policy Perspective