Local reaction Monday to paid family, medical leave bill in Legislature

Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers expressed his opposition Monday to a bill proposed by state lawmakers to provide paid family and medical leave and job protection to all employees in Colorado.
The legislation, Senate Bill 19-188, would provide up to 12 weeks of annual leave for employees who care for a new baby, for a seriously ill relative or for themselves if they are seriously ill. The bill’s language also lists relatives who are victims of abuse, or who are having issues related to active-duty military service, as being qualified for paid leave.

Employees would pay 60%, and employers 40%, into an insurance fund that would be managed by the state, and employees would be eligible for leave after only 90 days of employment.

Managing the fund would require hundreds of employees and cost the state nearly $19 million annually, Suthers said.

“Local governments would be exempted from paying the employer share, but local government employees could opt in, leaving private sector and nonprofit employees and employers to subsidize their coverage,” he said. “That’s unfair.”

It’s also why the chambers of commerce in Colorado Springs and Pueblo have opposed the bill.

The bill would be in addition to a federal version of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, which provides 12 weeks of unpaid leave.

Suthers said he’s urging voters to contact their state lawmakers and ask them to reject the bill.

“It would be too expensive for companies, particularly large companies,” he said during a news conference at the City Administration Building. “They’ll go somewhere else. And existing companies won’t want to expand or hire more workers. This would be a real job killer.”

Suthers said that concern was expressed to him by several military and high-tech contractors at the recent Space Symposium, an annual event in Colorado Springs.

Dave Jeffrey, owner of JPM Prototype, an industrial manufacturer in town, agrees with Suthers.

“We have 30 employees and they have different responsibilities,” he said. “It would be difficult to replace them with a temporary worker. And there’s opportunity for abuse in this bill. If it passes, I’d have to review the benefits I offer and possibly eliminate some of them.”

Jeffrey said he’s never had to deal with the situation because he falls short of the federal act’s minimum requirement of 50 employees.

But the Small Business Majority, a nationwide group representing 58,000 small businesses, said it supports the bill. A spokesman said it’s easier to contribute to a fund than to find, hire and train qualified workers.

Tracy duCharme is a member of the SBM and owns Color Me Mine, a pottery shop in the Chapel Hills Mall.“For a full-time, minimum-wage worker, it would cost them out of their paycheck $83 a year,” she said. “And as the business owner, my contribution would be even less, about $55 a year. So why wouldn’t I support my employees?”
One of her employees, Morgan Deegan, wants to see the bill pass.

“I’m expecting a baby and I’m due in August,” she said. “For my family, a bill of this nature that would ensure I had an extended period of time and felt financially secure is something that would be huge for us.”

The bill is co-sponsored by two Democratic senators and two Democratic representatives.

The SBM said nearly 60% of respondents in a recent poll of 300 Colorado business owners are Republicans who support the bill, and the same poll found that 64% of respondents are in favor of the measure.

The bill was scheduled for a second reading Monday in the Senate, to be followed by a third reading. A Democratic Party spokesman said he expected the bill to be passed pass by the Senate this week and to advance to the House for further consideration.