What do maternity leave programs look like in those states which have adopted a program?<\/p>\n
This is just a data dump, as I set about compiling this information for myself and thought readers might be interested.<\/p>\n
First, California<\/strong>.<\/p>\n They\u2019ve had a state disability program for two decades, which pays 55% of pay for up to 12 months,<\/a> up to an annual covered pay of $106,742. \u00a0The benefit is fully employee paid, via payroll deduction, which is treated as a tax and tax deductible as with any other state tax.<\/p>\n The current rate is 0.9%. \u00a0Does this reflect the full cost, or are there additional funds coming from general state revenues? \u00a0Based on the Wikipedia list of contribution rates<\/a>\u00a0it seems to be the former \u2014 that is, the rate bounces up and down a lot, which seems to suggest that it\u2019s adjusted each year based on the prior year\u2019s shortfall or surplus. \u00a0What\u2019s noteworthy is that the rate started at 0.5% when the program began in 1996, climbed to 1.18% in 2004, then dropped again, and has fluctuated at around 1%. \u00a0Likely there are causes in the underlying economy, but I can\u2019t discern anything obvious.<\/p>\n The parental leave program was an extension of the state disability program, implemented in 2004<\/a>. \u00a0New parents, as well as those taking FMLA-type leave of other kinds (e.g., care for a sick family member), receive 6 weeks. \u00a0For women who\u2019ve just given birth, this is in addition to 6 weeks of state disability benefits. How much has it cost Californians? \u00a0The costs are combined with the state disability program, and there\u2019s no obvious jump in premiums upon parental leave implementation.<\/p>\n What\u2019s been the effect? \u00a0Here\u2019s a sunny\u00a0case study on California<\/a>\u00a0from Harvard, that says everyone\u2019s happy, and it\u2019s been a nonevent for employers. \u00a0 Here\u2019s a 2015 article from Bloomberg<\/a> that says much the same thing. \u00a0At the same time, there were articles not long ago, which (sorry!) I can\u2019t find any longer, which said that middle-class women are more likely to use the benefit, because poor women can\u2019t manage a 45% pay cut.<\/p>\n Second, New Jersey.<\/strong><\/p>\n As with California, they built on a pre-existing state disability program; however, their family leave program (fact sheet\u00a0here<\/a>), implemented in 2009<\/a>, is a free-standing program.<\/p>\n Both programs pay 2\/3rds of pay up to a ceiling, the rate is higher than California\u2019s but the base is much lower, with covered wages at $32,600, according to this FAQ<\/a>. \u00a0Benefits are paid for 26 weeks for disability<\/a>, and 6 weeks for family leave.<\/p>\n For disability, workers pay 0.2% of pay<\/a>, and employers pay between 0.1% and 0.75% of pay, which I presume to be based on the likelihood of claims at a given employer given the risk level of the work.<\/p>\n For family leave, workers pay 0.08% of pay<\/a>, up to a maximum of $26.08, based on the same covered wages maximum. \u00a0It\u2019s not immediately clear if, as with California, this rate fluctuates based on the prior or projected deficit or surplus, or if there is any cross-subsidy from the one to the other program.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n New Jersey\u2019s program operates as a \u201csingle-payer with opt-out\u201d system. \u00a0That is, employers either collect and remit to the state the employee and employer contributions, or operate their own disability and maternity programs. \u00a0The idea here is that an employer will typically offer its own sick leave\/short-term disability program and it can be administratively easier to just encompass the NJ mandatory benefits than to have two\u00a0separate benefit programs.<\/p>\n Third, Rhode Island<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Temporary Disability Insurance benefits<\/a>: \u00a060% of pay (or a weekly benefit of 4.62% of a quarter-year\u2019s pay). \u00a0Covered pay $68,900 per year. \u00a0Benefits last up to 30 weeks.<\/p>\n Temporary Caregiver Insurance: \u00a0same benefit levels for up to 4 weeks (effective 2014).<\/p>\n Cost for both programs together: \u00a01.2% of pay.<\/p>\n Hawaii<\/strong> has a disability program<\/a> which functions solely by mandating that employers provide benefits to their employees, in the amount of, minimally, 58% of pay for 26 weeks, up to a covered pay of $51,000 per year. They have (so far as I can tell) no family leave program, except to require employers<\/a> who offer sick leave, to permit employees to use 10 days per year for care of a family member rather than their own illness.<\/p>\n New York<\/strong> I wrote about at length yesterday.<\/p>\n Oh, and Puerto Rico also has a disability benefit, but, let\u2019s face it, with as many economic troubles as they now have, they\u2019re not a good model.<\/p>\n So what do you make of this?<\/p>\n What\u2019s surprising is how variable the costs are \u2014 but New Jersey is the only one with a defined cost solely for the 6 weeks of family leave.<\/p>\n So, given these examples, which, if any, seem reasonable to you?<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" What do maternity leave programs look like in those states which have adopted a program? This is just a data dump, as I set about compiling this information for myself and thought readers might be interested. First, California. They\u2019ve had a state disability program for two decades, which pays 55% of pay for up to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[366,367],"class_list":["post-4283","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-family-leave","tag-parental-leave"],"yoast_head":"\n