Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from the Huffington Post.

“For everything you’ve taught me…” “For always being there…” “For all the sacrifices you’ve made… thanks, Mom.” These and messages like them are what mothers across the country will be reading in greeting cards and hearing from loved ones this weekend. But, for mothers who hold jobs, one reality is missing from these heartfelt sentiments. Where is the card that says thanks “For being a working mother in a country that rarely provides you the support you need and deserve”?

Women make up nearly half of the workforce in the United States today, and most families need two incomes to make ends meet. Women are breadwinners in two-thirds of households, and we continue to be the primary caregivers for our families. Yet the country is woefully behind in enacting policies that help women be the responsible employees and mothers they desperately want to be. And women, families, businesses and our economy suffer as a result.

With national dialogue around books like Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In, policy changes at Yahoo! and momentum for family friendly policies at the state and city levels, we are — fortunately — seeing some of the workplace issues that matter to women and mothers break through. But attention has largely been focused on a small and elite segment of the workforce, and it has not translated into broad-based federal level progress on policies that would help.

So, this Mother’s Day, we at the National Partnership for Women & Families are thinking about some new messages of gratitude for America’s mothers — ones that better reflect the tremendous achievement it is to be one today:

“For providing for your family even though you take home less than men… thanks, Mom.” Women in nearly every corner of the country are still paid less than men — even when occupation and education level are accounted for. That’s why we need the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would combat harmful discriminatory pay practices in our nation’s workplaces.

“For doing your best in a country where women are still fired or forced out of their jobs for becoming pregnant… thanks, Mom.” Six in 10 women who give birth in a one-year period also work during that time, yet pregnant workers are still forced out of the workplace by employers that refuse to provide them reasonable accommodations — like carrying a water bottle – that would allow them to continue working. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act would help to prevent this blatant discrimination.

“For caring and providing for your family even though you do not have the right to earn a single paid sick day… thanks, Mom.” When they get the flu or a child gets strep throat, more than 40 million workers in this country have to choose between health and a paycheck because they cannot earn paid sick days. These workers, including millions who are mothers, need the national paid sick days standard the Healthy Families Act would provide.

“For having a child in the only highly industrialized nation that does not guarantee you any paid time off to do so… thanks, Mom.” As a new infographic from the National Partnership illustrates, the United States is one of only a handful of nations that does not guarantee paid leave for new mothers. Just 11 percent of private sector workers have access to paid family leave and only 40 percent of the workforce is eligible for paid medical leave. It is past time for a national paid leave insurance program.

These messages — and they really only scratch the surface of the challenges America’s working mothers face — illustrate the incredible strength and resilience of mothers who hold jobs in this country. But they also reveal a stark and unacceptable reality: We are far from ensuring mothers the equality, fair treatment and support they deserve.

Fortunately, some states are doing better. Last year, the National Partnership released a report, Expecting Better, detailing the laws some states have enacted to fill the gaps in national standards. We know that at least eight states require some employers to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers. And we are seeing incredible momentum around and support for paid sick days policies. Just this week, the New York City Council approved a measure to guarantee nearly one million workers the right to earn paid sick days. This historic achievement builds on the success of paid sick days laws that already exist in Connecticut, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Seattle and, soon, Portland, Oregon.

But a patchwork of policies is not the solution working mothers need — or deserve. Just think: Would members of Congress be willing to send these messages to their mothers? Then why aren’t proposals like the Paycheck Fairness Act, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, the Healthy Families Act and a national paid family and medical leave insurance program among their highest priorities?

This Mother’s Day, let’s think about the real messages we’re sending mothers by failing to establish the family friendly workplace standards they need. And let’s insist that lawmakers do something about it.

Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs

Last month, I wrote about a disturbing trend: States are passing “preemption” laws that prohibit a growing number of cities and counties from adopting their own paid sick days standards. Sadly, these misguided attacks on local democracy have been spreading rapidly, as legislators put the interests of the national big business lobby ahead of the interests of their constituents. Now, there are paid sick days preemption bills or laws in 13 states.

This trend is no coincidence. In fact, it is a well-coordinated effort to thwart paid sick days bills just as momentum for this common sense policy continues to build. We know that the National Restaurant Association circulated a draft preemption bill at a 2011 meeting of the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Since then, the association and other groups have been working behind the scenes to advance very similar bills.

Take the case of Florida. Eighty percent of Floridians say that workers should be able to earn paid sick days, and six in 10 want localities to be able to make their own laws. But Florida legislators refuse to listen to voters. Instead, big business associations and local power players like Disney and Darden Restaurants have convinced them to shut down local governments’ ability to pass their own paid sick days standards. It is shameful that the same state legislators who claim to be for “local government” are pushing through a policy that essentially ties its hands.

Michigan’s battle against preemption is also ongoing. As Working America points out, legislators in the state who have railed against “big government intrusion” have changed their tune to fulfill the wishes of the business lobby. As in Florida, Michigan voters say that workers should be able to earn paid sick days. They know that if Michigan’s preemption bill passes, it will be families – like the moms who make up the local advocacy group Mothering Justice and their kids – who will suffer most.

This same pattern is repeating itself across the country: Louisiana. Mississippi. Kansas. Tennessee. Arizona. A preemption bill is introduced – usually by a legislator who is an ALEC member, and usually with the support of the big business lobby – and then it’s fast-tracked through the legislature and quietly signed by the governor. In these five states, the new laws preempt not only paid sick days, but also local minimum wage and other ordinances proven to improve workers’ lives.

The bill in Arizona – now law – is particularly disturbing. In 2006, Arizona voters passed a statewide ballot measure forbidding the legislature from doing exactly what it just did: preempting local wage and benefits standards. According to the state constitution, the legislature must meet certain strict requirements to overturn a voter-approved measure. It hasn’t done so, making the preemption bill illegal and open to litigation. Arizonans can thank legislators like the sponsor of the bill, Rep. Thomas Forese (an ALEC member), for the costly lawsuit that will almost certainly be filed.

The Indiana bill is also troubling. In addition to preempting workers’ rights, it may overturn local anti-discrimination ordinances meant to protect the right of LGBT individuals to keep their jobs.

The other states considering preemption legislation are Alabama and South Carolina. The South Carolina bill was introduced by an ALEC Task Force chair, Rep. William Sandifer, and is being pushed through quickly and under the radar, leaving concerned advocates little time to speak out.

Washington and Oklahoma also considered preemption bills in 2013, but those bills have not passed.

Almost all of these preemption bills have been pushed through quietly, without the knowledge of activists or legislators who might ask questions about their provenance and usefulness. But, as the intent of the big business lobby becomes clearer, and as it becomes more obvious that these bills have nothing to do with the well-being of states or their residents, sponsors will surely have a tougher time defending their attempts to usurp power from the people to whom it truly belongs: voters.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

In a major victory in the effort to increase access to paid sick days, the New York City Council has passed a measure that would guarantee approximately one million workers the right to earn the paid sick time they need. This is a momentous achievement for a strong and dedicated coalition that has been working for more than four years to bring paid sick days to our nation’s most populous city.

The bill now goes to Mayor Bloomberg who has the opportunity to support working families and promote the city’s health by signing it into law. There is no excuse for him not to do so: The bill has the support of the majority of New Yorkers, the speaker and the City Council; and paid sick days have been shown to benefit workers, businesses, public health and local economies.

With this historic step forward in New York City, there is now undeniable momentum for paid sick days across the country. From San Francisco to Washington, D.C., Seattle, Connecticut and, soon, Portland, Oregon, workers, businesses, advocates and lawmakers have come together to enact this common sense policy. And campaigns in support of similar measures exist in nearly 20 other states and cities.

It is time for members of Congress to recognize the growing need and demand for paid sick days by advancing a federal standard like the Healthy Families Act. The bill has already been introduced in Congress, and 86 percent of voters say they support the national paid sick days standard it would provide. It would go a long way toward making the nation truly family friendly.

Congratulations to the strong coalition that made this victory in New York City possible today. Soon, the city will be a true national leader on this issue.

Judith L. Lichtman, Senior Advisor

Today, I had the honor of testifying before the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on a topic of critical importance to our nation’s workers: employer wellness programs. These programs can offer women and families meaningful avenues for improving and maintaining their health. And, as part of the Affordable Care Act, employers will soon have new incentives to establish them. But they can also open doors to discrimination.

Employer wellness programs are aimed at promoting healthier lifestyles and improving health outcomes by encouraging health-related activities like signing up for gym memberships, taking health education classes, getting health risk assessments and more. They come in two basic forms: “participatory” wellness programs, which are available to employees regardless of a person’s health; and “health-contingent” wellness programs, which are tied to certain health benchmarks or targets. It’s the latter that cause concern.

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to individual health, wellness and life circumstances, and employer wellness programs must reflect that. That’s why they should be voluntary, carefully designed, and not tied to health indicators. Groups like women, older adults and racial minorities experience significant health disparities. Tying wellness program penalties to their health situations can cause them disproportionate harm and, as I argued today, violate nondiscrimination laws.

Health-contingent wellness programs that increase health care costs for certain workers aren’t about wellness; they are about shifting costs to working people, especially those with health problems. And there’s no scientific evidence that shows they do anything to improve health outcomes. That’s why the National Partnership is recommending that the EEOC:

1. Issue specific and thorough guidance to employers to inform them of best practices in designing and implementing wellness programs, as well as potential legal implications;
2. Engage in outreach and education to employers to help ensure compliance with nondiscrimination laws;
3. Enforce the law by challenging employer wellness programs that are discriminatory; and
4. Work with other agencies – including the Departments of Treasury, Labor, Justice and Health and Human Services, and the Office of Personnel Management – to provide the assistance employers need to prevent discrimination in the implementation and regulation of employer wellness programs.

At the National Partnership, we know that access to affordable, quality health care is essential for women and families. We also know the importance of ensuring people can work free from discrimination. Today, I made clear that, with proper oversight, wellness programs can do both: They can help women and families achieve meaningful improvements in their health, without running afoul of our nation’s civil rights laws. We will do all we can to ensure this happens.

You can read my full written testimony here.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from the Huffington Post.

Working people today face serious challenges when it comes to managing job and family: Nearly 40 percent of workers in the private sector — and more than 80 percent of those who are low-wage workers — cannot earn a single paid sick day. Forty percent of all workers have no access to even unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act when serious personal or family medical needs arise. And many struggle with unpredictable schedules or fear that taking time off will cost them the jobs they desperately need.

So why are some members of Congress wasting time on a bill that would make things even worse for many of these families? It’s a sad indicator of just how disconnected the majority leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives is from the realities of life for America’s families today.

The bill is H.R. 1406 – the misnamed Working Families Flexibility Act — and the House will consider it this week. H.R. 1406 pretends to offer workers the time off they need to meet health and family obligations, but in reality it would mean a pay cut for workers with no guarantee they can take time off when they need it most.

The idea seems simple enough: Hourly, non-exempt workers who work more than 40 hours a week would be able to bank extra hours as “comp time” — rather than time-and-a-half overtime pay — to be used later. The catch is that employees are paid nothing at the time they work the extra hours and employers decide when and if employees can use the comp time they earned. Employers can deny requests to use comp time if they decide it would be disruptive, or they can simply wipe out the banked time by paying workers the equivalent in wages even when a worker has been counting on the time to care for a new baby or an ill loved one. In short, it’s a smoke-and-mirrors attempt to undermine 75-year-old wage and hour protections guaranteed by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

People should not have to work more than 40 hours a week and forgo pay in order to earn time to recover from illness or care for loved ones — and this is just one of the numerous ways in which H.R. 1406 would harm America’s families and workplace culture.

Yet House leaders pushing the bill are claiming it’s the path to a more family friendly nation and the answer to working families’ problems. That’s absurd. And it adds insult to injury that the House is considering this legislation just before Mother’s Day — and proponents are holding it up as measure that would help mothers. This is blatantly dishonest, and women know better.

In fact, H.R. 1406 would disproportionately hurt women and mothers. Two-thirds of women are now breadwinners for their households, and they remain the primary caregivers for their families. They need predictable, stable schedules to ensure that their children are well-cared for and their families’ needs are met. Women are also more likely than men to work in low-wage jobs, so they can least afford to forgo pay. And what’s worse, under H.R. 1406, employers can deny them the comp time they’ve earned when they need to stay home with a sick child, attend a parent-teacher conference or help an aging parent.

If House leaders were serious about ensuring more family friendly workplaces, they would advance proposals that will actually help like the Healthy Families Act, which would establish a national paid sick days standard, the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would help combat pay discrimination, the Fair Minimum Wage Act, and measures that will expand the Family and Medical Leave Act and establish a paid family and medical leave insurance program. These are the advances working families truly need. They are popular, common sense proposals that don’t force workers into choosing between time and money, and they recognize that working families’ financially security depends on both.

The National Partnership has fought for more than 40 years for a country where no worker has to choose between job and family. We call on every member of the House to vote against H.R. 1406. We commend the representatives who have already spoken out against it, and all those who refuse to be fooled by this bill.

The fact that the House is wasting time on a harmful measure like H.R. 1406 when badly needed, time-tested proposals are on the table makes it clear that too many of our leaders are more concerned with making it look like they are doing something to address the needs of families when, in reality, their proposals will make life worse. We must demand better and work together for the policies working families need to thrive.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from What To Expect.

The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee some type of paid time off for employees, despite ample evidence that paid leave policies benefit workers, businesses, and the economy.

Having a baby is the most expensive health event for families during childbearing years; 13 percent of all families become poor within a month of delivery. But there’s another side. Paid leave offers major benefits — both to families and employers (see graphic, right).

As you can see, new mothers who take paid leave are more likely to return to — and stay at — their jobs and even experience wage increases. And they are less likely to need food stamps or public assistance.

Paid leave also has significant health benefits for new mothers and their babies. New mothers who have paid leave are more likely than those who don’t to take the six to eight weeks of leave recommended by doctors. And newborns of mothers with access to paid leave are more likely to be breastfed, receive medical check-ups, and get critical immunizations. The mere presence of a parent can reduce an ill child’s hospital stay — and help prevent future health care problems and the costs associated with them.

We also know that access to paid leave sharply increases the rate at which fathers take leave when a child is born, providing significant benefits for children and families. Studies show that when fathers take leave, they’re more likely to be involved in the long-term, direct care of their children.

These data are compelling, but people and their stories are what make the case for a national paid leave standard so strong. If Audrey from California had been able to take paid leave when her husband was hit by a car just days after her first child was born, she might not have had to burn through the family’s savings or turn to public assistance to survive. In Audrey’s case, the FMLA protected her job at a critical moment — but it could not provide the full support her family needed.

It is unacceptable that experiences like Audrey’s are so common. And they really only scratch the surface of the many reasons people need leave — which include pregnancy and childbirth but also serious illnesses and myriad caregiving responsibilities. It has been 20 years since Congress passed the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the only law that allows millions of mothers, fathers, adult children, and other hardworking people to care for their health and their families without having to worry about losing their jobs or their health insurance. It is long past time for lawmakers to take the next step by expanding the FMLA to cover more workers who need leave for more reasons, and by establishing the national paid family and medical leave insurance program the nation urgently needs.

Read some of the real stories of families whose lives have been impacted by the Family and Medical Leave Act here, and read the real stories of moms who could have benefited from a national paid leave standard here.

Then tell your members of Congress it’s time for a family-friendly America here. To find out if you’re eligible for leave under the FMLA, or to get involved in efforts to expand the law and pass a national paid leave program, visit www.NationalPartnership.org/FMLA.

Debra L. Ness is the president of the National Partnership for Women & Families , which drafted and led the fight to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) 20 years ago. The organization promotes fairness in the workplace, access to quality affordable health care, and policies that help women and men meet the dual demands of work and family. For more than three decades, Ness has been a strong advocate for fairness and social justice, possessing a unique understanding of the issues that face women and families at home, in the workplace, and in the health care arena.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Floridians are the latest state residents to fall victim to an underhanded and harmful effort to undermine democracy across the country. Yesterday, members of the Florida House approved far-reaching legislation that will prohibit all localities from establishing paid sick days standards. The state Senate passed the measure last week. It now goes to Governor Scott for final approval.

This is truly a sad day for Florida, where a coalition of workers, businesses and advocates have been working to increase access to fundamental paid sick days protections. In September, despite the will of Orange County voters, the Florida business lobby and lawmakers under its influence kept citizens from being able to vote on an ordinance that would have guaranteed workers in the county the right to earn paid sick days. There has also been significant energy around and support for a paid sick days standard for workers in Miami-Dade county.

It is unacceptable that in a state like Florida, where residents clearly support common sense paid sick days standards, local lawmakers are being denied the ability to respond to their constituents by enacting the workplace standards they want and need – especially when proponents of the bill fail to offer state-level solutions. Yet this is part of a growing trend of so-called “preemption” bills designed to subvert local authorities’ ability to address local needs. At least six states have enacted similar measures, and they are being considered in at least four more.

We commend the Florida Coalition for Local Control for fighting against this damaging bill, and call on Governor Scott to veto it. In the meantime, the prevalence of state preemption bills make the case for a national standard like the Healthy Families Act even stronger. Working people across the country urgently need this common sense policy.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from What To Expect.

While the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) has helped more than 100,000 families take the time they need to care for their families, a striking 40% of the U.S. workforce isn’t eligible for the 12 weeks of unpaid leave the FMLA provides because their employers have fewer than 50 employees, or because they haven’t been working for their employers for at least a year and put in a minimum of 1,250 hours. Millions more are eligible, but they simply can’t afford to take unpaid time off.

Hope from Texas wasn’t eligible to take FMLA leave when her daughter was born because her employer was too small. Fortunately, her employer allowed her to take eight weeks of unpaid leave — but there was no guarantee that her job would be there when she returned, and she had to rush back to work despite medical complications, post-partum depression, and a blood infection, because she couldn’t afford to lose any more income.

Stephanie from Wisconsin was the sole breadwinner for her family when her twins were born three months early. She was hospitalized for two months and wasn’t eligible for the FMLA. Since she couldn’t afford to lose any income by taking unpaid leave, she went back to work right away — commuting two hours each day so she could spend nights at the hospital.

Amber from Georgia was only able to take six days off of work when her son was born because she didn’t qualify to take FMLA leave and her husband just lost his job. And Claudia, from Illinois, was eligible for FMLA leave when she had her second child, but she could only afford to take three weeks. When she went back to work, she was so stressed that she found herself unable to pump breast milk.

These are just a handful of stories that make clear what we at the National Partnership for Women & Families have known for two decades: The FMLA provides an important safety net for many workers. But it was always meant to be just a first step toward a truly family-friendly America. People should not have to choose between a paycheck and their own health or the health of their families when illness strikes or a new baby arrives. But in our country, they do. And families are suffering as a result.

It is long past time for lawmakers to take the next step by expanding the FMLA and establishing the national paid family and medical leave insurance program the nation urgently needs.

Tomorrow, we’ll share the real, tangible benefits — for moms, babies, and even employers — of paid family leave, along with the ongoing efforts to expand the FMLA.

Debra L. Ness is the president of the National Partnership for Women & Families , which drafted and led the fight to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) 20 years ago. The organization promotes fairness in the workplace, access to quality affordable health care, and policies that help women and men meet the dual demands of work and family. For more than three decades, Ness has been a strong advocate for fairness and social justice, possessing a unique understanding of the issues that face women and families at home, in the workplace, and in the health care arena.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from What To Expect.

This year marks the 20^th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) — a law that has allowed millions of mothers, fathers, adult children, and other hardworking people to care for their health and their families without having to worry about losing their jobs or their health insurance. It is our nation’s only law designed to help women and men meet the dual demands of job and family, and it has been used more than 100 million times.

As the organization that drafted and led the fight for the FMLA, the National Partnership for Women & Families is proud of the impact the law has had on America’s families and our nation’s culture. It was the first bill President Clinton signed into law and, as he stressed at a recent event celebrating it, “every time it is used, there is a story.” He couldn’t be more right.

Take Robyn from Maryland, who was able to take six months of job-protected leave when one of her twin boys was born with a congenital heart defect. The FMLA meant that during a challenging and emotional time, she could focus on her family instead of worrying about losing her job.

Matari from Texas used the FMLA to take leave for both of her pregnancies. When she developed medical complications during the birth of her second child, the FMLA meant she could spend time at home recovering — without the stress and trauma that comes with the threat of job loss.

Robyn and Matari represent the tens of millions of men and women who have benefited tremendously from the FMLA — but there’s another side to their stories. Both had employers that offered some form of paid leave — paid sick days, vacation days, etc. They used that, along with their unpaid FMLA leave, to help make ends meet. Both were able to plan ahead with their spouses and save days off and critical income before their children arrived. And both were eligible to use the FMLA. Sadly, millions of Americans are not as fortunate.

Tomorrow, we’ll share the stories of a few real moms who either haven’t been eligible for the FMLA or simply can’t afford to take unpaid time off — and the challenges their families have had to overcome as a result.

Debra L. Ness is the president of the National Partnership for Women & Families , which drafted and led the fight to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) 20 years ago. The organization promotes fairness in the workplace, access to quality affordable health care, and policies that help women and men meet the dual demands of work and family. For more than three decades, Ness has been a strong advocate for fairness and social justice, possessing a unique understanding of the issues that face women and families at home, in the workplace, and in the health care arena.

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from MomsRising.

Susan, a single mother in Missouri, has a 10-year-old son who has pneumonia. She wants to stay home and care for him, but she cannot because her boss refuses to let her take the day off and she is terrified that, if she misses work, she will lose her job. She has no choice but to leave him home alone, breaking away from work as often as possible to call and check on him.

When Andrea’s seven-year-old daughter gets pinkeye, the Arizona mother is told to bring the sick child to work with her – at a school, no less. Andrea has to leave her daughter in a small room all day, checking on her regularly and worrying about the infection spreading to school staff and students.

Susan and Andrea are far from alone. They are just two of the nearly 40 million people in this country who cannot earn a single paid sick day. Millions more cannot use them to care for a sick child. For these mothers and fathers, having to choose between job and family is the norm. And it is simply unacceptable.

Fortunately, we have seen recent glimmers of hope that suggest a growing awareness of the plight of workers like Susan and Andrea, and the urgent need for public policies to help.

For the past several years, cities and states have been advancing paid sick days proposals. San Francisco and Washington, D.C., have had paid sick days laws in place since 2007 and 2008, respectively. In 2011, Connecticut became the first state to guarantee workers this basic right. And Seattle recently passed a paid sick days law, which took effect in 2012.

These laws paved the way for a flurry of activity that led last month to the approval of a paid sick days law in Portland, Oregon, City Council passage of a similar measure in Philadelphia for the second time (although Mayor Nutter vetoed it again), and an agreement in New York City that will lead to close to one million workers getting the right to earn paid sick days by the time the law is fully implemented in 2015.

These victories result from the tireless efforts of workers, businesses, advocates and lawmakers across the country. But the sad reality is that they won’t make life better for Susan or Andrea or for millions of workers like them who do not live in a city or state that gives workers the right to earn paid sick days. Their states, Missouri and Arizona, do not have paid sick days laws and, until recently, federal lawmakers have failed to even consider a national paid sick days standard.

That changed last week when members of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Education and the Workforce discussed H.R. 1406 – anti-worker legislation disguised as an effort to give workers more flexibility. The bill would cause real harm to workers; it would mean a pay cut without any guarantee of the time off workers need. But in the course of discussing this misguided and dangerous proposal, lawmakers acknowledged experiences like those of Susan and Andrea – and that the country needs policy solutions. And they had an unprecedented discussion of the Healthy Families Act, the federal paid sick days proposal.

As small a step as that was, it was a first for this Congress.  And it comes on the heels of local victories and significant momentum around and support for paid sick days policies. Lawmakers at the federal level need to seize this moment and pass the Healthy Families Act.

The time is now for federal action on paid sick days. Mothers, fathers, family members and workers across the country deserve it.