2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

As a company that has experience with paid family leave in other states (California and now New Jersey), I can attest that when implemented there was absolutely no negative employee reaction to the very minimal deductions that took place to fund paid family leave.  In fact, I would say that our associates don't even notice the deduction any more than they notice the small tax for funding a portion of workers compensation. 

I believe this is a very reasonable bill and as VP of HR for a smaller to mid-sized company (400 employees in 16 states), I do not see it as a burden to organizations or companies.  We see a number of situations annually where an associate has a family member with a serious health condition that needs their attention and care.  An example may be a spouse with cancer or a parent who has broken a hip - in both cases, there are no workplace benefits that help ease the financial burden in these cases.  The employee tries to juggle coming to work and being there and often ends up feeling like they are failing in both.  This bill would provide them the opportunity to take the time needed.  It does not provide any more burden on an employer than the current OFLA or FMLA requirements. 

As for those who think that this is unfair to single employees - unless that employee has no family - no parent, child, sibling or spouse  - they may very well find they will be in a situation where they will benefit from this program.  We would all be so lucky to not have a need for the benefit, however, it would be there if it is needed.  The United States is actually in the minority, I believe, in developed countries regarding access to at least a minimum of paid leave.  Oregon can be a leader on this and I would encourage other businesses to support this bill.

Gretchen Peterson, VP of Human Resources, Hanna Andersson LLC

posted 4 years, 1 month ago
view in context