An Act To Amend Title 19 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Family And Medical Leave Insurance Program.
If enacted, SB248 will have a significant impact on employer obligations under family and medical leave provisions in Delaware. Employers with 25 or more employees will be required to provide comprehensive family leave, while smaller employers (those with 10 to 24 employees) will be subject only to parental leave obligations. This could broaden the protection and support available for employees who require time off for family caregiving or medical needs, as their employers will maintain responsibility for meeting these requirements even when using leased employees.
Senate Bill 248 proposes amendments to Title 19 of the Delaware Code concerning the Family and Medical Leave Insurance Program. The bill aims to clarify the definition of 'employer' in regard to employees leased from staffing companies. Under the proposed revisions, the client company utilizing the services of a professional employer organization or an employee leasing company will be considered the employer for leave provisions rather than the leasing agency. This change seeks to ensure that businesses hiring employees through such agreements remain accountable for providing leave benefits mandated by state law.
The sentiment surrounding SB248 appears supportive among many legislators who recognize the need to enhance employee rights and protections in the realm of family and medical leave. Advocates for workers' rights view the clarification as a positive step towards ensuring that all state employees, regardless of their employment arrangement, have access to necessary leave benefits. However, some business owners and conservative lawmakers may express concerns about the increased obligations this bill places on businesses, especially those that operate with smaller workforces where the balance of cost and compliance becomes more challenging.
Notable points of contention regarding SB248 revolve around the definitions and responsibilities it places on employers. Critics worry that the complexities added to the liability structure may deter smaller employers from hiring leased staff or could result in increased operational costs as businesses adapt to comply with the stringent definitions. Furthermore, some may argue that the bill could lead to a tightening job market for smaller companies, who might become reluctant to hire due to the higher regulatory burdens imposed, potentially impacting job creation within the state.