Key Takeaways
- •Members debated replacing the current patchwork of state laws with a federal mandate versus expanding voluntary, private-sector-led paid leave initiatives to address the lack of national coverage.
- •Elyse Shaw (Director of the Education, Labor and Worker Justice Team, The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)) argued that a federal standard is essential for economic justice.
- •Rep. Mackenzie (R-PA-7) and Greta Kessler (Vice President of Employee Health and Benefits, Marsh McLennan Agency) discussed how a federal "safe harbor" could help multi-state employers navigate conflicting regulations.
- •Rep. Omar (D-MN-5) advocated for a comprehensive federal program, while Rep. Grothman (R-WI-6) argued that government mandates impose unsustainable administrative burdens and costs on small business owners.
- •Lawmakers will weigh the benefits of a national baseline against the potential for federal mandates to stifle private-sector innovation and increase administrative costs for small business owners.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Hearing Analysis
Overview
The House Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Workforce Protections convened on February 24, 2026, for a hearing titled "Balancing Careers and Care: Examining Innovative Approaches to Paid Leave." Chaired by Rep. Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA-7), the hearing focused on the tension between establishing a federal paid leave mandate and supporting a decentralized system of state-level programs and private-sector initiatives. The subcommittee sought to understand how to expand access to paid leave without imposing prohibitive costs on small businesses or stifling the flexibility currently offered by many employers.
Policy Proposals
Witnesses provided contrasting views on the necessity of federal intervention. Adrienne Schweer, a Fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC), emphasized that a "one-size-fits-all" federal mandate could be detrimental to small businesses. She advocated for a bipartisan approach that incentivizes private-sector innovation, citing the Section 45S tax credit as a foundational but underutilized tool. Schweer noted that for tax credits to be effective, they must be simplified and made permanent to help small businesses offset the costs of hiring replacement workers.
In contrast, Elyse Shaw, Director at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), argued that the current lack of a national standard is a "moral failure" that leaves millions of workers behind. Shaw highlighted that only 27 percent of private-sector workers have access to paid family leave, with low-wage workers and workers of color being the most disadvantaged. She proposed a comprehensive federal program with progressive wage replacement, arguing that such a system would increase labor force participation and reduce turnover costs, ultimately benefiting the economy.
Organizations & Entities
Greta Kessler, Vice President at Marsh McLennan Agency, detailed the practical challenges faced by employers. She described the "administrative nightmare" of complying with a patchwork of varying state laws, where an HR manager might have to navigate different eligibility rules and benefit amounts for employees in neighboring states. Kessler proposed a voluntary federal "safe harbor" framework. This would allow multi-state employers to offer a standardized plan that meets federal criteria and preempts state laws under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), providing much-needed consistency.
Overview
Julie Squire, representing the National Association of State Workforce Agencies (NASWA), shared insights from states already administering paid leave programs. She identified aging technology and legacy software in state unemployment insurance systems as major hurdles to implementation. Squire emphasized the need for federal policymakers to consider the administrative impact on state agencies and to view states as "laboratories of innovation" that can offer lessons on technology integration and claimant communication.
The partisan divide was evident throughout the hearing. Chairman Mackenzie and Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI-6) expressed concerns that federal mandates would create a "ceiling" for benefits, where employers might cut other perks like 401(k) matches to afford mandated leave. They also raised concerns about potential fraud, drawing parallels to issues seen in unemployment insurance. Ranking Member Ilhan Omar (D-MN-5) countered that the true burden lies with workers who must choose between a paycheck and family care. She argued that a federal baseline is essential for economic and racial justice.
Industry Impact
Notable exchanges included Rep. Mackenzie’s questioning of Ms. Kessler regarding the specific difficulties of multi-state compliance. Kessler explained that the lack of uniformity in defining "family members" and "eligibility" leads to frequent errors and high legal costs. Additionally, Rep. Grothman questioned Ms. Schweer on the specific impact on small "five-person shops," which Schweer noted lack the HR infrastructure to act as intermediaries for complex state systems.
Overview
The following organizations were discussed: - Subcommittee on Workforce Protections: The federal body holding the hearing to investigate paid leave policy options and their impact on the workforce. - Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP): Represented by Elyse Shaw; the organization was cited as an advocate for a national, comprehensive federal paid leave program to ensure equity for low-income workers. - Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC): Represented by Adrienne Schweer; the organization was discussed in the context of its research into bipartisan, hybrid models that combine private innovation with public safety nets. - National Association of State Workforce Agencies (NASWA): Represented by Julie Squire; the organization was mentioned regarding the technical and administrative challenges state agencies face when managing paid leave alongside unemployment insurance. - Marsh McLennan Agency: Represented by Greta Kessler; the company was referenced to provide the perspective of benefit consultants who help employers navigate the complex regulatory environment of paid leave.
Key Testimony
The hearing concluded with no immediate legislative action, though Chairman Mackenzie indicated that the subcommittee would continue to review the testimony and written responses to further questions to inform future policy development.
Transcript
[Gavel sounds.] The Subcommittee on Workforce Protections will come to order. I note that a quorum is present. The subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on Balancing Careers and Care: Examining Innovative Approaches to Paid Leave. Under Committee Rule 7, the chair and ranking minority member will each make an opening statement of five minutes. I now recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. Today, we are here to discuss a topic that touches the lives of every American worker: paid leave. Whether it is the birth of a child, caring for a sick family member, or managing one's own serious health condition, the ability to take time off work without losing one's livelihood is a critical component of a modern workforce. For years, the debate over paid leave has often been framed as a choice between a one-size-fits-all federal mandate or doing nothing at all. But as we will hear today, there is a third way. Across the country, states and private employers are leading the way with innovative, flexible, and sustainable paid leave programs that meet the unique needs of their workers and businesses. Currently, 13 states and the District of Columbia have enacted mandatory paid family and medical leave programs. Additionally, several other states have established voluntary programs or encouraged private insurance solutions. These state-led efforts provide valuable lessons on what works and what does not when it comes to program design, funding, and administration. At the same time, many private employers are voluntarily offering paid leave benefits to attract and retain talent. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 27 percent of private industry workers had access to paid family leave in 2023, up from 12 percent in 2014. This growth demonstrates that employers recognize the value of supporting their employees' needs outside of the workplace. However, a patchwork of different state laws can create significant administrative burdens for employers operating in multiple jurisdictions. This is why it is essential for us to examine how federal policy can support and build upon these innovative approaches without stifling the flexibility that allows these programs to succeed. Our witnesses today bring a wealth of expertise on this issue. We will hear about the Bipartisan Policy Center's work on paid leave, the experience of state workforce agencies in administering these programs, and the perspective of employers who are navigating this evolving landscape. I look forward to a productive discussion on how we can empower more Americans to balance their careers and their caregiving responsibilities. I now recognize the ranking member, the gentlewoman from Minnesota, Ms. Omar, for five minutes for her opening statement.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Not ready to subscribe?
Get a free daily digest with hearing summaries ranked by relevance.
Already have an account? Log in
