[T]he bill that was widely expected to soar through the Legislature this year and guarantee paid time off to thousands of Vermont workers ran into another hurdle Tuesday.
The House was scheduled to meet Tuesday morning and take up several amendments to the paid sick leave bill, H.187, which would require all Vermont employers to offer time off to certain categories of workers starting in 2017 or 2018.
The amendments in question would have exempted more workers and more employers from the legislation. But the lower chamber declared a recess before taking up the amendments.
Debate continued in the House Committee on General, Housing and Military Affairs, where members eventually opposed five amendments, all by a 5-2 margin.
House Majority Leader Sarah Copeland-Hanzas, D-Bradford, said leadership had the votes to defeat the amendments in the full House Tuesday morning. She said leadership delayed in order to give the committee more time to discuss the amendments out of respect for the authors.
Copeland-Hanzas said the House would vote Wednesday. She predicted the Democrats would defeat amendments that seek to water down the bill and that lawmakers would “stand tall” and concur with the Senate’s version of the bill.
As of Tuesday afternoon, there were five proposed amendments to H.187. Two each come from Reps. Alyson Eastman, I-Orwell, and Oliver Olsen, I-Londonderry. Another comes from Rep. Paul Dame, R-Essex Junction.
One of Eastman’s amendments would define an employer as someone who employs more than three people “for an average of 30 hours per week during a year.” Eastman’s other amendment would change the Senate’s language that exempts startups from offering leave for one year; her amendment would change that exemption to three years.
One of Olsen’s amendments would stipulate that salaried workers considered “exempt” under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act are not covered under the bill. Those workers include professionals and high-level administrators, according to Labor Commissioner Annie Noonan.
Olsen’s other amendment would keep the law from applying to employers that offer their workers a certain level of pay and benefits — 110 percent of Vermont’s minimum wage. The amendment involves a complicated formula, but he said the idea was to make employers provide about $2,000 worth of benefits over and above Vermont’s minimum wage.
Dame’s amendment would prevent people working for their family members from being eligible under the paid leave bill.
Rep. Helen Head, D-South Burlington, the chair of the House General Committee, said the Senate made changes that are “workable,” but she does not support the latest proposed amendments.
Rep. Tom Stevens, D-Waterbury, agreed. “We’ve been pretty consistent about the desire to make sure that every employee is covered, and so exempting any number of employees is really not acceptable,” he said.
Rep. Job Tate, R-Mendon, was one of the two on the House General Committee who voted in favor of the amendments. “I have grave concerns about Montpelier mandating to businesses how they can operate, and I look for any opportunity to make this bill better,” he said.
The Senate delayed implementation of the legislation for employers with five or fewer workers until 2018 and ordered a study in the meantime. Sixty percent of Vermont businesses have fewer than five workers, according to the Vermont Department of Labor.
