Policy Update: Changes to FMLA

A few weeks ago, I noted that the federal government made significant changes to the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The amendments are primarily to provide additional benefits for those families who have a member in the Armed Forces. The first amendment provides for unpaid leave of up to 26 weeks for a:

spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin” to care for a “member of the Armed Forces, including a member of the National Guard or Reserves, who is undergoing medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy, is otherwise in outpatient status, or is otherwise on the temporary disability retired list, for a serious injury or illness.

The second amendment provides that employees may take FMLA leave for:

“any qualifying exigency” arising out of the fact that the spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent of the employee is on active duty (or has been notified of an impending call or order to active duty) in the Armed Forces in support of a contingency operation.

Qualified exigency, as clarified in the changes includes: short-notice deployment, military events and related activities, childcare and school activities, financial and legal arrangements, counseling, rest and recuperation, post-deployment activities, and additional activities that arise out of the covered military member's active duty.

While I am 100% supportive of new policies that support military families (many of my extended relatives were in the military at some point), I can't help but wonder why other amendments have gone unnoticed and unsupported. For example, 12 weeks of unpaid leave does not assist with all the additional costs associated with a new baby, (i.e., car seats and medical bills). Nor does FMLA take into account the developmental needs of a child. The underlying philosophy is to offer just enough time off to get women ready to go back into the workforce.