Interview: Rachel Anderson on Paid Family Leave

We have been tracking paid family leave policy for a while here at the newsletter, including pushes for legislative action during both the Trump years and now under Biden. The place of paid leave in Build Back Better is changing every day it seems, and it’s possible the best chance yet at a federal paid leave program may slip away. I talked with Rachel Anderson, Resident Fellow with the Center for Public Justice about where things stand, and her hopes for paid leave policy moving forward. I hope you enjoy our conversation.

Michael

Michael: Rachel, what’s the current status of paid family leave policy in Build Back Better, and what do you think are the prospects for the policy moving forward?

Rachel: The House will likely pass a version of Build Back Better that includes a compressed four week-version of paid leave. The Senate’s passage of paid leave remains in doubt due to concerns, held by Senator Joe Manchin, about the overall cost of Build Back Better. 

Paid leave's passage through the House will be an achievement worth celebrating and returning to in future sessions of Congress. Earlier this fall, paid leave was dropped from the Build Back Better framework entirely. When this news circulated, I think it produced shock. After 20 months in which many families struggled so intensely and in which families mattered so much, why remove one of the key sources of family support in the bill? What’s more, family in general and paid leave in particular is a subject around which Americans are more likely to agree than divide. Given all our polarization, it makes sense to build from this common ground. 

Michael: What do you like about the current approach to paid family leave in the Democrats’ bill? What would you critique?

Rachel: The current approach will be a vast improvement on America’s current approach to paid leave which relies, entirely, on one’s employer. If you have a long work history at a well-resourced employer, then you might have paid leave in your benefits package. If you’re working for yourself or just starting in your career or making minimum wage, then you’ll likely go without paid leave. 

Four weeks of paid leave is better than no leave. But it is far too little time. Women who have given birth, for example, are often still healing eight weeks after delivery. 

The Democrats bill not only compresses the time available for leave but also the types of leave. Medical, family caregiving, and parental leave are treated alike - involving the same work requirements, application processes, etc. The program enacted by Build Back Better, in fact, has its roots in temporary disability insurance - a public policy first rolled out in the 1940s to help breadwinners to manage financially during a work-limiting illness or injury. When this model is transposed onto family events like the birth of a new child, it’s sometimes an uncomfortable fit. New parents who have just started their working life or have spent time at home caring for other children may not qualify under the program’s work history benchmarks. Providing care for a loved one often demands flexibility over a long period of time - driving a family member to doctor’s appointments or hospital visits. A one-size-fits all program doesn’t accommodate these situations well. 

When members of Congress next take up paid leave, potentially in bipartisan fashion, I’d love to see the parental and family caregiving components more clearly organized around families’ needs not fashioned as a version of temporary disability insurance. Such a program would be accessible to all new parents, including pregnant women, and offer flexibility for family caregivers.

Michael: Should paid family leave be a policy priority for Christians? Why?

Rachel: Paid leave contributes to precisely what many Christians have long said our society should do: strengthen families, protect the sanctity of life in its vulnerable stages, honor relationships as essential to human flourishing. Many Christians worry about public policies that diminish the role of family by centering services, education or growth outside of the home. Paid family leave doesn’t present this challenge and actually does the opposite. It explicitly empowers family members to care for one another. Paid leave is also so intimately and vitally connected to the well-being of children in the womb, newborns, pregnant women, and new mothers. If we are about honoring the uniqueness of each new life and the work it takes to nurture it, then investing in those crucial beginnings should be on the top of our list of priorities. 

Finally, although it should not be the main motivator, there is the issue of public perception. It’s notable to me and, I believe, others engaged in public policy that Christians have not been among the loudest voices calling for paid family leave despite the policy’s consistency with pro-family and pro-life commitments. It’s worth asking ourselves: what are we waiting for?