By NM Political Report staff
Sponsors of a family and medical leave bill before the New Mexico Legislature — a third attempt in as many years — fundamentally changed the bill before its second hearing on Wednesday.
The substitute bill for House Bill 11 lowers what the proposal would cost workers and employers, arguably the most significant reason similar legislation has failed twice before, and adds a new program that would be funded from state appropriations.
The House Commerce and Economic Development Committee approved the bill on a 6-5 vote.
The bill now goes to the full House for consideration. The House rejected a family and medical leave bill last year on a 36-34 vote.
The substitute bill creates two separate programs with differing funding sources and different benefits. A “family wellness” program would offer six weeks of paid leave for a variety of reasons, three weeks less than the original bill.
The program would be funded by what sponsors call a “premium” paid by workers and employers. Workers would pay 0.2% of their income, or $2 for every $1,000 of earnings. Employers would pay 0.15% of their wages, or $1.50 for every $1,000. The original bill proposed charging workers 0.5% of their income and employers 0.4% of wages.
“We’ve worked very hard to bring the cost down for both the employer and employee,” Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, the bill’s lead sponsor, said at the hearing. “We have listened to what the concerns are of the business community.”
Family leave, if the bill is enacted, could be taken to help a family member with a serious health condition, to aid a family member on or preparing for active military service, or following the death of a family member under age 18. It could also be taken by a person who has been the victim of domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, or abuse, or has a family member who has been. Foster parents would also be eligible for leave to bond with a new foster child.
Family members are defined in the legislation as a spouse or domestic partner, child, parent or guardian, grandparents, grandchild, sibling and any other individual “whose close association” with the applicant, their spouse, or partner “is the equivalent of a family relationship.”
Workers and employers would begin paying the premium in July 2027 and workers would be eligible to receive the benefit starting in January 2028.
People receiving family leave would be paid the state’s minimum wage, plus 67% of their average weekly income above the minimum. To qualify, an individual would have to have contributed premiums for at least six months in the year prior to applying for benefits.
Employers with fewer than five employees, which sponsors said include 66% of employers in the state, would be exempt from contributing. Employers who have their own family and medical leave programs that are “substantially similar” to the proposed state plan would also be able to apply for exemptions.
The substitute bill would also provide money and leave to new parents, but that program has also changed substantially from the original bill. The “welcome child” benefit would provide a $3,000 monthly payment to one of the parents of a child for three months following a birth or adoption. Both parents would also also be able to take up to 12 weeks leave in the first year after the birth or adoption, though that leave is technically not paid, contrary to what has been reported by other media, beyond the $3,000 monthly payment, which the bill calls a “refund.”
Bill proponents said the $3,000 payment and leave for new parents is intended to help them in the initial months after birth or adoption of a newborn, when, according to another sponsor, Rep. Linda Serrato, D-Santa Fe, “it is near impossible to find any childcare.”
A “welcome child” program would not be funded by employee and employer contributions but by an appropriation from the state’s Early Childhood Education and Care Department, and would not require new taxes, sponsors said. They estimated the initial cost of the program would be about $193 million a year and require the agency to add 219 employees.
The bill elicited passionate testimony from both supporters and opponents at Wednesday’s hearing, which lasted four hours. The committee room was filled to capacity and committee chair, Doreen Y. Gallegos, D-Doña Ana County, said there were 25 people in the hallway who wanted to testify.
Republican committee members and others who spoke against the bill said they opposed it because of the cost it would impose on businesses and workers. Although the bill’s proponents called the contribution required of workers and employers a “premium,” critics disagreed, insisting it was a tax.
“The largest tax increase in the state of New Mexico is going to harm New Mexico families,” Rep. Gail Armstrong, R-Magdalena, said.
Business owners testified that it would be difficult to temporarily replace employees while they were on leave and, if they couldn’t find replacements, would have to pay other workers overtime at a higher pay rate. That and administrating the programs would increase their costs beyond the premiums.
Others provided more personal appeals. Shaylynn Jim, who lives on the Navajo Nation, said she drives more than 300 miles per week to get to her job in Gallup and could not afford the premium, even at the reduced rate.
“The tax increase would take away … gas money I need to get to work,” she said. “I need every penny I rightfully earn.”
Supporters of the bill said family and medical leave would most help the poorest segment of the state’s population, many of whom don’t receive such a benefit from their employers.
Bernadette Hardy of Albuquerque told a cautionary tale of what can happen when workers don’t have paid family or medical leave. She said when she was preparing to give birth in 2006, she had to work “until the last day” to keep her health insurance and then was “essentially fired.” Soon after, her mother was diagnosed with cancer and died when her son was only eight months old.
“We were left destitute and homeless,” she said. “Families should not be left in poverty due to an unforeseen medical tragedy.”
Thirteen states had enacted or approved paid family and medical leave programs as of August 2024, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. New Mexico would be the lowest-income state to create such a program.
The financial details of the two programs could change in the future. The bill authorizes the state to contract with an actuary by Jan. 1 to make sure that the family wellness program, as originally designed, will be self-sufficient. That analysis could require the premiums to be modified.
The state will also assess the program’s finances annually and make adjustments to the premiums if necessary, but the proportion of premiums paid by workers and employers would remain the same. The $3,000 monthly payment provided as part of the welcome child program would be adjusted periodically for inflation.
Another business friendly law, about to be passed by the morons in Santa Fe. No wonder people and business is fleeing the state.
Totally agree. I’m not sure why our lawmakers don’t understand that the majority of us who work and contribute to society are getting fed up with this state.
I understand that people deal with personal tragedies like Ms. Hardy in this story. But is the best of course of action writing laws that deal with isolated cases like that? I’d prefer legislation that is beneficial to most people, not just a select few.
My understanding is those who are paid through the FMLA program or whatever they decide to call it, will receive a 1099 to pay taxes as the FMLA money is considered taxable income to be paid by the recipient. Those representing this bill have not been up front with this bill from the beginning. Example calling this forced tax a premium. Continued BS from the progressives. Quit trying to help us.