Judge Rejects Milwaukee's Paid Sick Leave Mandate
Ballot language invalidates new city ordinance.
August 31, 2009 at 08:00 PM
5 minute read
A Milwaukee judge struck down the city's newly enacted ordinance requiring employers to provide paid sick leave, but employment lawyers say it may do little to slow down growing national support for legislation to make paid sick leave a basic employee right.
On June 12, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Thomas Cooper granted summary judgment to the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC), which challenged the ordinance on the grounds that it placed an unconstitutional burden on employers. MMAC asserted that the ordinance was improperly enacted because it included language extending coverage for absences due to domestic abuse, sexual assault or stalking that was not included in a ballot question approved by voters in November 2008. Furthermore, MMAC contended that this posed an unconstitutional exercise of police power.
Cooper agreed, concluding that the ordinance is invalid. “While the effects of domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking … may qualify for the treatment provisions of sick leave, the acts themselves are not conditions,” he wrote.
MMAC's lawyer Scott Beightol calls the ruling a victory over an attempt to implement labor and employment lawmaking through a referendum process.
“Our argument was that if you or I go into that voting booth and we look at this ballot question, would we really understand what we were voting yes or no for?” says Beightol, a partner in the Milwaukee office of Michael Best & Friedrich. “The judge agreed.”
In November 2008, Milwaukee became the third U.S. city to mandate paid sick leave when voters approved the ordinance by a whopping 69 percent to 31 percent. San Francisco was the first city to do so, also by ballot question in 2006, and Washington, D.C., became the second last year when the city council did it on its own. Unlike Milwaukee, however, the ordinances in those two cities haven't been challenged in court.
Attorney Sherry Leiwant, executive director of Better Balance: A Work & Family Legal Center, a national legal organization that helped draft the Milwaukee ordinance, says an appeal is planned. If the appeal fails, proponents may seek a second ballot question incorporating the judge's conclusions about spelling out the rights of domestic abuse, sexual assault and stalking victims under the ordinance.
The business community is expected to continue fighting the idea. “I've been doing this work for 21 years, and I've never seen the business community more upset about an issue,” Beightol says. “There were employers who said they'd leave the city and [others] who said they'd think twice about expanding their operations in the city.”
Different Reactions
While Milwaukee's ordinance stirred up controversy, employment lawyers in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., say that client reactions to paid sick leave laws have been mild–in large part because most of them already have polices at least as generous as the ordinances' requirements.
“For the smaller employers that are scraping for every nickel, this is a bigger issue,” says Jeffrey Bosley, a partner in the San Francisco office of Winston & Strawn. “Some of my smaller clients don't even have a dedicated human-resources function. They've got an office manager who's struggling with 'What can I ask?'”
In Washington, D.C., Evelyn Becker, a partner at O'Melveny & Myers, says after the ordinance there went into effect last fall, she counseled clients on careful ly examining their sick-leave policies to ensure compliance because the qualifying conditions are so broad.
“One thing my clients have had to look at is whether what constitutes a qualifying event is defined as broadly in their policies as in the law,” she says. “For example, an employer might provide 10 days of sick leave, but only for the employee's own illness, as opposed to a family member's illness or an incident of domestic violence.”
Beightol believes that the quieter reaction in San Francisco and Washington was the result of greater inclusion of business interests in hashing out the details.
“My own analysis is that in Milwaukee [business owners] felt that they were shut out of the process,” Beightol says.
National Push
Management-side employment lawyers and proponents of mandated sick pay agree on one thing: With 43 percent of American workers lacking any paid sick leave, the issue won't be going away soon.
“This is a trend that's here to stay,” says Bosley. “We're going to see more and more activity around this concept of workplace flexibility, whether that be paid family leave or paid sick time.”
The push for paid sick time has already reached Congress. The Healthy Families Act, introduced in the Senate in late May by Democratic Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Chris Dodd of Connecticut and in the House by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., would mandate paid sick leave nationally. Its chances of passage this year appear doubtful, but Leiwant and others believe it could muster enough support for passage next year.
Meanwhile, proponents of paid sick leave have also set their sights on state legislatures–bills have been introduced in about 15 states. None has passed, although Leiwant expects that several will succeed in 2010.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250