The Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013 has almost nothing in common with the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2010, save the name. The 2010 Democratic bill would have allowed employees to file applications seeking flexible work schedules and set up a structure for employers to consider the requests. The 2013 Republican bill proposes allowing private employers to offer time off instead of paying overtime.    

“The parties really seem to wrestle with the branding,” says Paul DeCamp, a partner at Jackson Lewis and former administrator of the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division. “They understand that the name of legislation is important and that labels are important. Because everybody likes families, everybody agrees that flexibility is a good thing, right? And so those titles have warm and fuzzy notions.”

The title could cause confusion between bills that sound similar but in fact do very different things and are sponsored by opposing parties.

“Both [goals] are perfectly fine goals,” says Hinshaw & Culbertson Partner Cheryl Wilke. “It's just interesting that they're incorporated into an act that is called the same thing but says two totally different things.”