Should the Family and Medical Leave Act be changed?

  • Uncategorized

Shouldthe Family and Medical Leave Act be changed?

Shouldthe Family and Medical Leave Act be changed?

Having met thequalification criteria for the benefits of the Family and MedicalLeave Act, all employees are entitled to such. Every individualrequires time with their families and other aspects of social lifeapart from their jobs. No one can be guaranteed of leading adisease-free life, making it necessary for employers to ensure thatthe law is enacted. The Act comes along with many advantages rangingfrom socio-economic and equitable to political.


Most of theclauses contained in the Act are appropriate to all the partiesinvolved, that is, the government, employers, and the employees. Theabove statement makes it less attractive to introduce changes to theFamily and Medical Leave Act (Chatterji &amp Markowitz, 2012).However, there is always the room for change as it addresses the fewexisting gaps. The many advantages associated with the Act that makeit not to be changed have been discussed in the following paragraphs.

All partiesbenefit from the policies that are outlined in the Family and MedicalLeave Act. Workers are in a position of balancing theirresponsibilities at the workplace, as well as their familyobligations. Socially, the employees enjoy more time with theirfamilies while on leave. They are in a good position to take care ofsick family members and maybe even taking care of their personalmedical problems. Mothers need sufficient time with their young oneswho may be entirely dependent on them (Megan &amp Bell, 2014). Thoseadvocating for change argue that women benefit more as compared totheir male counterparts. Truth be told-mothers are the solecaregivers of the homes and require more time with the family.Statistics show that more than 26% of the women make use of the leaveto take care of their infants[ CITATION Baa13 l 1033 ]. Implementingsuch changes to the Act may be detrimental to the family and sociallives.

Secondly, thereis a general understanding that most states provide their citizenswith the Family and Medical Leave with no pay. For economicsustainability, no employee should be entitled to pay without givingany service. Human right activists are advocating for a change inthis clause to make it a paid leave. It this is to be adopted, theeconomy may fail. Some workers may need to take leave, but thencannot afford to take it without pay. They are obligated to stay atwork and continue providing services (Boushey, O`Leary, &ampMitukiewicz, 2013). More incomes are accrued, increasing the GrossDomestic Product in the process. By so doing, the economy gets aboost.

Finally, the Actis advantageous and needs no changes as it allows business to cut thecosts of hiring and training more staff. Employees on leave arelikely to be more productive once they get back to work. There is alikelihood of a reduction in work-related hazards that may makebusiness entities to incur more expenses which in turn reduce theirprofit margins. There is no need for the Act to get any changes.

In conclusion, it is possible that any changes made to the Familyand Medical Leave Act may be disastrous and disadvantageous. Theadvantages that come with the Act make it suitable economically,socially and politically. Employees get more time with theirfamilies employers use fewer funds to recruit and train new staff,and the government benefits financially.


Boushey, H., O`Leary, A., &amp Mitukiewicz, A. (2013, December 12). The Economic Benefits of Family and Medical Leave Insurance. Center for American Progress.

Chatterji, P., &amp Markowitz, S. (2012). Family leave after childbirth and the mental health of new mothers. International Journal of Health Services, 61-76.

Megan, S., &amp Bell, J. (2014). Paid Leave Benefits Among a National Sample of Working Mothers with Infants in the United States. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 286-295.

Close Menu