[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11225-S11226]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             STRENGTHENING THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, passage of the Family and Medical Leave 
Act in 1993 was a true landmark for America's families. For the first 
time, millions of working men and women were freed from the threat of 
job loss if they needed time off for the birth of a child or to care 
for a sick family member.
  The act has worked well--for employees and for their employers. 
Employees are now able to take a leave of absence to be with their 
children or with a sick relative at a crucial time for the family, so 
that they can provide the special care and compassion which are the 
glue that binds a family together. In the 3 years since its enactment, 
it has already helped millions of American families.
  For seriously ill children it is particularly important. Having the 
emotional support of close family members can be a crucial element in 
their recovery. Allowing a parent the time to be with his or her child 
under these circumstances can truly make a difference.
  The impact on employers has been negligible. A research survey 
commissioned by the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that 93 percent of 
businesses incurred little or no additional cost due to the Family and 
Medical Leave Act. There was no noticeable effect on productivity, 
profitability, and growth resulting from the new law, according to 87 
percent of the businesses surveyed.
  In light of these facts, it is particularly shocking that Bob Dole 
would attack the Family and Medical Leave Act as he did the other day. 
He criticized the Family and Medical Leave Act as an example of ``the 
long arm of the Federal Government'' interfering with the rights of 
business owners. As he stated, ``My view is, why should the Federal 
Government be getting into family leave? * * * the Federal Government 
ought to be out of it.''
  Bob Dole is wrong about family and medical leave and many other 
issues. In more and more American homes today, both parents must have 
jobs in order to support their families. A substantial majority of 
children live in families where neither parent is at home during the 
day because of their jobs. If we value families--if we are serious 
about helping parents meet the needs of their children--then family 
medical leave is essential. Family members must be allowed time off 
from work to care for a newborn infant, to nurse a sick child back to 
health, or to be with a sick parent or spouse in a time of medical 
crisis.
  The price of meeting these family responsibilities should not be 
losing your job. That is why family and medical leave is essential. Bob 
Dole may not understand this, but American people, by an overwhelming 
majority, do understand it.
  The current law has made a dramatic difference for working families. 
But, it does not address another very important issue for such 
families--the need for a brief break in the workday to meet the more 
routine, but still very important, demands of raising children. At a 
time when more children than ever are growing up in one parent homes or 
in families where both parents work outside the home, this flexibility 
is becoming more and more essential.
  Every working parent has experienced the strain of being torn between 
the demands of their job and the needs of their children. Taking a 
child to the pediatrician, meeting with a teacher to discuss a problem 
at school, accompanying a child to a school event, watching a child 
perform in a special recital or in the big game--all of these often 
require time off from work. No parent should have to choose between 
alienating the boss and neglecting the child.
  Many employers understand this, and allow their workers to take time 
for family responsibilities. But many other companies refuse to 
accommodate their workers in this way. The ability of parents to meet 
these family obligations should not be dependent on the whim of their 
employer. In a society that genuinely values families, it should be a 
matter of right.
  Under proposed Democratic amendments to the Family and Medical Leave 
Act, working parents would be entitled to 4 hours of unpaid leave a 
month, up to a total of 24 hours of leave a year, to participate in 
their child's school and community activities or to take that child to 
the doctor.

[[Page S11226]]

 Employers would have to receive at least 7 days advance notice of each 
absence, so that employers will have ample opportunity to arrange work 
schedules around the brief absence of the employee.
  Clearly, this legislation is needed. A recent survey of 30,000 PTA 
leaders found that 89 percent of parents cannot be as involved in their 
children's education as they would like because of job demands. A 
Radcliffe Public Policy Institute study completed last year found that 
the total time that parents spend with their children has dropped by a 
third in the past 30 years. This disturbing trend must be reversed.
  Greater involvement of parents in their children's education can make 
a vital difference in their learning experience. A big part of that 
involvement is more regular contact between parent and teacher, and 
more regular participation by parents in their children's school 
activities.
  Many of those meetings and activities are scheduled during the 
workday. As a result, millions of parents are unable to participate 
because their employers refuse to allow time off. Permitting a modest 
adjustment in a parent's workday can greatly enrich a child's 
schoolday. All children will benefit from this kind of parental support 
and encouragement, and so will the country.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Frist). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be 
permitted to speak for up to 15 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________