[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 28974-28975]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             AIRLINE FLIGHT CREW TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT

  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 
and pass the bill (S. 1422) to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act 
of 1993 to clarify the eligibility requirements with respect to airline 
flight crews.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 1422

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Airline Flight Crew 
     Technical Corrections Act''.

     SEC. 2. LEAVE REQUIREMENT FOR AIRLINE FLIGHT CREWS.

       (a) Inclusion of Airline Flight Crews.--Section 101(2) of 
     the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611(2)) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Airline flight crews.--
       ``(i) Determination.--For purposes of determining whether 
     an employee who is a flight attendant or flight crewmember 
     (as such terms are defined in regulations of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration) meets the hours of service 
     requirement specified in subparagraph (A)(ii), the employee 
     will be considered to meet the requirement if--

       ``(I) the employee has worked or been paid for not less 
     than 60 percent of the applicable total monthly guarantee, or 
     the equivalent, for the previous 12-month period, for or by 
     the employer with respect to whom leave is requested under 
     section 102; and
       ``(II) the employee has worked or been paid for not less 
     than 504 hours (not counting personal commute time or time 
     spent on vacation leave or medical or sick leave) during the 
     previous 12-month period, for or by that employer.

       ``(ii) File.--Each employer of an employee described in 
     clause (i) shall maintain on file with the Secretary (in 
     accordance with such regulations as the Secretary may 
     prescribe) containing information specifying the applicable 
     monthly guarantee with respect to each category of employee 
     to which such guarantee applies.
       ``(iii) Definition.--In this subparagraph, the term 
     `applicable monthly guarantee' means--

       ``(I) for an employee described in clause (i) other than an 
     employee on reserve status, the minimum number of hours for 
     which an employer has agreed to schedule such employee for 
     any given month; and
       ``(II) for an employee described in clause (i) who is on 
     reserve status, the number of hours for which an employer has 
     agreed to pay such employee on reserve status for any given 
     month,

     as established in the applicable collective bargaining 
     agreement or, if none exists, in the employer's policies.''.
       (b) Calculation of Leave for Airline Flight Crews.--Section 
     102(a) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 
     2612(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Calculation of leave for airline flight crews.--The 
     Secretary may provide, by regulation, a method for 
     calculating the leave described in paragraph (1) with respect 
     to employees described in section 101(2)(D).''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Bishop) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for 5 
legislative days in which Members may revise and extend and insert 
extraneous materials on S. 1422 into the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I rise in strong support of S. 1422, the Airline Flight Crew 
Technical Corrections Act, which is almost identical to H.R. 912 which 
the House passed in February. I am proud to be the principal author and 
principal sponsor of H.R. 912, and I was delighted to see it garner 
such support in the House of Representatives.
  The Family Medical Leave Act has been a great program for working 
families in this country since it was passed in 1993. No one can 
question the benefit as provided for working women and men by being 
able to take time off from work to care for themselves or family 
members.
  The intent of the law was to provide for 12 weeks of unpaid leave if 
an employee has worked 60 percent of a full-time schedule over the past 
year, which is about 1,250 hours. In order to qualify for FMLA 
coverage, therefore, an employee has to have logged in 1,250 hours over 
12 months to be eligible. While 1,250 hours adequately reflects 60 
percent of a full-time schedule for the vast majority of employees in 
this country, that equation does not work for flight attendants and 
pilots.
  Flight attendants and pilots work under the Railway Labor Act rather 
than the Fair Labor Standards Act, which covers most 9 to 5 workers. 
Time between flights, whether during the day or on overnight layovers, 
is based on company scheduling requirements and needs but does not 
count towards crewmember time at work. Flight attendants and pilots can 
spend up to 4 to 5 days a week away from home and family due to the 
nature of their job. However, all those hours will not count towards 
qualification.
  The courts have strictly interpreted the law and insisted that 
crewmembers must abide by the 1,250 hours for qualification even though 
the intent of the law was 60 percent of a full-time schedule.
  Airline flight crews have been left out of what was intended to cover 
them. Therefore, a technical correction is needed to ensure that FMLA 
benefits are extended to these employees. This legislation seeks to 
clarify the intent of the law.
  This legislation simply states that an airline crewmember will be 
eligible for FMLA benefits if they have worked or been paid at least 60 
percent of the applicable total monthly guarantee or the equivalent for 
the previous 12-month period and a minimum of 504 hours.

[[Page 28975]]



                              {time}  1115

  In keeping with current law, any sick, vacation, or commuting time 
does not count towards the required number of hours. This brings these 
transportation workers in line with the intent of the original 
legislation, and as promised, when the law was first passed.
  Last Congress, during an Education and Labor Committee hearing, we 
heard from Jennifer Hunt, a flight attendant for U.S. Airways. Jennifer 
was denied FMLA coverage when she applied to take time off to care for 
her ill husband, an Iraq war vet. Jennifer, unfortunately, like many 
other flight attendants and pilots as well, did not meet the hourly 
requirement.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation so that flight 
attendants like Jennifer can qualify for the FMLA.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I might 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1422, the Airline Flight Crew 
Technical Corrections Act. This bill is a companion to H.R. 912, which 
this House approved in February on a voice vote. The bill we consider 
today contains a few minor changes to the House-passed legislation made 
in the other body and is equally deserving of support.
  As we have heard, this legislation is needed to address a very 
narrow, very specific concern. At issue is the fact that some airline 
personnel are subject to a unique scheduling process in which they are 
paid for being on-call, but in some cases are not credited with those 
hours in the calculation used for Family and Medical Leave Act 
eligibility. The practical impact of this technicality is that some 
flight crew personnel may work a full-time schedule but fail to qualify 
for family and medical leave. This is a real concern for those 
grappling with health conditions or family obligations.
  Many Members have been uneasy about efforts to open up the Family and 
Medical Leave Act for small changes when it is clear that broader 
reforms are necessary. The FMLA has worked well for 16 years, offering 
workers the flexibility to tend to their own health or care for a loved 
one in their time of need without fear of losing their job. But despite 
the law's many successes, it has also become clear that changes are 
needed. The realities of today's workplaces are different from those of 
a decade and a half ago. Courts have offered evolving interpretations, 
and, as is often the case with such a sweeping change to employment 
law, there have been unintended consequences for both employers and 
employees.
  I know the majority has worked with Members on our side of the aisle 
to craft legislation carefully and avoid some of the pitfalls that 
could come with piecemeal reform of FMLA. I want to thank them for 
ensuring this bill does exactly what it intends, no more and no less. 
The bill before us today, in fact, clarifies further several narrow 
points contained in the House-passed bill and ensures that these are 
truly technical corrections.
  I hope Members will join me in supporting this bill and sending it to 
the President for his signature.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, may I ask if the gentleman 
from Kentucky has any further speakers?
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, we have no further speakers, and with 
that, I will yield back.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, let me just observe that we 
have been working on this bill now for approximately 2 years. I am 
delighted that we are now at the point where we are on the verge of 
passage and moving this bill to the President for his signature.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and with that, I 
yield back the balance of my time as well.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, S. 1422.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________