GovernmentExecutive.com

The White House announced its opposition Tuesday to a House bill that would increase paid parental leave for all federal employees.

In a statement, the White House said the measure "would provide a costly, uncessary new paid leave entitlement" and that President Bush's advisers would recommend he veto the bill.

Sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., the bill would provide four weeks of paid maternal or paternal parental leave for all federal employees for the birth or adoption of a child. It would, for the first time, let employees use their accrued sick leave for an additional eight weeks of paid leave. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., Monday introduced a companion measure in the Senate.

Like House proponents, Webb said the federal government does too little to compete with private sector firms offering increasingly generous leave packages to new mothers. "Paid parental leave will improve recruitment and retention for federal agencies," he said in a statement Monday.

But the White House statement said "federal employees aged 20 to 45 already have a combined paid leave balance of over seven weeks." The statement cited a 2006 federal human capital survey that found 86 percent of federal employees already say they are satisfied with paid leave offered by the government.

In addition, the statement noted that "employees may also use up to 12 weeks of accrued sick leave in a year to care for a family member." Arguing that the House bill will cost $87 million to $175 million a year, the White House said most federal employees can already take advantage of "generous leave benefits."

Those who cannot should be able to use a short-term disability insurance benefit proposed by the Office of Personnel Management, though it is not yet approved, the administration argued.

The bill passed the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in April with 10 Republicans opposing it due to cost concerns.

COMMENTS

• Like many others, I have seen many coworkers abuse their sick leave and then turn around and request leave donations. The truth is that Govt employees have more leave than most private sector employees. FED Up Posted July 22, 2008 11:19 PM
• As a federal employee, I only accrue 4 hours of sick leave per payperiod, which is a total of 104 hours a year (2 weeks, 3 days, and 6 hours of annual leave, which is 156 hours (3 weeks, 4 1/2 days). This is barely 6 weeks of total leave a year. This is nowhere enough for maternity leave. You have to take time off for doctor's appointments, exams, etc. I am 29 years old, got married last year, and am waiting to have children because of this concern. The government has to take into consideration that you use your leave for other things as well. I've been responsible with my leave. I've worked for the government a little over 4 years. I've had to take emergency leave several times to care for a sick parent, the death of my fater(who lived out of town), other deaths in the family, etc. Not to mention personal sick days. There are many unforseen circumstances that arise which you use your leave for. Also, you can't expect people to not take a vacation with their annual leave. I think it is crazy to assume that we must save our vaction and sick time to use as maternity leave. Not only do you need your sick leave for the birth and initial care(first few weeks), but after that, you need it for doctor's visits. I've yet to meet one person who has not needed to take their baby to the doctor because he/she got sick. For me to have 12 weeks of sick leave accrued (480 hours, I would neet to "SAVE" my sick leave for over 4 1/2 years!!!! That means not getting sick, no doctor's appointments, no emergencies, etc. Also, remember that you cannot carry over more than 240 hours of annual leave. That's only a month and a half. And also, that's assuming you NEVER take a vacation. It is sad to know that the government is willing to spend money in helping other countries and in war, rather than to help their own employees. I pray that these people will come to their senses and realize that this is an important matter that affects people's lives. I understand those who have expressed their opinions about being responsible for our own actions, but there are many RESPONSIBLE adults that will benefit from this. I personally think I've been responsible in planning and that is why I'm pushing 30 (fighting against time)and have not had children yet. I'm trying to plan my future as best as possible for my (future)children's sake as well. Responsible adult Posted July 21, 2008 4:42 PM
• I worked for the federal government for 37 years and watched too many employees use their leave as soon as they earned it; then had the nerve to ask for leave donations when they needed leave. I have witnessed employees calling in sick to take care of the animals! Yes, that is a fact. At what point are we held responsible for our own actions and needs? If the generous leave policy isn't enough buy your own insurance to cover the gap. Why should the government be financially responsible for your choices? Debbie Posted June 26, 2008 9:07 AM