Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJones, Bernie D.
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-12T17:11:20Z
dc.date.available2020-11-12T17:11:20Z
dc.date.issued2014-08-08
dc.identifier.other6337872
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1813/72998
dc.description.abstract[Excerpt] Women’s greater participation in the workplace spurred support for the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993. Nonetheless, advocates have not gained what they desired the most: a program of federally funded paid family medical leave and wage replacement. American social insurance models that offer paid family leave through workers’ compensation benefits has been effectuated in states like California, Rhode Island and New Jersey, but it is time to consider an alternative: privately funded family medical leave pensions similar to 401(k) plans authorized by the Internal Revenue Code[1] or the Traditional IRA[2] and Roth IRA plans.[3] These might be funded exclusively through employees’ contributions with the possibility of an employer match. Such programs would meet important policy goals of minimizing Americans’ tax liabilities and contributing towards long-term investment strategies. Income streams would then follow in the wake of a family medical leave occurrence.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.rightsRequired Publisher Statement: © Cornell HR Review. This article is reproduced here by special permission from the publisher.
dc.subjectHR Review
dc.subjectHuman Resources
dc.subjectfamily medical leave
dc.subjectprivate funds
dc.titlePrivately Funded Family Medical Leave?
dc.typearticle
dc.description.legacydownloads8_8_14_Privately_Funded_Family_Medical_Leave.pdf: 34 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020.
local.authorAffiliationJones, Bernie D.: Suffolk University Law School


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Statistics