Mpls. Clarifies Sick Leave Law; More Clarity to Come

On Monday, the Minneapolis City Council adopted several clarifying amendments to its recently-adopted sick leave ordinance.  The amendments seek to shed light on several provisions of the sick leave ordinance, which is set to go into effect on July 1, 2017 for employers with six or more employees.

Some of these amendments are helpful in figuring out how all of this will work.  Others, however, call out for clarifications of the clarification.

  • Sick Leave is Paid at the “Regular Rate of Pay.”  The amendments specify that employees taking sick leave must be paid his or her “regular rate of pay” for the hours that the individual “was scheduled to work.”  For exempt employees, “regular rate of pay” is defined as the “equivalent rate.”  For non-exempt employees, the term includes “shift differentials,” but does not include: “tips,” “commissions,” “expense reimbursements,” “bonuses,” or payments pursuant to a profit-sharing plan.  “Premium payments” for overtime work or work on the weekends, holidays, etc., also can be excluded if the premium rate is at least 1.5 times the employee’s normal rate.
  • Accrual.  The amendments specify that sick leave accrues only in on-hour increments; no longer in fractions of an hour.  The amendments also provide that the employer’s recording of the accrual can be done consistent with its practices or industry standard, provided that it is not less than monthly.
  • Front-Loading.  In lieu of tracking the employee’s accrual of sick leave, the amendments permit employers to “front load” leave by providing: (1) 48 hours of leave immediately following the employee’s 90 days of employment, and (2) at least 80 hours of leave at beginning each leave year (following the initial year).
  • Recordkeeping.  The amendments provide more prescriptive language for records that must be kept by the employer to include hours worked (by non-exempt employees only), leave available, and leave used.  The amendments remove the portion of the ordinance that required employers to “track hours worked in the city” for employees who “occasionally perform work in the city.”
  • More Generous Leave.  The amendments specify that employers who have more general leave policies are not required to provide additional leave.  However, the amendments make clear that, to be exempt, the employer’s policy must “provide for greater accrual or use by employees” and must be made available “for the same purposes and under the same conditions as sick and safe time” as set forth in the ordinance.  If all of those conditions are not met, the employer will be required to provide additional sick leave under the ordinance.

Bottom Line

While these amendments do offer some clarity, many unanswered questions remain.  City Officials have reported that they are working on an FAQ document, with a release scheduled for October.  We will continue to update you as this story develops.

Critical developments like this will be in focus at the Felhaber Larson Labor & Employment Seminar on October 28, 2016.  You may register for this program by clicking here.