A new era for federal paid family and medical leave legislation? 

Bipartisan legislation in Washington DC is about as outdated as parachute pants and legwarmers. It seems unfathomable that Democrats and Republicans will agree on anything in 2025. And yet, there just might be one issue that could actually bring the two parties together: federal paid family and medical leave legislation. 

In December 2024, a bipartisan working group of lawmakers in Congress released drafts of two pieces of federal legislation that, if signed into law, could have a major impact on state mandated paid family and medical leave laws. The two bills – the I-PLAN Act of 2024 and the Paid Family Leave Public-Private Partnerships Act – would create incentives for states to harmonize their laws making it easier for multistate employers to coordinate their own leave policies with state mandates. 

The Paid Family Leave Public-Private Partnership Act creates a three-year pilot program to incentivize states to establish a paid family leave program if they meet certain requirements, including:  

• Providing paid leave benefit for the birth or adoption of a child 
• Providing a wage replacement rate of at least 50-67% of income up to 150% of the state’s average weekly wage 
• Providing a minimum of six weeks of paid leave 
• Forming a partnership with a private entity that assists with program administration 
• Participating in the I-PLAN 

The first four requirements are not usual for existing state paid family and medical leave mandates. But what does it mean for a state to participate in I-PLAN? 

The I-PLAN would be formed by the companion legislation, the Interstate Paid Leave Action Network Act of 2024, to produce an interstate agreement that would create uniform:  

• Policy standards, including definitions for key terms like family member, waiting period and employee eligibility 
• Administrative standards, including payroll contributions process, employer and employee notice requirements coordination with other leave benefits rules, and private or equivalent employer plan standards 
• Claims administration process for sharing work history and covered pay for individuals working in more than one I-PLAN member state 

I’m not qualified to handicap the chances of this legislation passing, but there’s a lot to like, for people on both sides of the aisle. There are no mandates on employers or states. The law drives change through carrots, not sticks. The cost of the legislation is small relative to the federal budget. And it would not require a massive expansion of the federal bureaucracy. If the law works as intended, it will make it easier for multistate employers to comply with state mandates while empowering additional states to pass new paid leave laws. For those reasons, it’s no surprise the proposed bills have been praised both by employer organizations and paid leave advocacy groups. 

What do employers think? In our recent Survey on Health Policy 2025, with more than 500 organizations responding, employers overwhelmingly support the goals of the legislation. A proposal that would enhance consistency between state programs and FMLA as well as improve standardization across states received especially positive employer support.

Sounds good so far. What’s the catch? From an employer perspective, the biggest negative is how long it will take for the legislation to have an impact. Skipping over how long it would take to pass the legislation, it will take time for the law to be enacted, standards to be set, and for states to meet and agree to I-PLAN requirements. And that’s just the start. Once a state agrees to the I-PLAN requirements, the legislature in that state would need to pass enabling legislation, get the governor’s signature and then implement. That process is likely to take years.  

On the one hand, employers should be encouraged that there has been some movement at the federal level on legislation that will someday harmonize the current patchwork quilt of state mandates. But they should not get too excited that help is on the way soon. There may be a light at the end of the tunnel, but it appears to be a very long tunnel.