Groups rip baby-leave plan
One objection raised: Changes would hurt small businesses THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH After largely keeping their silence for months, business groups came out swinging yesterday against a proposed policy that would give women 12 weeks of pregnancy leave regardless of their tenure at a company. Lawyers and representatives of the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses panned the Ohio Civil Rights Commission's proposed policy as an affront to small businesses. They predicted that it would drive up workers compensation premiums, erode existing benefits such as paid sick leave and chase businesses out of Ohio. On the other side, representatives of NARAL Pro Choice Ohio and the Wright State University College of Nursing called on the commission to make the change. The panel is expected to decide by autumn whether to expand protections for pregnant employees, requiring that employers grant 12 weeks of unpaid leave and reinstate women to their old jobs with no loss of benefits or tenure. The policy would move Ohio beyond the federal Family Medical Leave Act, which does not apply to small businesses or new employees. During a public hearing yesterday, several business leaders said the proposal would put Ohio businesses at a competitive disadvantage. "It is out of step with the laws of other jurisdictions," said George Yund, a Cincinnati attorney representing the Ohio Management Lawyers Association. "It will place an unusual burden on doing business in Ohio." Ohio law requires that employers provide reasonable time off for pregnancy and childbirth but does not specify the length. Proponents of the new policy say the old standard is open to abuse and should be defined. The executive director of the abortion-rights group, Kellie Copeland, said the state should support women who want a healthy pregnancy and birth. "From a woman's perspective, pregnancies aren't always planned," Copeland said. "To be on the job for less than a year and have that impediment to your career is not in a woman's best interest. There's uncertainty with the current amount of leave, as to what's sufficient." In proposing the new rules, the Civil Rights Commission's staff said pregnancy should be treated the same as injuries or illnesses that sideline employees for extended periods. Opponents, however, said the commission would classify pregnant women as "most-favored employees" -- discriminating against men. Leonard Hubert, the only commission member who attended yesterday's hearing, said opponents were overstating the magnitude of the change. The state already mandates pregnancy leave, he said. "These things are already on the books," Hubert said. "We're trying to come up with a policy of what's reasonable and what makes sense." The commission's other public hearing on the issue, in Dayton in June, attracted little interest. Commission spokeswoman Toni Delgado said no more public hearings are planned. The rule changes could go before a bipartisan legislative panel in late September or October. If approved, they will take effect 30 days later.
| 
