The Department of Labor’s recent opinion letter provides important reminders to employers about the proper method for calculating an employee’s available leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, especially for employees whose schedules include mandatory overtime. You can read our full analysis here.  

On October 7, 2025, the Senate confirmed President Trump’s nomination of Brittany Panuccio as the third Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Commissioner giving the EEOC the quorum needed to make significant policy changes such as amending or adopting new regulations and guidance.

The EEOC has been patiently waiting until the third EEOC Commissioner was confirmed before issuing changes to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) Final Regulations (Final Rule). Of course, no one knows what will be included in the revised regulations. However, among other changes, we predict the EEOC will quickly take action that results in the removal of the following conditions from the litany of potential conditions that may require accommodation, absent undue hardship: menstruation, infertility, abortion and menopause. Here’s why.

EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas has been vocal about her support for the PWFA. However, she has indicated that she does not agree with the EEOC’s interpretation in the Final Rule of the phrase “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions” and  what the EEOC under Acting Chair Lucas’ leadership describes as “the contrivances the Commission used to arrive at its construction of the statute.” Shortly after her appointment as Acting Chair, the EEOC published a statement making it clear that “Once a quorum is re-established at the Commission, Acting Chair Lucas intends for the Commission to reconsider portions of the Final Rule that she believes are unsupported by law.”

When the EEOC voted on the final regulations in April 2024, Lucas issued a public statement  explaining that she believes the EEOC’s Final Rule goes too far.

I support elements of the final rule.  However, I am unable to approve it because it purports to broaden the scope of the statute in ways that, in my view, cannot reasonably be reconciled with the text.  At a high level, the rule fundamentally errs in conflating pregnancy and childbirth accommodation with accommodation of the female sex, that is, female biology and reproduction.  The Commission extends the new accommodation requirements to reach virtually every condition, circumstance, or procedure that relates to any aspect of the female reproductive system.  And the results are paradoxical.  Worse, the Commission chose not to structure the final rule in a manner that realistically allows for severability of its objectionable provisions from its reasonable and rational components.

According to Lucas, “menstruation, infertility, menopause, and the like are not caused or exacerbated by a particular pregnancy or childbirth – but rather the functioning, or ill-functioning, of the female worker’s underlying reproductive system.” Therefore, they are not subject to accommodation under the PWFA.

In addition to the Acting Chair’s stated position, a federal court in the Western District of Louisiana issued an order May 21, 2025, vacating the portion of the EEOC’s Final Rule interpreting the PWFA as requiring employers to accommodate what the court refers to as “elective abortions.” The court ordered the EEOC to revise the PWFA Final Rule. At the time, Acting Chair Lucas could not do so because the EEOC did not have a quorum necessary to take such action.

Now that the EEOC has a quorum with Acting Chair Lucas and Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal joined by Brittany Panuccio, the agency is well-position to take action consistent with the court order and Acting Chair Lucas’ stated intentions.

Unless and until the EEOC revises the Final Rule, it remains in effect except for the portion of the Final Rule that requires accommodation of purely elective abortions.  That means employers should continue to comply with the Final Rule but be on the lookout for a revised Final Rule to be issued. When the Final Rule is revised, employers may need to review their policies and practices related to the PWFA to ensure that they are updated to align with the revised regulations. Jackson Lewis lawyers are continuing to monitor these developments. If you have questions about what this means in your workplace, please reach out to a Jackson Lewis lawyer.

The Massachusetts Department of Family and Medical Leave has announced the 2026 weekly benefit amount and contribution rates for employers and employees under the Paid Family and Medical Leave Act.

As of Jan. 1, 2026, the benefit contribution rate remains at .88% of eligible wages for all employers. The benefit contribution rates are as follows:

  1. For employers with 25 or more covered individuals, for the family leave contribution, the employer can withhold .18% of eligible wages. As for the medical leave contribution, the employer can withhold .28% of eligible wages and is responsible for paying .42% of eligible wages directly.
  2. For employers with 24 or fewer covered individuals, for the family leave contribution, the employer can withhold .18% of eligible wages. As for the medical leave contribution, the employer can withhold .28% of eligible wages. These smaller employers are not required to pay the employer share for medical leave.

As a reminder, these contribution rates apply equally to employers with private plans, so all employers must review their plans and contribution rates to ensure continued compliance for Jan. 1, 2026. Since the contribution rates have not changed, employers need not notify current employees of the contribution rates (but employers may wish to do so if they have a practice of doing so annually). Employers must continue to provide new hires notice of the contribution rates within 30 days of hire.

Additionally, on Jan. 1, 2026, the maximum weekly benefit will increase from $1,170.64 to $1,230.39.

The Department has not yet released the 2026 posting and notice templates, but they are expected in November 2025. For additional guidance, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.

The State of Texas asked the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this week to reconsider its case challenging the validity of the entire Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). Texas filed suit against the federal government shortly after President Biden signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act in December 2022, claiming the PWFA could not be enforced against it because Congress violated the U.S. Constitution when it passed the bill relying on the COVID-19-pandemic-era rule permitting non-present members of Congress to be included in the quorum count and vote by proxy.

On Aug. 15, 2025, a divided panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the PWFA was constitutionally enacted because the Quorum Clause did not require members of Congress to be physically present when they enacted the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, which included the PWFA.  The 5th Circuit’s decision reversed the Northern District of Texas’ Feb. 27, 2024 decision permanently enjoining the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) from enforcing  the PWFA against  the State of Texas and its agencies.

Today, the 5th Circuit stayed further proceedings in this case pending the restoration of appropriations to the Department of Justice.

Jackson Lewis attorneys will continue to monitor these developments. If you have questions about the PWFA or what these developments mean in your workplace, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.

Takeaways

  • Connecticut expands paid leave and state FMLA rights to “non-certified school employees” of public schools and nonpublic elementary and secondary schools starting 10.01.25.
  • Employees may be entitled to up to 12 weeks of job-protected leave with additional leave available for some pregnant employees, as well as, wage replacement benefits.
  • Employers should review and revise leave policies and notices to ensure compliance.

Related link

Public and nonpublic elementary and secondary schools must prepare for the upcoming changes to Connecticut Paid Leave (CT Paid Leave) and the Connecticut Family and Medical Leave Act (CT FMLA) taking effect Oct. 1, 2025.

Previously, employees of both public and nonpublic elementary and secondary schools were not eligible for CT Paid Leave or CT FMLA, unless the benefit was granted through a collective bargaining agreement.

Connecticut House Bill 7288 requires both public school and nonpublic elementary and secondary schools to provide “non-certified school employees” access to CT Paid Leave and  CT FMLA. Non-certified school employees are those in positions that do not require a license or certification under chapter 166 of the Connecticut General Statutes, which governs certification requirements for teachers, supervisors, administrators, special service staff members, and school superintendents.

Newly covered employees are eligible under the CT FMLA if they have been employed for at least three months during the previous 12-month period by their employer, and may be entitled to take up to 12 workweeks of job-protected leave for certain family and medical reasons during a 12-month period. Employees with a serious health condition resulting in incapacitation that occurs during a pregnancy may be entitled to take an additional two weeks (for a possible total of up to 14 weeks).

Covered employees also are eligible for CT Paid Leave if they meet certain earnings criteria. Under CT Paid Leave, wage replacement benefits are available to eligible employees who take leave for any of the purposes covered by the CT FMLA. CT Paid Leave is also available to employees who are victims of family violence or sexual assault who take leave from work for covered reasons.

School Employers’ new obligations under the law include:

  • Registering with the Connecticut Paid Leave Authority;
  • Providing required notices to employees; and
  • Implementing appropriate employee payroll withholdings (currently, 0.5% of a covered employee’s wages must be withheld each pay period) for contribution to the program.

School employers should review and revise leave policies to ensure compliance with the new requirements. For questions or assistance, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.

Oregon employers should prepare to update their paid sick leave policies to comply with recent amendments. Effective January 1, 2026, blood donation will be added to the list of reasons permitted for taking time off under Oregon’s paid sick leave law. 

Earlier this summer, Oregon Governor Tina Kotek signed Senate Bill 1108 amending Oregon’s paid sick leave law by allowing employees to use their accrued sick time to donate blood through a program approved or accredited by the American Association of Blood Banks or the American Red Cross. State Senator Lew Frederick, the bill’s sponsor, wrote that the goal is to help address the critical blood shortage around the country.

The amendment expands Oregon’s already comprehensive sick leave law, which is one of the most inclusive in the nation.  Under Oregon law, employers with at least ten employees (or at least six in Portland) must have a sick leave policy that allows employees to accrue one hour of sick leave for every 30 hours they work. Employers are permitted to cap this leave at 40 hours per year. 

Employees can use their paid sick leave for many reasons specified under the law including if they are sick or a family member is sick, injured, experiencing mental illness, or need to visit the doctor. SB 1108 adds blood donation to the list of reasons permitted for taking time off. 

This bill, alongside Oregon’s additional newly-passed employment legislation, illustrates the challenges of navigating paid leave requirements.  While there are still several months left before SB 1108 goes into effect, employers should be proactive and begin to plan for this new addition to Oregon’s sick leave law. If you have questions, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.

Beginning June 1, 2026, Illinois employers with at least 16 or more employees will be required to provide unpaid parental leave to employees with a child who is a patient in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker signed the Family Neonatal Intensive Care Leave Act (Act) into law on August 15, 2025.

Under the Act, Illinois employers with 16 to 50 employees must provide up to 10 days of unpaid leave for employees with a child who is a patient in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Employers with 51 or more employees must provide employees with a child in the NICU with up to 20 days of unpaid leave. The Act does not apply to employers with 15 or fewer employees.

Eligible employees may choose to take NICU leave continuously or intermittently. For intermittent leave, employers can set the minimum increment of time that must be taken, so long as the increment is not less than 2 hours. However, employees eligible for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) must first exhaust their available FMLA entitlement before taking leave under this Act.

Employers may require “reasonable verification” of the employee’s child’s length of stay in the NICU but cannot request confidential medical information in support of the leave.

The Act also contains additional protections for employees taking NICU leave:

  • Although employers cannot require employees to use paid leave that is available “for any reason” (such as PTO or leave under the Illinois Paid Leave for All Workers Act) instead of unpaid leave provided by the Act, employees may choose to substitute any available paid leave for unpaid leave.
  • Employers are required to reinstate employees to their former or a substantially equivalent position at the conclusion of leave.
  • Employers must maintain any applicable health insurance benefits for employees while on leave.
  • Employees cannot be required to provide a replacement worker while taking leave.
  • Employees are protected from retaliation when exercising their own rights under the Act, opposing employer practices prohibited by the Act, or supporting co-workers who are exercising rights under the Act.

The Act does not currently require employers to provide notice to employees of their rights under the Act. However, the IDOL is authorized to adopt rules necessary to administer and enforce the Act and may address this (or other matters) through regulation. Jackson Lewis attorneys will monitor regulatory developments.

Employers should review and revise leave policies to ensure compliance with these upcoming requirements. For questions or assistance, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.

As of August 28, 2025, paid sick leave will no longer be required in Missouri. Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe signed House Bill 567, officially repealing Missouri’s voter-enacted paid sick leave law.

Under Missouri’s short-lived paid sick leave law, beginning May 1, 2025, employers were required to provide employees with one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours worked and to allow employees to use accrued leave for qualifying reasons. Those obligations will end when the repeal is effective on August 28, 2025. 

Employers who modified prior paid leave policies or created new paid leave policies due to the passage of the paid sick leave law should consider whether they want to continue providing paid sick leave benefits, revert back to their prior policy, or something in between.  Employers should carefully consider how to communicate any policy changes to their employees and how to handle any accrued but unused paid sick leave benefits on and after August 28.

Please contact a Jackson Lewis lawyer if you have questions.

On August 1, 2025, Illinois enacted amendments to its Nursing Mothers in the Workplace Act (“Act”), which will take effect on January 1, 2026.

Under the Act, Illinois employers must provide reasonable break time to employees who need to express breast milk for their nursing infant for one year after the child’s birth.  That break time may run concurrently with any break time already provided to the employee.

Effective January 1, 2026, breaks required by the Act must be paid at the employee’s regular rate of compensation, unless doing so would create an “undue hardship” as defined in the Illinois Human Rights Act (IHRA). The IHRA defines “undue hardship” as “prohibitively expensive or disruptive” when considered in light of specified factors including, among other things, the financial resources of the employer, the size of the employer and the impact on operations. The amendment also prohibits employers from requiring employees to use paid leave for breaks required by the Act or from otherwise reducing a nursing employee’s compensation during the break time.

Employers should review and revise their lactation accommodation policies to ensure compliance with these upcoming requirements as well as the federal PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act (PUMP Act) and Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. For questions or assistance, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.