[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6638150,"mediaKeyId","2574247-201b58e28c24e207f96fdd91736eb48e","parentId",2574247,"title","Committee reviews wide-ranging changes to Minnesota—earned sick and safe time; amendment adopted and bill laid over","audioSeconds",4440,"startMs",1857150,"endMs",6297640,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2574247-201b58e28c24e207f96fdd91736eb48e&start=1857&end=6297","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2574247-201b58e28c24e207f96fdd91736eb48e/thumbnail_1857150.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6638150/Minnesota/Committee-reviews-wide-ranging-changes-to-Minnesotaearned-sick-and-safe-time-amendment-adopted-and-bill-laid-over","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6638150-f7cd50d14ba74dd8f2acb3cb185a738e/orig.mp4?Expires=1775011129&Signature=ZFfbPNxjZBo51D5Qp5Bo6N10F9tECX0-wMWtZO9aYDJfV3lgvPk65mAuL2RL-UqDUuUVpfH97Cig2XiLmzVLPaUrQoPwOZiBZxWEuhDwbF3YNtx6jACbc3mHjxHD~2cmU-J8qk7gHm6WdL0A5vVLBh7xJ3cuHE8OzO5qyffxzppqXDlsb8CKQrNaNyyqDGuc8rc7rRRfM-MAr7eU65IafhS2aeYZxIw4FwFGu8bfNW~Lk~e3UFnJl-lHUHD51TbA4jy~xLO5BtttYTZzVBqw3gwum2IWMMQsda8QgXkSzMnbwspp-icrVoPCXC5cQVLkzYlSVuh86BCqbbCPLO7FjA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Minnesota Legislature","date","2025-03-12T18:02:56.013Z","article","The House Workforce, Labor and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee on March 12 heard more than a dozen witnesses about House File 1325, a bill that would alter how Minnesota's earned sick and safe time (ESST) law is applied to minors, part-time and seasonal workers, small employers and public employers. The committee approved an author\u0000A2 amendment and laid the bill over for further consideration.

Representative Schultz, the bill\u0000s author, said the package aims to make the ESST law \"workable and flexible\" for small businesses, schools, counties and cities. \"Listening to the needs of small business owners and locally elected leaders across Minnesota, I have heard the concerns of unfunded, 1 size fits all mandates, which is exactly the challenge we are seeking to address today with Earn Sick and Save Time,\" Schultz said.

The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry opposed the measure. \"This bill would exclude minors, part time and seasonal workers and others from earned sick and safe time coverage,\" Commissioner Nicole Blissenbach told the committee. She said the DLI estimates that the proposed exclusions would remove protections for roughly \"800,000 Minnesotans,\" about 30% of the workforce, and warned that removing coverage in whole categories would leave some workers with fewer protections than before ESST took effect.

Employer groups urged changes to ease administrative burdens. Lauren Schochhorst of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce said small businesses lack HR expertise and face compliance complexity; John Beshe of the National Federation of Independent Business urged measures such as 90-day waiting periods, documentation rules and proration for front-loaded hours. The League of Minnesota Cities and multiple county and school-district representatives asked for clarifications to avoid disruptions to essential public services, and the League supported removing a bargaining requirement tied to a weather-related exemption for emergency employees.

Labor unions, nurses and worker advocates opposed the proposed carve-outs and delays. Brian Elliott of SEIU Minnesota said the bill would \"take sick and safe time and its accompanying protections away from many hundreds of thousands of workers who've already been earning this benefit for 14 months.\" John Welsh, a nurse and union representative, said the law has reduced disciplinary action for nurses who previously came to work sick because they feared losing time or pay.

Several public-employee witnesses, including school HR staff and district associations, said practical problems had emerged since ESST took effect in January 2024. Those witnesses urged targeted fixes such as proration for new hires and clearer rules for substitutes and stipend positions rather than broad rollbacks.

The committee voted by voice to approve an author's A2 amendment that sponsor Schultz requested to shape the bill. After additional member discussion, the chair renewed a motion to lay the bill over for further consideration; the committee carried the motion by voice vote.

Committee members expressed conflicting priorities in floor debate: some said ESST remains a vital baseline protection that should not be reduced for groups of workers, while others emphasized reducing unintended administrative burdens on small employers and public employers. Representative Leila Pinto urged legislators to center the policy's human impacts, saying workers should not be treated differently depending on employer size or type.

What\u0000happens next: The bill, as amended, was laid over for further consideration and may be revised or returned with additional amendments at a later committee meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee 3/12/25","oneSentenceSummary","House File 1325, a package of amendments to Minnesota\u0000earned sick and safe time, drew testimony from state agencies, business groups, public employers and labor unions on March 12; the committee approved an author\u0000A2 amendment and laid the bill over.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MN, Minnesota","taxId",77817,"location","Minnesota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6638154,"Committee Hears Farm Exemption to Minnesota—earned sick and safe time; bill laid over",1806,43215,1849490,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2574247-201b58e28c24e207f96fdd91736eb48e&start=43&end=1849","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2574247-201b58e28c24e207f96fdd91736eb48e/thumbnail_43215.jpg","/articles/6638154/Minnesota/Committee-Hears-Farm-Exemption-to-Minnesotaearned-sick-and-safe-time-bill-laid-over","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6638154-f66b77f5ff0978696605eacfa4c3d988/orig.mp4?Expires=1775011129&Signature=N9HjEqj34Oq9SW1~sHawe2~VwKeF6zpxi8IXpXXz-Wvqb7rhNjG~Dal9PXR6OHnYcK1xknFMe-125TfdnNZkaZWOceBkKDYmhg6yjtWkSyMFMEbxrG8O2NkR87PawCAf6MIqwO8iqbJbQ2l9wvx0RSP5F5Dp~lZkuZRYiSDvPJbrpzfOa7mPyqxxJkZ9SxWu8xa2eIfbAThwwhbQ7GxHTyqGfkK5UefhvWdaar1T~xJ243w1kUODgi6u5pWranTubgq1~hK~4D24-9P0KMkiiwkqfUWhk3aX8bLVwlSnVuTDZML8pyN8fmUxrS8EKD61ByqV20r3qcyjpTBSpWKxtg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House File 1057, a proposal to exempt some small farms from Minnesota\u0000\bearned sick and safe time (ESST), was discussed March 12 before the House Workforce, Labor and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee and was laid over for further consideration.

Representative Anderson introduced the bill, describing it as a targeted exclusion for small and family-run operations. \"What my bill does, House File 10 57, would be to add 1 other, relatively small exclusion for farms that would, have fewer than 5 or fewer full time employees,\" Representative Anderson said, adding that many small farms lack human-resources staff and face seasonal labor demands.

The bill drew mixed testimony. Nicole Blissenbach, commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, told the committee the department opposed the measure. \"The earn sick and safe time law sets a floor for all employees in the state,\" Blissenbach said, and she warned that exempting groups of agricultural workers would reduce protections and create enforcement complications because farm employment is highly seasonal. She told members the department estimates \"about 1,500 establishments and 2,500 employees\" would be affected by the proposed change, and cautioned that the estimate is likely an undercount.

Darren Broton, executive director of the Minnesota Agri Growth Council, testified in favor. He described broad economic stress in agriculture and urged the committee to consider the bill as a modest, bipartisan way to ease burdens on family farms. \"Minnesota is among many states, in the midst of a great farm recession,\" Broton said, adding that family farms operate differently from other employers and that coverage requirements can be disruptive during planting and harvest.

Bruce Clavin, representing several farm groups including the Minnesota Association of Wheat Growers and Minnesota Turkey Growers, also supported the bill and noted the statute already includes a 28-day seasonal exemption meant to cover brief harvest help.

Committee members pressed both witnesses. Representative Frazier and others questioned whether small farms had documented harm from the existing law; Representative Anderson cited anecdotes from farmers who said compliance pulled them into unemployment insurance and raised annual costs. Commissioner Blissenbach and worker advocates cautioned that ESST also serves public-health goals, allowing workers to stay home when contagious and helping control outbreaks.

There was no final vote on the bill\u0000beyond the committee\u0000motion to lay it over. The chair renewed a motion that House File 1057 be \"laid over for further consideration,\" and the committee carried that motion by voice vote.

The committee record shows a continuing debate between members who said the bill would protect small family operations with limited administrative capacity and those who said the change would remove a baseline protection for vulnerable workers and complicate enforcement because of seasonal hiring.

Votes at a glance: The committee took voice votes to approve procedural steps and to lay the bill over; no final passage or defeat occurred during the March 12 hearing.

What\u0000happens next: The bill remains laid over for future consideration by the committee; further hearings or amendments may follow.","A House committee heard testimony on House File 1057, which would exempt certain small farms from Minnesota\u0000earned sick and safe time requirements. Supporters said small family farms need relief; the Department of Labor and Industry warned of public-health and enforcement problems. The committee laid the bill over for further consideration.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee reviews wide-ranging changes to Minnesota—earned sick and safe time; amendment adopted and bill laid over

Committee Hears Farm Exemption to Minnesota—earned sick and safe time; bill laid over