[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-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",6033520,"mediaKeyId","5364872-c696f2ab231aa2115aae59695c95c3e0","parentId",5364872,"title","Committee hears broad ESST changes in House File 1325; members split over carve‑outs and implementation","audioSeconds",4453,"startMs",1844000,"endMs",6297000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5364872-c696f2ab231aa2115aae59695c95c3e0&start=1844&end=6297","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5364872-c696f2ab231aa2115aae59695c95c3e0/thumbnail_1844000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6033520/Minnesota/Committee-hears-broad-ESST-changes-in-House-File-1325-members-split-over-carveouts-and-implementation","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6033520-e245cf4a80ca93f1ed3b6e45a8b6eb15/orig.mp4?Expires=1770998145&Signature=NQYZWqpj~TUFoZPEAqXFF-AWtEHLv9UUukV0S21Po6t8eS1E0JJuB7kXdxFhYWWB2RysN2VKZwcrn8oc4UJvVh0zGMup-JtHa2h-CxO~qp9xWuQNvbaiHC3VSKAdHWFb-RcRStYQ2yq7~NNswA8QvKzDpc70PZSDv47knGXeuxbDAivOsbhlyxE27qX9eLOJTYAaimvGdlpT96pPIiwL3lFOcpIPwft2agiIJ1tnT6-cZDWQP4QgkURkxzMluj8K25MVW~EIzTtiNu8LMyce-W2y6kG3b3YnExIeGrSl-aydnPq4k~qxL2WsMxHhm~gGcesJDUpAlPeum8OXAM88tw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Minnesota House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee","date","2025-03-12T00:00:00Z","article","The Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee on March 12 considered House File 1325, sponsored by Representative Kelly Schultz, a package of changes to Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time (ESST) law intended to address administrative and operational challenges raised since the law took effect Jan. 1, 2024.

Schultz told the committee the bill is aimed at making ESST “workable and flexible” for small businesses, schools, public employers and taxpayers. The proposal includes multiple changes: redefining covered employees (carving out certain minors, part‑time and seasonal workers), permitting employers with fewer than 25 full‑time equivalent employees to pay ESST at half the employee’s regular hourly rate, allowing prorated front‑loading of hours and an optional 90‑day waiting period for new hires, and clarifying treatment of more generous employer leave policies and weather‑related exemptions for emergency employees.

Nicole Lisonbee, commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, opposed the bill. She said removing coverage for minors, part‑time and seasonal workers would strip protections from approximately 800,000 Minnesotans — roughly 30 percent of the workforce, according to the department’s testimony — and could leave many workers with weaker rights than they had before ESST’s enactment. Lisonbee also warned that employer‑size thresholds and seasonal fluctuations would complicate compliance and enforcement and criticized a provision delaying DLI civil penalties until Jan. 1, 2026.

Business groups, local governments and school districts supported parts of the bill. Lauren Schotchorst of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce told the committee that many members lack HR capacity and that broad documentation and notice provisions have created operational challenges. The League of Minnesota Cities, St. Louis County and school district human‑resources witnesses asked for clarifications on how the statute interacts with more generous, preexisting leave policies and requested changes to the bargaining requirement tied to weather‑related emergency exemptions so essential public services can be maintained during severe weather.

Labor and worker advocates urged rejecting the bill. Brian Elliott of SEIU Minnesota State Council described ESST as a ‘‘short‑term insurance policy’’ that protects workers from losing wages or jobs for brief illnesses; he warned that the proposal would create “a baroque new set of rules” that complicate enforcement and could take coverage away from hundreds of thousands of workers. Nurses, public‑sector employees, union representatives and Take Action Minnesota witnesses offered personal testimony about the law’s benefits and urged the committee to leave ESST unchanged.

Members debated the balance between operational burden and worker protections. Some legislators — particularly those representing rural and small‑business constituencies — said modifications were needed to prevent undue administrative cost or service‑delivery problems for towns, counties and small employers. Other members warned the bill would roll back core protections and disproportionately affect low‑hour and younger workers.

The committee approved an author’s A2 amendment by voice vote that amended several provisions and then the chair moved to lay House File 1325 over for further consideration. No roll‑call tally appears in the transcript. Representative Schultz said she welcomed continued bipartisan conversations to refine the bill.

Votes at a glance: House File 1325 — A2 amendment: approved (voice vote). Motion to lay over: moved by Chair; outcome: laid over (voice vote; no roll call recorded).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Minnesota House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee March 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee on March 12 considered House File 1325, sponsored by Representative Kelly Schultz, a package of changes to Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time law that would add exemptions, proration options and new documentation and waiting‑period rules.","taxTitle","Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Minnesota","taxId",80487,"location","Minnesota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":44,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6033523,"Committee lays over bill to exempt very small farms from Minnesota earned sick and safe time",1801,43000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5364872-c696f2ab231aa2115aae59695c95c3e0&start=43&end=1844","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5364872-c696f2ab231aa2115aae59695c95c3e0/thumbnail_43000.jpg","/articles/6033523/Minnesota/Committee-lays-over-bill-to-exempt-very-small-farms-from-Minnesota-earned-sick-and-safe-time","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6033523-5ab1096eb41a683e47d35b2a1952a5da/orig.mp4?Expires=1770998145&Signature=elsxQPbtFMJ86uUHKA5m7b1zAw55j4AcSu0vS5tYXCiLz1dwiNDr-SIU~sZvadF0Ku3uThtTF3YnV2y-pdIjIJIKLe4VD3GAICOwMPPPISVbCiy1zUOsAntBHdoiqpCGkd1aana-gS05H0DgJlXeGepQh776sdB0CzJRSLzyelhhqtU~57Ll0lRdvcPktttZwaXer5gr-PWNvhduNFZJkAv6v2BZRb5Xyz-vXIj5bwRGIRyB4enCLlCbJHZZst8EdJzOML3X08s3yo4uu5lFNO60mdxhAGbMQZvFJFklCSaaYALkWF9ZDgCNC6Uc-ZZqPFMwVESm4RSqdG8fR3gOeA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee on March 12 laid over House File 1057, a bill from Representative Ruth Anderson that would exempt ‘‘farms that have fewer than five full‑time employees’’ from Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time (ESST) law.

The bill’s author, Representative Ruth Anderson, told the committee the change would be a ‘‘relatively small exclusion’’ to ease administrative burdens on family farms that lack human resources staff. Anderson said many family farms ‘‘have shared labor’’ among relatives and rely on workers during high‑intensity seasons such as planting and harvest.

Nicole Lisonbee, commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, testified in opposition and said the department estimates roughly 1,500 agricultural establishments and about 2,500 employees would be affected by the proposed exemption. Lisonbee reiterated the current ESST standard — one hour of sick time earned for every 30 hours worked, up to 48 hours per year — and said the law was intended to set a statewide floor so workers do not have to choose between their paychecks and recovering from illness or caring for family. She warned agricultural work can involve higher occupational hazards, noted public‑health concerns such as avian influenza and cited technical problems enforcing a ‘‘five or fewer employees’’ threshold because farm employment is highly seasonal.

Supporters of the bill said the change recognizes the practical differences of family farms. Darren Broton, executive director of the Minnesota Agri Growth Council, described a prolonged downturn in farm income and argued family farms operate differently than other businesses; he said family members often cover work when someone is ill and that certain tasks (for example, milking or feeding livestock) are difficult to replace with temporary labor. Bruce Clavin, representing multiple farm organizations including the Minnesota Association of Wheat Growers and Red River Valley Sugar Beet Growers, told the committee the idea was not new and pointed out that a 28‑day harvest exemption enacted last year targeted seasonal help.

Committee members pressed both sides on practical effects. Representative Cedric Frazier asked for concrete examples of harm to small farmers; Representative Anderson offered two anecdotal accounts she said came from farmers who told her the ESST law had drawn them into unemployment insurance and raised costs — one example cited an estimated $30,000 annual cost for a two‑brother family farm. Members from both parties expressed concerns about administrative complexity and enforcement. Representative Kelly Schultz and others said they wanted to protect farm operations and avoid undue paperwork burdens; Representative Janelle Greenman and several members representing labor interests argued the bill would reduce protections for vulnerable workers and oppose carving out categories of employees.

The committee did not vote to advance the bill; the chair moved to lay House File 1057 over for further consideration and the motion was carried. No formal roll‑call vote was recorded in the transcript.

Because testimony raised both worker‑protection and agricultural‑operational issues — and because enforcement questions were raised about a seasonal workforce — the committee left the bill on the table for additional discussion rather than taking final action.

Votes at a glance: House File 1057 — Motion to lay over: moved by Chair; outcome: laid over (voice vote; no roll call recorded).","The Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee on March 12 laid over House File 1057, a bill from Representative Ruth Anderson that would exempt ‘‘farms that have fewer than five full‑time employees’’ from Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time (ESST) law.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears broad ESST changes in House File 1325; members split over carve‑outs and implementation

Committee lays over bill to exempt very small farms from Minnesota earned sick and safe time