Talk:Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Irmask.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ArianaDelgadillo22. Peer reviewers: Mariamalsamar.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Halle.davis.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Improving this article

This is a very good start. I'd give it higher class. I added a category. Can anyone make suggested edits or additons so it can become a Featured Article? Bearian 17:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Sweden?

"The benefits provided by the Act are not as generous to employees as policies in some other countries, such as Sweden. Swedish parental leave provides an unusually generous 480 days (16 months) of paid leave (80% or more of wage) with similar right of return protections as its American counterpart."

What does this have to do with the US or FMLA? I would imagine it is more than some countries but less than others. Either way, the mention of Sweden's policy seems irrelevant and non NPOV...

204.17.31.126 (talk) 19:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I disagree completely, and am sad to see the section has been edited out. Comparative law is definitely relevant and interesting, and contrast only furthers understanding. What makes you think it is POV? The language is very careful about being NPOV, IMO, and makes no judgment as to which law is better. It simply states "Swedish parental leave provides an unusually generous ____"; this is a statement of fact, not opinion. If I thought I could do so without mucking the article up, I would edit this section right back in. TheSearchForTelos (talk) 15:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't California be in the "Dropping the employer threshold" section?

Per http://www.edd.ca.gov/Disability/FAQ_PFL_Eligibility.htm#SmallBusinesses " Are employees of small businesses covered by Paid Family Leave insurance? Yes, if an employee pays into State Disability Insurance, " Mathiastck (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

50-employee threshold does still affect public workers

This article -- rightly -- states that the 50-worker threshold doesn't apply to "public agencies." While that is technically true, a public employee still has to work for a public agency that employs 50 workers within 75 miles in order to qualify for FMLA leave. So the fact that the threshold only applies to public employEEs and not public agencies as employERs is irrelevant.

See 29 C.F.R. Sec. 825.108(d) ("All public agencies are covered by the FMLA regardless of the number of employees; they are not subject to the coverage threshold of 50 employees carried on the payroll each day for 20 or more weeks in a year. However, employees of public agencies must meet all of the requirements of eligibility, including the requirement that the employer (e.g., State) employ 50 employees at the worksite or within 75 miles.") 206.18.112.127 (talk) 22:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC) <--Sorry! Wasn't signed in! This is me. Papillonderecherche (talk) 22:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

References

Vandalism changing "unpaid" to "paid"

This article is currently being subject to a vast right-wing conspiracy to make it say that the leave is paid rather than unpaid. It started with 50.234.127.58 on March 25, whose other edits were reverted, and it is continuing now with Chesnaught555. 73.31.160.18 (talk) 11:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I suggested that Ches should check the facts, which they have done. You, IP, could have done the same, rather than assuming the worst!  —SMALLJIM  12:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@Smalljim and 73.31.160.18: I had no intention of deliberately vandalising the article. What I did engage in, however, was by definition edit-warring, and for that I apologise. It will not happen again. --Ches (talk) (contribs) 12:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090703173531/http://paidsickdays.nationalpartnership.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ourwork_fmla_FamilyandMedicalLeave to http://paidsickdays.nationalpartnership.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ourwork_fmla_FamilyandMedicalLeave

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Assignment 3 Part 3

For the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, I would include more resources in this article that would further help the comprehension of this act. For example, I would add this website https://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/ in order to have a link to get all the forms needed for this act. A big reason I would add this website is because it is a government website that would provide a reliable resource. I would also add any cases in which people did not receive this act when he/she could have.

Source: https://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/

ArianaDelgadillo22 (talk) 02:59, 15 March 2018 (UTC) ArianaDelgadillo22