Accuracy on Leave from ABC
Accuracy on Leave from ABC
Network paints
business-law reformers as eager to take parents away from sick kids.
by Megan
Alvarez
July 11, 2005
Small businesses and the Bush administration are not teaming up to
take away a mothers right to care for her sick child, but that was
what ABC conveyed in a report on the July 9, 2005, World News
Tonight.
ABC anchor Dan Harris opened the report on possible
reforms to the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) saying, this
mother is worried about what the Bush administration might do to a
law that lets Americans take time off when a family member gets
sick. Harris pointed out that the act, passed by President Bill
Clinton in 1993, allows up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a
newborn or sick family member.
Reporter Gigi Stone centered the story on Regina Ice, a
single mother whose daughter, Maddie, had leukemia. Stone reported,
Regina is a working single mother. The only small consolation for
her in this ordeal is that she's been able to be at Maddie's side
every step of the way, thanks to the Family Medical Leave Act. Now a
battle is brewing over whether to change the law. That would affect
millions of families, like the Ices.
Implying that the government would take away Ices
leave needed to take care of her seriously ill daughter protected
under FMLA, Stone said, Regina Ice says changes to the law could be
devastating. Ice was then shown saying, I would have to make a
decision of whether to work or take care of my child. And nobody
should make that decision.
Deborah Ness, from the National Partnership for Women
and Families, added to the report, The last thing we need is to be
rolling back protections. According to its Web site, Nesss
organization opposes privatization of Social Security and supports
abortion and stem cell research, though she was not labeled as a
liberal advocate.
Contrary to what this report would have viewers
believe, neither the president nor small businesses are proposing to
take away Ices ability to care for her child. They are not rolling
back protections, but rather many groups, including the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce, Southwest Airlines, and Hallmark Cards, are
seeking reform to clarify the protections intended in the first
place. Their concern is workers exploiting the act, which leads to
lost productivity. Thus, for ABC to frame the story in the tragic
light of Ices situation was misleading.
Stone even reported on the reasons for reform. Michael
Eastman from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was featured on the report
saying, Unfortunately, there's a small but significant amount of
employees who have figured out how to use the regulations as a
shield for chronic attendance or tardiness problems. Stone then
went on to say, Businesses estimate abuses created by the law costs
them $20 billion a year. That's why they're calling for a stricter
definition of what constitutes a serious health condition under the
act.
Other problems that have been identified with the FMLA
are found in the Congressional Record. Rep. William Goodling (R-Pa.)
said of the FMLA on the House floor on May 19, 2000, problems
include: the administrative burden of allowing leave to be taken in
increments of as little as six minutes; the additional burdens from
overly broad and confusing regulations of the FMLA, not the least of
which is the Department of Labor's ever-expanding definition of
serious health condition; and inequities stemming from employers
with generous leave policies in effect being penalized under the
FMLA for having those policies.
These problems hurt businesses in a number of ways. One
example as presented before the House subcommittee on Energy Policy,
Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs on Nov. 17, 2004, by Nancy
McKeague, senior vice president of the Michigan Health and Hospital
Association, is when employees use the FMLA for chronic health
problems like migraines or asthma. With certification of a health
problem, like asthma, the employer must provide the employee with
intermittent leave whenever the condition flares up the employer
is not allowed to require an employee to verify that the absences
were indeed caused by the chronic condition.
ABC would have done its viewers a service by reporting
on the many problems the FMLA creates for employers rather than
using a tragic situation to raise unsubstantiated fears.
