Search form

Portland, Oregon, Mandates Employer-Provided Sick Leave

By Scott Oborne and Mark A. Crabtree
  • March 15, 2013

Following examples set by San Francisco to the South, and Seattle to the North, the Portland, Oregon, City Council unanimously passed Portland’s new sick leave ordinance. The new law imposes significant burdens on employers in addition to mandating up to 40 hours of annual sick leave. The new sick leave entitlements apply to all private-sector employers, regardless of location of the employer’s primary place of business. The law goes into effect January 1, 2014.

Under the leave law, private employers with at least six employees will be required to provide qualifying employees up to 40 hours of paid sick leave per year. Employers with fewer than six employees still must provide up to 40 hours of unpaid sick leave per year. 

All employees, regardless of whether they are temporary, part-time or full-time, have the right to use protected sick leave if they work in Portland at least 240 hours within a calendar year. Employees based elsewhere, but who travel to Portland for business, accrue only benefits for paid work hours within the city limits and are subject to the 240-hour threshold. 

After the January 1, 2014, effective date, employees working in Portland will accrue sick leave at the minimum rate of one hour for every 30 hours worked. Newly hired employees accrue leave at the same 30:1 ratio from the outset of employment, but are subject to a 90-day waiting period before accrued leave may be taken. 

Unused sick time can be carried over to the following calendar year, but an employee’s annual use of sick time accrued under the new law is capped at 40 hours. 

Employers may not require employees wishing to take leave accrued under the new law to find a replacement worker, nor may employers require employees to work an alternate shift to make up for time missed. Conversely, if an employer permits shift trading and a shift is available, employees must be permitted to trade shifts to avoid using accrued sick leave. 

The law extends well beyond traditional “sick” leave. As an initial matter, the leave may be taken not only for an employee’s own illness, injury or preventive medical care, but also for a qualifying family member’s similar needs. “Family member” is broadly defined to include the employee’s children, parents, parents-in-law, grandparents, grandchildren and registered same-sex domestic partners. Additionally, sick leave may be taken for absences resulting from workplace or school closures, or for reasons related to domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking that affect the employee or the employee’s family members. 

The new law prohibits employers from taking any adverse action against employees who take leave accrued under the ordinance. Therefore, employers will find it difficult to enforce no-fault attendance policies lawfully in light of these new requirements. Further, because the new law mandates accrual and tracks usage on a calendar-year basis, employers with Portland-based employees likely will find it too onerous to implement time-off policies based on an employee’s hire date. In addition to these and other systemic changes that may be necessary, employers are required under the law to develop and disseminate policies advising employees of the procedure for reporting absences. Adding extra complexity, successor employers are required to recognize sick leave accrued under the new law. Finally, covered employers will be required to post a notice describing the new law. 

Covered employers that fail to comply with the sick leave obligations, including the new posting requirement, are subject to civil penalties. Employees who believe their employer interfered with or failed to provide them with the minimum benefits under the new law may bring an action for injunctive relief and back pay, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. 

Employers covered by the new requirements should review their existing policies carefully. While employers currently providing leave entitlements equal to or greater than Portland’s new requirements may be exempted from providing additional leave, that exemption applies only if the existing policies are co-extensive with the new requirements. Consequently, many employers will need to modify their policies and may need to negotiate changes in collective bargaining agreements to integrate the law’s new requirements. 

Jackson Lewis attorneys routinely work with employers of every size throughout Oregon on compliance and implementation strategies, including the many nuances of this new leave requirement. If you have any questions about this or other workplace developments, please contact the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work. 

 

©2013 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

February 5, 2016

Puerto Rico Supreme Court Scolds Employer for Interfering with Working Mother’s Breastfeeding Rights

February 5, 2016

Emphasizing that Puerto Rico legislation protects employees’ breastfeeding rights in the workplace and that maternity enjoys special judicial protection in the Commonwealth’s legal framework, the Puerto Rico Supreme Court has ruled that employers, public and private, regardless of their circumstances, must provide a “... Read More

February 4, 2016

Retail Employer Workplace News - Winter 2016

February 4, 2016

Top Five OSHA Changes to Watch for in 2016 Retailers should stay tuned in the year ahead to the busy agenda of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as it attempts to finalize significant rulemakings and guidance documents. OSHA initiatives on electronic injury and illness recordkeeping, employer safety incentive... Read More

January 29, 2016

What California Retail Employers Need to Know About Accommodating Pregnancy

January 29, 2016

Navigating the California laws on discrimination and accommodation of pregnant employees is a significant challenge for retail employers. The Golden State’s protections for pregnant employees are many and they differ from those of federal law and of other states. Pregnancy Disability Leave Law Under the Pregnancy Disability... Read More