Summary#
SB-360, “An Act To Amend Title 19 Of The Delaware Code Relating To The Family And Medical Leave Insurance Program,” would amend Delaware law on the Family and Medical Leave Insurance Program. Its stated goal is to make workers eligible based on their hours of service even if they have worked for an employer for less than 12 months.
- It would remove the requirement that a covered individual have worked for the employer for at least 12 months.
- It would keep the requirement to have worked at least 1,250 hours for that employer during the previous 12 months. Federal FMLA legal standards would apply when counting those hours.
- Applicants would still have to meet the program’s administrative requirements and submit an application.
- The bill is at the introduced stage and is not law. The parent Act was not supplied, so the full current law and surrounding program rules could not be verified. The bill’s text identifies the 12-month employment requirement it would remove.
What it means for you#
- Workers applying for program leave: If you meet the 1,250-hour requirement in less than 12 months, the bill would remove the separate 12-month employment condition. You would still need to meet the other requirements and apply.
- Employers: The change concerns which workers meet the definition of a covered individual. The bill does not set out new employer procedures.
- Everyone else: The supplied text does not directly change other program rules, such as the types or amount of benefits.
Money#
No publicly available information.
- The bill text contains no cost estimate or funding provision.
What is unclear#
- The supplied text does not explain the program’s administrative requirements or how applications are handled.
- It does not state when the change would take effect.
- It does not describe benefit amounts, the kinds of leave covered, or how this eligibility change interacts with other program rules.
- The parent Act was not supplied, so these details could not be checked against the full current law.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to avoid excluding workers who have already met the 1,250-hour requirement but have not yet worked for their employer for 12 months.
- A possible argument for the change is that eligibility would turn on the hours worked during the previous year, rather than also requiring a minimum length of employment.
Case against#
- One concern is that removing the 12-month condition would allow some workers to qualify earlier than under the current wording.
- The bill does not explain how the change would affect application handling or program costs.