This bill amends the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to establish an alternative eligibility test for paraprofessionals and education support staff (ESPs). Instead of the traditional hours‑worked test, a covered educational employee qualifies if they worked at least 60 percent of the total monthly hours expected for their job as assigned in the previous school year; employers must keep a file of those expected monthly hours and submit it to the Secretary of Labor under regulations the Secretary will prescribe.
The measure also directs the Secretary to issue methods for calculating FMLA leave for these employees. The change targets part‑time and school‑year staff who currently fall short of the FMLA’s 1,250‑hour threshold, while imposing new documentation, regulatory, and operational requirements on school employers and the Department of Labor.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds an alternative hours‑of‑service test to the FMLA for paraprofessionals and ESPs: meet the test by working at least 60% of the job’s applicable total monthly hours as assigned in the previous school year. It requires employers to maintain a file of those expected monthly hours and directs the Secretary of Labor to publish calculation methods under existing statutory authority.
Who It Affects
Local education agencies, school districts, charter schools that are educational agencies under federal law, and the workforce categories described as paraprofessionals and education support staff (bus drivers, custodians, food service workers, clerical staff, health aides, skilled trades, etc.). State and private schools receiving federal funds may be in scope through the cross‑referenced definitions.
Why It Matters
The bill removes a common barrier to FMLA use for part‑time and seasonal school employees while creating a federal documentation obligation and triggering Department of Labor rulemaking. HR practitioners, benefits administrators, and labor counsel will need to adapt leave systems, collective bargaining language, and staffing plans.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts a new subparagraph into the FMLA’s definitions to treat certain school employees differently when determining eligibility for leave. Rather than counting actual clocked hours against the FMLA’s 1,250‑hour standard, a paraprofessional or ESP will be deemed to meet the hours requirement if they worked at least 60 percent of the ‘total monthly hours expected’ for their position as assigned during the previous school year.
That creates a forward‑looking baseline tied to an employee’s assigned workload, rather than strictly to cumulative hours worked over the prior 12 months.
Employers must keep a record — “on file with the Secretary” — listing the total monthly hours expected for each covered employee’s job description and duties for each school year. The bill explicitly gives the Secretary authority to prescribe regulations governing this filing, which implies federal standards for the format, timing, and content of those records and for how the Department of Labor will verify them.To operationalize how leave will be calculated for covered educational employees, the bill directs the Secretary to issue methods under the FMLA (referencing section 108).
That will cover how to prorate weeks of leave for workers with school‑year schedules, how to treat breaks in assignment, and how to reconcile the alternative hours test with existing FMLA calculations (for example, converting ‘‘monthly expected hours’’ into an annualized or prorated leave entitlement). The text also pulls established statutory definitions by reference: it adopts the ESEA definition of “paraprofessional” and uses the General Education Provisions Act definition of “educational agency or institution,” while listing job categories that fall under “education support staff.”The immediate practical effect is twofold: more part‑time/seasonal education employees become eligible for FMLA protections, and school employers face a new federal recordkeeping and compliance obligation plus ensuing rulemaking risk.
The Secretary’s forthcoming regulations (the text requires them but not their content) will be critical to resolve how the 60 percent test functions across variable schedules, new hires, substitutes, and employees with multiple assignments.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill amends 29 U.S.C. 2611(2) by adding a new subparagraph (F) that creates an alternative eligibility route specifically for paraprofessionals and education support staff.
It sets the eligibility threshold at 60% of the job’s applicable total monthly hours as assigned in the previous school year, rather than requiring 1,250 actual hours worked in the prior 12 months.
Employers must maintain — and keep on file with the Secretary of Labor under implementing regulations — the total monthly hours expected for each covered employee for each school year.
The statute defines ‘‘paraprofessional’’ by reference to ESEA section 8101(37) and enumerates categories included in ‘‘education support staff’’ (clerical, transportation, food and nutrition, custodial, health and student services, technical services, skilled trades).
Section 3 adds a requirement that the Secretary provide methods for calculating FMLA leave for covered educational employees, tying implementation to DOL rulemaking (and referencing section 108 for the regulatory framework).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the measure the ‘‘ESP, Paraprofessional, and Education Support Staff Family Leave Act.’
Alternative hours‑of‑service determination (60% test)
Establishes the core eligibility mechanism: a covered educational employee meets the FMLA hours requirement if they worked not less than 60% of the applicable total monthly hours expected for the job as assigned in the previous school year. Practically, this creates an alternative, assignment‑based standard that school HR systems must be able to compute and compare to an employee’s assigned schedule rather than relying solely on clocked hours.
Employer recordkeeping and federal filing obligation
Requires each employer of a covered educational employee to maintain a file with the Secretary specifying the total monthly hours expected for that employee’s job description and duties for each school year, subject to DOL regulations. This elevates what has typically been internal schedule data to a federally regulated record, with implications for audit, privacy, and how districts document assignments and temporary changes.
Definitions and cross‑references
Defines ‘‘covered educational employee’’ to include ‘paraprofessional’ and ‘education support staff,’ adopts the ESEA definition of paraprofessional, and lists job categories covered by ESP. It also references the General Education Provisions Act definition of ‘educational agency or institution,’ pulling existing federal definitions into FMLA eligibility determinations and potentially widening scope to entities that meet those statutory definitions.
Secretary of Labor to issue calculation methods for leave
Directs the Secretary to provide methods for calculating the amount of FMLA leave for covered educational employees, in accordance with section 108. This is an implementation mandate rather than a substantive rule in the statute; the substance of how weeks or hours of leave are prorated, how seasonal breaks are treated, and how the 60% test converts into leave entitlement will be established through DOL rulemaking and guidance.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Employment across all five countries.
Explore Employment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Paraprofessionals and education support staff (ESP): Part‑time and school‑year employees who previously fell short of the 1,250‑hour FMLA test gain a clear statutory pathway to eligibility tied to their assigned workload, improving access to protected leave.
- Families and caregivers of covered employees: Greater access to FMLA reduces the risk that caregivers must choose between job loss and caregiving duties, increasing economic stability for households dependent on ESP wages.
- Unions and worker advocates representing school staff: The measure strengthens a collective bargaining and advocacy tool for members, potentially increasing leverage in negotiations over schedules, leave policies, and staffing.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local education agencies and school employers: Districts and schools must update scheduling and payroll systems, produce expected‑hours records, respond to DOL requests or audits, and potentially absorb substitute and staffing costs when more employees take leave.
- Department of Labor: The agency must draft regulations, issue calculation methodologies, and handle filings and enforcement for a new category of federally regulated records, requiring administrative resources.
- Smaller schools and charter operators with limited HR capacity: These employers face disproportionate administrative burdens to document and submit expected monthly hours and to interpret forthcoming DOL rules, increasing compliance costs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill attempts to resolve a fairness problem—part‑time and school‑year education workers lack access to FMLA—by substituting an assignment‑based hours test, but doing so shifts the burden to employers and the Department of Labor to define, document, and enforce that test; expanding coverage therefore improves worker protections at the cost of increased administrative complexity, potential staffing disruption, and legal uncertainty about how the new test will work in the messy reality of school schedules.
The statute creates an alternative eligibility path but leaves essential operational questions to the Secretary’s rulemaking. Key ambiguities include how to calculate ‘‘applicable total monthly hours expected’’ for employees with rotating assignments, split roles across buildings or programs, or staggered schedules; how to treat new hires who lack a prior school‑year assignment; and whether substitute or emergency assignments alter eligibility.
The requirement to keep a file ‘‘with the Secretary (in accordance with such regulations as the Secretary may prescribe)’’ flags a federal filing regime, but the statute does not specify timing, format, or privacy protections for those records.
Those gaps create practical implementation tradeoffs. If the Department of Labor issues flexible guidance, employers may face uneven application across districts and potential legal challenges; if the agency issues a strict, prescriptive rule, compliance costs and staffing burdens could be high.
Collective bargaining agreements that already set assignment and scheduling practices may either mitigate or complicate implementation, and the bill’s cross‑references to ESEA and GEPA pull federal education definitions into FMLA administration in ways that could expand covered employers beyond traditional public school districts. Enforcement, audit capacity, and data security for the federal filing are unresolved operational headaches that will determine how impactful the eligibility change proves to be in practice.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.