Philadelphia City Council approved a measure last week that will allow victims of domestic violence, including those who suffer abuse from a same-sex partner, to seek treatment without risking their jobs.
The body unanimously approved “Entitlement to Leave Due to Domestic or Sexual Violence” on Nov. 19.
Council had unanimously passed the measure in October 2008, and the law went into effect in January of this year; last year’s legislation, however, contained a “sunset” clause that mandates expiration on Jan. 5, 2010.
The legislation, which has now been extended into perpetuity, requires employers with more than 50 staffers to provide up to eight weeks of unpaid leave, and those with fewer than 50 workers up to four weeks of leave, if an employee or his/her family member experiences domestic abuse, sexual abuse or stalking.
Employees can take the leave to seek medical attention for physical injuries, undergo counseling or therapy, make safety plans, seek legal assistance or to get counsel from a domestic-violence agency and will be able to retain their positions and benefits. The law further guards against employer retaliation.
Family members are defined as “spouses or persons who have been spouses, persons living as spouses or who lived as spouses, parents and children, other persons related by consanguinity or affinity, current or former sexual or intimate partners, persons who share biological parenthood or ‘Life Partners,’” referring to the city’s Life Partner registry for same-sex couples, although couples do not need to be registered with the city to make a claim under the law.
Councilman-at-Large Bill Greenlee (D), who spearheaded the legislation, said he saw no opposition to the inclusion of same-sex couples in the bill’s provisions.
“I never recall that being brought up,” Greenlee said. “The issue of same-sex partners was not a problem as far as I saw.”
When the bill was introduced last year, it faced some opposition from the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce and the Nutter administration, who Greenlee said contended the bill could be taken advantage of by employees to the detriment of area businesses.
“Originally, I wanted it to be permanent right away, but because of the objections, some Council members decided to pretty much just call a bluff and do it for one year to prove that the fears expressed aren’t valid, and then we could enact it permanently,” Greenlee said. “That suggestion eventually turned out to be a good strategy, because this time around we saw no opposition from the chamber or the administration because there was no evidence that it was abused.”
Greenlee said there was a “very small amount” of employees who took a leave under the law, which he said he expected.
“We never thought it would be a ton of people. But for the occasional person who has to choose between taking care of their problem or keeping their job, we wanted that person protected. The fears about this were really unfounded, and we knew it wasn’t going to be affecting every business, but we thought it should be available for those people who need it. We felt from the beginning, and most domestic-violence advocates will agree, that the problem isn’t overreporting, but rather underreporting.”
Jen Colletta can be reached at [email protected].