A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the ``Flexible Leave Act'', aims to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. The primary goal is to allow all leave to be taken on an intermittent schedule. It specifically modifies section 102(b) regarding how leave is taken. Additionally, it amends section 103(b) to remove certain certification requirements for intermittent leave.
Yes· 3 of 17
- Scored +5
Would people with disabilities be better off under this?
Removing certification requirements and allowing intermittent leave significantly assists people managing long-term disabilities.
- Scored +4
Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities?
By allowing intermittent leave and removing certification hurdles, the bill provides better flexibility for those managing chronic health conditions.
- Scored +3
Would people in middle age be better off under this?
Middle-aged workers often face increased caregiving responsibilities which this bill's flexibility helps address.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased flexibility in leave schedules: Under Section 2(a), leave under certain subsections may be taken intermittently or on a reduced leave schedule, which provides more options for how leave is used.
-
Reduced documentation requirements: Section 2(b) amends section 103(b) by striking paragraphs (5), (6), and (7), which removes specific certification requirements for intermittent leave.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- There are no specific negative impacts or burdens for individuals or groups of people explicitly stated within the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Removing certification requirements and allowing intermittent leave significantly assists people managing long-term disabilities. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Reducing documentation requirements and increasing leave flexibility provides more security for low-income workers. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged workers often face increased caregiving responsibilities which this bill's flexibility helps address. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill offers greater flexibility for middle-income families managing health and caregiving needs. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill strengthens labor protections by providing more flexible leave options for workers. Would women be better off under this? — Increased leave flexibility often disproportionately benefits women who statistically handle more caregiving duties. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides increased flexibility for workers managing health or family needs. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides increased flexibility for workers managing health or family needs. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides increased flexibility for workers managing health or family needs. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides increased flexibility for workers managing health or family needs. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — The flexibility can assist seniors who may need to manage their own health or care for others intermittently. Would white Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides increased flexibility for workers managing health or family needs. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Younger workers often benefit from more flexible leave arrangements for managing life transitions or health.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — By allowing intermittent leave and removing certification hurdles, the bill provides better flexibility for those managing chronic health conditions. Does this make child care cost less? — Increased flexibility in leave schedules can help parents manage caregiving responsibilities more effectively. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — More flexible leave options can help workers maintain employment while managing health or family needs.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — The bill enhances worker protections by allowing more flexible leave schedules and reducing certification burdens.
- 2/11/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida