A bill from an independent · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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
The "Guaranteed Paid Vacation Act" requires employers to provide paid annual leave to covered employees. Employees earn one hour of paid leave for every 25 hours worked, up to a maximum of 80 hours per year. This leave can be used for any reason and must include the maintenance of employment benefits. The bill establishes strict rules for how leave is used, requested, and compensated. It also includes enforcement mechanisms through the Secretary of Labor and a private right of action for employees.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +6
Would union members be better off under this?
The bill strengthens the ability of workers to secure and enforce their leave benefits through legal and union channels.
- Scored +5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The mandate for paid leave provides significant financial and wellness benefits to workers in many industries.
- Scored +5
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill expands federal oversight and the authority of the Secretary of Labor over private employers.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill imposes mandatory costs and significant administrative requirements on employers.
- Scored -2
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
The bill imposes new administrative and financial obligations on employers to provide paid leave and maintain records.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Earned Leave for Workers: Covered employees will earn one hour of paid annual leave for every 25 hours they work, providing a way to take paid time off (Section 3(a)(1)).
-
Flexibility of Use: Employees can use their earned paid annual leave for any reason (Section 3(b)(1)).
-
Protection of Benefits: Employers must maintain any employment benefits for a worker while they are taking their paid annual leave (Section 3(b)(7)(A)).
-
Job Security and Non-Discrimination: It is unlawful for an employer to fire or discriminate against an individual for exercising their rights under this Act, such as using their earned leave (Section 5(a)(2)).
-
Compensation Upon Separation: If an employee is terminated, the employer must pay them for any unused earned paid annual leave (Section 3(d)(1)).
-
Legal Recourse: Employees have a private right of action to recover damages, including lost wages and benefits, if their rights are violated (Section 6(a)(3)(B)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Leave Limits: An employer is not required to provide more than 80 hours of paid annual leave during any 12-month period (Section 3(a)(2)(A)).
-
Restrictions on Leave Use: Employers may place "limited, reasonable restrictions" on the scheduling of leave for bona fide business reasons and may reject scheduling requests (Section 3(c)(3)(A)).
-
Notice Requirements: Employees are generally required to provide notice of their intent to use leave at least one day before, but no more than 14 days before, the intended leave (Section 3(c)(2)(C)).
-
Leave Expiration: Employers are not required to offer alternative times to employees if the leave they are trying to use is set to expire (Section 3(c)(3)(B)(ii)(II)).
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 union members be better off under this? — The bill strengthens the ability of workers to secure and enforce their leave benefits through legal and union channels. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The mandate for paid leave provides significant financial and wellness benefits to workers in many industries. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class employees gain more flexible and secure paid time off for their work life. Would men be better off under this? — The bill provides gender-neutral benefits for all covered employees. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged workers benefit from predictable paid time off for personal or family needs. Would women be better off under this? — Increased leave access can support work-life balance for women in various life stages. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Younger workers entering the workforce benefit from guaranteed leave and job security protections. Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill imposes mandatory costs and significant administrative requirements on employers.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal oversight and the authority of the Secretary of Labor over private employers. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill establishes clear legal recourse and private rights of action for employees whose rights are violated. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires employers to provide specific notices and maintain transparent leave tracking systems.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — The bill supports labor rights by allowing union members to use grievance and arbitration procedures to enforce leave provisions. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill imposes new administrative and financial obligations on employers to provide paid leave and maintain records.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The bill provides guaranteed paid leave which can improve financial stability for low-wage workers.
- 8/6/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
Ruben GallegoDemocrat · Arizona
Edward MarkeyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Christopher MurphyDemocrat · Connecticut
Alex PadillaDemocrat · California