Definition of misuse of earned sick and safe time provided.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Patty Mueller

Defines ESST misuse and lets employers require documentation for suspected pattern of misuse, while protecting legitimate ESST use.

Introduction and first reading, referred to Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

#employmentandeconomicdevelopmentdepartment

Purpose and main intent

HF 4762 defines what constitutes misuse of earned sick and safe time (ESST) and clarifies when employers may require documentation for suspected misuse. The bill adds specific definitions and conditions around misuse and patterns of misuse, with an emphasis on distinguishing legitimate ESST usage from improper use and ensuring employees are not retroactively penalized for using ESST appropriately.

Key provisions and changes

1) New definition of misuse (Subdivision 3a)

Misuse is defined as an employee using earned sick and safe time for a purpose not covered by the general ESST protections.

When misuse occurs, it is not protected by the ESST protections found in Minn. Stat. §§ 181.9445 to 181.9448.

2) New provision on pattern or clear instance of suspected misuse (Subdivision 3b)

Employers may require reasonable documentation when there is a pattern or clear instance of suspected misuse.

A pattern or clear instance includes:

Repeated ESST use on a scheduled work day immediately before or after a scheduled day off, vacation, or holiday.
Repeated use of ESST in increments of less than 30 minutes at the start or end of a shift.
Use of ESST on a day for which the employer previously denied the employee’s request to take other paid leave.
Documentation or evidence that conflicts with the employee’s claimed ESST use.

If documentation is required, it must be conducted in accordance with other related provisions in subdivision 3 (paragraphs b–f).

The act of requesting reasonable documentation under this subdivision is not considered retaliation under subdivision 6.

3) Effective date

Both new subdivisions (3a and 3b) become effective the day after final enactment.

Who or what is affected

Employees earning ESST: The definition of what constitutes misuse directly affects eligibility for protection under ESST statutes.

Employers: Given the new authority to request documentation for suspected misuse, employers have a clearer mechanism to address suspected misuse patterns while needing to adhere to nondiscrimination and retaliation rules.

Human resources and payroll practices: May need to adjust to track ESST usage patterns, collect documentation when warranted, and ensure compliance with the new definitions.

Procedural and timeline aspects

The bill codifies new definitions and documentation requirements and states they take effect the day after final enactment.

It interacts with Minn. Stat. sections 181.9445–181.9448, which cover ESST protections, by carving out misuse from those protections and outlining when documentation can be requested.

There is an explicit allowance for employers to seek documentation in cases of suspected misuse patterns, provided it aligns with the bill’s defined criteria.

Considerations

The bill aims to deter improper use of ESST while protecting legitimate usage.

It introduces measurable indicators of suspected misuse, such as timing around days off or time increments, and potential conflicts with other leave requests.

Stakeholders may evaluate how the new definitions interact with existing ESST policies, reporting requirements, and anti-retaliation protections.

Bill