Minnesota legislators adopted a lot of major policies in this year's session, including actions to support workers in many different fields. State employees are cheering the provisions.

A new statewide paid-leave program is among the highlights as Democrats pushed through a range of proposals with their majorities.

The Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, which represents 15,000 state workers, was a key supporter of the paid-leave plan. Its president, Megan Dayton, said there were other victories, too. Collectively, she said, she feels they'll establish a new era for the state's workforce.

"It's a historic investment," she said. "It's also a breath of fresh air with programs and policies that, in my opinion, echo the spirit of FDR's New Deal."

According to MAPE, pension changes are a big win for its members, including a one-time 2.5% cost-of-living adjustment for retirees. Advocates were also able to secure back pay for state workers in the event of a future government shutdown.

Republicans and some business groups have criticized some of the plans, namely the paid-leave program, set to begin in 2026. The National Federation of Independent Business in Minnesota described it as "complex employment regulations and severe penalties that will create more headaches for Main Street."

However, Dayton said whether it's paid leave or the other policies signed into law, Minnesota is in a better position to attract workers, including state government.

"Recruitment and retention is a really difficult piece of the workforce for everybody right now," she said, "and we think that many of the provisions made through this legislative session will contribute to making the state of Minnesota an employer of choice."

As for other workplace changes, the Legislature broadened protections for nursing mothers and pregnant employees. That includes allowing for a pregnant worker to take longer restroom, food and water breaks as an accommodation without being required to provide documentation.

A Colorado law passed in 1943 amid intense big-business and white-supremacist campaigns to block worker organizing has suppressed unionization in the state, according to a new report.

Jennifer Sherer, deputy director of state policy and research at the Economic Policy Institute and the report's co-author, said state lawmakers have an opportunity to level the playing field at a time when a growing number of workers are looking to unions to improve working conditions, wages and address rapidly growing economic inequality.

"Colorado is one of the states in the country that still has a very old law on the books that creates obstacles for workers who want to form unions," Sherer pointed out. "This year, the Legislature is looking at finally repealing that very old law."

Under current law, if Colorado workers vote to unionize, they must then call a second election and win by a supermajority of 75%, in order to negotiate a contract with their bosses. Senate Bill 5 to repeal the old law has 392 registered lobbyists and fewer than one in four support the bill that cleared the Senate and now heads to the House.

Sherer noted requiring two elections means Colorado workers face extra obstacles to unionizing, on top of opposition from what has become a union-busting industry. Employers have been charged with violating federal labor laws in four out of 10 union elections.

"Too often, employers are stepping over the line and illegally disciplining, firing, threatening or retaliating against workers when they try to organize," Sherer explained. "There are very few consequences when employers do that."

Colorado's union membership is now 22% below the national average, in line with antiunion states with so-called right-to-work laws in place. Sherer added the effects of low unionization rates on Colorado workers are also similar.

"Workers end up with lower wages, fewer benefits, less safe workplaces," Sherer outlined. "As union membership has declined in recent years, income inequality across the state is increasing at a really rapid pace."


get more stories like this via email

This Sunday, most of the United States will "spring forward" for daylight saving time, which means losing an hour of sleep.

Dr. Deepa Burman, associate professor of pediatrics and co-director of the Pediatric Sleep Evaluation Center at the University of Pittsburgh, said the time change disrupts the body's internal, social and natural clocks, and can lead to irritability and mood issues. She pointed out research also links the shift to workplace and economic effects.

"Studies have shown that in the United States, we actually lose anywhere from $400 million to $600 million a year because of not only loss of workplace productivity, because people are more tired at their workplace, but also increased calls of absenteeism," she said.

Burman noted the American Academy of Sleep Medicine supports permanent "standard time," arguing it is better for people's internal clocks. Some describe "springing forward" for daylight saving time as like shifting to a new time zone without traveling.

Burman emphasized daylight saving time may also be harmful to some people's health, as research has shown the chances of heart attack go up by 6% when people lose that hour of sleep.

"There is an increased risk of stroke by around 8%," Burman added. "Motor vehicle accidents actually increase by 6% in the week following the time change."

Burman recommended Pennsylvanians try adjusting to time changes with small steps, such as shifting your bedtime by 15 minutes each night before the time change, update nondigital clocks the night before, get plenty of morning light and dim screens in the evening.

Advocates for people with disabilities in Tennessee are concerned about the potential impact of a lawsuit challenging Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

The Texas-led case, Texas v. Becerra, could weaken protections against discrimination for people with disabilities in federally funded programs.

Donna DeStefano, assistant executive director of the Tennessee Disability Coalition, warned that rolling back these protections could lead to widespread exclusion for people with disabilities. She emphasized that Section 504 has been a key Civil Rights law ensuring equal opportunities for individuals with disabilities.

"If somebody comes into a school situation or a health-care situation and has a disability, they're not automatically denied," she explained. "Pre-Section 504, there was no legal reason that people could not be discriminated against, and they were."

DeStefano noted that Section 504 was one of the first laws to support disabled civilians, thanks to Judy Heumann and fellow activists. Their record-breaking sit-in helped secure protections against disability discrimination in federally funded programs.

DeStefano noted anyone receiving federal funding cannot discriminate based on disability. During COVID, some people with disabilities were denied treatment at medical facilities, which violates Section 504. This led some states to update their crisis care standards to prevent discrimination.

"This law protects that, and this law looks now at increasing accessibility in medical equipment," she continued. "There are things like examination tables that are accessible, that can go up and down. There are weight scales that people could roll onto, if they were in a wheelchair."

DeStefano said Section 504 bans discrimination against people living with a disability by the federal government. This law, which predates the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, ensures equal access. Eliminating Section 504 would remove key protections and allow disability-based discrimination.