As previously reported, on Oct. 2, 2020, the Michigan Supreme Court invalidated post-Apr. 30, 2020 Executive Orders that Governor Whitmer issued related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
With 53 presumptive-positive cases of the novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) as of March 15, Michigan is taking proactive steps to reduce transmission of the virus.
The end of 2019 brought more nuances, but also resolutions to paid sick leave (PSL) state and local laws. For instance, challenges to the Michigan PSL law and Alabama preemption law were resolved, but the PSL turbulence in Texas continues as we await a decision from the Texas Supreme Court on whether it will wade into the PSL controversy.
On Dec. 18, 2019, the Michigan Supreme Court said no, it would not issue an advisory opinion on the legality of the recently enacted state PSL law.
The paid sick leave (PSL) turbulence in Texas garnered most of the PSL headlines in the third quarter. How that turbulence ends will determine the fate of PSL ordinances in Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio.
The Michigan Supreme Court will wade into the clash involving the constitutionality of the state’s Paid Medical Leave Act, at least to decide whether to consider the substance of that clash.
The Michigan Paid Medical Leave Act requires employers in Michigan to provide their employees with accrued paid medical leave to use for their own or their family members’ medical needs and for purposes related to domestic violence and sexual assault. The new law will become effective in March 2019.
On Dec. 13, Michigan GOP Governor Rick Snyder signed into law the bill amending the recently enacted Paid Sick Leave (PSL) law, putting the finishing touch on a two-step political strategy to have the legislature craft a PSL bill rather than have voters consider a bill crafted by PSL advocates.
On Sept. 5, Michigan lawmakers adopted the paid sick leave initiative that otherwise would have been presented to voters in November. The GOP-controlled Senate and House adopted the initiative by wide margins.