Methods: Data from the 2006-2019 Current Population Survey (CPS) Basic Monthly files, accessed via IPUMS, were used to identify workers and absences by reason-for-absence in the previous week in five states that implemented PSL mandates between 2009 and 2016. The sample was limited to fulltime workers ages 16-64 years. Difference-in-differences models were estimated to exploit variation in PSL coverage between public and private sector workers and the timing of PSL mandate implementation on illness-related-leave taking and overall absenteeism. Stratified analyses test for heterogenous impacts by subgroups most impacted by mandates.
Results: Between 2006 and 2019, 10.8% of workers reported at least a partial absence in the previous week: 2.2% of workers reported absences that were illness related. The implementation of PSL mandates led to an increase in illness-related leave-taking among private sector workers of 0.34 percentage points (p=0.08), but decreased absences for other reasons by 1.03 percentage points (p<0.05) and did not significantly change absences overall. Latinx workers significantly increased the rate of illness-related absences by 0.69 percentage points (p<0.05) and significantly decreased absences for other reasons by 1.68 percentage points (p<0.05), with no change in overall absences or for illness-related leave taking were observed for Black or White workers.
Conclusion and Implications: Mandates appear to increase leave-taking due to illness among private sector workers who otherwise are most likely to lack access to PSL, while not increasing overall absenteeism. These findings – which focus on workers most likely to gain coverage via mandates, support previous findings that PSL mandates do not adversely impact employers or employees. Deeper understanding of the impacts of PSL on workers and employers supports advocacy toward family supportive policies.