Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Minnesota House Bill HF4569

Introduced
3/23/26  

Caption

Definition of "seasonal employee" under the Minnesota Paid Leave Law modified.

Summary

HF4569 amends Minnesota’s Paid Leave Law to expand the definition of a “seasonal employee” in the hospitality industry. Under current law, a seasonal employee is generally limited to working no more than 150 days in a consecutive 52-week period; this bill increases that limit to 180 days. The bill also keeps the existing requirement that the employer be a hospitality business with a seasonal revenue pattern, and it continues to require employer certification to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) that the worker and employer meet the statutory criteria. The bill also updates the related benefit-denial provision so that an applicant classified as a seasonal employee remains ineligible for paid leave benefits or protected leave during the seasonal period, but if the worker stays employed beyond 180 days, eligibility would begin the Sunday after the 180-day threshold is completed. In practical terms, the bill would allow hospitality employers to retain seasonal workers for a longer period before those workers gain access to Minnesota Paid Leave benefits and job-protected leave under chapter 268B.

Impact

HF4569 would amend Minnesota Statutes sections 268B.01 and 268B.06, changing how seasonal employment is defined and administered under the Minnesota Paid Leave Law. The main legal effect is to extend the seasonal employment cutoff from 150 to 180 days for hospitality workers, which delays when such workers become eligible for paid leave benefits and protected leave. It also preserves the employer notice and certification process with DEED, meaning employers must still affirm compliance and notify the department if a worker no longer qualifies as seasonal.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available record suggests a technical, employer-focused adjustment rather than a highly contentious policy change. The bill appears aimed at aligning the seasonal worker definition with hospitality industry staffing patterns and giving employers more flexibility in using seasonal labor. No formal opposition or support is documented in the provided materials, so overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll-call history.

Contention

The likely point of contention is the tradeoff between employer flexibility and worker access to paid leave and protected leave. Hospitality employers may support the longer 180-day seasonal window because it better matches extended tourism and event seasons, while worker advocates could object that the change delays benefits for employees who work for a substantial portion of the year. Another possible issue is administrative enforcement, since employers must certify eligibility and notify DEED when a worker no longer qualifies, which may raise compliance questions.

Companion Bills

MN SF4862

Similar To Seasonal employee definition under the Minnesota Paid Leave Law modification

Previously Filed As

MN SF4862

Seasonal employee definition under the Minnesota Paid Leave Law modification

MN HF1976

Minnesota Paid Leave Law modified.

MN SF2466

Minnesota Paid Leave Law modification

MN HF2269

Penalties on employers for failure to notify employees about the Minnesota Paid Leave Law delayed.

MN SF1771

Minnesota Paid Leave Law repeal

MN SF2277

Minnesota Paid Leave Law repeal

MN HF915

Small local government employers exempted from the Minnesota Paid Leave Law.

MN SF2399

Small local government employers exemption from the Minnesota Paid Leave Law

MN SF1793

Small employers exemption from the Minnesota Paid Leave Law until January 1, 2028

MN HF11

Minnesota Paid Leave Law implementation delayed by one year.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.