Employee definition modified for purposes of earned sick and safe time.
HF1057 amends Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time law by narrowing who counts as an “employee” for purposes of accruing and using sick and safe time. The bill keeps the general rule that employees include temporary and part-time workers who are expected to work at least 80 hours in a year in Minnesota, but it preserves and clarifies several exclusions from coverage.
Under the bill, independent contractors remain excluded, as do volunteer firefighters, paid on-call firefighters, volunteer ambulance attendants, and paid on-call ambulance personnel. The bill also continues to exclude elected officials and individuals appointed to fill vacancies in elected offices on legislative or governing bodies. In addition, it excludes certain farm workers employed by a farmer, family farm, or family farm corporation when the employer has five or fewer employees, or when the work lasts 28 days or less per year.
The bill would amend Minnesota Statutes section 181.9445, subdivision 5, which defines “employee” for the state’s earned sick and safe time requirements. Its practical effect would be to limit which workers are covered by the earned sick and safe time law, especially in small-scale agricultural settings and certain public-safety and public-office roles. Employers in those excluded categories would not be required to provide earned sick and safe time to the affected workers under this definition.
No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears targeted and technical rather than expansive, suggesting a policy adjustment focused on clarifying or preserving existing exclusions rather than broadening benefits. The authorship by multiple representatives indicates some legislative interest, but the available record does not show how controversial the proposal was.
The most likely points of contention are the carve-outs for agricultural workers and for volunteer or paid on-call emergency personnel. Supporters may view these exclusions as necessary to reflect the seasonal, small-business, or volunteer nature of those jobs, while critics could argue that they create unequal access to earned sick and safe time for workers who still perform labor in Minnesota. Another possible area of disagreement is whether the 80-hour threshold and the specific exclusions strike the right balance between worker protections and employer flexibility.