Religious order exemption from the Minnesota Paid Leave Law establishment
Summary
SF 3433 amends Minnesota’s Paid Leave Law to add an explicit exemption for members of religious orders when they are performing duties required by the order. The bill also retains the existing exclusion for duly ordained or licensed ministers serving in the exercise of their ministry. In practical terms, the measure narrows the scope of “covered employment” under the paid leave program by clarifying that certain religious service is not treated as covered employment for purposes of paid leave coverage.
The bill does not create a new paid leave benefit or change eligibility rules for most workers; instead, it adjusts the definition of who is included in the state paid leave system. Entities or workers excluded under the section may still opt into coverage through a procedure established by the commissioner, and the commissioner retains authority to adopt rules to further define covered employment and related criteria. The bill was introduced in the Senate and referred to the Jobs and Economic Development Committee.
Impact
The bill would amend Minnesota Statutes 2024, section 268B.01, subdivision 15, which defines “covered employment” under the Minnesota Paid Leave Law. Its main legal effect is to expressly exclude members of religious orders, in addition to ordained or licensed ministers, from mandatory paid leave coverage when performing duties required by their order or ministry. This would affect religious organizations and their members by removing those services from the base paid leave payroll/coverage framework, while leaving intact the commissioner’s authority to allow opt-in coverage for excluded entities and to adopt implementing rules.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a targeted technical or religious-liberty accommodation rather than a broad policy change. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials, so there is no evidence of formal opposition or support in the record here. The bill’s introduction suggests an intent to clarify and narrow the reach of the paid leave law for religious workers, which is likely to be viewed favorably by supporters of religious exemptions and neutrally or cautiously by those focused on uniform coverage.
Contention
The likely point of contention is whether religious orders should be carved out from the Minnesota Paid Leave Law and, if so, how broad that exemption should be. Supporters would likely argue that members of religious orders and ministers should not be treated as ordinary covered employees when performing religious duties. Critics could argue that the exemption reduces worker protections or creates unequal treatment among employees performing similar services. The bill preserves an opt-in pathway, which may mitigate some concerns, but the scope of the exemption itself remains the central issue.