Senate Bill 622 would create a new Article 3A in Chapter 95 of the North Carolina General Statutes establishing a statewide earned paid sick leave requirement for covered employees. The bill allows workers to accrue one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked, beginning at the start of employment, and permits use of that time for an employee’s own illness or preventive care, care for an immediate family member, or needs arising from domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. It sets annual accrual caps of 32 hours for employees of small businesses and 56 hours for employees of other employers, with carryover subject to those limits, and it requires reinstatement of unused leave if a worker is rehired within 90 days.
The bill also establishes notice, posting, recordkeeping, confidentiality, and enforcement requirements. Employers would have to inform employees of their rights, may request certification after more than three consecutive workdays, and may not require employees to find replacement workers or disclose unnecessary medical or abuse-related details. The Commissioner of Labor would administer and enforce the law, and employees could recover unpaid sick time, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs through administrative or court action. The act would take effect January 1, 2026, and would apply to covered employment on or after that date, with a delayed application for employees covered by existing collective bargaining agreements until those agreements expire or are modified.
The bill’s impact on state law would be significant because North Carolina currently does not have a statewide earned paid sick leave mandate. If enacted, it would add a new labor standards article to Chapter 95 and also expand the state’s anti-retaliation statute to protect employees who assert rights under the new paid sick leave law. It would affect most private-sector employers and employees in the state, while exempting certain categories of workers already excluded from wage-and-hour protections and bona fide volunteers.
Because there were no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented debate or vote history to gauge formal legislative sentiment. Based on the bill text alone, the measure is framed as a public health, family stability, and worker protection policy, with emphasis on contagious disease prevention, domestic violence leave, and access for low-wage workers. The overall tone of the bill is strongly supportive of paid sick leave, but the inclusion of business-size caps, exemptions, and a delayed effective date for existing collective bargaining agreements suggests an effort to balance worker protections with employer concerns.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the cost and administrative burden on employers, especially small businesses, versus the public health and equity benefits cited in the findings. Employers may also focus on the accrual mandate, recordkeeping and notice obligations, and the private right of action with liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees. Supporters are likely to emphasize that the bill addresses gaps in access for low-wage workers, women, and workers of color, and that it protects employees from retaliation when they use earned sick time.
The bill would create a new statewide earned paid sick leave entitlement in Chapter 95, requiring covered employers to provide accrued sick time for specified health and safety-related reasons and establishing enforcement by the Commissioner of Labor and the courts. It would also amend the state’s retaliation law to expressly protect employees who exercise rights under the new paid sick leave article. The measure would affect private employers statewide, with limited exemptions and special rules for small businesses and existing collective bargaining agreements.
No committee discussion or vote record was provided, so there is no formal legislative sentiment reflected in the materials. The bill’s findings and structure indicate strong pro-worker and pro-public-health support, with an emphasis on family care, disease prevention, and protections for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. At the same time, the bill’s small-business cap and delayed applicability for some unionized workers suggest an attempt to address employer concerns and make the proposal more politically and operationally workable.
Likely areas of contention include whether North Carolina should impose a statewide paid sick leave mandate at all, the compliance costs for employers, and the administrative burden of tracking accrual, notice, certification, and recordkeeping. Small businesses may object to the mandate even with a lower annual cap, while worker advocates are likely to argue that the bill is necessary to protect low-wage employees who currently lack paid sick time. The private enforcement provisions, liquidated damages, and attorneys’ fees may also draw scrutiny from business interests.