Skip to main content

By Diane Harris

CLASP comments in support of the Family Care Act. The Family Care Act would establish a paid family and medical leave program in Pennsylvania, a historic feat that would significantly improve the health and well-being of workers and their families while driving economic growth and cost savings for employers. and promote GDP growth and cost savings for employers. This program would enable workers to navigate major life events, such as welcoming a new child, recovering from a serious illness or injury, or caring for a loved one, without jeopardizing their employment, financial security, or their loved ones’ health and safety.

Read the comment here.

By Molly Weston Williamson, Nat Baldino, and Marianne Bellesorte

Fourteen states (including Washington, D.C.) have passed paid family and medical leave laws. These state paid leave programs have collectively enabled millions of workers to take the time needed for their health and family without compromising their economic security. As efforts toward passing a national, comprehensive paid leave policy continue, more states look to create their own paid leave laws, building on the strong foundation laid by these nation-leading states.

In June 2024, Family Values @ Work (FV@W) and the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) brought together more than 100 paid leave stakeholders from across the country, including state program administrators, state and national paid leave advocates, Congressional staff, and other partners for the Paid Family and Medical Leave Collaborators Convening. The event included representatives from 18 states, including D.C., ranging from states that have provided paid leave benefits for decades to those working to pass programs. This report reflects critical themes and lessons learned from the convening.

>> Read the full report here

by Lulit Shewan

An incoming Trump Administration, with its pro-business agenda, has grim plans to disrupt the labor movement’s fight for fair wages, paid family leave, and stronger workplace protections. This means that workers will not only be navigating entrenched corporate structures but also a political system that has long prioritized profitability over people. Workers in essential sectors like agriculture, food service, health care, and the gig economy continue to face stagnant wages, inadequate benefits, and precarious employment conditions. The passage of pro-worker policies in several states on Election Day speaks volumes: workers are calling for safer workplaces, livable wages, and the dignity that comes with stable and secure jobs. These victories reflect a groundswell of determination to reshape working conditions, even as policies that have been stalled or attacked now face heightened threats of rollback or further inaction. Localized victories, like raising minimum wages and passing paid leave policies, demonstrate the power of grassroots movements to drive change where federal action has stalled.

Grassroots organizations like Missouri Jobs with Justice, which mobilized to secure a minimum wage increase, and the Alaska Food Coalition, which has long advocated for economic stability, highlight how community-led efforts are advancing worker-centered policies. These successes underscore the potential of localized solutions to address entrenched issues such as stagnant wages, inadequate benefits, and precarious employment conditions—challenges exacerbated by federal inaction. 

As federal policies like the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act and Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) languish in legislative purgatory, local and state initiatives have stepped in to fill the gap. The failure to raise the federal minimum wage or eliminate the subminimum wage for tipped workers has deepened financial insecurity, disproportionately affecting Black, Indigenous, and other workers of color. Grassroots action offers a pathway to address these inequities and create tangible improvements in workers’ lives. 

Pushing for Localized Labor Solutions Informed by Grassroots Work  

Recent wins at the state and municipal levels underscore the importance of the labor movement focusing on these areas. These victories didn’t happen in isolation; they resulted from years of grassroots organizing and community-led efforts to push for change. Organizations like Missouri Jobs with Justice and Alaska Food Coalition, exemplify the power of community-led movements in achieving worker-centered policies. To amplify such efforts and achieve lasting change, progressive local governments must implement policies that address the unique needs of workers earning low wages and Black workers in particular: 

Federal Inaction and the Need for Grassroots Momentum 

Federal inaction remains a barrier to broader systemic change. The PRO Act and PFML are prime examples of federal policies that could transform labor conditions but have been stalled due to relentless corporate lobbying and political opposition. These policies aim to: 

Historically, labor reforms like the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) have faced similar fates. Despite promises from political leaders, the EFCA, which sought to simplify union organizing and enhance penalties for labor law violations, never materialized. This persistent pattern of federal inaction has eroded trust among workers, emphasizing the urgency of grassroots and local approaches to advance the labor movement. 

The victories of grassroots movements reflect the resilience and determination of workers who have long fought for fair wages, safe workplaces, and economic dignity. By prioritizing localized solutions and building on the momentum of recent state and municipal wins, the labor movement can continue to make meaningful strides. While federal policies remain essential for widespread reform, the power of community-led efforts demonstrates that change is possible—one city, state, and coalition at a time. 

In an attempt to maximize profits and cut labor costs, corporations are skirting labor laws to classify their workers as independent contractors rather than employees. Replacing direct employees with independent contractors reduces labor costs for companies because contractors do not receive the same benefits and protections as employees, including employer-sponsored health care, Social Security benefits, and unemployment insurance. This trend shows no sign of slowing down; In fact, the rise of app-based workers in the United States economy tripled between 2017 and 2021. According to IRS data, five million taxpayers reported income from an app-based platform company. Digital platform companies such as Uber, Lyft, and Instacart have relentlessly mounted federal, state, and local campaigns to erode worker rights and consumer protections further. They aim to legislate permanent carve-outs for their workers, allowing corporations to deny workers employee benefits and minimum wage and misclassify them as non-employees.

App-based workers such as ridehail (commonly referred to as “rideshare”) and delivery drivers are disproportionately people of color. According to a survey by Pew Research Center, Hispanics are more likely than other racial or ethnic groups to have done platform work, with 30 percent of Hispanic adults having earned money through an online app-based platform. These jobs are precarious by design, harmful to workers’ health and financial security, and exacerbate racial inequities. In a survey by Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) and Data for Progress, 50 percent of app-based workers reported feeling overworked and say their jobs are physically exhausting, and 56 percent of app-based workers say that knowing their employer tracks them worsens their mental health. Compared to non-app-based workers, app-based workers are 13 percent more likely to say that the pace of work makes them exhausted.

In this report, CLASP outlines a set of principles to provide a framework for policymakers and advocates that uses an economic and racial justice perspective to assess a range of proposals on the intertwined issues of low wages, less benefits, and fewer protections for workers in these jobs, including temp and franchise workers. There are no set definitions of “gig” work or the “gig” economy. Some experts define it as workers who “earn money from an online employment platform across industries, such as ridehailing, online tasks, and cleaning,” while others have applied “gig” to all sorts of nontraditional labor, such as “contingent labor,” “temp labor,” or the “precariat,” as in the precarious nature of the type of work.

The scope of this CLASP report includes app-based workers, as they are a large group of workers misclassified as independent contractors rather than employees. This report also includes temp workers, who are largely considered contractors to the companies they are temping for since they are employed by temp or staffing agencies. Finally, this report also discusses franchise workers, whose ability to organize and bargain with the parent company that controls their employment is greatly undermined.

In offering the following principles, CLASP draws on our expertise about policy that reduces poverty, improves the lives of people with low incomes, tears down systemic barriers that hold back Black people and people of color, and advances racial and economic justice. Within that context, we propose the following principles to improve the work and lives of app-based workers, temp workers, and franchise workers:

  1. Policymakers should center the voices and experiences of workers in their decisions about how to regulate digital labor platforms, including but not limited to ridehail and delivery workers, temp workers, and other independent contractors. In order to do this, policymakers should prioritize meeting with worker centers and labor unions.
  2. Employment and labor law must be strengthened to widen the benefits that app-based workers receive in order to reduce poverty and inequality.
    • Policymakers should support the U.S. Department of Labor’s final Independent Contractor Rule, which will more effectively ensure that all workers, including misclassified app-based workers, have access to work protections such as federal minimum and overtime wages, employer-sponsored health insurance, worker’s compensation, and anti-discrimination protections.
    • Federal regulations should be in place on deactivation policies such as Just Cause termination or suspension in order to protect workers from being wrongfully deactivated from app-based platforms, which can lead workers to not having an income.
    • At the federal level, NLRB regulations such as the Joint Employer Rule should be protected in order for all workers – including workers in temp agencies, franchise models, and subcontractors – to hold employers responsible for labor rights violations.
  3. Comprehensive policies to protect app-based workers’ rights should include regulations on corporations and establishing corporate accountability.
    • Regulators such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) should aggressively crack down on corporate and monopoly power by enforcing laws on price fixing and worker misclassification.
    • Congress should enact legislation to increase data transparency on app-based platform companies in order to seek a better understanding of the gig economy and its app-based workers.

>>Read the full report

By Lorena Roque  

Last week’s election brought significant victories for the advancement of nationwide pro-worker policies, including increases to the minimum wage and paid sick leave policies. These wins signify a desire for working people in the U.S. to achieve more economic equity.  

Voters in Missouri and Alaska approved initiatives to increase the state minimum wage to $15 per hour. Studies show that this would increase wages for approximately 30,000 workers in Alaska and 560,000 workers in Missouri. The current minimum wage in Alaska is $11.73 while the living wage for workers in the state is approximately $23.26. The current minimum wage in Missouri is $12.30 per hour in 2024; however, the living wage for one adult and no children is calculated to be approximately $20.20 per hour. Due to low wages around the country, approximately 6.4 million workers—almost three million of whom are full-time workers—live in poverty. These minimum wage ballot initiatives were essential in providing wages closer to the living wage for workers in these states and greatly affect women and workers of color, who were overrepresented as the working poor as of 2022.  

Voters in Alaska, Missouri, and Nebraska all approved initiatives to grant paid sick leave to eligible workers. Nebraska’s Measure 436 gives workers the right to earn up to 56 hours a year, depending on the size of their employer. Most Alaskans are now entitled to at least 40 hours, and possibly 56 hours or more, of paid sick leave each year. And in Missouri, workers will earn one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours they work (this measure does provide an exception for businesses with less than 15 employees, who are still entitled to at least seven sick days per year). This new paid sick leave policy will reach 728,000 Missouri private sector workers.  

The absence of paid sick leave policies disproportionately affects families with low incomes, women of color, and workers in the U.S. South. The inability of employees to take paid time off to tend to their health or care for family members has had a profound impact on the U.S. economy; the Department of Labor estimates that, if women in the U.S. were able to participate in the labor force at the same rate as women in Germany and Canada (which both have national paid leave policies), the country would generate an additional $775 billion in economic activity annually. 

CLASP and our partners will continue our decades-long work to enact a national paid sick leave policy in the U.S. while supporting minimum wage increases. Still, we recognize the significance of these state-level victories. These three initiatives all passed by resounding margins, ranging from 56.5 percent in Alaska to more than 74 percent in Nebraska, bringing the total number of states with formal paid sick leave policies to eighteen plus Washington, D.C. While Missouri passed their initiative for increases in wages and paid sick leave by 58 percent voting in favor.  

Working people across the United States are demanding higher wages and more benefits such as paid sick leave. Pro-worker policies are essential in establishing an equitable economy and closing racial gaps in wages. As the popularity of these state initiatives soar, the U.S. Congress should prioritize centering workers and passing policies that achieve higher earnings and a better quality of life for workers in the country.  

The statement can be attributed to Olivia Golden, Interim Executive Director at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)  

November 6, 2024, Washington, D.C.—Today, as we confront the prospect of a second Trump administration, we are deeply concerned about the significant impact of his administration’s policies. We know what his intentions are because he has stated them many times: to target immigrant communities, people of color, women, and LGBTQ Americans; to harm workers and people with low incomes, including threatening job protections and the right to unionize, for the benefit of billionaires; and to threaten core public programs and the capacity of public officials to do their jobs honestly, fairly, and without fear.

CLASP is prepared for this moment, informed by our experience in responding to the first Trump administration, which previewed all these threats. Our preparations include strengthening the powerful coalitions we are already engaged in, including those that protect immigrant families and children, and building new ones where needed; working with partners to build on our collective knowledge and expertise to slow down, minimize, and where possible prevent or mitigate damage; standing ready to build on our powerful past record of documenting the harm when it happens and telling the story to the public; moving the vision forward in the states; and bringing our deep knowledge into partnership with organizing and movement leaders.

CLASP has a long history of and commitment to advocating for the safety, rights, and economic security that families with low incomes, workers, children, and immigrants deserve. As these communities stand to lose the most under another Trump administration, it’s more important than ever that we remain steadfast in advocating for social, economic, and racial justice.

Donald Trump and his advisors have made no secret about their roadmap for administration priorities. It’s a path that will benefit the very wealthy while creating and exacerbating hardship for millions.  CLASP fought the fight to resist these priorities and elevate a very different vision during his first administration, and we are committed to doing so again.  As we prepare for this work, we are inspired by the partners who share this work with us.

Comments Submitted by the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) on the Proposed Rule “Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings” Docket No. OSHA–2021–0009

Submitted by Lulit Shewan

The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) submits this comment in strong support of OSHA’s proposed rule aimed at preventing heat-related injuries and illnesses in both outdoor and indoor work environments (Docket No. OSHA-2021-0009). This proposed rule takes decisive action to mitigate the dangers posed by extreme heat, which disproportionately affects low-wage, immigrant, and outdoor workers, particularly in industries like agriculture, construction, and warehousing.

CLASP is a national, nonpartisan, nonprofit advancing anti-poverty policy solutions that disrupt structural and systemic racism and sexism and remove barriers blocking people from economic security and opportunity. With deep expertise in a wide range of programs and policy ideas, longstanding relationships with anti-poverty, child and family, higher education, workforce development, and economic justice stakeholders, including labor unions and worker centers, and over 50 years of history, CLASP works to amplify the voices of directly-impacted workers and families and help public officials design and implement effective programs.

CLASP seeks to improve the quality of jobs for low-income workers, especially workers of color, women, immigrants and youth. Our work includes working with policymakers to raise wages, increase access to benefits, implement and enforce new and existing labor standards, and ensure workers can strengthen their voice through collective bargaining. Quality jobs enable workers to balance their work, school, and family responsibilities—promoting economic stability and security.

The Need for Federal Heat Standards

The dangers of heat stress are well-documented. Each year, thousands of workers suffer from heat-related illnesses, and tragically, some of these incidents result in fatalities.¹ The current lack of comprehensive heat protections for workers exposes them to significant risks. In 2024, as we experienced record-breaking heat waves across the country, these dangers became even more pronounced.² Workers, particularly those in physically demanding jobs with prolonged exposure to heat, faced increased risks of heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and other heat-related illnesses. It is crucial to recognize that the brunt of these dangers falls disproportionately on workers earning low incomes, communities of color, and immigrant laborers, who are overrepresented in physically demanding outdoor jobs. Many of these workers already face precarious working conditions and are further burdened by the lack of heat safety measures. This summer has highlighted dangerous gaps in current worker safety regulations, making the need for enforceable standards more urgent than ever.

CLASP has consistently advocated for comprehensive labor protections that reflect the lived experiences of marginalized communities. We firmly believe that addressing the physical toll of extreme heat is both a matter of worker safety and racial and economic justice. The absence of federally mandated heat protections has left too many workers vulnerable, and this rulemaking is a necessary corrective.

Strengthening Provisions for Monitoring and Heat Exposure Reduction

There are serious dangers posed by heat exposure and the need for monitoring environmental conditions to mitigate these risks. We commend OSHA for its inclusion of comprehensive provisions for monitoring both temperature and humidity in both indoor and outdoor workplaces, particularly in industries where workers face prolonged heat exposure, such as farming and blue-collar work.

The implementation of mandatory use of real-time heat index monitoring equipment ensures that workers and supervisors are aware of rising heat conditions. In addition to requiring access to drinking water and shade, CLASP encourages the implementation of mandatory engineering controls (such as cooling systems, increased air circulation, and ventilation) in indoor work environments where heat can accumulate, like warehouses and manufacturing plants. Regular monitoring, coupled with mandatory adjustments to workloads and schedules during extreme heat, will reduce the likelihood of heat illness and protect workers’ health.

Excessive heat exposure has been one of the deadliest risks for workers, particularly those already vulnerable due to their jobs.³ According to the CDC, heat stress accounts for more than 700 deaths each year in the United States alone, with thousands more suffering from serious heat-related illnesses, such as heat stroke and heat exhaustion.⁴ The Department of Labor has reported over 2,000 cases of heat illness in the workplace annually⁵, though many of these incidents are likely underreported.

The rule correctly prioritizes environmental monitoring as a core prevention strategy. An emphasis on the need for regular and continuous assessment of both temperature and humidity levels, two critical factors that can significantly elevate the risk of heat stress—is essential. In outdoor settings, where direct sunlight can raise temperatures far above the ambient air temperature, and in indoor environments like warehouses, where heat can become trapped and stagnant, real-time monitoring of heat exposure is key to implementing timely interventions.⁶

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has underscored the importance of environmental monitoring, noting that heat exposure is cumulative and can build up over the course of the workday or workweek.⁷ As such, it is critical for employers to continuously track conditions and adjust workloads, provide additional water breaks, and implement cooling strategies when temperatures and humidity levels rise.

Acclimatization and Training for Vulnerable Populations

CLASP supports implementing acclimatization procedures as a necessary approach to protecting workers who are susceptible to heat-related illnesses or required to spend long hours in the heat.

Many workers, particularly those in low-wage jobs, outdoor labor, and seasonal industries, are at increased risk of harm due to their limited ability to control their work environments. Agricultural workers, who face the highest rates of heat-related deaths among all occupational groups⁸, are predominantly immigrants, and a significant portion are undocumented.⁹ Many of these workers lack access to basic protections like shade, rest breaks, water, and they often work in states with few heat safety regulations. These workers are also exposed to climate-related hazards that the general public can choose to avoid.

Acclimatization—gradually adjusting workers to heat conditions over a period of days or weeks—is a scientifically validated method of reducing heat stress and preventing illness.¹⁰ Both OSHA and NIOSH recommend acclimatization for new workers, those returning from time away, and workers transitioning to more strenuous tasks. Without this crucial period of adjustment, workers are at heightened risk of heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and even death. The rule’s emphasis on mandatory acclimatization periods is a crucial safeguard, especially for vulnerable populations who may not be able to advocate for themselves in unsafe working conditions.

Training is another essential component of heat illness prevention. Many workers, especially those with limited English proficiency, may not receive adequate training on the dangers of heat exposure or the steps they can take to protect themselves. The rule’s requirement for accessible training materials in multiple languages is a critical advancement in ensuring that all workers, regardless of background, are equipped with the knowledge to recognize symptoms of heat stress and take appropriate action. Studies show that workers who are adequately trained are more likely to take necessary precautions, such as staying hydrated and taking breaks, which can prevent the onset of heat-related illnesses.¹¹

Heat Illness Prevention Plans (HIPPs) and Worker Empowerment

CLASP supports development and implementation of Heat Illness Prevention Plans (HIPPs) to standardize the process for identifying, mitigating, and responding to heat-related hazards in the workplace. HIPPs can provide a clear framework for protecting workers from the dangers of excessive heat. A formalized plan ensures that employers are held accountable for maintaining safe working conditions and that workers are informed about the specific measures in place to protect their health.

Equally important is the focus on empowering workers to report unsafe conditions without fear of retaliation. Many low-wage and undocumented workers hesitate to report unsafe conditions due to fear of job loss, deportation, or retaliation from employers.¹² This reluctance leaves them vulnerable to continued exposure to dangerous heat conditions. Empowering workers with the knowledge that they have the right to a safe workplace and that reporting heat hazards is both encouraged and protected under the law is critical to ensuring the success of any heat illness prevention program. By including explicit protections for workers who report unsafe heat conditions, the rule takes an important step toward addressing this issue.

Mandatory Paid Rest Breaks and Emergency Response

The proposed rule correctly identifies the importance of rest and hydration in preventing heat illness, but further clarification is needed to ensure that workers are compensated for rest periods. In industries that require constant physical exertion, particularly outdoors, frequent breaks are critical to preventing heat exhaustion and heat stroke.

OSHA should require that employers provide paid rest breaks during periods of extreme heat, particularly when heat index levels surpass certain thresholds. These rest breaks should be mandatory and occur in cool or shaded areas.

CLASP supports the notion that employers provide paid rest breaks during periods of extreme heat, particularly when the heat index exceeds designated safety thresholds. These mandatory breaks should be scheduled regularly and occur in cool, shaded, or air-conditioned areas to maximize their effectiveness.¹³

To ensure emergency preparedness, employers must establish and communicate clear emergency protocols for responding to heat-related illnesses, ensuring that workers know how to recognize s Furthermore, OSHA must require employers to develop and disseminate comprehensive emergency response protocols for heat-related incidents. These protocols should include clear guidelines on recognizing symptoms of heat illness, administering first aid, and seeking medical assistance.

Ensuring Robust Protections for Vulnerable Workers

As noted, CLASP’s previous work on worker protections, vulnerable populations—including workers in low-wage industries, undocumented immigrants, and workers of color—are disproportionately impacted by heat-related illnesses due to inequities in working conditions and access to safety resources. The proposed rule must explicitly address the needs of these workers to ensure equitable enforcement and compliance. This rule must include stringent anti-retaliation protections to empower workers to report violations without the fear of job loss or other punitive actions. OSHA should establish clear reporting channels that are accessible to non-English speakers and workers in isolated settings.

Promote Worker Involvement and Empowerment

Effective heat illness prevention requires active worker participation. Workers should be given the tools to protect themselves and their colleagues without fear of retaliation. CLASP believes that empowering workers to report unsafe heat conditions is critical to the success of any prevention program. Thus, CLASP supports OSHA’s requirement for Heat Illness Prevention Plans (HIPP), with addition that OSHA requires the direct involvement of non-supervisory workers in both the creation and periodic review of these plans. This input can provide first-hand experiences with daily operational challenges ensure that the HIPP addresses real-world conditions effectively. It also not only makes the plans more relevant and tailored to specific job roles and environments but increases worker buy-in and adherence. When workers contribute to the development and ongoing evaluation of occupational health and safety programs, they are more likely to feel a sense of ownership and commitment, leading to better compliance and proactive problem-solving.

CLASP supports the mandating of employers to deliver comprehensive training programs that thoroughly cover heat illness symptoms, preventive measures, and emergency response protocols. This training must be tailored to meet diverse language needs by providing materials and instruction in multiple languages, using visual aids, and offering bilingual trainers or interpreters as needed.¹⁴ Importantly, the training should be provided at no cost to workers, removing financial barriers and ensuring equal access for all employees. To maintain effectiveness, the training should be ongoing, including regular refresher courses and updates to address evolving conditions and reinforce key concepts. Interactive and engaging methods, such as simulations and role-playing, should be employed to enhance learning and retention. Additionally, mechanisms for evaluating the training’s effectiveness and collecting worker feedback should be implemented to continuously improve the program and address any gaps. By ensuring comprehensive, accessible, and cost-free training, employers can better prepare workers to manage heat-related risks and promote a safer workplace.¹⁵

Consider Climate Change’s Impact on Worker Safety

As climate change continues to exacerbate the frequency and intensity of heat waves, OSHA’s heat protection rule must be forward-thinking and adaptable to rising temperatures. Workers, particularly those in outdoor occupations, will face increasing risks in the coming years, and it is critical that OSHA’s standards evolve in tandem with these environmental changes.

We encourage OSHA to adopt a flexible framework for updating heat protection thresholds and requirements, reflecting the changing climate and scientific advancements in heat illness prevention. This includes creating a mechanism for automatically adjusting heat protection standards as new climate data becomes available, ensuring workers remain protected in the face of worsening conditions.

CLASP strongly supports OSHA’s initiative to address the hazards of heat exposure in the workplace. This proposed rule is an important step toward safeguarding the health and well-being of millions of workers. The rule’s provisions for environmental monitoring, acclimatization, worker empowerment, paid rest breaks, and emergency protocols are critical to protecting workers from the dangers of heat exposure. By adopting and strengthening these interventions, OSHA can significantly reduce the incidence of heat-related illnesses and injuries across all sectors of the workforce. We appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments and look forward to continued engagement as OSHA works to finalize this critical rule.

>>Download full comment, contact information, and citations.

By Christian Collins

The Leadership Conference Education Fund, in collaboration with CLASP, recently released We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education. The agenda, which has been endorsed by NAACP, the National Urban League, and the National Women’s Law Center, offers 100 specific strategies that federal and state policymakers and institutional leaders can adopt to ensure postsecondary educational access for all students regardless of racial identity.  

Our postsecondary system continues to navigate uncertain waters that include mitigating the impact of recent Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) challenges, direct political threats to end the federal Department of Education, and continued roadblocks placed on long-needed debt relief for student loan borrowers. Opponents of racial progress in education have used both this tumultuous period and recent legal victories to apply pressure on institutions to no longer incorporate racial equity in postsecondary education. Institutions, policymakers, advocates, and other stakeholders must not use these challenging times to cede victories to the anti-racial equity movement, but as an opportunity to utilize strategies like those outlined in We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education to publicly reaffirm their commitment to a postsecondary system that removes, not reinforces, obstacles to equity. 

Equity and Diversity Remain Compelling Interests in Postsecondary Education 

Last year’s Supreme Court rulings on the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions were the onus for the We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education. In these decisions, the Supreme Court upended more than four decades of precedent and weakened equal opportunity in college admissions. Race-conscious admissions policies were one of few protections that racially marginalized students had from a postsecondary system that has never been meritocratic.  

National reaction to the loss of race-conscious admissions showed that the lack of meritocracy is not just evident within the educational outcomes experienced by different demographics, but also within the way we publicly discuss the impact of the loss. The bulk of institutions under scrutiny with their latest admissions classes are highly selective and often private “elite” institutions, whose status is intrinsically tied to creating admissions scarcity by rejecting applicants along racial and socioeconomic lines. However, the loss of race-conscious admissions will impact enrollment and retention at all institutions, ranging from the most selective to community colleges.  

The current narrow scope of evaluating the loss of race-conscious admissions has diminished the urgency to end current policy and cultural assaults on institutions offering educational opportunities for underrepresented students. Removing race-conscious admission practices has not stopped opposition to diversity, and restoring the small number of admissions at highly selective institutions that were available through those policies should not be the end of transforming the postsecondary education system. 

The 100 recommendations outlined in We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education encourage the entire postsecondary system to engage in the work of removing racially based educational barriers that plagued the system even with race-conscious admissions in place. Contrary to the argument that any diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility efforts now violate federal law, the recommendations in this agenda comply with federal statutory and constitutional terms. 

A lack of broad implementation of policies like prioritizing recruitment of rural students of color and community college transfers; bridging resource gaps faced by institutions serving higher proportions of traditionally marginalized students; and expanding the basic needs supports available for students cannot be blamed on the loss of race-conscious admissions. Yet these policies, along with others highlighted in We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education are necessary to expand educational opportunities.  

Just Like a Tree Planted by the Water 

We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education represents a call to action for the postsecondary education system and its stakeholders. It calls for restoring the system to where it was before the loss of race-conscious admissions and also redesigning the foundational policy blocks that make up the system. These recommendations will not remedy every malaise currently impacting postsecondary education; but they offer a bold reimagining of how postsecondary education can become an educational system that remedies its prior history of discrimination for the benefit of all students. 

By Emily Andrews, Sapna Mehta, and Jessica Milli

Executive Summary

Bonding with a new child, recovering from a serious illness or injury, or caring for a sick partner or an aging parent—these are some of life’s most important moments. Almost everyone will experience a caregiving need at some point in their lives. But despite the universal need for care, the United States does not guarantee working people any paid time away from work, and many employees aren’t even entitled to unpaid leave.

In the absence of a federal policy, 13 states and Washington, D.C. have established state paid family and medical leave programs. Under these programs, working people can take time to welcome a new child, care for an ill loved one, or recover from their own serious medical illness or injury while receiving some pay. Workers can also use many of these programs to address needs related to military deployment or domestic or sexual violence.

Utilizing data from the Worker Paid Leave Usage Simulation Model (Worker PLUS), we estimate the current need for leave in those states that do not have established paid family and medical leave programs; the extent to which the need for leave goes unmet in these states; and the economic losses that families incur as a result of unpaid or partially paid leaves. This report presents our overall findings in these states; we also provide state-level estimates in the Appendix. While workers face an unmet need for leave even in states with paid family and medical leave programs due to work requirements, employer carve-outs, and other barriers to leave-taking, this report focuses exclusively on where the largest unmet need for leave exists: in the 37 states that have not passed paid family and medical leave policies.

Our analysis finds that in these 37 states:

Without Paid Family and Medical Leave, Workers Go Without or Lose Pay on More than Half of Needed Leaves.

Our analysis also finds that women of color are disproportionately impacted by the lack of paid family and medical leave. In states without paid leave programs, Native American women, Black women, and Latinas are more likely than white women not to take needed leave, and Black women who take leave are more likely than white women to take it unpaid. Due to occupational segregation and racism in the labor market, on average women of color earn less than their white counterparts and are less able to take leave that may jeopardize their family’s economic security. Similarly, they are more likely to return to work early because they cannot afford extended periods without income.

Geography and regional demographics play important roles in the lack of paid leave for women of color. Forty-two percent of women of color reside in the South, where–with the exception of Maryland, where Democrats have controlled the state legislature for decades–not a single state has passed paid family and medical leave. Given the political makeup of this region, it is unlikely that any additional Southern state will pass a paid family and medical leave program, making federal action on this issue all the more urgent due to the gender and racial disparities in the region.

The scope of unmet leave extends beyond the workplace, as not taking needed leave can lead to compounding health and financial costs. Research suggests that paid leave supports improved health outcomes, including improved infant and toddler development, better maternal mental and physical health, increased breastfeeding rates, reduced infant mortality, and increased ability to afford and complete cancer treatments. Paid leave also supports household economic security following the birth of a child and makes it more likely that individuals with serious health conditions, like cancer, can remain in the workforce.

In addition, paid leave supports greater labor force participation, particularly among women. The implementation of a paid family and medical leave program has been shown to increase the number of mothers in the workforce the year after the birth of a child by 6 percent, reducing new mothers’ labor market detachment by 20 percent in the first year after giving birth.11 Increased labor force participation results in greater economic activity. According to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), if women in the U.S. had labor force participation rates similar to women in Germany and Canada, both of which have national paid leave policies, we would generate more than $775 billion in additional economic activity per year. Paid leave also benefits businesses by supporting recruitment efforts, decreasing turnover costs through greater retention, and increasing worker morale and business productivity.

Despite the recent momentum at the state level to pass paid leave laws (see chart on page 6), the majority of working people in this country still lack access to paid family and medical leave. In this brief we utilize data from the DOL Worker Paid Leave Usage Simulation model (Worker PLUS) to estimate the need for paid family and medical leave and wages lost among workers taking unpaid or partially paid leave in the states that do not have paid leave programs.

About the Worker PLUS Model

The Worker PLUS model was developed for the DOL in response to the growing interest at the state and local level to develop and implement paid family and medical leave programs. It addresses the limited availability of data at the state level on workers’ need for leave and leave-taking behaviors by modeling them with the 2018 Family and Medical Leave Act employee survey and simulating them onto each state’s sample in the 2020 5-year American Community Survey (ACS). The Worker PLUS model also enables users to simulate the potential effects of a state program on worker leave-taking compared with current leave-taking and estimate the associated costs of proposed programs.

>> Read the full report

By Eddie Martin, Jr.

This is the fifth in a series of commentaries from CLASP experts that explore dimensions of poverty as part of the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual release of poverty, income, and health insurance coverage statistics from the previous year. On September 10, we provided a snapshot of the economic hardship that children, youth and young adults, and families experienced in 2023. Ahead of the release, CLASP experts offered key insights on the impending 2025 tax debate, the child care crisis, Medicaid unwinding, and raising labor standards and enacting new regulations to protect workers. The complete series is available here. 

As we reflect on the U.S. Census Bureau’s recent poverty and income report—showing that more than 1 in 10 people in America live in poverty and documenting stubbornly higher poverty rates for Black, Hispanic and Native American people—it is crucial to revisit President Lyndon B. Johnson’s declaration 60 years ago of an “unconditional” War on Poverty. Johnson sought not only to address the symptoms of poverty but to “cure it and, above all, to prevent it.” He poignantly remarked that “many Americans live on the outskirts of hope—some because of their poverty, some because of their color, and all too many because of both.” Johnson understood that these issues were not the result of individual failures but were rooted in systemic inequities like limited access to education, health care, housing, and opportunities for upward mobility. He recognized poverty as a moral and societal challenge tied to short-sighted public policies that left too many Americans behind.

The War on Poverty led to significant programs like Head Start, Medicaid, and Medicare. At the time, the national poverty rate stood at 19 percent and was nearly double that for Black Americans. These programs reduced poverty and provided a safety net for millions. But the latest Census report shows that the 2023 poverty rate was 11.1 percent, revealing only marginal progress after six decades. Johnson’s vision has been hindered by political compromises and reforms that failed to tackle economic inequality and racial disparities.

A major shortcoming of the War on Poverty was its inability to fully address the intersection of racial injustice and economic inequity. Johnson’s Great Society agenda laid the groundwork for progress through landmark legislation like the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which linked racial justice to economic opportunity. However, the failure to implement more “radical” solutions—such as guaranteed incomes or large-scale systemic reforms in housing, law enforcement, education, and civil rights enforcement—has meant that poverty, particularly for communities of color, persists.

Today, these shortcomings are glaringly apparent. The lack of affordable child care and early education continues to create economic instability for families. Black and Hispanic workers remain overrepresented in jobs without adequate benefits or wages, perpetuating the cycle of the “working poor.” The housing crisis, driven by rising costs and stagnant wages, has pushed many who were once part of the middle class to the brink of homelessness. Elected officials have failed to prioritize justice, and equity and progress has been painfully incremental, leaving children and families across the U.S. to suffer.

These interconnected challenges create a vicious cycle that deepens inequality and undermines democracy. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. emphasized, “the evils of racism, economic exploitation, and militarism are all tied together.” Poverty erodes both economic participation and political engagement. When individuals and communities are trapped in poverty, they are less able to participate in the democratic process, less likely to trust public institutions, and often deprived of basic human rights. Both Johnson and King understood that poverty is not just an economic issue—it is a fundamental threat to democracy itself.

To truly revive the War on Poverty and achieve Johnson’s vision, we must enact bold policies that create a strong safety net for workers and families. These measures should go beyond merely lifting people above the poverty line. Rather, we must ensure that economic progress is met with sustained access to benefits and opportunities. This means investing in an equitable, high-quality child care and early education system; enacting comprehensive minimum wage reform; strengthening labor laws; permanently expanding the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit; and ensuring universal health coverage that includes publicly funded care for immigrant populations, including the undocumented. As Olivia Golden, CLASP’s interim executive director, has stated, such bold approaches, grounded in both an economic strategy and the necessary investments in core programs, are vital to eliminating poverty. Without comprehensive support, poverty will remain episodic, trapping families in cycles of hardship across generations.

In 1967, King called for a “radical revolution of values,” urging society to shift from a “thing-oriented” to a “person-oriented” approach. He argued that poverty demands not just charity, but systemic change, stating “true compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It is seeing that an edifice that produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth.” King’s message remains as relevant today as it was in the 1960s. He recognized that to achieve true democracy, our country needed a complete reimagining of our economic and political systems rooted in a redistribution of power and wealth.

If we are ever to truly defeat systemic poverty, we must have a national awakening—a profound shift in values, driven by moral and political courage. We must ensure that all people, not just the fortunate few, have access to the resources and opportunities they need not only to survive but to thrive. This means dismantling the structural inequities that perpetuate racial and economic disparities while building a more just, compassionate, and equitable society for all. Only then can we realize the vision Johnson and King had of an America free from poverty, where opportunity and democracy are truly accessible to everyone.