Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9125

Bill Overview

Title: Safe Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence Act

Description: This bill provides family and medical leave for employees to meet their needs related to being a victim of dating violence, domestic violence, sexual assault, sex trafficking, or stalking. This includes to obtain medical care and mental health services, seek safe housing, and prepare for legal proceedings.

Sponsors: Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5]

Target Audience

Population: Victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and related abuses

Estimated Size: 50000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Nurse (Austin, Texas)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having access to safe leave means I can take time to sort out my living situation and look after my mental health without losing my job.
  • This policy feels like a lifeline. It gives me breathing room to handle ongoing legal issues related to my situation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Retail Manager (Columbus, Ohio)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act might help ensure safety while dealing with law enforcement and legal proceedings.
  • Being able to leave work to prioritize personal safety is crucial.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Software Engineer (San Francisco, California)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Being able to take leave without worrying about job security for therapy is essential for recovery.
  • I appreciate the focus on mental health services.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Teacher (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Leave will provide me time to focus on legal procedures without impacting my students.
  • I'm thankful the law considers these issues important enough to ensure work leave.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Barista (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 24 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful that having these protections will allow me to take steps to leave safely.
  • Awareness of such laws can even encourage victims to come forward.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 3
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 5 4
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 4 3

Warehouse Supervisor (Salt Lake City, Utah)

Age: 53 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Even though I am not currently affected, it is comforting to know support is available if needed again.
  • It's less likely to directly impact me now, but it's good protection for those still at risk.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 5

Marketing Specialist (New York City, New York)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My workplace already supports these types of leave, but it's great to see it nationwide.
  • I feel secure knowing the legal backing is more robust.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 6 6

Stay-at-home parent (Miami, Florida)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Although I don't work, the policy adds a layer of security if I start a job.
  • It acknowledges the importance of prioritizing personal safety over employment concerns.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Student (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It lifts a burden knowing I wouldn't need to choose between work and seeking help.
  • Focus should also be given to educational instutions applying similar support.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 4

Freelancer (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 36 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 2

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Although this policy doesn't directly help me since I'm freelancing, it’s critical for those who are employed.
  • The societal acknowledgment of issues like trafficking is significant for survivors.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 2 2
Year 2 2 2
Year 3 3 3
Year 5 3 3
Year 10 3 3
Year 20 3 3

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $3000000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $4000000000)

Year 2: $3150000000 (Low: $2100000000, High: $4200000000)

Year 3: $3307500000 (Low: $2205000000, High: $4410000000)

Year 5: $3640875000 (Low: $2437500000, High: $4860000000)

Year 10: $4486593750 (Low: $2990625000, High: $5962500000)

Year 100: $116706695300 (Low: $77833500000, High: $155667000000)

Key Considerations