July 31st marked a significant decision by the Michigan Supreme Court as it ruled to adopt the Michigan Time To Care (PA 338) and Michigan One Fair Wage (PA 337) proposals. These initiatives, originally proposed in 2018, are crucial for many working families across the state, aiming to address essential changes to paid sick leave and minimum wage laws.
Danielle Atkinson, the founder and executive director of Mothering Justice, has been deeply involved in this landmark case. Her tireless advocacy for Black mothers and mothers of color has underscored the necessity for these legislative changes, providing a unique perspective on the case’s implications and potential outcomes.
Mothering Justice, a Michigan-based national grassroots policy advocacy organization, has been at the forefront of this movement. The recent ruling in Mothering Justice v. Attorney General ruled in favor of adopting the Michigan Time To Care proposal and the Michigan One Fair Wage proposal, both of which promise significant improvements for working families.
Photo: Danielle Atkinson, the founder and executive director of Mothering Justice
The original language of these initiatives guarantees a minimum of 72 hours, or nine days, of earned paid sick time for employees to address personal or family-related short-term illnesses. Additionally, the proposals include an increase in the minimum wage, benefiting even tipped workers, and expanding eligibility for paid sick time.
Danielle Atkinson emphasized the importance of this decision, stating, “As a lead sponsor of the initiative, we applaud the Michigan Supreme Court on its decision to adopt the original ballot initiatives. This decision puts the power back in the hands of the voters and impacts the lives of hundreds of thousands of workers. Today the Supreme Court stood on the side of families and voters in Michigan. They affirmed that the ballot initiative process should be for and by the people without the legislation undermining their voice as a political game.”
In 2018, Michigan voters approved both ballot initiatives to appear on the ballot. However, after the November election, Republican legislation adopted and changed the initiatives, delaying the minimum wage increase and reducing the amount of paid sick time that could be earned. While the Court of Appeals initially ruled that these legislative changes violated the Michigan Constitution, this ruling was reversed in January 2023. The recent Supreme Court decision, therefore, reinstates the original proposals, ensuring that the will of the voters is respected.
The impact of this ruling is already being felt in communities across Michigan. Tyra Degraffenreid, a Detroit mother and Mothering Justice Mamavist fellow, shared her experience, saying, “Having paid sick time allows me as a Mom to take my daughter to her basic doctor appointments to prevent her from getting sick. I don’t miss any income while doing my parental duties taking care of my child. Paid Sick Time is a necessity for parents!”
What does this decision mean for the future of paid sick leave and minimum wage in Michigan? How will these changes affect working families, particularly in marginalized communities? Will the reinstatement of these proposals inspire other states to adopt similar measures? The implications of this ruling raise important questions about the balance of power between voters and legislators and the ongoing struggle for workers’ rights.
About Post Author
