Paid parental leave for state workers, a Reynolds priority, advances with bipartisan vote

• The Iowa House of Representatives voted to advance a bill guaranteeing paid parental leave to all state workers, but it's not clear what kind of reception it will face in the Senate.
• Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has said paid parental leave is a top priority.
• Although Democrats say they wish the bill went further, they supported it as a "good first step."

State employees are one step closer to receiving dedicated paid parental leave after the Iowa House of Representatives advanced a proposal Thursday that would cement those benefits into law.

It was a bipartisan effort aimed at keeping the state competitive as it fights for high-quality employees, lawmakers said.

House File 889, which passed on a floor vote of 87-2, would guarantee state workers four weeks of paid maternity leave and one week of paid paternity leave after the birth of a child. The bill would also provide four weeks of paid leave for state employees who adopt a child. 

Currently, Iowa state workers receive no dedicated paid time off for the birth of a child — a policy that puts them at odds with most other states in the country.

Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds introduced the proposal at the start of the legislative session, saying it's a priority to finally change that.

“Nothing is more important to me than supporting Iowa families,” Reynolds said in a statement Thursday following the House vote. “The weeks after bringing home your baby are vital time for bonding and recovery and a crucial development period for newborns. I want to thank Iowa House legislators for prioritizing families and recognizing the importance of present parenting.”     

Rep. Sami Scheetz, D-Cedar Rapids, said on the House floor that the bill is "a good first step," but he said it doesn't go nearly far enough.

"If we want to recruit the best and brightest into state government, we have to give better benefits than the private sector, because we're never going to match pay," he said. "And unfortunately, (this bill) doesn't do that."

Still, he said, employees "need to be able to spend time with their newborns. I am hopeful, as I've said throughout the process too, that the governor will be able to use her considerable influence to get this through the Senate this year."

An unclear future for paid parental leave as bill moves to the Senate

This is the third consecutive year lawmakers have considered the policy. And although it's cleared committee votes before, it's never previously advanced to a floor vote in either chamber.

A companion bill in the Senate, Senate Study Bill 1040, advanced out of a subcommittee earlier this year, but it was not considered by a full committee.

It's unclear what appetite Senate Republicans have for advancing Reynolds' legislation.

Some Republicans have expressed concerns that making government jobs disproportionately appealing will lure employees away from the private sector.

“We have to measure that there is a private sector economy who are going to also to be competing for these high-value employees,” Sen. Jason Schultz, R-Schleswig, previously told the Des Moines Register. “Are we using tax dollars to pull them out of the private sector or take them away?”

In the House, Rep. John Wills, R-Spirit Lake, was one of two Republicans to oppose the bill. He said he opposed it primarily because of cost.

“I was a state employee for a number of years," he said following the vote. "And when my wife and I had our child, I planned for a vacation. I planned by saving up my time. And I just think that that’s a personal responsibility, that if I want to take off some time for the birth of my child, that I should do that. Now the governor’s position is that it’s a workforce issue and it’s a competitive issue. I understand that. But I also think that we need to be responsive to the taxpayers and make sure that our employees are getting the most bang for their buck for the dollars that we provide for their pay.”

A 2025 fiscal analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency found that the legislation may have a cost to the state, but it can't be determined.

A 2024 analysis of the same proposal also found that a cost couldn't be determined. But analysts wrote that the “value of the new leave potentially used by state employees is approximately $4.8 million per year from all funding sources.”

In February, Reynolds told the Register she believes state agencies will work around their employees' paid time off schedules without a real cost to their budgets.

“When you think about the normal churn of government and the way that it works, you know, employees go on vacation. We don't contract out (to cover for them),” she said. “We don't bring somebody in for two weeks. We cross train. We take that into account.”

Reynolds said it's important to think about the proposal in the context of Republicans' pro-life agenda.

“We want to make it clear that we're a pro-family, pro-life state,” she said in February. “I talk about that all the time, but, you know, a lot of times, it always gets put in the context of abortion. But I think it's bigger than that. We want to work really hard to create a culture where I think having and raising children is a priority — that we want to put families first.”

Most states offer paid parental leave to state employees, putting Iowa in the minority

Iowa is currently in the minority of states that offer no paid parental leave to public employees, according to a tally by A Better Balance, a legal advocacy nonprofit that works on issues supporting workers, such as paid leave policies.

It identifies 36 states and the District of Colombia that offer state employees some kind of dedicated paid leave for new parents, although some states offer it only for executive branch employees.

In nearby Kansas, the state provides eight weeks of paid leave to full- and part-time workers who are primary caregivers, while secondary caregivers get four weeks.

And all federal employees have access to 12 weeks of paid parental leave after Republican President Donald Trump signed it into law during his first term in office.

Although House Democrats joined with Republicans to advance the legislation Thursday, they were clear that they would have preferred a more expansive policy that provided greater benefits.

House minority leader Jennifer Konfrst, D-Windsor Heights, said the policy is "critically important" for worker retention.

"These are talented people who we want to keep here instead of going to higher paid jobs in the private sector where they’re already getting a lot of paid leave," she told reporters at a news conference Thursday. "And though I don’t believe this is enough, I do believe it’s a good start and it’s taking us in a positive direction for state employees.

Senate minority leader Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, said she was disappointed the Senate has yet to move the bill beyond a subcommittee. But she said she hopes to see the House bill advance through the chamber.

"We need to do something for working parents," she said. "Again, it’s not enough. I would like to see it equalized in the event of how many weeks you get after a child is born, but we need to start somewhere, as Leader Konfrst said, to be able to recruit and retain good people at the state level. And I’d love to expand it further, but we’ve got to start somewhere."

Des Moines Register reporter Stephen Gruber-Miller contributed to this report.

Brianne Pfannenstiel is the chief politics reporter for the Des Moines Register. Reach her at bpfann@dmreg.com or 515-284-8244. Follow her on X at @brianneDMR.