Published on
In November 2024, with nearly 1.7 million “Yes” votes, Missouri voters decisively approved Proposition A, which established paid sick leave requirements for employers across the state. But, after this clear expression of voter will, the Missouri legislature has moved to dismantle these protections through House Bill No. 567 (HB 567), which sought to repeal the law before it could take effect.
By: Alaina Valdes
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 290.603 (2024)
I. Introduction
While the Family and Medical Leave Act guarantees eligible workers of covered employers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave,[1] currently, in the United States, there exists no federal requirement for paid sick leave.[2] In this absence, certain states and municipalities have passed their own paid sick leave legislation. In November 2024, with nearly 1.7 million “Yes” votes, Missouri voters decisively approved Proposition A,[3] which established paid sick leave requirements for employers across the state.[4] But, after this clear expression of voter will, the Missouri legislature has moved to dismantle these protections through House Bill No. 567 (HB 567), which sought to repeal the law before it could take effect.[5]
II. Proposition A: Origins and Substance
On November 5, 2024, Proposition A, a voter-led ballot measure that included changes to the state’s minimum wage and paid sick time benefits to employees, passed with nearly 60% approval.[6] Codified in §§ 290.600–290.642 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri,[7] the new paid sick leave legislation requires certain employers to provide 1 hour of “earned paid sick time” to employees for every 30 hours worked, beginning May 1, 2025.[8]
Proposition A exempts federal and state government employers, including their subdivisions, but all private employers who are not exempt must provide earned paid sick time to eligible employees.[9] Private retail and service businesses whose annual gross sales are less than $500,000 are also exempt.[10] Small businesses, however, are not exempt solely on account of their size.[11]
Under Proposition A, eligible employees would accrue a minimum of one hour of paid sick leave for every thirty hours worked beginning May 1, 2025.[12] Although there is no limit on how much paid sick leave employees can accrue, employers may restrict the use of leave to 56 hours (or 40 hours for employers with fewer than fifteen employees) annually.[13] If an employee has unused sick leave, employers can either allow employees to carry over up to 80 hours to the following year or pay out unused sick leave at the end of the year.[14] Both of these options are subject to additional requirements or limitations.[15] An employee can use their paid sick leave for the following reasons:
- diagnosis of, treatment of, or preventive care for the mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition of the employee or the employee’s family member;
- closure of the employee’s place of employment due to a public health emergency;
- caring for a child whose school district has been closed due to a public health emergency; and
- attending to matters related to domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking.[16]
If an employer violates the provisions of Proposition A, employees can sue their employer to enforce their rights.[17] Complaining employees can bring such action without first filing an administrative complaint, and the statute of limitations for these actions is three years from the date of the violation.[18] An employer’s willful failure to comply is considered a class C misdemeanor, and each day that an employer continues to be in violation constitutes a separate offense.[19]
III. The Repeal Legislation and Debate Over Paid Sick Leave
The triumph of Proposition A at the ballot box was quickly met with resistance.[20] A mere 8 days into 2025, Republican lawmakers introduced House Bill No. 567 (HB 567), a bill designed to repeal the paid sick leave requirements enacted by Proposition A.[21]
Initially, HB 567 changed only the date on which employers were required to provide paid sick leave from May 1, 2025, to January 1, 2026.[22] Prior to passage in the House, the House amended the bill to include a full repeal of the paid sick leave part of Proposition A.[23] HB 567 swiftly passed the House along party lines and moved to the Senate,[24] where it is currently awaiting consideration.[25]
On April 7, 2025, the bill cleared review by the Senate Committee on Fiscal Oversight.[26] HB 567 then moved to the full Senate for debate and a third read.[27] Missouri Senate Democrats launched a filibuster to delay and protest the bill, which has temporarily stalled the bill’s progress.[28]
The Missouri legislature possesses authority to repeal statutes passed by initiative,[29] although it cannot, on its own, repeal constitutional amendments.[30] While a valid exercise of the legislature’s power, HB 567 nevertheless has drawn considerable scrutiny, especially considering its timing and intent.[31] The legislature’s efforts to overturn a voter-approved law within months of its passage have raised serious concerns about the integrity of direct democracy in the state.[32] While proponents of HB 567 framed the bill as a necessary measure to protect businesses from regulatory overreach,[33] its critics viewed it as an explicit rejection of the people’s will.[34]
The policy rationale behind HB 567 rests largely on economic concerns.[35] Business groups argue that the paid sick leave mandate imposes new costs and administrative burdens, particularly on small and mid-sized employers.[36] This is reflective of a common concern in response to paid sick leave.[37] Opponents of paid sick leave argue that mandating paid sick leave places a disproportionate financial burden on small businesses, which may struggle to absorb the additional costs.[38] While larger corporations may already offer paid sick leave and have the resources to adjust, smaller employers—especially those with thin profit margins—may find it challenging to comply. Critics warn that businesses might respond by reducing employee hours, freezing hiring, or even raising prices to compensate for the increased costs.[39]
Another concern is the potential for employees to misuse sick leave.[40] While the law intends to provide leave for legitimate medical needs, critics argue that some employees might take advantage of the system.[41] Further, opponents highlight that Proposition A’s language regarding penalties for “retaliatory personnel action” may make it difficult for an employer to investigate sick leave misuse.[42]
While critics argue that mandated paid sick leave imposes financial burdens on businesses, proponents point to research showing that the cost of providing sick leave is often offset by gains in employee retention and overall workplace morale.[43] Some business leaders and economists argue that paid sick leave ultimately benefits employers by reducing turnover and increasing productivity.[44] Studies suggest that when employees can take sick leave without fear of losing income, they recover faster and return to work more focused and efficient.[45] Moreover, businesses with paid sick leave policies tend to experience lower employee turnover, reducing hiring and training costs.[46]
Paid sick leave may also be an effective tool for reducing the spread of contagious illnesses and protecting employees. Workers without paid sick leave are more likely than workers with paid leave to forgo medical care for themselves and for their families.[47] Workers without paid sick leave are also 1.5 times more likely to go to work contagious,[48] so they risk infecting people around them too.[49] A phenomenon called presenteeism occurs when sick workers report for work but, due to illness or another medical condition, are not fully functioning.[50] Because these workers cannot perform at their best, they may risk injuring themselves on the job.[51]
IV. Comment
The Missouri legislature’s response to Proposition A raises fundamental questions about the relationship between direct democracy and representative government. When a clear majority of voters approve a statute through the initiative process, what obligations do elected officials have to respect that outcome? While the legislature may have the legal authority to repeal Proposition A, doing so in the immediate aftermath of its passage undermines the democratic process and risks alienating voters.
HB 567 exemplifies a growing trend in state politics: legislative preemption used not to resolve conflicts among laws, but to negate the will of the people.[52] Proposition A represents not just a policy preference, but a form of civic engagement that HB 567 seeks to undo.
Moreover, the repeal effort stands in tension with broader societal values exposed during the pandemic. The COVID-19 crisis made clear that paid sick leave is not merely a worker benefit but a public health necessity.[53] By attempting to repeal this mandate, the Missouri legislature sends a signal that short-term economic concerns of business owners outweigh the long-term health and stability of the workforce.
And, if voters perceive the repeal of Proposition A as an overreach, it may galvanize further activism, electoral backlash, or even another ballot initiative. The Missouri legislature should tread carefully—for, in preempting the people, it may awaken them.
[1] Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2612 (1993).
[2] Sick Leave, supra note 1. The United States is “the only wealthy nation in the world that does not guarantee workers paid time off when they are sick.” Shefali Milczarek-Desai, Op-Ed: The U.S. needs paid sick leave. Here’s how to get it right, L.A. Times (May 24, 2022), https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-05-24/paid-sick-leave-covid-benefits.
[3] Election Results, Mo. Sec’y of State (Dec. 5, 2024), https://www.sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/ElectionResultsStatistics/2024GeneralElection.pdf.
[4] Proposition A – Paid Sick Time Benefits, Dep’t of Lab. & Indus. Rels., https://labor.mo.gov/dls/proposition-a-paid-sick-time-benefits-faqs (last visited Apr. 24, 2025).
[5] First Regular Session [Perfected] House Committee Substitute No. 2 For House Bill Nos. 567, 546, 758 & 958, Missouri House of Representatives, https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills251/hlrbillspdf/1616H.05P.pdf (last visited Apr. 24, 2025).
[6] Proposition A – Paid Sick Time Benefits, supra note 4.
[7] Id.
[8] Mo. Rev. Stat. § 290.603 (2024). “Earned paid sick time” is defined as “time that is compensated at the same hourly rate and with the same benefits, including health care benefits, as the employee normally earns during hours worked.” Mo. Rev. Stat. § 290.600 (2024).
[9] Proposition A – Paid Sick Time Benefits, supra note 4.
[10] Id.
[11] Id. Even business that employ fewer than fifteen people must provide “earned sick time” benefits if the business is not an exempt employer. Id.
[12] Jessica Liss and Madelyn Foster, Missouri’s Paid Sick Leave Law Analyzed, SHRM (Dec. 2, 2024), https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/missouri-paid-sick-leave-law-analyzed.
[13] Mandatory Paid Sick Leave and Wage Hikes: Missouri Employers Face New Requirements Under Proposition A, Dentons (Dec. 16, 2024), https://www.dentons.com/en/insights/alerts/2024/december/16/mandatory-paid-sick-leave-and-wage-hikes.
[14] Id.
[15] Id.; Liss, supra note 12.
[16] Proposition A – Paid Sick Time Benefits, supra note 4.
[17] Id.
[18] Mo. Rev. Stat. § 290.627 (2024).
[19] Proposition A – Paid Sick Time Benefits, supra note 4.
[20] In addition to the legislative challenges, a legal challenge seeking to invalidate Proposition A on the grounds that it violates the Missouri Constitution is currently before the Supreme Court of Missouri. Melissa M. Pesce, Update on Missouri’s Proposition A: Status of Earned Paid Sick Time Law, Ogletree Deakins (Apr. 14, 2025), https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/update-on-missouris-proposition-a-status-of-earned-paid-sick-time-law/.
[21] HB 567, Missouri House of Representatives, https://house.mo.gov/bill.aspx?bill=HB567&year=2025&code=R (last visited Apr. 24, 2025).
[22] Pesce, supra note 20.
[23] Id.
[24] Id.
[25] Clara Bates, Missouri Democrats Filibuster GOP Effort To Overturn Voter-Approved Paid Sick Leave, Missouri Independent (Apr. 17, 2025), https://missouriindependent.com/2025/04/17/missouri-democrats-filibuster-gop-effort-to-overturn-voter-approved-paid-sick-leave/.
[26] Pesce, supra note 20.
[27] Id.
[28] Bates, supra note 31.
[29] Mo. Const. art. III, § 52(b).
[30] Mo. Const. art. XII, § 2(a).
[31] Blair, supra note 22.
[32] Id.
[33] Chrystal Blair, Poll: Voters Oppose Missouri House Repeal Of Prop A’s Sick-Leave Provision, WCPT 820 Radio (Apr. 15, 2025), https://heartlandsignal.com/2025/04/15/poll-voters-oppose-missouri-house-repeal-of-prop-as-sick-leave-provision.
[34] Id.; Pat Kellett, Opinion: Prop. A Victory Preserved – For Now, St. Louis/Southern Illinois Labor Tribune (Apr. 24, 2025), https://labortribune.com/opinion-prop-a-victory-preserved-for-now/.
[35] Jon Patterson, Jon Patterson: Missouri Small Businesses Need Lawmakers To Amend Prop A’s Sick Leave | Opinion, Kansas City Star (Mar. 25, 2025), https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/readers-opinion/guest-commentary/article302674294.html.
[36] Id.
[37] See Should Every Worker Have Paid Sick Leave? The Ethics of Employee Benefits and Rights, ENACT: The Educational Network for Active Civic Transformation (Nov. 2011), https://www.brandeis.edu/enact/archive/ethical-inquiry/2011/paid-sick-leave.html.
[38] Id.
[39] Id.
[40] Proposition A Will Continue To Raise Prices On Missourians, Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Oct. 21, 2024), https://mochamber.com/news-archive/proposition-a-will-continue-to-raise-prices-on-missourians/.
[41] Id.
[42] Id.
[43] Should Every Worker Have Paid Sick Leave?, supra note 37.
[44] Id.
[45] Universal Paid Sick Time Would Strengthen Public Health and Benefit Businesses, Center for American Progress (May 15, 2023), https://www.americanprogress.org/article/universal-paid-sick-time-would-strengthen-public-health-and-benefit-businesses/.
[46] Should Every Worker Have Paid Sick Leave?, supra note 37.
[47] Universal Paid Sick Time Would Strengthen Public Health and Benefit Businesses, supra note 45.
[48] Olivia Dinwiddie, The Critical Importance of Income Security During Covid-19 and Beyond, 36 ABA J. Lab. & Emp. L. 363, 365 (2022).
[49] Should Every Worker Have Paid Sick Leave?, supra note 37.
[50] Paul Hemp, Presenteeism: At Work—But Out of It, Harvard Bus. Rev. (Oct. 2009), https://hbr.org/2004/10/presenteeism-at-work-but-out-of-it.
[51] Should Every Worker Have Paid Sick Leave?, supra note 37.
[52] See, e.g., Rachel Lippmann, Missouri Lawmakers Look To Undo Voter-Approved Initiatives, St. Louis Public Radio (Apr. 22, 2019), https://www.stlpr.org/government-politics-issues/2019-04-22/missouri-lawmakers-look-to-undo-voter-approved-initiatives.
[53] Dinwiddie, supra note 48.