This bill amends an existing Washington law (RCW 50A.15.020) governing paid family and medical leave. It reduces maximum leave durational limits (paid family leave and paid medical leave from 12 to 8 times an employee’s typical workweek hours in a 52-week period, combined family and medical leave from 16 to 12 times the typical workweek hours, with specified 2‑times extensions for pregnancy-related serious health conditions that result in incapacity). It also prescribes a seven-calendar-day waiting period (with no waiting period for birth or placement of a child or qualifying exigency), sets the waiting period to begin the previous Sunday of the week when an otherwise eligible employee takes qualifying leave, allows the waiting period to be satisfied while using employer-provided paid time off, requires weekly benefits to be prorated by the percentage of hours on leave, establishes rounding rules for dollars and hours, and fixes the minimum claim payment at four consecutive hours. The amendment changes the benefit formula and benefit limits. For low‑wage workers it sets benefits at 90 percent of the employee’s average weekly wage up to one-half of the state average weekly wage, and for higher earners it applies a blended formula that combines 90 percent of the lower portion with 50 percent of the excess. It sets a $1,000 maximum weekly benefit for leave on or after January 1, 2020, directs the commissioner to adjust the maximum by September 30, 2020 and each September 30 thereafter so the following January 1 the maximum equals 90 percent of the state average weekly wage, and establishes a minimum weekly benefit of $100 (or the employee’s full wage if the average weekly wage is under $100). The provision treats certain postnatal leave as medical leave unless the employee elects family leave, and for that postnatal paid leave it waives the requirement for certification of a serious health condition. The change is a statutory amendment (not a new crime or penalty change) that alters benefit calculations, duration limits, procedural rules for waiting periods and claims, and administrative adjustment timing. The text relies on definitions and cross-references in RCW 50A.05.010 (for “typical workweek hours,” “qualifying exigency,” and certain eligibility criteria) that are not included here, it does not identify the specific office titled “commissioner,” and the statute text references availability beginning January 1, 2020 while this act’s stated effective date is January 1, 2027; how those dates interact is not clarified in the extracted material.

If enacted, workers would have fewer total paid leave hours available each year because the law cuts maximum family and medical leave limits (and the combined cap) from prior levels down to smaller multiples of a typical workweek. The first seven calendar days remain the waiting period for most claims (but not for birth or placement of a child or certain military-related exigencies), claims must be for at least four consecutive hours to get paid, benefit payments and leave hours are rounded down to whole dollars/hours, and weekly benefits follow the stated sliding formula with a $100 minimum and an annually adjusted maximum tied to the state average weekly wage. Postnatal leave for certain employees would be treated as medical leave without needing a medical certification, and the changes take effect January 1, 2027. The people most affected are employees who use paid family or medical leave (they will likely have to take shorter or more limited leaves) and employers or the program administrator (they will need to apply the new caps, waiting-period and minimum-claim rules, and rounding and benefit-calculation changes). These limits could lower total program outlays by cutting available hours, though the automatic annual adjustment of the maximum weekly benefit could raise per-week costs over time; which effect dominates depends on factors not included here. Important definitions referenced in the text (for example, how a "typical workweek" is calculated and the exact eligibility categories) and the specific office of the "commissioner" are not provided in the extracted facts, so some implementation details remain unclear.