PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Hayes, Jahana [D-CT-5] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Jan 21, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1002 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1002 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1002 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1002 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-05 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Caring for All Families Act would expand family relationships recognized by existing leave rules, including for covered federal employees. It would include domestic partners, adult children, more extended relatives, and people with a close bond like family. It would also add limited leave for school or community activities, routine family medical care, and care for an elderly person with a family-like bond.
This Act may be cited as the Caring for All Families Act .
2. Leave to care for a domestic partner, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, parent-in-law, adult child, grandparent, grandchild, or sibling of the employee, or another related individual
3. Leave to care for a domestic partner, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, parent-in-law, adult child, grandparent, grandchild, or sibling of the employee, or another related individual for Federal employees
(i) participate in or attend an activity that is sponsored by a school or community organization and relates to a program of the school or organization that is attended by a son or daughter or a grandchild of the employee; or (ii) meet routine family medical care needs (including by attending medical and dental appointments of the employee or a son or daughter, spouse or domestic partner, or grandchild of the employee) or attend to the care needs of an elderly individual who is any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee
5. Entitlement of Federal employees to leave for parental involvement and family wellness
Both sets of leave rules would recognize a significant personal bond that is or resembles a family relationship, whether or not the people are biologically or legally related. This definition would apply to relationships with an employee or a covered servicemember.
The term any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship, used with respect to an employee or a covered servicemember, means any person with whom the employee or covered servicemember, as the case may be, has a significant personal bond that is or is like a family relationship, regardless of biological or legal relationship.
the term any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship, used with respect to an employee or a covered servicemember, means any person with whom the employee or covered servicemember, as the case may be, has a significant personal bond that is or is like a family relationship, regardless of biological or legal relationship;
A domestic partner would qualify through recognition under state or local domestic-partnership or civil-union law. Alternatively, an unmarried employee or covered servicemember could designate an unmarried adult in a committed personal relationship, provided that adult has neither a legally recognized domestic partnership nor such a relationship with another person. Designation would go to the employer or, under the federal rules, the employing agency.
(A) the person recognized as the domestic partner of the employee or covered servicemember under any domestic partnership or civil union law of a State or political subdivision of a State; or (B) in the case of an unmarried employee or covered servicemember, an unmarried adult person who is in a committed, personal relationship with the employee or covered servicemember, is not a domestic partner as described in subparagraph (A) to or in such a relationship with any other person, and who is designated to the employer by such employee or covered service member as the domestic partner of that employee or covered servicemember.
(A) the person recognized as the domestic partner of the employee or covered servicemember under any domestic partnership or civil union law of a State or political subdivision of a State; or (B) in the case of an unmarried employee or covered servicemember, an unmarried adult person who is in a committed, personal relationship with the employee or covered servicemember, is not a domestic partner as described in subparagraph (A) to or in such a relationship with any other person, and who is designated to the employing agency by such employee or covered service member as the domestic partner of that employee or covered servicemember;
The bill would add a domestic partner’s child to the child definitions in both leave systems. It would also replace the existing language beginning “who is—” with language expressly including an adult child; the deleted conditions are not reproduced.
Section 101(12) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 2611(12)) is amended— (A) by inserting a child of an individual’s domestic partner, after a legal ward,; and (B) by striking who is— and all that follows and inserting and includes an adult child.
Section 6381(6) of such title is amended— (A) by inserting a child of an individual’s domestic partner, after a legal ward,; and (B) by striking who is— and all that follows and inserting and includes an adult child.
In both systems, a parent-in-law would include a spouse’s or domestic partner’s parent. A son-in-law or daughter-in-law would include a child’s spouse or domestic partner.
The term parent-in-law, used with respect to an employee or a covered servicemember, means a parent of the spouse or domestic partner of the employee or covered service member.
The terms son-in-law and daughter-in-law, used with respect to an employee or a covered servicemember, mean any person who is a spouse or domestic partner of a son or daughter, as the case may be, of the employee or covered service member.
the term parent-in-law, used with respect to an employee or a covered servicemember, means a parent of the spouse or domestic partner of the employee or covered service member;
the terms son-in-law and daughter-in-law, used with respect to an employee or a covered servicemember, mean any person who is a spouse or domestic partner of a son or daughter, as the case may be, of the employee or covered service member;
For the existing family-care leave provisions amended in paragraph (1)(C) of each system, the relationship list would include spouses, domestic partners, children, children’s spouses or partners, parents, parents-in-law, grandparents, grandchildren, siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and people with equivalent family bonds.
in subparagraph (C), by striking spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent, of the employee, if such spouse, son, daughter, or parent and inserting spouse or domestic partner, or a son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece of the employee, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee
in subparagraph (C), by striking spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent, of the employee, if such spouse, son, daughter, or parent and inserting spouse or domestic partner, or a son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece of the employee, or any other individual whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship
The expanded relationship lists would differ across existing leave provisions. In both systems, paragraph (1)(E) would expressly list grandchildren but not grandparents. The paragraph (3) provision concerning a covered servicemember would expressly list grandparents but not grandchildren and retain “next of kin.” Both lists would also include people with equivalent family bonds, so omission of a named relationship does not by itself establish exclusion.
in subparagraph (E), by striking spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent of the employee and inserting spouse or domestic partner, or a son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, parent, parent-in-law, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece of the employee, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee;
in paragraph (3), by striking spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin of a covered servicemember and inserting spouse or domestic partner, son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, sibling, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, or next of kin of a covered servicemember, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the covered servicemember;
in subparagraph (E), by striking spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent of the employee and inserting spouse or domestic partner, or a son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, parent, parent-in-law, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece of the employee, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee;
in paragraph (3), by striking spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin of a covered servicemember and inserting spouse or domestic partner, son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, sibling, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, or next of kin of a covered servicemember, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the covered servicemember;
Related amendments would expand the relationship lists in existing notice-related provisions in both leave systems. They would change who those provisions reference without reproducing the complete existing requirements.
in subsection (e)— (A) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking son, daughter, spouse, parent, or covered servicemember of the employee, as appropriate and inserting son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, spouse or domestic partner, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, or covered servicemember of the employee, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee, as appropriate;
in subsection (e)— (A) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking son, daughter, spouse, parent, or covered servicemember of the employee, as appropriate and inserting son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, spouse or domestic partner, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, or covered servicemember of the employee, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee, as appropriate;
Existing Family and Medical Leave Act provisions referring to a husband and wife would also refer to domestic partners. One parent reference in those provisions would also include a parent-in-law. The source does not reproduce the surrounding rules governing these provisions.
in subsection (f)— (A) in paragraph (1)— (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting , or domestic partners, after husband and wife; and (ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting or parent-in-law after parent; and (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting , or those domestic partners, after husband and wife each place it appears.
Both systems’ existing certification provisions would be updated to recognize the expanded relationships. The amended wording would include an estimate of how long the employee is needed to provide care.
and an estimate of the amount of time that such employee is needed to care for such son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, spouse or domestic partner, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece, or such other individual;
and an estimate of the amount of time that such employee is needed to care for such son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, spouse or domestic partner, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece, or such other individual.
The bill would also expand relationship references in the Family and Medical Leave Act’s employment and benefits protection provisions. The supplied amendments do not reproduce those provisions’ full operation.
(d) Employment and Benefits Protection Section 104(c)(3) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2614(c)(3)) is amended— (1) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking son, daughter, spouse, or parent of the employee, as appropriate, and inserting son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, spouse or domestic partner, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, uncle or aunt, or nephew or niece of the employee, or any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee, as appropriate,;
The new parental-involvement leave would let eligible employees under the Family and Medical Leave Act and employees covered by the federal provision attend or participate in school- or community-sponsored activities connected to a program attended by their child or grandchild.
an eligible employee shall be entitled to leave under this paragraph to— (i) participate in or attend an activity that is sponsored by a school or community organization and relates to a program of the school or organization that is attended by a son or daughter or a grandchild of the employee;
an employee shall be entitled to leave under this paragraph to— (i) participate in or attend an activity that is sponsored by a school or community organization and relates to a program of the school or organization that is attended by a son or daughter or a grandchild of the employee;
For that leave, schools would include elementary and secondary schools, assisted Head Start programs, and state-licensed child care facilities. Community organizations would have to be private nonprofits representing a community or a significant part of it and providing activities for people covered by the amended child definition; scouting and sports organizations are examples.
The term community organization means a private nonprofit organization that is representative of a community or a significant segment of a community and provides activities for individuals described in section 101(12), such as a scouting or sports organization.
The term school means an elementary school or secondary school (as such terms are defined in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801)), a Head Start program assisted under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), and a child care facility licensed under State law.
the term community organization means a private nonprofit organization that is representative of a community or a significant segment of a community and provides activities for individuals described in section 6381(6), such as a scouting or sports organization;
the term school means an elementary school or secondary school (as such terms are defined in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801)), a Head Start program assisted under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), and a child care facility licensed under State law.
The new family-wellness leave in both systems would cover routine family medical needs, including medical and dental appointments for the employee, a child, a spouse or domestic partner, or a grandchild. It would also cover care needs of an elderly person with an equivalent family bond, including visits to nursing homes and group homes.
meet routine family medical care needs (including by attending medical and dental appointments of the employee or a son or daughter, spouse or domestic partner, or grandchild of the employee) or attend to the care needs of an elderly individual who is any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee (including by making visits to nursing homes or group homes).
meet routine family medical care needs (including by attending medical and dental appointments of the employee or a son or daughter, spouse or domestic partner, or grandchild of the employee) or to attend to the care needs of an elderly individual who is any other individual whose close association is the equivalent of a family relationship with the employee (including by making visits to nursing homes and group homes).
Parental-involvement and family-wellness leave would share a limit of four hours in any 30-day period and 24 hours in the applicable 12-month period. In both systems, this leave would be additional to leave provided by the other paragraphs of the same subsection.
An eligible employee shall be entitled to— (I) not to exceed 4 hours of leave under this paragraph during any 30-day period; and (II) not to exceed 24 hours of leave under this paragraph during any 12-month period described in paragraph (4). (ii) Coordination rule Leave under this paragraph shall be in addition to any leave provided under any other paragraph of this subsection.
An employee is entitled to— (I) not to exceed 4 hours of leave under this paragraph during any 30-day period; and (II) not to exceed 24 hours of leave under this paragraph during any 12-month period described in paragraph (4). (ii) Leave under this paragraph shall be in addition to any leave provided under any other paragraph of this subsection.
Employees in both systems could take the new leave in separate periods or through a reduced work schedule, subject to the referenced notice and certification rules.
Subject to subsection (e)(4) and section 103(g), leave under subsection (a)(5) may be taken intermittently or on a reduced leave schedule.
Subject to subsection (e)(4) and section 6383(f), leave under subsection (a)(5) may be taken intermittently or on a reduced leave schedule.
Under the Family and Medical Leave Act amendment, an eligible employee could choose—or the employer could require—use of accrued paid vacation, personal, or family leave for any part of the new leave entitlement.
An eligible employee may elect, or an employer may require the employee, to substitute any of the accrued paid vacation leave, personal leave, or family leave of the employee for any part of the period of leave under subsection (a)(5).
For family-wellness leave under that amendment, the employee could choose—or the employer could require—use of accrued paid medical or sick leave. This would not require an employer to provide paid medical or sick leave in circumstances where it would not normally provide it.
An eligible employee may elect, or an employer may require the employee, to substitute any of the accrued paid medical or sick leave of the employee for any part of the period of leave provided under clause (ii) of subsection (a)(5)(A), except that nothing in this title shall require an employer to provide paid sick leave or paid medical leave in any situation in which such employer would not normally provide any such paid leave.
When accrued paid leave is used for the new Family and Medical Leave Act entitlement, the employer could not restrict the leave substituted or impose conditions more demanding for the employee than those in the Act.
If the employee elects or the employer requires the substitution of accrued paid leave for leave under subsection (a)(5), the employer shall not restrict or limit the leave that may be substituted or impose any additional terms and conditions on the substitution of such leave that are more stringent for the employee than the terms and conditions set forth in this Act.
Under the federal employee provision, employees could choose to use accrued or accumulated annual or sick leave for any part of the new entitlement. The agency could not restrict the substituted leave or impose conditions more demanding than those in the governing subchapter. This provision gives the choice to the employee.
An employee may elect to substitute for any part of the period of leave under subsection (a)(5), any of the employee’s accrued or accumulated annual or sick leave. If the employee elects the substitution of that accrued or accumulated annual or sick leave for leave under subsection (a)(5), the employing agency shall not restrict or limit the leave that may be substituted or impose any additional terms and conditions on the substitution of such leave that are more stringent for the employee than the terms and conditions set forth in this subchapter.
Employees requesting the new leave would have to give their employer or federal agency at least seven days’ advance notice. If that is impracticable, they would have to give as much notice as practicable.
provide the employer with not less than 7 days’ notice, or (if such notice is impracticable) such notice as is practicable, before the date the leave is to begin, of the employee’s intention to take leave under such paragraph;
provide the employing agency with not less than 7 days’ notice, or (if such notice is impracticable) such notice as is practicable, before the date the leave is to begin, of the employee’s intention to take leave under such paragraph;
For family-wellness leave, employees in both systems would have to make a reasonable effort to schedule the care or activity without unduly disrupting operations, subject to approval by any health care provider involved.
in the case of leave to be taken under subsection (a)(5)(A)(ii), make a reasonable effort to schedule the activity or care involved so as not to disrupt unduly the operations of the employer, subject to the approval of the health care provider involved (if any).
in the case of leave to be taken under subsection (a)(5)(A)(ii), make a reasonable effort to schedule the activity or care involved so as not to disrupt unduly the operations of the employing agency, subject to the approval of the health care provider involved (if any).
For the new Family and Medical Leave Act leave, an employer could require a supporting certification, with its timing and form set by regulations prescribed by the Secretary. For federal employees, the bill would add the new leave paragraph to an existing certification provision; that provision’s full requirements are not supplied.
An employer may require that a request for leave under section 102(a)(5) be supported by a certification issued at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe.
(e) Certification Section 6383(f) of such title is amended by striking paragraph (1)(E) or (3) of and inserting paragraph (1)(E), (3) or (5) of .
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated January 21, 2026, records introduction in the House on February 5, 2025, and referral that day to the Committees on Education and Workforce, Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration. This dated snapshot does not establish subsequent action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-01-21T02:42:21Z.
2025-02-05: Introduced in House
2025-02-05: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-05. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status in accompanying materials is not established.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Broad access to leave does not alone constitute a targeted benefit. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jan 21, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI