The Michigan Court of Claims ruled that Michigan’s Earned Sick Time Act (ESTA) law applies to collective bargaining agreements that do not address earned sick time off for workers. The Michigan Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) sued the MI Labor and Economic Opportunity Department (LEO) saying the Department did not interpret ESTA correctly.

This is the first case brought and decided around Michigan’s Earned Sick Time Act.

Last year, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the way the previous Legislature passed the Paid Medical and Paid Sick Leave Act – using the “adopt and amend” method – was unconstitutional. As a result, the original Earned Sick Time Act (ESTA), passed in 2018, was recognized as the valid law and, per the Court’s ruling, took effect on February 21, 2025. Following this decision, Michigan’s Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO) issued guidance in the form of Frequently Asked Questions on its website. Regarding collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) in place when ESTA takes effect, LEO clarified that current CBAs will not prevent the law’s implementation. If a CBA lacks a sick leave or PTO provision as required by ESTA, it does not need to be updated until the next agreement is negotiated.

The Electrical Workers Union believed the ESTA law should have been interpreted to require the employer to follow ESTA even without any sick or paid time off language in the CBA.

The Michigan Court of Claims judge looked at the way the law was written and applying English grammar rules stated that the law had “conflicts with” language and because “conflicts with is an active verb” the CBA’s contract provisions about earned sick time would have to conflict with ESTA “in order for the CBA to be exempted from immediate application of the ESTA.”

Further carrying forward her English grammar schooling, the judge stated, “Silence is passive and therefore, silence on the issue of ESTA does not ‘conflict with’ EST’.” Absent a conflict, the ESTA takes immediate effect for those employers and employees with a CBA that is silent on the issue of EST.” The law states ESTA does not require compliance until the current contract expires.

This decision impacted 10 CBA’s that the Electrical Union currently had bargained with. So, they will have to expire before any ESTA compliant language and benefits would be put into effect.

The Court also addressed whether LEO’s interpretation would not be legal under the contracts and equal protections clauses of the Michigan and U.S. Constitutions. The Claims Court Judge did not see any substantial impact on the “contractual relationship” between the parties. The judge stated, “The nature of the impairment is too fleeting to be substantial.” Lastly, the judge also held

the National Labor Relations Act does NOT preempt ESTA.

LEO issued a statement last Friday about the decision saying the judge’s ruling upholds LEO’s interpretation of the statute which follows legislative intent.

Case: Michigan Chapter, National Electrical Contractors Association v. Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity. (Case# 25-000037-MZ. MI Court of Claims)

ASE Connect

ESTA FAQs:

Visit the ASE ESTA FAQ page.

Webinar:

Source: Law360 Employment Authority.  Court Finds Mich. Law Applies to CBAs Silent ON Sick Time (7/18/2025)