On June 25, 2025, the Alaska Department of Labor & Workforce Development (“DOL”) published a Notice of Proposed Regulations for the Alaska Paid Sick Leave Law.

The proposed regulations clarify ambiguities in the statutory language that have caused confusion for employers. Below are some of the most important changes that would occur should the proposed rule be adopted:

• The proposed rule provides guidance on how employers should calculate how many employees they have. Under AS 23.10.066, employers with 14 or fewer employees are required to provide eligible employees with a minimum of 40 hours of paid sick leave per year, whereas employers with 15 or more employees must provide eligible employees with a minimum of 56 hours of paid sick leave per year. 8 AAC 15.106 of the proposed rule states that employers must calculate how many employees they have based on the average number of employees who were employed per day during the entire previous calendar year, including all full-time, part-time, seasonal, and temporary employees.
• The proposed rule clarifies that for full-time employees, employers may “front-load” the total amount of hours required by AS 23.10.1066 in a lump sum at the beginning of each year, or on a prorated basis for employees hired later in the year. For employees who are not full-time, employers can pro-rate the front-loaded amount based on the amount the employee would accrue in a year, based on the employee’s normally scheduled hours for regular part-time employees, or average past hours worked for irregular part-time employees. And, employers that front-load sick leave are not required to keep track of sick leave accruals, or allow unused sick leave hours to carry over from year to year. Notably, the option to “prorate” the minimum yearly accrual amount is only connected to an employer’s decision to front-load sick leave hours. The proposed rule does not specify that the minimum yearly accrual rate can be prorated if accrued based on hours worked throughout the year.
• The proposed rule states that employers can automatically apply sick leave to any unapproved absence, not just those used for protected uses. The statute does not expressly state that the employer can automatically apply sick leave hours for any absence. However, the statute states that employers “shall not interfere with . . . the right to paid sick leave,” which might be interpreted as prohibiting employers from applying sick leave hours to absences not intended for sick leave use.
• The proposed rule states that paid time off (“PTO”) that an employer provides through a paid leave or PTO policy will satisfy the requirement to provide paid sick leave as long as (1) the policy meets the requirements of the paid sick leave statute; (2) the employer provides notice that the PTO policy is being utilized to meet the requirement to provide paid sick leave; (3) that PTO accrues at a rate of not less than one hour for every 30 hours worked; and (4) that an employee may utilize hours in the PTO bank on the same terms as provided under the paid sick leave statute.  Further, an employer is not required to provide additional PTO if an employee uses PTO for a non-sick leave reason. Finally, if an employer provides an employee paid time-off or sick leave hours in excess of the minimum yearly allotment, the excess hours are not subject to the Alaska paid sick leave statutes (and the rights granted under it). This language is similar to Oregon law, where the requirements of the Oregon sick leave statute apply only to the first 40 hours of leave in a PTO / sick leave policy. Similarly, the proposed rule states the “excess” PTO or sick leave hours beyond the minimum yearly allotment (40 or 56 hours) are “not subject” to the Alaska sick leave statute.
• The proposed rule states that employers can require reasonable advance notice of up to 10 days in advance for foreseeable absences. The statute only states that employees must make a “good faith effort” to provide advance notice, but provides no clarity on what constitutes a “good faith effort.”
• The proposed rule states that an employer’s “advance notice policy” can require employees to make a reasonable attempt not to schedule medical appointments during peak business hours, when work is time sensitive, or when a mandatory meeting is scheduled if the employee’s absence would unduly disrupt business operations. This proposed rule intends to clarify what constitutes a “reasonable effort” and when scheduling a foreseeable absence would “unduly disrupt business operations.”
• The proposed rule states that employers can require notice of the employee’s intent to use sick leave in advance of the start of the employee’s shift or as soon as possible thereafter for unforeseen absences.
• The proposed rule states that if an employer has provided employees with a copy of the written sick leave policy (or PTO policy), an employer may discipline an employee if the employee fails to provide reasonable advance notice (as specified above) and may deny an employee’s sick leave request if the employee does not make a ‎reasonable effort to schedule so as not to unduly disrupt business operations. ‎
• The proposed rule states that after an employee uses sick leave for three consecutive working days, an employer may require reasonable documentation to verify the reason for sick leave. An employer’s right to ask for verification is allowed only if the employer has a sick leave policy that includes the verification requirement. An employer is not required to pay for sick leave until an employee has provided the requested verification.
• Finally, the proposed rule clarifies that an employer has satisfied the notice requirement under the statute if it provides written notice of the rights and policies of the Alaska Paid Sick Leave law to employees in any of the following ways:

(1) by distributing the written notice to each employee personally, by United States mail, by ‎electronic mail, or by including the notice in an employee’s paycheck; ‎

(2) by incorporating the written notice into a handbook or manual made available to ‎employees, whether in a print or electronic format; or ‎

(3) by posting the written notice in a conspicuous and accessible location in each workplace ‎of the employer. ‎

The proposed rules are currently undergoing notice and comment and thus are subject to change. Employers should continue to implement sick leave policies in compliance with existing statutory language until the DOL adopts a final rule.

The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors. This article does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice for your situation, you should contact an attorney.