The Council of Independent Colleges in Virginia, Inc. d/b/a Virginia Private Colleges appreciates the opportunity to submit comments in response to the Virginia Employment Commission’s Notice of Intended Regulatory Action regarding implementation of Virginia’s new Paid Family and Medical Leave Insurance Program established by Chapters 981 and 1093 of the 2026 Acts of Assembly.

CICV represents 28 Virginia nonprofit independent colleges and universities. Our member institutions are employers, educators, community anchors, and providers of significant student employment opportunities. As the Commission begins this important regulatory process, CICV respectfully urges the development of regulations, guidance, FAQs, and implementation materials that are clear, practical, and attentive to the unique operational structures of institutions of higher education.

Virginia’s PFML program will require significant payroll, human resources, benefits administration, employee communication, and compliance planning. For colleges and universities, those responsibilities are complicated by the fact that institutions employ students in a variety of campus-based roles, including federal work-study positions, hourly student employment, graduate assistantships, resident assistant roles, and other positions connected to a student’s enrollment. Because certain student services may be excluded from “employment” under existing unemployment compensation principles, VEC guidance is essential to determine whether and how those exclusions apply in the PFML context.

CICV respectfully requests that the Commission address certain questions in the forthcoming regulatory process, including but not limited to:

1. Are student employees at institutions of higher education intended to be treated as covered individuals under the new PFML program?
2. Are wages paid to students employed by the same institution in which they are enrolled and regularly attending classes intended to count toward monetary eligibility under the PFML program?
3. Does the Commission anticipate that existing Title 60.2 exclusions applicable to certain student services will inform implementation of the new PFML program?
4. Will forthcoming regulations or guidance specifically address student employees, graduate assistants, federal work-study positions, hourly student workers, resident assistants, and similar campus-based roles?

CICV members have received early, but speculative, indications that student services performed for the institution where the student is enrolled and regularly attending classes may be excluded from “employment” under existing unemployment law principles, but clear guidance is needed.

A key implementation question is whether the PFML statute incorporates all relevant unemployment-law exclusions, including those related to student services, or whether PFML coverage and monetary eligibility will be interpreted more broadly. Institutions would also benefit from confirmation on whether the following categories are likely to be excluded or covered:

• A work-study student employed by the institution where the student is enrolled and regularly attending classes: likely excluded.
• A student hourly employee employed by the institution where the student is enrolled and regularly attending classes: likely excluded.
• A recent graduate, non-enrolled student, or student not regularly attending classes: potentially covered.

This clarification is not merely technical. Student employment is integrated into campus operations, financial aid, residence life, academic support, athletics, dining, libraries, admissions, advancement, and other institutional functions. Ambiguity regarding coverage, wage counting, contribution obligations, and monetary eligibility could create significant payroll and reporting complexity for institutions and confusion for students.

CICV joins the broader employer community in urging the Commission to conduct an open, deliberate, and highly transparent regulatory process. This rulemaking will be among the most consequential employment-related regulatory actions undertaken in Virginia. The Commission’s regulations will need to address claims administration, employer reporting, contribution rates, actuarial assumptions, certification standards, employee notice, private plan approval, intermittent leave, appeals, enforcement, and coordination with other leave and benefits programs.

CICV joins others in requesting the Commission convene a regulatory advisory panel or comparable stakeholder workgroup that includes representatives of nonprofit employers, institutions of higher education, small and mid-sized employers, human resources professionals, payroll administrators, benefits professionals, legal counsel, insurers, and other affected stakeholders. Formal comment periods are important, but they are not a substitute for sustained technical engagement during the development of regulations.

CICV also encourages the Commission to provide a minimum 60-day formal comment period when proposed regulations are published. Given the breadth of the issues involved, employers will need adequate time to review the proposal, consult with counsel and benefits advisors, model financial and administrative impacts, and provide comments that will be useful to the Commission.

Contribution rates also require particular care. CICV respectfully requests that, before proposing contribution-rate regulations, the Commission make publicly available a full actuarial analysis of projected program costs, utilization assumptions, solvency scenarios, and expected employer and employee contribution impacts. Institutions need reliable information to prepare future budgets, configure payroll systems, communicate with employees, and evaluate whether private plans may be viable.

The Commission should consider providing clear rules governing intermittent leave. Colleges and universities operate on academic calendars, semester schedules, residential life staffing models, athletic seasons, clinical placements, lab schedules, and other time-sensitive operational structures. Intermittent leave rules should align, where appropriate, with federal FMLA standards to avoid duplicative or conflicting compliance burdens. Regulations should clearly define qualifying leave increments, certification requirements, notice obligations, employer response timelines, and coordination with existing institutional leave policies.

CICV asks the Commission to develop a clear and workable private-plan approval process. Many nonprofit colleges and universities already provide paid parental leave, short-term disability, long-term disability, sick leave, PTO, or other benefits that may overlap with or exceed portions of the new statutory program. The regulations should include transparent standards, defined application timelines, renewal procedures, and clear guidance on how private plans will coordinate with state-administered benefits. Ambiguity in this area could discourage employers from maintaining or expanding existing benefits.

Finally, the Commission should consider the cumulative impact of the PFML program alongside other new employer mandates. Colleges and universities must prepare for payroll contributions, employee notices, coordination with existing leave programs, benefits continuation, job restoration requirements, student-worker questions, HRIS changes, and employee communications. These obligations carry real administrative and financial consequences, particularly for smaller institutions and nonprofit employers with limited administrative capacity.

CICV appreciates the Commission’s willingness to engage stakeholders early in this process, and we welcome continued dialogue as the regulatory process moves forward.