BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
485 (Carter)
Hearing Date: 8/17/2009 Amended: 7/23/2009
Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: Judic 3-2 L&IR 6-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 485 would require employers employing more than
15 employees to provide not less than 10 days per year of leave,
beyond any leave benefits otherwise available to employees, to
employees who have been employed by that employer for at least
90 days, who are volunteer members of the California Wing of the
Civil Air Patrol (CAP) and who have been duly directed to
respond to an emergency operational mission of the California
Wing of the CAP. This bill would provide that an employer is
not required to grant CAP leave to employees who are required to
respond as first responders. An employer would be required,
upon expiration of the leave, to restore the employee to the
position he or she held when the leave began, unless the
employee is not restored due to unrelated conditions. This bill
would authorize an employee to bring a civil action to enforce
CAP leave rights.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Fund
Expansion of employee No state costs; unknown, likely
minorGeneral
leave rights non-reimbursable costs to local govern-
ments.
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: The CAP is a nonprofit, 501(c) (3) corporation
which operates as the all-volunteer civilian auxiliary of the
U.S. Air Force when performing services for the federal
government. There are eight geographic regions consisting of 52
wings, including approximately 1,600 units, more than 56,000
members nationwide operating one of the largest fleets of
single-engine piston aircraft in the world, with 550 currently
in the fleet flying, through volunteer members, nearly 110,000
hours each year. Through its emergency services, the CAP
conducts approximately 90 percent of inland search and rescue in
the U.S while also provides disaster-relief support to local,
state and national organizations and transports time-sensitive
medical materials, blood products and body tissues.
According to this bill, leave for a single emergency operational
mission shall not exceed three days, unless a specified
extension is provided. This would allow an employee to
participate in a minimum of four missions annually. According
to one policy committee analysis, the CAP has participated in
two emergency missions this year. Generally, volunteers spend a
few days on the mission before they are sent home and are
replaced by other CAP volunteers.
An employee would be required to give the employer as much
notice as possible of the intended dates upon which leave would
begin and end. How this would occur is unclear since emergency
operational missions should, by definition, be unknown in
advance. Employers would not be required to grant CAP leave to
CAP employees who are
Page 2
AB 485 (Carter)
required to respond as first responders or disaster assistance
service workers for a federal, state, or local agency to the
same or a simultaneous emergency operational mission.
A court would be authorized to enjoin an act or practice that
violates the CAP leave provisions and to order any equitable
relief necessary and appropriate to redress a violation or to
enforce CAP leave rights.
Government Code 19844.5 provides a state employee who serves in
the CAP (or other named volunteer program) as a volunteer with
administrative leave of up to 10 calendar days per fiscal year
to engage in a search and rescue operation, disaster mission, or
other life savings mission conducted within the state, at the
discretion of the employee's appointing authority. As noted by
the Legislative Analyst's Office, court decisions have found
that local government employer obligations were comparable to
other employers, and were not attributable to providing a new
program to the public. These cases form the basis of what is
commonly referred to as the "law of general applicability."
That is, if a statute imposes similar obligations on the private
and public sector, the public sector's costs to comply with the
requirement do not constitute a state reimbursable mandate. This
bill would result in unknown, likely minor costs to non
governmental employers.