BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 325
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 325 (Bonnie Lowenthal)
As Amended April 7, 2011
Majority vote
LABOR & EMPLOYMENT 4-1 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Swanson, Alejo, Allen, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Yamada | |Bradford, Charles |
| | | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| | | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Miller |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Authorizes employees to take four days of unpaid time
off in the event of the death of certain relatives.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits an employer from discharging, disciplining, or
discriminating against an employee for inquiring about,
requesting, or taking up to four days bereavement leave upon
the death of a spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent,
grandchild, or domestic partner.
2)Limits the application of the right to bereavement leave to
employees who have been employed by the employer for at least
60 days.
3)States that the bereavement leave is to be unpaid, but allows
the employee to use vacation, personal leave, or compensatory
time off that is otherwise eligible to the employee.
4)Provides that the four days of bereavement leave need not be
consecutive.
5)Permits the employer to require documentation of the death
within 30 days of the first day of the leave.
6)Provides that the bereavement leave must be completed within
AB 325
Page 2
13 months of the date of death of the family member.
7)Grants employees the right to recover actual damages if the
employee is discriminated against for the exercise of rights
pursuant to this section.
8)Specifies that the employee may either file a complaint with
the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) or bring a
civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction for
violations of this section.
9)Clarifies that bereavement leave for state employees remains
subject to collective bargaining agreements.
EXISTING LAW provides employees the opportunity to take both
paid and unpaid time away from work without fear of discharge or
discrimination for a number of specified purposes.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, this bill may have minor fiscal impact on state
government as an employer, to the extent that bereavement leave
for state employees would remain subject to collective
bargaining.
COMMENTS : This bill is sponsored by the California Employment
Lawyers Association (CELA), who states that everyone suffers the
devastating loss of a relative at some point during their life.
Without legislation providing the right to bereavement leave, an
employer may legally discharge an employee for requesting or
taking any leave of absence to prepare for or attend the funeral
of a loved one. CELA argues that no employee in California
should have to choose between their employment and grieving the
loss of a loved one. Unfortunately, currently no federal or
state law provides job protection for an employee who must take
a leave of absence following the death of a relative.
CELA points out that the federal Family and Medical Leave Act
(FMLA) and the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) provide
California employees with up to twelve weeks of unpaid
job-protected leave in order to care for an ailing family
member. However, neither law provides job-protected leave
following the death of an employee's relative.
Therefore, CELA contends that in order to protect employees
AB 325
Page 3
during this sensitive time of need, this bill ensures up to four
days of unpaid bereavement leave for all employees working in
California. This bill, they conclude, provides an important
right to California employees. Furthermore, the bill includes
protections to ensure that employees do not abuse the
bereavement leave protections.
Opponents argue that by making bereavement leave mandatory in
every situation, this bill removes flexibility employers need to
balance bereavement leave requests with pressing leave requests
by other employees for other reasons, such as to care for a
family member who is in trouble. They contend that coordinating
overlapping leave requests can be especially challenging for
small businesses with limited staff. For example, a small
business that can only accommodate two days of bereavement
leave, without being unfair to other employees or bringing
operations to a complete halt, should not have to face a
lawsuit.
In addition, several local public employers oppose this bill
unless it is amended to exclude them. They contend that the
majority of local public sector employers are covered by
collective bargaining agreements that provide for paid leave
benefits, including bereavement leave, and that this bill
therefore undermines local control and the integrity of the
collective bargaining process. They also argue that the
expansion of leave rights to temporary, part-time and seasonal
employees who are not eligible for many of the leave accruals
and benefits offered to full-time employees is not appropriate.
They conclude by arguing that, considering the already generous
leave and benefit policies enjoyed by public sector employees,
they strongly believe that this bill should not apply to public
sector employees.
Analysis Prepared by : Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091
FN: 0000395