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