BILL ANALYSIS Ó Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair AB 2039 (Swanson) - Family and medical leave. Amended: As Introduced Policy Vote: L&IR 5-0 Urgency: No Mandate: No Hearing Date: August 6, 2012 Consultant: Bob Franzoia This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. Bill Summary: AB 2039 would increase the circumstances under which an employee is entitled to protected leave under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA). Fiscal Impact: Minor, absorbable General Fund costs annually to Department of Fair Employment and Housing (department) to respond to an increase in complaint filings. Unknown, potentially major General Fund and special fund costs to state agencies annually. Background: The CFRA requires employers of 50 or more employees to grant qualified workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave during any 12 month period to bond with a child, care for a parent, spouse or child with a serious illness, or because the employee has a serious health condition. This bill would expand those definitions. The department estimates its caseload for denied leave claims involving families may double from 400 cases to 800 cases annually. However, because the department has implemented case processing innovations and is currently transitioning to a cloud based electronic case management system that have significantly reduced caseloads and made case processing much more efficient, the cost to process these claims is estimated to be minor. The department would also incur minor costs one time to develop and distribute materials to employers for distribution to employees explaining employee rights under the expanded CFRA. Proposed Law: This bill would eliminate the age and dependency elements from the definition of "child," thereby permitting an employee to take protected leave to care for his or her independent adult child suffering from a serious health condition, expand the definition of "parent" to include an AB 2039 (Swanson) Page 1 employee's parent-in-law and permit an employee to also take leave to care for a seriously ill grandparent, sibling, grandchild, or domestic partner. Related Legislation: This bill is similar to AB 537 (Swanson) 2007 which was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger with the following message: This bill, along with two others I am returning without my signature, would significantly expand California's workplace leave laws. While some expansion of existing law may have merit, these laws in combination are too expansive and also fail to recognize the need for reforms to current law. California has the strongest employment leave and workplace protection laws in the country. While these laws have been enacted with the best of intentions, they have also caused much confusion for employers and employees. Unfortunately, many California-only standards in areas such as family leave, overtime, and meal and rest periods have been developed haphazardly and have resulted in needless litigation that has created a perception that California is not friendly to business. Instead of expanding the confusing network of laws that presently exist, employers and employees should be working together to eliminate confusion and create a system of workplace laws that protects workers, provides reasonable leave requirements, and offers both employers and employees flexibility to meet their respective needs. This bill also is similar to AB 849 (Swanson) 2009 and AB 59 (Swanson) 2011, both of which were held in Assembly Appropriations Committee. Staff Comments: It is estimated approximately 210,000 state employees would be eligible for expanded CFRA benefits. At present, about 12,000 employees receive this benefit annually. If this bill resulted in a ten percent increase (1,200) in utilization and the cost of the added workload to hire, train, and manage a temporary employee was $1,000 over three months, costs to the state would be $1,200,000 annually. Both the need to hire a temporary employee and the cost to train and manage that employee can be expected to vary widely between state entities. AB 2039 (Swanson) Page 2 Compensation costs would vary based on the period of leave (maximum of three month) thereby, increasing the probably of temporary employees being needed. Depending on employee workload, temporary employee compensation costs would also vary. For example, assuming average total compensation of $90,000 ($22,500 for replacement faculty or staff) California State University costs could range up to $2.6 million annually if five employees per campus were to avail themselves of the expanded benefits