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