BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2405
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
2405 (Gatto)
As Amended May 31, 2016
Majority vote
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Labor |4-2 |Roger Hernández, Chu, |Patterson, Linder |
| | |McCarty, Thurmond | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |13-6 |Gonzalez, Bloom, |Bigelow, Chang, |
| | |Bonilla, Bonta, |Gallagher, Jones, |
| | |Calderon, Eggman, |Obernolte, Wagner |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Roger Hernández, | |
| | |Holden, Quirk, | |
| | |Santiago, Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Requires an employer to annually provide an employee
at least eight hours of paid, job-protected, time off for the
AB 2405
Page 2
purposes of an absence under the Family School Partnership Act
(Act) except as specified. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires an employer to annually provide an employee at least
eight hours of paid, job-protected, time off for the purposes
of an absence under the Act except as specified.
2)Authorizes an employee to use vacation or paid time off, or
use unpaid time off, if available, when taking time off under
these provisions.
3)Provides a remedy to an employee whose request for time off
under these provisions is denied by the employer.
4)Requires the Labor Commissioner (LC) to create a poster
listing the protections available to employees and would
require an employer to post it at the workplace, as specified.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Prohibits an employer who employs 25 or more employees working
at the same location from discharging or discriminating
against an employee who is a parent, as defined, having
custody of a child in a licensed child day care facility or in
kindergarten or grades one to 12, inclusive, for taking off up
to 40 hours each year to find, enroll, or reenroll their child
in a school, to participate in school activities (time off
shall not exceed eight hours in any calendar month a year), or
address emergency situations at school, subject to specified
conditions.
2)Requires an employee to use vacation or other paid time off
when taking time off under these provisions and authorizes the
use of unpaid time off, to the extent made available by the
employer.
AB 2405
Page 3
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, the state would incur costs of approximately $16.3
million to provide time off to employees of skilled nursing
facilities and unknown minor costs for the Department of
Industrial Relations to process claims.
COMMENTS: According to the author, this legislation seeks to
update the Act protecting a parent's right to participate in his
or her child's education. Current law allows parents to take up
to 40 hours of unpaid, job-protected time off for school
activities and school related emergencies. The author hopes to
strengthen this right by requiring eight hours of those 40 hours
to be paid time off for each calendar year.
The author argues that there are a large number of parents who
want to be more involved with their children in school, but
can't be involved as a result of parental/financial obligations.
The author states, there is also evidence that parental
involvement is really important in all schools, but particularly
crucial in low-income communities. Like many other types of
leave without pay it is difficult for these parents to use their
time off because of the day to day necessities.
Arguments in Support
Supporters, argue that this bill shows California can lead the
nation when it comes to providing common sense support to
families. Years of research suggests parental involvement leads
to substantial improvements in a child's academic performance.
There is a clear correlation between higher student test scores,
better grades for the school as a whole with parental
engagement. While parental engagement benefits all students, it
is particularly important for English learners and students from
low-income families.
AB 2405
Page 4
Arguments in Opposition
The California Chamber of Commerce and others, writing in
opposition to this bill, express significant concerns for
employers with regard to the administration of the paid time off
policy such as accrual, carryover, usage of the paid time off,
pay out at the time of termination or separation, documentation
of the paid time off and calculation of the paid time off. They
state that, while mandating an employer to provide eight hours
of "paid time off" may seem minor in isolation, the cumulative
impact of all the existing protected leaves of absence required
in California that are both paid and unpaid must be taken into
consideration in this analysis.
Prior Related Legislation
SB 579 (Jackson), Chapter 802, Statutes of 2015, expanded the
authorized reasons for which an employee can take job-protected
time off from work under the Act and specified "kin care" sick
leave provisions of existing law.
AB 2030 (Campos) of 2014 would have provided that existing leave
provided for school-related activities under the Act be fully
paid by employers, as specified. The bill was subsequently
pulled by the author and not heard by this Committee.
Analysis Prepared by:
Lorie Alvarez / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091 FN:
0003090
AB 2405
Page 5