BILL ANALYSIS
AB 514
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
William W. Monning, Chair
AB 514 (De Leon) - As Amended: April 2, 2009
SUBJECT : Lactation accommodation.
SUMMARY : Amends existing law relating to lactation
accommodation by employers. Specifically, this bill :
1 Requires an employer to provide a 20-minute paid rest period
during each four-hour work period to accommodate and employee
desiring to express breast milk for the employee's infant
child.
2)Specifies that this rest period shall immediately precede or
follow any rest period to which the employee is entitled by
law.
3)Specifies that provision of this rest period for lactation
accommodation does not satisfy or otherwise affect an
employer's separate obligation to provide a meal or rest
period required by statute, and order of the Industrial
Welfare Commission, or a collective bargaining agreement.
EXISTING LAW :
1 Requires employers to provide a "reasonable amount" of break
time to accommodate an employee desiring to express breast
milk for the employee's infant child.
2)Provides that the break time shall, if possible, run
concurrently with any break time already provided to the
employee, but that break time that does not run concurrently
with other paid rest periods shall be unpaid.
3)Requires employers to make reasonable efforts to provide the
employee with the use of a room or other location, other than
a toilet stall, in close proximity to the employee's work
area, for the employee to express milk in private.
4)Specifies that an employer is not required to provide break
time if to do so would "seriously disrupt the operations of
the employer."
AB 514
Page 2
5)Provides that an employer who violates these requirements
shall be subject to a civil penalty of $100 for each violation
and that the Labor Commissioner may issue citations for
violations.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : In 2001, California enacted legislation to require
employers to provide accommodation to employees who desire to
express breast milk for their infant children. This legislation
was enacted as Assembly Bill 1025 (Frommer), Chapter # 821,
Statutes of 2001.
The author of the original bill argued that, at the time,
employers were not required to give lactating mothers any extra
break time or a proper facility to express breast milk.
Working, breastfeeding mothers were often forced to use bathroom
stalls or hide in supply closets while pumping breast milk. In
addition, the American College of Obstetricians and
Gynecologists supported the original measure, stating that work
demands and lack of employer support, as well as time
constraints, all tend to hinder a woman's desire and ability to
breastfeed. They argued that the bill would encourage working
women to continue the healthy practice of providing breast milk
to their infant children.
In June 2008, Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet issued a
press release announcing the issuance of a citation against a
Santa Clara company for failing to comply with the lactation
accommodation requirements of the law. Following an employee
complaint, the Labor Commissioner investigated and alleged that
the employee was not provided an appropriate room in which to
express breast milk. Initially, the room that was provided to
the employee was the company's computer server room, which was
monitored by security cameras. The Labor Commissioner assessed
a fine of $4,000 against the employer. However, subsequently it
was discovered that the complaint was barred by the statute of
limitations because the alleged violation had occurred in 2006.
DLSE states that there has been one other enforcement action
against a physician employer in Coalinga. The employer was
cited in November 2008 for a $100 violation, which was paid in
AB 514
Page 3
December 2008.
The United States Breastfeeding Committee (USBC) is a national
collaborative partnership of organizations whose stated mission
is "to improve the nation's health by working collaboratively to
protect, promote, and support breastfeeding." On its website,
the USBC summarizes state employment legislation on this issue
as follows:
"Experience has shown that legislation is still necessary
to protect breastfeeding mothers from discrimination in the
workplace. Because working environments or conditions may
discourage mothers from continuing to breastfeed once they
return to work, many women see no alternative to weaning
their children or quitting their jobs. Women can have
difficulty in obtaining relief from the courts because of
several federal court opinions that do not find
discrimination against breastfeeding mothers to be
actionable.
Initial employment legislation only encouraged employers to
provide breastfeeding support, rather requiring support, as
is the more recent trend. Encouragements included allowing
businesses to advertise themselves as "mother-friendly" or
"infant-friendly" if they set up lactation support that
conformed to state guidelines.
To solve the problem of discrimination against
breastfeeding mothers, 10 states have enacted legislation
that either encourages employers to support breastfeeding
mothers when they return to work, or requires the employers
to take specific actions to provide this support. On the
federal level, a bill has been submitted but not yet
enacted into law that would provide tax incentives for
expending funds on lactation support.
Recognizing that encouragement alone may not be enough to
provide employees with adequate support, six states have
enacted laws that require employers to accommodate
breastfeeding mothers when they return to work, but only
two of the six states make it clear that it is
discrimination to treat a breastfeeding mother differently
from any other employee. Five states require employers to
take specific actions in accommodating breastfeeding
AB 514
Page 4
employees. Four of those states require employers to
provide mothers with sufficient break time to express
breast milk on the job, and all five require employers to
also provide a private place that is not a bathroom stall
to do so. The most current law of one of those states also
provides for a remedy in the form of a civil penalty for
violation of its laws.
The sixth state has taken a different approach to
supporting breastfeeding employees by clarifying in its law
that it is discrimination to not allow a mother to express
or breastfeed on her breaks, or to treat her differently
from any other employee because she is breastfeeding or
wants to express milk on her breaks. Though this approach
does not necessarily require employers to take any specific
action, it prevents them from taking action against or
discriminating against breastfeeding mothers. It also
overrides the negative federal court decisions that found
discrimination against breastfeeding mothers not to be
actionable.
One state (Connecticut) has found that a combination of
approaches provides mothers with the most comprehensive
protection. Its law clarifies that it is discrimination to
not allow a breastfeeding mother to express milk or
breastfeed on her regular breaks, and also requires
employers to provide mothers with a private, sanitary place
to express her milk on the job."
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT :
According to the author, low-income working mothers are least
likely to breastfeed for the recommended six months because
often their work environment does not offer them the support
they need. Ensuring that all women have a break in the day to
pump milk will help protect all women, but particularly
low-income working women who want to continue breastfeeding
their babies. It will also ensure that their babies receive the
significant health benefits of breast milk. This bill seeks to
build upon the prior legislation to ensure that new mothers are
guaranteed a 30 minute break every four hours in order to
express milk.
The California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO argues that this bill
promotes the health and welfare of children in working families
AB 514
Page 5
by ensuring that women are afforded adequate rest periods to
continue lactation after they return to work. Breastfeeding is
relatively easy for women who stay home or those with
professional jobs who can manage their own time. But for many
women workers, returning to work means an end to nursing because
they simply cannot take the time during the day to pump. This
forces women workers to make the terrible choice between what is
required to keep their jobs and what they know is in the best
interest of their children's health. That is unacceptable. A
child's long-term health should not depend on the type of job
his or her mother has.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION :
The California Chamber of Commerce argues that this bill
unnecessarily specifies the exact amount of break time an
employee must be provided to express breast milk. They argue
that given that current law requires an employer to provide
"reasonable" time, mandating a specified amount of time is
unnecessary and duplicative.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
9to5 National Association of Working Women, Los Angeles Chapter
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
California Church IMPACT
California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit Union
California Conference of Machinists
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing
Committee
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
Engineers and Scientists of California
International Longshore and Warehouse Union
Numerous Individuals
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Prevention Institute
Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21
Strategic Committee of Public Employees, LIUNA
AB 514
Page 6
UNITE HERE!
United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Western States Council
Opposition
California Chamber of Commerce
Analysis Prepared by : Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091