BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2340
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2340 (Monning)
As Amended May 6, 2010
Majority vote
LABOR & EMPLOYMENT 4-2 APPROPRIATIONS 11-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Swanson, Monning, Yamada, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Ammiano, |
| |Ma | |Bradford, Coto, Davis, |
| | | |Hill, Hall, Skinner, |
| | | |Solorio, Torlakson, |
| | | |Torrico |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Bill Berryhill, Gaines |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Gives employees in California the right to take three
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 three 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 three days of bereavement leave need not be
consecutive.
5)Permits the employer to require documentation of the death
within 30 days of the leave taken.
6)Provides that the bereavement leave must be completed within
AB 2340
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)Provides that these provisions would not apply to an employee
who is covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that
provides for bereavement leave and other specified working
conditions.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, minor impact on state government as an employer and
potential non state-reimbursable costs to some local government
agencies. Minor, probably absorbable costs to the DLSE.
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 of attend the funeral of
a loved one.
CELA points out that the federal Family and Medical Leave Act
and the California Family Rights Act 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 during this sensitive time of need, this bill
ensures up to three 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
AB 2340
Page 3
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.
Opponents state that bereavement leave should be left to
employers to provide on a voluntary basis. Today, many
employers voluntarily provide bereavement leave to their
employees along with other types of leaves and will make every
effort to accommodate time off for the loss of a loved one.
Employers that do not are often those with workplace cultures
and philosophies that are undesirable on multiple levels and
drive good employees away and deservedly so.
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: 0004309