BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 592
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 592 (Lara)
As Amended August 31, 2011
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |61-17|(May 23, 2011) |SENATE: |23-12|(September 7, |
| | | | | |2011) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: L. & E.
SUMMARY : Prohibits employers from interfering, restraining or
denying an employee's exercise or attempted exercise of their
rights under the state's medical leave law and states that this
bill is declarative of existing law.
The Senate amendments
1)Make it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to
interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of, or the
attempt to exercise, any right provided under pregnancy
disability leave (PDL).
2)Make technical non substantive changes to the bill.
3)Incorporate changes to prevent a chaptering out conflict with
SB 299 (Evans) of 2011.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW establishes the Pregnancy Discrimination
Act (PDA), as an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to
prohibit sex discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth and
related medical condition
EXISTING STATE LAW entitles an employee disabled by pregnancy,
childbirth or related medical conditions to take pregnancy
disability leave (PDL) for a maximum of four months.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version passed by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to Senate Appropriations Committee,
pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS : According to the author, as written, California's
AB 592
Page 2
Pregnancy Disability Leave and California Family Rights Act
(CFRA) do not specifically recognize "interference" with an
employee's right to leave as a basis for liability. The author
states that this bill will bring California's pregnancy and
family medical leave laws in line with the federal standard by
clarifying that "interference" is a basis for liability under
California law as well.
According to the United States Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC), the PDA is an amendment to Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. EEOC notes that discrimination on the
basis of pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions
constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII, which
convers employers with 15 or more employees, including federal,
state and local government, employment agencies and labor
organizations. EEOC notes that in the fiscal year of 2008, the
latest data available, they received 6,285 charges of
pregnancy-based discrimination.
EEOC states that they resolved 5,292 pregnancy discrimination
charges in 2008 and recovered $12.2 million in monetary benefits
for charging parties and other aggrieved individuals.
The National Partnership for Women & Families (NPWF) states that
32 years after the 1978 passage of PDA, the measure is still a
critical tool for fighting pregnancy discrimination. NPWF notes
that, while PDA was the first law that gave pregnant women and
key federal enforcement agencies the legal means to discourage
and combat pregnancy discrimination, EEOC has seen a 39%
increase in the number of pregnancy discrimination charges filed
since 1992. According to NPWF, many women face discriminatory
pregnancy-related practices that pose serious obstacles to their
success and advancement in the workplace. They note that
vigorous enforcement of the law and comprehensive public
education about what the law requires are essential to ensure
that the PDA continues to be a vital tool for creating
workplaces free of discrimination.
Under the current Fair Employment Housing Department (FEHD)
Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Section 7291.5), it
is unlawful for an employer to harass an employee because of
pregnancy or retaliate against an employee because of pregnancy
or because a pregnant employee has exercised her right to take a
pregnancy disability leave. In addition, current proposed
amendments to FEHD regulations (as amended at the Fair
Employment and Housing Commission (FEHC) meeting on October 19,
AB 592
Page 3
2010) would add the term "intermittent leave" to PDL regulations
that would specify that a pregnant employee can use PDL time for
medical appointments for purposes related to pregnancy,
childbirth or related medical conditions.
Supporters feel this bill makes it clear that interfering with
an employee's CFRA rights is forbidden and that by stating this
in the CFRA statute itself will better aid employers in
conforming their conduct to the law helping to avoid potential
litigation.
Analysis Prepared by : Shannon McKinley / L. & E. / (916)
319-2091
FN: 0002548