BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2386|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2386
Author: Allen (D), et al.
Amended: 4/25/12 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 6/19/12
AYES: Evans, Harman, Blakeslee, Corbett, Leno
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 64-10, 5/29/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Employment and housing discrimination: sex:
breastfeeding
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill clarifies, under the Fair Employment
and Housing Act (FEHA), protection from employment
discrimination for breastfeeding or medical conditions
related thereto.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, the FEHA, prohibits
discrimination in housing and employment on the basis of
race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry,
physical disability, mental disability, medical condition,
marital status, sex, age, or sexual orientation.
(Government Code (GOV) Section 12920 et seq.)
Existing law, under FEHA, provides that the definition of
CONTINUED
AB 2386
Page
2
"sex" includes, but is not limited to, pregnancy,
childbirth, or medical conditions related to pregnancy or
childbirth. (GOV Section 12926(q))
Existing law prohibits an employer from refusing to provide
reasonable accommodation for an employee for a condition
related to pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical
condition, if she so requests, with the advice of her
health care provider. (GOV Section 12945(a)(3)(A))
This bill adds "breastfeeding or medical conditions related
to breastfeeding" to the definition of "sex" under FEHA.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/3/12)
AFSCME, AFL-CIO
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
California Breastfeeding Coalition
California Communities United Institute
California Employment Lawyers Association
California Medical Association
California Nurses Association
California Society of Association Executives
California Women, Infants and Children Association
First 5 LA
National Nurses Organizing Committee
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author writes:
The lack of specificity in state law with respect to
breastfeeding can contribute to unfortunate
consequences. In fact, several federal district courts
have ruled against workplace discrimination cases
involving breastfeeding. Most recently on February
10th, 2012, a federal district court judge in Houston �,
Texas] in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v.
Houston Funding II, Ltd., upheld the termination of a
woman because of her request to pump at work. In the
decision, the judge reasoned that nursing was not
pregnancy-related, so firing her was not sex
discrimination.
AB 2386
Page
3
Women with infants and toddlers are a rapid growing
segment of the labor force today. Given the inherent
inconvenience of pumping in any environment, it is not
surprising that woman often cite their job as a primary
factor in their decision to stop breastfeeding.
However, many women cite workplace harassment or
pressure from employers, supervisors, or co-workers as a
major reason for their decision to stop breastfeeding.
For example, it is not uncommon for employers,
supervisors, or co-workers to express their preference
for the nursing mother to stop pumping in the workplace.
Many women have also cited employer requested leave
until they are done breastfeeding or being barred from
work activities.
Scientific evidence supports the importance of
breastfeeding for infants and their mothers.
Breastfeeding significantly reduces children's risk for
acute infections and chronic diseases such as diabetes,
asthma, and obesity. Breastfeeding also reduces the
mother's risk for type 2 diabetes and breast and ovarian
cancers. These health and social benefits translate
into significant cost savings for businesses because of
reduced absenteeism and lower healthcare premiums.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 64-10, 5/29/12
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall,
Bill Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos,
Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson, Eng,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Beth Gaines, Galgiani,
Gatto, Gordon, Halderman, Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez, Hill,
Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, Knight, Lara, Bonnie
Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Nestande,
Nielsen, Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Portantino,
Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Valadao,
Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Donnelly, Garrick, Grove, Hagman, Harkey, Jones,
Logue, Miller, Morrell, Silva
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cedillo, Fletcher, Gorell, Hall,
Mansoor, Norby
AB 2386
Page
4
RJG:k 7/3/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****