BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 299|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 299
Author: Evans (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE LABOR & INDUST. RELATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 3/23/11
AYES: Lieu, DeSaulnier, Leno, Padilla, Yee
NOES: Wyland, Runner
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 4-1, 4/5/11
AYES: Evans, Blakeslee, Corbett, Leno
NOES: Harman
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-3, 5/2/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Emmerson, Runner
SUBJECT : Employment: pregnancy or childbirth leave
SOURCE : California Commission on the Status of Women
Equal Rights Advocates
Labor Project for Working Families
DIGEST : This bill prohibits employers from refusing to
maintain and pay for insurance coverage, as specified, for
the duration of maternity leave up to four months, as
specified. This bill authorizes employers to recover
insurance premiums from the employee if the employee fails
to return from maternity leave provided that the employee's
failure to return from maternity leave is not due to leave
CONTINUED
SB 299
Page
2
taken under the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act
(CFRA), for a health condition that entitles the employee
leave, or for another circumstance beyond the control of
the employee.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides employees options for
leave for various reasons including pregnancy.
The existing federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
requires all employers with 50 or more employees within a
75 mile radius of the work site to grant leave to eligible
employees. FMLA entitles eligible employees to take up to
12 workweeks of unpaid, job-protected leave in a 12-month
period for specified family and medical reasons, including
for the birth and care of a newborn child of the employee.
Under FMLA, among other things, a covered employer is
required to:
1. Maintain group health insurance coverage for an employee
on FMLA leave whenever such insurance was provided
before the leave was taken and on the same terms as if
the employee had continued to work.
2. If applicable, make arrangements for employees to pay
their share of health insurance premiums while on leave.
In some instances, the employer may recover premiums it
paid to maintain health coverage for an employee who
fails to return to work from FMLA leave.
The existing CFRA requires all employers with 50 or more
employees within a 75 mile radius of the work site to grant
leave to eligible employees. CFRA was established ensure
secure unpaid, job-protected, leave rights for the birth of
a child for purposes of bonding, placement of a child in
the employee's family for adoption or foster care, for the
serious health condition of the employee's child, parent or
spouse, or for the employee's own serious health condition.
An employer is not required to pay an employee during a
CFRA leave, except when an eligible employee elects, or the
employer requires, the employee to use any accrued vacation
time or other accumulated paid leave other than accrued
sick leave.
SB 299
Page
3
Under CFRA, among other things, a covered employer is
required to:
1. Continue providing health care coverage for employees
during their CFRA leave. If the employer provides
health benefits under any group health plan, the
employer has an obligation to continue providing such
benefits during an employee's CFRA leave.
2. Continue providing health care coverage for the duration
of the leave(s), up to a maximum of 12 work weeks in a
12-month period. In addition, during the period of
CFRA leave, the employee is entitled to participate in
employee benefit plans, including pension and retirement
plans to the same extent and under the same conditions
as would apply to any other leave granted by the
employer for any reason other than CFRA leave.
The existing Pregnancy Disability Leave (PDL), under the
Fair Employment and Housing Act, requires all employers
with five or more employees to provide job-protected leave
for pregnancy disability for a period of up to four months,
as needed, for the period(s) of time a woman is actually
disabled by pregnancy. There is no length of service
requirement before an employee disabled by pregnancy is
entitled to a pregnancy disability leave. An employer is
not required to pay an employee during a pregnancy
disability leave, except in certain specified instances.
During any part of the pregnancy disability leave, if it
runs concurrently with FMLA leave and if the employer
provides health benefits under any "group health plan," the
employer may have an FMLA obligation to continue providing
such benefits. However, for employers with 50 or fewer
employees, FMLA does not cover its employees and only PDL
is applied. Under existing law, PDL does not require
employers to continue providing group health coverage
during the employees pregnancy disability leave.
This bill makes it an unlawful practice for an employer to
refuse to maintain and pay for coverage under a group
health plan for an employee who takes Pregnancy Disability
Leave, as specified. Specifically, this bill:
SB 299
Page
4
1. Prohibits an employer from refusing to maintain and pay
for health care coverage, not to exceed four months over
the course of a 12-month period, at the level and under
the conditions that coverage would have been provided if
the employee had continued in employment continuously
for the duration of the leave.
2. Allows an employer to recover from the employee the
premium that the employer paid for maintaining coverage
for the employee under the group health plan if both of
the following conditions occur:
A. The employee fails to return to work after the
period of leave has expired.
B. The employee's failure to return to work is for a
reason other than one of the following:
The employee taking leave under the CFRA.
The continuation, recurrence, or onset of a
health condition that entitles the employee to
leave under PDL or other circumstance beyond the
control of the employee.
Related Legislation . AB 592 (Lara), 2011-12 Session,
prohibits employers from interfering with or restraining an
employee's exercise of pregnancy disability leave or rights
under CFML.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Unlawful employment Unknown, likely minor,
absorbable General
practice prohibition costs annually
SB 299
Page
5
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/3/11)
California Commission on the Status of Women (co-source)
Equal Rights Advocates (co-source)
Labor Project for Working Families (co-source)
9to5 National Association of Working Women
American Association of University Women California
American Civil Liberties Union
California Academy of Family Physicians
California Alliance for Retired Americans
California Child Care Resource and Referral
California Employment Lawyers Association
California Family Health Council
California Labor Federation
California Medical Association
California National Organization for Women
California Nurses Association
California Nurse-Midwives Association
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
California Primary Care Association
California State Employees Association
California Women's Law Center
Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO District 9
Los Angeles Alliance for New Economy
Nevada County Citizens for Choice
Restaurant Opportunities Center of Los Angeles
SEIU Local 1000
St. John's Well Child and Family Center
The Legal Aid Society Employment Law Center
United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 5
United Steelworkers Local 675
Warehouse, Processing, and Distribution Workers Union,
Local 26
Western Center on Law & Poverty
Women's Employment Clinic, Golden Gate University School of
Law
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, while the
PDL provides leave for pregnancy-related conditions, the
law does not require employers to continue group health
insurance coverage for an employee during leave.
Proponents argue that this lack of maternity coverage
assurance discourages and prevents women from taking
pregnancy leave despite their health needs and the needs of
SB 299
Page
6
their baby. In addition, the author argues that forced to
pay out-of-pocket costs for health coverage, many women
will delay or cut short their leave despite well-documented
benefits to maternal and child health. According to the
author, almost four-fifths of workers report being unable
to take leave because they could not afford it.
Proponents maintain that although, other federal and state
leave laws require employers to continue health care for
employees on leave, the FMLA has strict eligibility
requirements and only 47 percent of the workforce is
included and CFRA excludes leave for pregnancy-related
conditions. Proponents argue that due to these gaps in
coverage, an estimated 50 percent of the workforce is not
afforded the continued health insurance coverage guaranteed
by the FMLA and CFRA. According to proponents, the current
gap in the law puts the health and well-being of women and
their infants at risk. The author believes that this
inequitable coverage under the law effectively penalizes
women for taking maternity leave.
Proponents argue that health care benefits for women who
are pregnant or have just given birth should not be
terminated at a time when they're needed most. The author
believes that meaningful access to leave - including the
maintenance of health insurance coverage - is essential to
protecting the health and economic security of working
women and their families. This bill seeks to close the gap
in health insurance for women on maternity leave by
bringing PDL in line with health coverage provisions of
related state and federal family and medical leave laws.
PQ:kc 5/3/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****