BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Committee on Industrial
Relations 1999-2000 Regular Session Hilda L. Solis,
Chair
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
Bill No: SB118
Author: Hayden
Version: As Amended: April 6, 1999
Subject:
Family care and medical leave
Support:
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
Tower Records
California State Pipe Trades Council
California State Association of Electrical Workers
Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
California Alliance for Pride and Equality (CAPE)
California School Employees Association
Engineers & Scientists of California, Local 20 IFPTE,
AFL-CIO
Region 8 States Council of the United Food & Commercial
Workers
California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit
Union
Hotel Employees, Restaurant Employees International Union,
AFL-CIO
California Conference of Machinists
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
Westin Bonaventure Hotel and Suites, L.A. County
L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center
E.J. Oshins
United Teachers Los Angeles
PFLAG- Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays
California Federation of Business and Professional Women
Coalition of University Employees
California Professional Firefighters (CPF)
Pilgrim Congregational Church/Rev. Ann R. Lougee
Legal Aid/Society of San Francisco
129 individual letters
Opposition:
Committee on Moral Concerns
Valley Paper & Packaging, Inc.
Heritage Estates, Inc.
N/S Corporation
DJB Liberty, Inc.
Burkleo Roofing, Inc.
The Sound Company
California Chamber of Commerce
Gray Lift, Inc.
Tubular Specialties Mfg., Inc.
Loar Ward Property Appraiser
California Manufacturers Association
Purpose:
To allow an employee leave to care for a grandparent,
sibling, domestic partner or an individual who depends on
the employee for immediate care and support and who has a
serious health condition.
Analysis:
Existing law makes it an unlawful employment practice for
any employer to refuse to grant a request by any employee
with more than one year of service with the employer and
who has worked at least 1,250 hours during the previous
12-month period, to take family care and medical leave: 1)
in connection with the birth or adoption or serious health
condition of the employee's child; 2) to care for a parent
or spouse who has a serious health condition, or; 3)
because of the employee's own serious health condition.
The employer may refuse family care and medical leave if
the employer employs fewer than 50 employees within 75
miles of the employee's worksite.
This Bill provides that an employee may take family care
and medical leave to care for a grandparent, sibling,
domestic partner or an individual who depends on the
Hearing Date: April 14, 1999 SB
118
Consultant: Stephen Holloway Page
2
Senate Committee on Industrial Relations
employee for immediate care and support, who shares a
common residence with the employee, and who has a serious
health condition.
The bill defines''Domestic partners'' to mean two adult
persons in a committed relationship of mutual caring where
all of the following conditions apply:
a) Both persons share a common residence.
b) Both persons agree to be responsible for each other's
basic living expenses during the
domestic partnership.
c) Neither person is married or a member of another
domestic partnership.
d) Both persons are at least 18 years of age.
e) Both persons file a Declaration of Domestic Partnership
with the employer.
Comments:
1. Proponents :
According to the author and supporters of this measure,
under current law, unmarried spouses, siblings, and
others who are primary caregivers are precluded from
taking unpaid leave to provide care. Many families'
caregiving needs are now being met by family members who
also are holding down jobs. This has fueled the rising
need among employees for workplace policies that unable
them to meet the often competing needs of job and home.
Without the availability of job-protected family and
medical leave employees often face the difficult choice
of returning to work prematurely, or giving up their jobs
or of not providing their families the care and support
they need. This bill corrects the inequity of excluding
domestic partners,
siblings, and others who are primary caregivers from
the family and medical leave law.
2. Opponents :
The California Chamber of Commerce states that this
Hearing Date: April 14, 1999 SB
118
Consultant: Stephen Holloway Page
3
Senate Committee on Industrial Relations
measure provides new incentives to sue employers for
failing to grant "family leave" to non-family members.
Any employer who denies family leave in violation of the
law may be liable for compensatory damages, punitive
damages, court costs and attorney fees. For this reason,
the California Chamber of Commerce opposes this bill.
The California Manufacturers Association states that
the bill is overly broad and is subject to abuse by
employees and would lead to increased litigation.
The Committee on Moral Concerns argues that employers
should not be forced into the expense and inconvenience
of accommodating employees' non-legal relationships of
convenience. The historical family arrangement works
best for society. Struggling families do not need their
tax burden increased or their wages or benefits cut to
support employee's adult friends.
3. Prior Legislation :
SB 1506 (Hayden), 1998
Hearing Date: April 14, 1999 SB
118
Consultant: Stephen Holloway Page
4
Senate Committee on Industrial Relations