BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       


           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 118|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                        
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS
                                        

          Bill No:  SB 118
          Author:   Hayden (D), et al
          Amended:  6/16/99
          Vote:     21

            
           SENATE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE  :  4-1, 4/14/99
          AYES:  Alarcon, Figueroa, Karnette, Solis
          NOES:  Mountjoy
          NOT VOTING:  Haynes, Morrow

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  8-5, 5/10/99
          AYES:  Johnston, Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Escutia, Karnette,  
            Perata, Vasconcellos
          NOES:  Johnson, Kelley, Leslie, McPherson, Mountjoy

           SENATE FLOOR  :  21-13, 5/27/99
          AYES:  Alarcon, Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Chesbro, Dunn,  
            Escutia, Figueroa, Hayden, Hughes, Johnston, Karnette,  
            Murray, O'Connell, Ortiz, Peace, Perata, Polanco, Sher,  
            Solis, Speier
          NOES:  Brulte, Costa, Johannessen, Kelley, Knight, Leslie,  
            Lewis, Monteith, Morrow, Mountjoy, Poochigian, Rainey,  
            Wright
          NOT VOTING:  Baca, Haynes, Johnson, McPherson, Schiff,  
            Vasconcellos

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  41-33, 1/26/00 - See last page for vote
           

           SUBJECT  :    Employment:  family care and medical leave

           SOURCE  :     Author

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 118
                                                                Page  
          2

           
           DIGEST  :    This bill allows 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.

          Assembly amendments (a) delete Senate language relative to  
          requirement of an affidavit by an employer and the  
          provision relating to damages, and (b) revise the  
          definition of child.

           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.
           
           Current law provides under the California Family Rights Act  
          (CFRA) that a "child" of the employee must be a minor under  
          18 years of age or an adult dependent.

          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  
          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.








                                                                SB 118
                                                                Page  
          3

          (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.

          The bill permits an employee to utilize leave under the  
          CFRA for care of any adult child, by removing the  
          limitation that an adult child be a dependent.

           Prior Legislation
           
          SB 1506 (Hayden), 1998 (failed passage on the Senate  
            Floor).

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          No state costs.  According to the Department of Personnel  
          Administration, state law already allows such leaves at the  
          discretion of the appointing authority.  Department of  
          Personnel Administration also reports that existing  
          collective bargaining agreements with the state provide  
          this benefit.

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  5/25/99) (Unable to reverify Support  
          and Opposition at time of writing)

          AIDS Project Los Angeles
          American Cancer Society
          American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
          California Alliance for Pride and Equality (CAPE)
          California Association for the Education of Young Children  
          (CAEYC)
          California Catholic Conference 
          California Church
          California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit  
          Union
          California Conference of Machinists
          California Federation of Business and Professional Women 
          California Independent Public Employees Legislative Council  








                                                                SB 118
                                                                Page  
          4

          California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
          California Professional Firefighters (CPF)
          California School Employees Association 
          California State Association of Electrical Workers
          California State Pipe Trades Council
          California Teachers Association 
          California Teamsters Public Affairs Council 
          Coalition of University Employees (CUE)
          Communication Workers of America, District 9, AFL-CIO
          E.J. Oshins 
          Election Committee of the County of Orange (ECCO)
          Employment Law Center, Legal Aid Society of San Francisco
          Engineers and Scientists of California, Local 20 IFPTE,  
          AFL-CIO 
          Equal Rights Advocates 
          Friends Committee on Legislation of California (FCL)
          Gay and Lesbian Center
          Hotel Employees, Restaurant Employees International Union,  
          AFL-CIO 
          Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center 
          Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)
          Pilgrim Congregational Church/Rev. Ann R. Lougee
          Region 8 State Council of the United Food and Commercial  
          Workers
          Rolling Hills United Methodist Church
          Tower Records 
          United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA)
          Western State Council of Sheet metal Workers
          Westin Bonaventure Hotel and Suites, Los Angeles County
          129 individual letters

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  5/25/99)

          Burkleo Roofing, Inc.
          California Chamber of Commerce 
          California Manufacturers Association 
          Committee on Moral Concerns
          DJB Liberty, Inc.
          Gray Lift, Inc.
          Heritage Estates, Inc.
          Loar Ward Property Appraiser
          N/S Corporation
          New Life Christian School 
          Pacific Towing 







                                                                SB 118
                                                                Page  
          5

          The Sound Company
          Tubular Specialties Mfg., Inc.
          Valley Paper and Packing, Inc.
          Department of Finance
          12 individual letters

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author and  
          supporters of this bill, 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.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    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."

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :
          AYES:  Alquist, Aroner, Bock, Calderon, Cardenas, Cedillo,  
            Corbett, Cunneen, Davis, Ducheny, Dutra, Firebaugh,  
            Gallegos, Havice, Hertzberg, Jackson, Keeley, Knox,  
            Kuehl, Lempert, Longville, Lowenthal, Mazzoni, Migden,  
            Nakano, Papan, Romero, Scott, Shelley, Soto, Steinberg,  
            Strom-Martin, Thomson, Torlakson, Vincent, Washington,  
            Wayne, Wesson, Wiggins, Wildman, Villaraigosa
          NOES:  Aanestad, Baldwin, Bates, Battin, Baugh, Brewer,  







                                                                SB 118
                                                                Page  
          6

            Briggs, Campbell, Cardoza, Cox, Dickerson, Florez,  
            Frusetta, Granlund, House, Kaloogian, Leach, Leonard,  
            Maddox, Maldonado, Margett, McClintock, Olberg, Oller,  
            Robert Pacheco, Rod Pacheco, Pescetti, Reyes, Runner,  
            Strickland, Thompson, Wright, Zettel
          NOT VOTING:  Ackerman, Ashburn, Correa, Floyd, Honda,  
            Machado


          NC:sl  1/27/00   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****