BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2716
Page A
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2716 (Ma)
As Amended March 24, 2008
Majority vote
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT 6-2 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Swanson, DeSaulnier, |Ayes:|Leno, Caballero, Davis, |
| |Fuentes, Laird, Leno | |DeSaulnier, Eng, Huffman, |
| |Ruskin | |Berg, Krekorian, Lieu, |
| | | |Ma, Nava, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Strickland, Gaines |Nays:|Walters, Emmerson, La |
| | | |Malfa, Nakanishi, Sharon |
| | | |Runner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires employers to provide paid sick days, as
specified. Specifically, this bill :
1 Provides that an employee who works in California for seven or
more days in a calendar year is entitled to paid sick days,
compensated at the same wage the employee normally earns
during regular work hours.
2)Specifies that paid sick days accrue at the rate of no less
than one hour for every 30 hours worked.
3)Provides that paid sick days shall be carried over to the
following calendar year, but an employer can limit their use
as follows:
a) A small business employer (defined as having 10 or fewer
employees) may limit an employee's use to 40 hours or five
days in each calendar year; and,
b) All other employers may limit an employee's use to 72
hours or nine days in each calendar year.
4)Specifies that an employee shall be entitled to use paid sick
days beginning on the 90th calendar day of employment.
AB 2716
Page B
5)Requires an employer, upon oral or written request of an
employee, to provide paid sick days for the following
purposes:
a) Diagnosis, care or treatment of an existing health
condition of, or preventative care for, an employee or the
employee's family member; and,
b) For an employee who is a victim of domestic violence or
sexual assault, as specified.
6)Defines "family member" to include a child (as specified), a
parent (as specified), a spouse, a registered domestic
partner, a grandparent, a grandchild, a sibling, or another
"designated person" for whom the employee may use paid sick
days, as specified.
7)Prohibits an employer from denying an employee the right to
use sick days, discharging, threatening to discharge,
demoting, suspending or in any manner discriminating against
an employee for using sick days.
8)Establishes a rebuttable presumption of unlawful retaliation
if an employer takes certain action within 90 days of
specified activity on the part of an employee.
9)Requires employers to provide notice of these requirements, as
specified.
10)Requires employers to keep certain records related to paid
sick days for five years.
11)Authorizes the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) to
coordinate implementation and enforcement of these
requirements and to promulgate guidelines and regulations.
12)Authorizes DIR to investigate alleged violations and order
appropriate relief, including reinstatement, back pay, the
payment of sick days unlawfully withheld, and additional
administrative penalties, as specified.
13)Authorizes DIR, the Attorney General, a person aggrieved, or
an entity a member of which is aggrieved to bring a civil
action in a court of competent jurisdiction to recover relief,
AB 2716
Page C
as specified, including back pay, penalties, liquidated
damages and attorney's fees and costs.
14)Specifies that this bill establishes minimum requirements and
does not preempt, limit, or otherwise affect the applicability
of any other law or similar requirement that provides greater
accrual or use by employees of sick days, or that extends
other protections to employees.
15)Provides that these requirements do not apply to an employee
covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that, among
other things, expressly provides for paid sick days and
finding and binding arbitration of disputes concerning the
application of those provisions.
16)Provides that these requirements do not apply to employees in
the construction industry covered by a valid collective
bargaining agreement that meets certain conditions but does
not necessarily provide for paid sick days.
17)Makes other conforming and related changes to existing law.
18)Makes related legislative findings and declarations.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)DIR anticipates that it would incur significant workload
related to rulemaking and ongoing investigation and
enforcement of complaints. Based on the experience with the
San Francisco law, annual investigation and enforcement costs
would likely be in the range of $600,000.
2)There would be an increase in costs to providers of
state-subsidized child care and to the In-Home Support
Services program, potentially in the tens of millions of
dollars.
COMMENTS : This bill is sponsored by the California Labor
Federation, AFL-CIO and California ACORN and is intended to
address the current situation in which a reported six million
California workers (or about 40% of the workforce) are not
provided paid sick days through their employer.
AB 2716
Page D
In 2006, San Francisco voters approved Proposition F, the first
law in the nation that required workers with the ability to earn
and use paid sick days. That measure was implemented and is
enforced by the San Francisco Office of Labor Standards
Enforcement (OLSE). OLSE reports that there is no hard data as
to the utilization of sick leave under the San Francisco law, or
of its impact on employers or employees. However, in terms of
enforcement, OLSE reports that it had approximately 35 formal
complaints the first year of the law and sent an additional 35
cautionary letters to employers about whom anonymous workers had
contacted the office. In addition, OLSE undertook a three-month
public rulemaking process in early 2007 to clarify outstanding
issues regarding the law and has made over 20 public
presentations to business and merchant associations.
The author states that the fact that six million working
Californians do not have any paid sick days is a public health
concern, and harms children and families. Workers who have no
paid sick days are forced to make an impossible choice when they
or their children become ill. They have to choose between
losing a day's wages or maybe even their job if they are going
to stay home to take care of themselves or their children.
Instead, many workers who show up to work sick handle our food
at restaurants and take care of our children at daycare centers,
thereby spreading germs to co-workers and to the public.
Parents who have no paid sick days either must lose a day's pay
or send their child to school sick, putting other children at
risk.
The author states that this bill allows workers to earn paid
sick days, which they can use for personal illness, to care for
a sick family member and to recover from domestic violence or
assault. Workers who are employed by a small business (fewer
than 10 employees) can earn and use five sick days per year and
those who work for large employers (more than 10 employees) may
earn and use nine sick days per year. The author argues that
studies have found that providing sick days to workers saves
money for businesses by reducing turnover, reducing the spread
of illness in the workplace and improving workers' morale and
productivity.
Opponents argue that this bill would unreasonably expand
employer's costs and liability for a new protected and paid sick
leave for employees. They argue that most California employers
AB 2716
Page E
participate in the State Disability Insurance (SDI) program,
which is paid for through payroll deductions and provides
temporary disability benefits for employees who are disabled by
a non-work related illness or injury. The employer is not
required by law to offer paid sick leave to employees in
addition to mandated SDI benefits. In fact, payment of sick
leave may reduce the SDI benefits to which an individual is
entitled.
Opponents also state that many California employers provide paid
sick leave and/or paid vacation time even though current law
does not require it. Under current law, unlike vacation days,
sick leave does not accrue nor vest. Therefore, any unused sick
leave may be forfeited at the end of a designated period of
time. This bill proposes to require unpaid sick time to carry
over from year to year.
Opponents conclude that the ever-increasing burden of costly
mandates on employers can cumulatively result in lower wages,
reducing available health insurance, limiting training programs
and - in the worst case scenario - job loss or reduced work
hours. In an already troubled economy California should be
seeking ways to stimulate job growth and avoid forcing costly
mandates on employers.
Analysis Prepared by : Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091
FN: 0004988