Hannah-Beth Jackson
- Democratic
Author
Existing law, the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, commonly known as the California Family Rights Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for a government employer or any employer with 50 or more employees, as specified, to refuse to grant a request by an employee, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves, a child, a parent, or a spouse, as specified. Existing law authorizes an employer to refuse to grant the request if the employer employs less than 50 employees within 75 miles of the worksite where the employee is employed or if the employee is a salaried employee who is among the highest paid 10% of the employer's employees, as provided. Existing law, if both parents of a child are employed by the same employer, authorizes the employer to only grant both employees a total of 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during the 12-month period. Existing law prohibits an employer from refusing to allow a female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition to take a leave for a reasonable time of up to 4 months before returning to work. Existing law also prohibits an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes that leave, as specified. The California Family Rights Act specifies that those existing pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition leave provisions are separate and distinct from the protections provided by the California Family Rights Act. Existing law, the New Parent Leave Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for any employer to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child. The New Parent Leave Act defines employee as a parent who has more than 12 months of service with the employer, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, and who works at a worksite in which the employer employs at least 20 employees within 75 miles. This bill would expand the California Family Rights Act to make it an unlawful employment practice for any employer with 5 or more employees to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves or a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner, as specified. The bill would require an employer who employs both parents of a child to grant leave to each employee. The bill would also make it an unlawful employment practice for any employer to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period due to a qualifying exigency related to the covered active duty or call to covered active duty of an employee's spouse, domestic partner, child, or parent in the Armed Forces of the United States. The bill would define employee for these purposes as an individual who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, unless otherwise provided.
Approved by the Governor.
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 86, Statutes of 2020.
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.
In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 46. Noes 16. Page 5509.) Ordered to the Senate.
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 5.) (August 20).
August 18 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
Coauthors revised.
Assembly Rule 56 suspended.
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 21. Noes 12. Page 3930.) Ordered to the Assembly.
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
Read third time and amended.
Ordered to second reading.
Joint Rule 61 suspended. (Ayes 29. Noes 11. Page 3861.)
Joint Rules 61 and 62 suspended.
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
(Corrected June 24).
Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(c).
(Ayes 29. Noes 10. Page 3815.)
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 10. Noes 8. Page 3829.) (June 24).
Read third time and amended.
Ordered to second reading.
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 3771.) (June 18).
Set for hearing June 18.
June 9 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
Set for hearing June 9.
Hearing rescheduled due to Capitol closure.
Set for hearing June 1.
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 3. Noes 0.) (May 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
Set for hearing May 14 in L., P.E. & R. pending receipt.
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 25.
Read first time.
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
| Bill Text Versions | Format |
|---|---|
| SB1383 | HTML |
| 02/21/20 - Introduced | |
| 03/25/20 - Amended Senate | |
| 06/18/20 - Amended Senate | |
| 06/23/20 - Amended Senate | |
| 06/29/20 - Amended Senate | |
| 09/04/20 - Enrolled | |
| 09/17/20 - Chaptered |
| Document | Format |
|---|---|
| No related documents. |
Data on Open States is updated periodically throughout the day from the official website of the California State Legislature.
If you notice any inconsistencies with these official sources, feel free to file an issue.