California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB334

Introduced
2/13/17  
Introduced
2/13/17  
Refer
2/23/17  
Refer
3/16/17  
Refer
3/16/17  
Refer
3/23/17  
Refer
3/23/17  
Report Pass
4/25/17  
Refer
4/25/17  
Refer
4/25/17  
Report Pass
5/25/17  
Report Pass
5/25/17  
Engrossed
5/31/17  
Engrossed
5/31/17  
Refer
6/12/17  
Refer
6/12/17  
Report Pass
6/21/17  
Report Pass
6/21/17  
Refer
6/21/17  
Refer
6/21/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Chaptered
10/15/17  
Chaptered
10/15/17  
Passed
10/15/17  

Caption

Enhanced industrial disability leave.

Impact

The bill significantly impacts the benefits available to state employees who face temporary disabilities due to their work. By extending the duration and calculation of disability leave based on net salary instead of gross salary, SB 334 ensures that employees receive a more equitable compensation during their recovery period. It also enhances the protections available to workers, particularly those in high-risk roles that may suffer severe injuries, such as burns, thereby responding to the needs of vulnerable state workers.

Summary

Senate Bill 334, introduced by Dodd, amends existing provisions regarding industrial disability leave for state employees. This legislation specifically addresses employees who are temporary members of State Bargaining Unit 8 and have been disabled due to work-related injuries for more than 22 consecutive days. Under the new provisions, eligible employees can receive an industrial disability leave benefit equivalent to their net salary for up to 52 weeks after the injury occurs. In cases of burn-related injuries, the leave can extend to a maximum of 156 weeks.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB 334 appears largely positive, particularly from employee advocacy groups and labor representatives who view it as a necessary enhancement to worker protections. Proponents argue that this change better reflects the realities of managing temporary disability, especially in high-risk occupations. However, some concerns may arise regarding the financial implications for the state budget, as extending benefits could lead to increased costs, but these concerns were not predominant in the discussions surrounding the bill.

Contention

While there seems to be general support for the bill, potential contention could stem from debates around the financial ramifications and the implications of long-term benefits for the state's budget. Critics might raise concerns about how enhanced benefits may impact overall labor costs and whether the state can sustainably fund these provisions in the long term. The balance between adequately supporting state workers while maintaining fiscal responsibility is likely to continue being a focal point of discussions around similar legislation.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

VA HB2715

Retail Sales and Use Tax; exemption for data centers, definitions.

CA AB3145

Disability insurance: state employees.

CA SB83

Employment.

CA AB83

Housing.

CA AB2106

Water quality: permits.

CA SB1504

Public employment: retirement savings plans, employment conditions, and training.

CA SB32

California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2018.

CA AB1832

State public employment: memorandum of understanding: approval: State Bargaining Units 9 and 10.