California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB63

Introduced
12/22/16  
Refer
1/12/17  
Refer
1/12/17  
Report Pass
3/22/17  
Report Pass
3/22/17  
Refer
3/23/17  
Refer
3/23/17  
Report Pass
4/6/17  
Report Pass
4/6/17  
Refer
4/17/17  
Refer
4/17/17  
Report Pass
5/25/17  
Report Pass
5/25/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Refer
6/8/17  
Refer
6/8/17  
Report Pass
6/22/17  
Report Pass
6/22/17  
Refer
6/22/17  
Report Pass
6/28/17  
Report Pass
6/28/17  
Refer
6/28/17  
Refer
7/13/17  
Refer
7/13/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Chaptered
10/12/17  
Chaptered
10/12/17  
Passed
10/12/17  

Caption

Unlawful employment practice: parental leave.

Impact

The implications of SB 63 are significant for state labor laws, as it expands employee rights under the California Family Rights Act. Employers are legally prohibited from denying the requested leave and must maintain health coverage for employees during their leave. They are also barred from retaliating against employees who exercise their parental leave rights. The bill aims to support family bonding while also protecting employees from discrimination or adverse employment actions due to their exercise of these rights.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 63, known as the New Parent Leave Act, was enacted to enhance parental leave rights for employees in California. It mandates that eligible employees, who have at least 12 months of service and have worked a minimum of 1,250 hours in the preceding year, are entitled to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid protected leave to bond with a new child. This leave can be taken within one year of the child's birth, adoption, or foster care placement. The bill clarifies the definitions of eligible employees and the conditions under which they can request this leave.

Sentiment

The reception of SB 63 was largely supportive among advocates of family rights, viewing it as a necessary expansion of employee protections that acknowledges the importance of parental leave in today’s workforce. However, some business groups expressed concern that new mandates could impose additional burdens on employers, especially smaller businesses. Prospective impacts on operational flexibility and costs were points of contention in discussions surrounding the bill.

Contention

Notable points of contention included how SB 63 interacts with existing laws such as the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Critics argued that the overlap could create confusion regarding employee rights, while supporters contended that the state needs stronger protections than federal standards provide. Additionally, the provision allowing recovery of health coverage costs under certain conditions was a sticking point, indicating concerns about the balance between protecting employee rights and managing employer liabilities.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB1383

Unlawful employment practice: California Family Rights Act.

CA AB1224

Disability insurance: paid family leave program.

CA SB135

Paid family leave.

CA AB3216

Unemployment: rehiring and retention: state of emergency.

CA AB1033

California Family Rights Act: parent-in-law: small employer family leave mediation: pilot program.

CA AB1556

Employment discrimination: unlawful employment practices.

CA AB465

Local public employees: memoranda of understanding.

CA AB1041

Employment: leave.