Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: SB 1383 (California)


As with many employment and labor law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on.


Prior to the July 4th holiday, the California State Senate passed SB 1383 which would expand the availability of unpaid family leave to many workers in the state.  SB 1383, authored by Democratic Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, would extend unpaid family leave to employers with five or more employees and add to situations in which employees would be able to use family leave (as well as the right to return to the same or comparable job.)

Under the proposed legislation, eligible employees would be able to use up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave for the birth, adoption, or serious illness of a child; to care for a seriously ill parent, spouse, or grandparent, or other listed relative; to deal with their own serious health condition; or to deal with the absence of a spouse, domestic partner, child, or parent that is called to active duty in the armed services.

Now for one of the most important parts of the legislation:  to be eligible, the employee must have at least twelve months of service with the employer and at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous twelve month period.

It is worth noting (and somewhat curious) that SB 1383 passed the Senate with only 21 votes (out of 40.)  I call this a curious development as Democrats hold 29 of the 40 seats.  In order for SB 1383 to advance to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk, it now must clear the California Assembly prior to September 1st.  (The California Assembly is also in Democratic control, with Democrats occupying 61 of the 80 seats.)  With SB 1383 only needing majority approval in the Assembly, I think it is likely that this legislation gets to Governor Newsom’s desk...the only question is whether the coronavirus pandemic slows things down.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more