News Release

For Immediate Release:
June 27, 2007
Contact: Amber Maltbie
(916) 319-2260
SSwanson’s Bill to Protect California’s Working Families Gains Ground in Senate

(Sacramento) – Assemblymember Sandré Swanson (D – Oakland), Chairman of the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee, was pleased today that AB 537, his bill to strengthen leave laws for California’s working families, passed out of the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee. Reflecting the reality of today’s families in which multi-generational households are increasingly normal, AB 537 will expand the list of family members that an employee can take job-protected leave to care to include grandparents, grandchildren, siblings, and independent adult children. AB 537 also clarifies existing law so that domestic partners, as well as their respective parents-in-law, are conclusively protected. The bill passed the Assembly earlier this month by a 47 – 32 vote.

“There is a two-way street that exists at the workplace – an employee agrees to be a hard worker and help the employer be more productive; and the employer agrees to provide the worker with a fair wage and benefits in an environment with dignity and respect. This is the social compact that should be supported between employee and employer,” Assemblymember Swanson stated.

California's Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act (CFRA) was enacted in 1991 and amended in 1993 to bring the statute into conformity with a new federal entitlement, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).  Both statutes entitle eligible employees working for a covered employer to take unpaid, job-protected leave for up to 12 weeks for specifically-defined family members. Under existing federal and California law, employees may take time off for a "parent, spouse, or child" with a serious medical condition.  In other words, employees may not take leave to attend to an ill sibling, grandparent, grandchild or parent-in-law. However, currently at least 12 states have family leave laws that are more generous than the federal law, and five states use a more expansive definition of family member. “AB 537 will move California to the forefront of our nation’s family protection and leave laws, while proving a more practical and realistic definition for today’s families,” summarized Swanson.

The need for job-protected family care and medical leave is critical to workers' physical and emotional well-being, as workers who do not have job protection are often presented with the untenable choice between caring for their family members and losing their job. In addition, the inability to take job-protected leave to care for a seriously ill family member increases the demand on the state unemployment insurance system and dependence on the state's welfare system.

Mr. Swanson concluded: “I think most Californians would be shocked to discover that if, for example, they had a sister who was dying of cancer, the law would not protect their right to take leave to care for her.  California should be at the forefront of ensuring that our family and medical leave laws accomplish the purpose for which they were intended.”

AB 537 now heads to the Senate Appropriations Committee, where it is expected to pass.

###