Under SB 83, wage replacement benefits under the California Paid Family Leave (PFL) increases from 6 weeks to 8 weeks beginning July 1, 2020. This bill amends, repeals, or adds multiple sections of the Government Code, Labor Code, and Unemployment Insurance Code.
Employers are not required to provide paid parental leave under federal or California law. New parents can receive partial wages from the state while taking time off to bond with a child. The state pays 60 percent of most employees' wages—up to a maximum set by state law ($1,252 in 2019)—for six weeks. California Senate Bill 83.
Paid Family Leave (PFL) provides benefits to individuals who need to take time off work to care for a seriously ill child, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or registered domestic partner. Benefits are also available to new parents who need time to bond with a new child entering their life either by birth, adoption, or foster care placement. PFL does not provide job protection, only monetary benefits. California Senate Bill 83.
“[A] reasonable accommodation can include providing the employee accrued paid leave or additional unpaid leave for treatment ...” provided it is likely that, at the end of such leave, the employee will be able to perform his or her employment duties.” (Id. at 1193-84). “In addition, an employer is not required to choose the best accommodation or the specific accommodation the employee seeks.” (Id. at 11934).
Employment
Other Employment
Los Angeles County, CA
“[A] reasonable accommodation can include providing the employee accrued paid leave or additional unpaid leave for treatment ...” provided it is likely that, at the end of such leave, the employee will be able to perform his or her employment duties.” (Id. at 1193-84). “In addition, an employer is not required to choose the best accommodation or the specific accommodation the employee seeks.” (Id. at 11934).
Employment
Other Employment
Los Angeles County, CA
In May 16, 2016, Plaintiff started a paid-leave of absence due to maternity and returned to work on October 30, 2016 with her doctor’s approval. (DSS 10-11.) In March 2017, Wells Fargo received multiple reports from Plaintiff’s subordinates of inappropriate and unprofessional behavior by Plaintiff. (DSS 13.) Cathy Tautkus, a Wells Fargo Senior Employee Relations Consultant, investigated these allegations. (DSS 15.) Plaintiff was placed on administrative leave during the investigation. (DSS 16.)
Employment
Wrongful Term
Los Angeles County, CA
In contrast, LAUSD presents evidence Plaintiff requested and was granted an employee-initiated paid medical leave of absence on October 8, 2018 that was converted to an unpaid leave of absence on March 29, 2019 after she exhausted all of her available paid leave. Hannah Decl. ¶¶ 2-3, Ex. A.
Employment
Other Employment
Los Angeles County, CA
· Plaintiff contends that Staples unlawfully subverted California paid sick leave policy by prohibiting temporary employees from accruing paid leave, citing Mondragon’s deposition, but this evidence is not before the court. There is no evidence before this court that Plaintiff had accrued enough sick time by 6/28/17 and 11/7/17 such that Plaintiff should not have been disciplined for his absences on 6/12/17 and 10/23/17, as well as tardies on 9/20/17 and 10/9/17.
Employment
Wrongful Term
Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales
Los Angeles County, CA
To the contrary, USC gave two months of paid leave to Plaintiff and asked her to return to work with a transfer to a different work location. Defendant contends that Plaintiff was never asked or encouraged to resign.
Employment
Wrongful Term
Los Angeles County, CA
In the instant Motion, Defendants argue that Salazar could not perform the functions of a police officer with an accommodation, and that in three of five injuries she was permitted to work light duty and one time she was given paid leave when light duty was not available. (Motion at p. 16.) In Opposition, Salazar presents evidence that in November 2016 she injured her wrist during a work Jiu Jitsu training, and in 2017 she sustained an injury to her feet. (PMF ¶ 176.)
Employment
Other Employment
Los Angeles County, CA
In the instant Motion, Defendants argue that Salazar could not perform the functions of a police officer with an accommodation, and that in three of five injuries she was permitted to work light duty and one time she was given paid leave when light duty was not available. (Motion at p. 16.) In Opposition, Salazar presents evidence that in November 2016 she injured her wrist during a work Jiu Jitsu training, and in 2017 she sustained an injury to her feet. (PMF ¶ 176.)
Los Angeles County, CA
In the instant Motion, Defendants argue that Salazar could not perform the functions of a police officer with an accommodation, and that in three of five injuries she was permitted to work light duty and one time she was given paid leave when light duty was not available. (Motion at p. 16.) In Opposition, Salazar presents evidence that in November 2016 she injured her wrist during a work Jiu Jitsu training, and in 2017 she sustained an injury to her feet. (PMF ¶ 176.)
Employment
Other Employment
Los Angeles County, CA
The District presents evidence that that Anderson was being placed on paid leave on February 2, 2015, rather than remaining at work as Anderson preferred. (UMF 42.) However, this fact does not establish that any decision was permanent. In the Court’s employees regularly are placed on medical leave, return to work, and again are placed on medical leave: the process may be cyclical and the fact that Anderson was placed on medical leave a single time does not establish what the District seeks to establish.
Employment
Discrimination/Harass
Los Angeles County, CA
., Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 635, 651-652—discharged employee's request for paid leave as accommodation to allow him to donate kidney to sister, and complaints regarding denial of leave, did not qualify as “protected activity” for retaliation claim under § 12940(h) because employee did not “oppose any conduct forbidden” by FEHA (though termination was otherwise actionable.] The McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework applies to retaliation claims as well.
Orange County, CA
The agreement additionally contained a provision regarding third party disclosure: “[W]ith respect to any and all third party inquiries about Picton,. . . such inquiries shall be directed to the Superintendent of the District, or his successor, who shall respond verbally and only disclose the dates of Picton’s employment,, his highest yearly salary, that Picton is or was, as the case may be, on a paid leave for the 1993/94 school year, and the information set forth in Exhibit ‘B’ attached thereto. . .
Los Angeles County, CA
Bilgin also provides the declaration of a former City Attorney’s Office investigator, Delia Sarmiento (“Sarmiento”), who states that while she was on medical leave, she was forced to burn through all of her “benefit time” (sick time, vacation time, paid leave time, etc.) until she was paid nothing. (Savarese Decl. ¶ 7, Exh. 6, ¶ 10.)
Los Angeles County, CA
This interpretation also finds support in case law that holds paid leave, when offered, “is part of the employee’s basic compensation package.” (Paton v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 1505, 1518; see also Suastez v. Plastic Dress-Up Co. (1982) 31 Cal.3d 774, 779 [“It is established that vacation pay is not a gratuity or a gift, but is, in effect, additional wages for services performed.”]; Brown v.
Sacramento County, CA
leave for the post-surgery recovery as the financial sacrifice of unpaid leave was too extreme for her; the State of California has an express public policy set forth in Labor Code, §§ 1508, et seq. to provide 30 days paid leave to organ donors, which benefits both private and public sector employees; recuperating donors are expected to exhaust unused vacation and sick days before the paid leave commences; defendant County contends that Labor Code, §§ 1508, et seq. do not apply to counties; an email from County
El Dorado County, CA
Both employees were put on paid leave at the end of June through the first two weeks of July 2016, while Henkel investigated this charge. (UMF 4, 5; Pltf’s Ex. A, Malzahn Depo., at 153:22-154:9.) MacCaskie was off work on this leave starting on June 30, 2016. (UMF 5.) During the investigatory leave, Ken Swank wrote an email on July 7, 2016 to Plant Manager, Leonard Bunes, about three instances of non-conforming materials and one of foreign object debris.
Contra Costa County, CA
See UF Nos. 22 – 32; Merritt Depo, pages 132:7 – 163:11; Exhs. 11 – 22 (Plaintiff was on paid leave from June 7, 2017 to January 18, 2018 when his benefits (illness and vacation time) ended. Also, Defendant has failed to meet its initial burden, as the party moving for summary adjudication, that Plaintiff was not qualified to do his job with reasonable accommodation. See discussion below at 6. Accordingly, Defendant does not shift the burden to Plaintiff based upon this argument.
Employment
Wrongful Term
Los Angeles County, CA
leave for the post-surgery recovery as the financial sacrifice of unpaid leave was too extreme for her; the State of California has an express public policy set forth in Labor Code, §§ 1508, et seq. to provide 30 days paid leave to organ donors, which benefits both private and public sector employees; recuperating donors are expected to exhaust unused vacation and sick days before the paid leave commences; defendant County contends that Labor Code, §§ 1508, et seq. do not apply to counties; an email from County
El Dorado County, CA
Labor Code §245.5(a)(1) provides an exemption to the Act for certain “employees” Appellant relies on the exemption for employees as defined in §245.5(a)(1), which provides (a) “Employee” does not include the following: (1) An employee covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement if the agreemen expressly provides for the wages, hours of work, and working conditions of employees and expressly provides for paid sick days or a paid leave or paid time off policy tha permits the use of sick days for those employees
Santa Cruz County, CA
ABUSE OF AUTHORITY IN VIOLATION OF GOV’T CODE SECTION 53243.4 (FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION) Gov’t Code Section 53243 provides for reimbursement of paid leave salary by an officer or employee of a local agency upon conviction of a crime involving an abuse of his or her office or position.
Contra Costa County, CA
G) by: - allowing plaintiff only eight vacation hours for the year, while the agreement states that plaintiff earns 80 hours of paid leave progressively throughout the first year of employment, in addition to paid holidays (Complaint ¶ 109); - placing plaintiff on-call at all times in November 2016 (Complaint ¶ 110); - requiring plaintiff to consistently exceed 40 hours in a workweek (Complaint ¶ 111); and - terminating plaintiff after she gave 30-days’ notice (Complaint ¶ 112).
Fresno County, CA
This is a mixed action in which Plaintiff alleges causes of action for promissory estoppel and disability discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"), stemming from Defendant's denial of Plaintiff's request for paid leave following her kidney donation to an ailing family member. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a public health nurse. As a public health nurse, Plaintiff provided nursing services to the Community HUBs in El Dorado County.
Employment
Other Employment
Sacramento County, CA
Accordingly, the undisputed evidence shows that defendant reasonably accommodated plaintiff by providing her paid leave. Thus, defendant has established that plaintiff cannot prove she made a request for accommodation that was not granted, an essential element of her claim. Therefore, it is appropriate to grant summary adjudication as to the second cause of action.
Fresno County, CA
The Court is not persuaded that the opinion letter FMLA-100 issued on January 12, 1999 is thorough in its consideration as the letter was based on limited information and one sentence that provides, “…if the FMLA leave was covered by paid leave (or unpaid leave) that provides for the accrual of benefits and seniority, then the FMLA leave could be credited towards the time free of a recordable incident.” (emphasis added.)
Employment
Wrongful Term
Los Angeles County, CA
Defendant contends they provided Plaintiff with an accommodation in the form of a lengthy paid leave of absence with multiple extensions. Plaintiff was afforded an unpaid permissive leave after she had exhausted her paid leave balances. (UF 58). When after four months of permissive leave Plaintiff submitted a doctor’s note in September of 2016, Principal Nunez denied her request for additional unpaid time off, triggering the mandatory provisions of Education Code §45192.
Los Angeles County, CA
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
