California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Enacted 3 D cosponsors

SB 1383 — Unlawful employment practice: California Family Rights Act.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 86, Statutes of 2020.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 21, 2020. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 82% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 7 sponsors

    1 primary, 6 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (3 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 8 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

Existing law, the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, commonly known as the California Family Rights Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for a government employer or any employer with 50 or more employees, as specified, to refuse to grant a request by an employee, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves, a child, a parent, or a spouse, as specified. Existing law authorizes an employer to refuse to grant the request if the employer employs less than 50 employees within 75 miles of the worksite where the employee is employed or if the employee is a salaried employee who is among the highest paid 10% of the employer's employees, as provided. Existing law, if both parents of a child are employed by the same employer, authorizes the employer to only grant both employees a total of 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during the 12-month period. Existing law prohibits an employer from refusing to allow a female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition to take a leave for a reasonable time of up to 4 months before returning to work. Existing law also prohibits an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes that leave, as specified. The California Family Rights Act specifies that those existing pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition leave provisions are separate and distinct from the protections provided by the California Family Rights Act. Existing law, the New Parent Leave Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for any employer to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child. The New Parent Leave Act defines employee as a parent who has more than 12 months of service with the employer, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, and who works at a worksite in which the employer employs at least 20 employees within 75 miles. This bill would expand the California Family Rights Act to make it an unlawful employment practice for any employer with 5 or more employees to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves or a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner, as specified. The bill would require an employer who employs both parents of a child to grant leave to each employee. The bill would also make it an unlawful employment practice for any employer to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period due to a qualifying exigency related to the covered active duty or call to covered active duty of an employee's spouse, domestic partner, child, or parent in the Armed Forces of the United States. The bill would define employee for these purposes as an individual who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, unless otherwise provided.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 86, Statutes of 2020.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.

  4. In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 46. Noes 16. Page 5509.) Ordered to the Senate.

  6. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  7. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 5.) (August 20).

  8. August 18 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.

  9. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  10. Coauthors revised.

  11. Referred to Com. on L. & E.

  12. Assembly Rule 56 suspended.

  13. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  14. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 21. Noes 12. Page 3930.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  15. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  16. Ordered to second reading.

  17. Read third time and amended.

  18. Joint Rule 61 suspended. (Ayes 29. Noes 11. Page 3861.)

  19. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 10. Noes 8. Page 3829.) (June 24).

  20. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

  21. (Ayes 29. Noes 10. Page 3815.)

  22. Joint Rules 61 and 62 suspended.

  23. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(c).

  24. (Corrected June 24).

  25. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  26. Ordered to second reading.

  27. Read third time and amended.

  28. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  29. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  30. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 3771.) (June 18).

  31. Set for hearing June 18.

  32. June 9 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  33. Set for hearing June 9.

  34. Hearing rescheduled due to Capitol closure.

  35. Set for hearing June 1.

  36. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 3. Noes 0.) (May 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  37. Re-referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

  38. Set for hearing May 14 in L., P.E. & R. pending receipt.

  39. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  40. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  41. Read first time.

  42. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 25.

  43. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 6 co-sponsors · 115 not signed on · 11 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Jackson

Co-sponsors (6)

Not signed on (115)

115 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 115 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

SB 1383 Jackson Senate Third Reading By Gonzalez

Passed 46 Yea · 16 Nay · 17 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 3110010
Democratic 15007
Republican 0600
Total 4616017
% of votes cast 58%20%0%22%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Ting — Yea
Levine — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Holden — Yea
Medina — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Burke — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Weber — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Smith — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Gloria — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Chu — Yea
Low — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Chau — Yea
Bigelow — Nay
Cunningham — Nay
Gray — Nay
Fong — Nay
Brough — Nay
Mayes — Nay
Obernolte — Nay
Kiley — Nay
Cooley — Nay
Frazier — Not Voting
Diep — Not Voting
Daly — Not Voting
Salas — Not Voting
Wood — Not Voting
Eggman — Not Voting
Voepel — Not Voting
Cooper — Not Voting
Mathis — Not Voting
Waldron — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Not Voting
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Not Voting
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Not Voting
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Not Voting
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Not Voting
Ramos, James C. Democratic Not Voting
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Not Voting
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Choi, Steven S. Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 11 Yea · 5 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4002
Unaffiliated 7400
Republican 0100
Total 11502
% of votes cast 61%28%0%11%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Quirk — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Voepel — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Fong — Nay
Diep — Nay
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Not Voting
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Not Voting
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay

Official roll call →

3rd Reading SB1383 Jackson et al.

Passed 21 Yea · 12 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 14706
Democratic 7201
Republican 0300
Total 211207
% of votes cast 53%30%0%18%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Hueso — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Allen — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Hill — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Beall — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Pan — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Melendez — Nay
Borgeas — Nay
Glazer — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Chang — Nay
Moorlach — Nay
Dodd — Nay
Morrell — Not Voting
Roth — Not Voting
Bradford — Not Voting
Galgiani — Not Voting
Bates — Not Voting
Wilk — Not Voting
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Nay
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Nay
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Not Voting
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 10 Yea · 8 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7500
Democratic 3200
Republican 0100
Total 10800
% of votes cast 56%44%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Beall — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Monning — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Pan — Yea
Morrell — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Moorlach — Nay
Melendez — Nay
Roth — Nay
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Nay
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Nay
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended

Passed 5 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5100
Republican 0100
Total 5200
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Leyva — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Hill — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Bates — Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 6000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Leyva — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Hill — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

civil-rights labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 1383 do?
Existing law, the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, commonly known as the California Family Rights Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for a government employer or any employer with 50 or more employees, as specified, to refuse to grant a request by an employee, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves, a child, a parent, or a spouse, as specified. Existing law authorizes an employer to refuse to grant the request if the employer employs less than 50 employees within 75 miles of the worksite where the employee is employed or if the employee is a salaried employee who is among the highest paid 10% of the employer's employees, as provided. Existing law, if both parents of a child are employed by the same employer, authorizes the employer to only grant both employees a total of 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during the 12-month period. Existing law prohibits an employer from refusing to allow a female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition to take a leave for a reasonable time of up to 4 months before returning to work. Existing law also prohibits an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes that leave, as specified. The California Family Rights Act specifies that those existing pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition leave provisions are separate and distinct from the protections provided by the California Family Rights Act. Existing law, the New Parent Leave Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for any employer to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child. The New Parent Leave Act defines employee as a parent who has more than 12 months of service with the employer, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, and who works at a worksite in which the employer employs at least 20 employees within 75 miles. This bill would expand the California Family Rights Act to make it an unlawful employment practice for any employer with 5 or more employees to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to bond with a new child of the employee or to care for themselves or a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner, as specified. The bill would require an employer who employs both parents of a child to grant leave to each employee. The bill would also make it an unlawful employment practice for any employer to refuse to grant a request by an employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period due to a qualifying exigency related to the covered active duty or call to covered active duty of an employee's spouse, domestic partner, child, or parent in the Armed Forces of the United States. The bill would define employee for these purposes as an individual who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, unless otherwise provided.
Who sponsors SB 1383?
SB 1383 is sponsored by Jackson, Kalra, Ash (Democratic), Leyva, Chiu, Limón, Monique (Democratic), Gonzalez, Lena A. (Democratic), and Wendy Carrillo.
What is the current status of SB 1383?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 21, 2020. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 1383?
Track SB 1383 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 1383

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 1383

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →