By Grace Weber and Angelica Vera-Franco | Special To The OBSERVER
A new law in California requires employers to provide workers with more sick days and allow them to use more unused sick time annually.
Senate Bill 616 provides at least two additional sick days each year, for a total of at least five, to be accessible by the 200th calendar day of employment.
The existing Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 entitled employees to use at least three paid sick days a year if employed 30 or more days within a year, to be accessible by the 120th calendar day of employment.
The law also raises the cap employers can put on paid sick leave from six days to 10. The modified law preempts any local ordinances that contradict it, while also preventing employers from retaliating against employees for using paid sick days.
Sen. Lena A. Gonzalez, the bill’s main author and advocate, said it is crucial for families to have paid sick time, a lesson bolstered by the COVID-19 pandemic. She said research proves families who lose money from three unpaid sick days can lose the equivalent of a month’s worth of money on groceries.
Supporters of the legislation included the California Conference of Machinists, the California Labor Federation, the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council, Service Employees International Union California, and United Food and Commercial Workers.
Lee Simpson, the general education honors program director at Sacramento State, also supports the bill. Simpson said that in the past she has struggled to use paid sick days.
“Because it was for a planned surgery, it was difficult to use,” she said. “It required requesting advance approval through HR, which is never easy, simple, or exactly what you need.”
When asked what she thought about SB 616 increasing the number of paid sick days, Simpson said, “It’s probably a good idea. If you have real flu, or another virus which doesn’t clear up within 72 hours, you are screwed. I have certainly had illnesses where I was not recovered fully in just three days.”
However, Simpson remains critical of the system used to accrue sick days.
“Accruing sick days based on hours worked seems nit-picky. What are you supposed to do if you get sick prior to accruing your sick days?” she said. “If people thought they could stay home when they were sick and not lose money, we would probably have a much healthier world. A better answer is universal health care not tied to an employer and guaranteed basic income.”
Diego Conejo, a Caltrans civil engineer, also supports the bill and the increase in sick days.
“It provides [flexibility] to workers. Life can be unpredictable and those extra few days can come a long way for the employees,” Conejo said. “Overall, I believe this new state bill will create more opportunities and provide a safer work environment. It provides more power and flexibility for the employees of California.”
Many individuals and organizations, however, opposed the bill. Chris Micheli, an attorney, lobbyist and founding partner at Aprea and Micheli Inc. in Sacramento, represented members of the business community in opposition.
Micheli said businesses in nine cities, including Los Angeles, San Diego and San Jose, often require documentation for the usage of more than three consecutive paid sick days. He said businesses wanted a similar provision in the state law, but that Gonzalez, the bill’s author, refused.
“So the employer community has been concerned that it’s effectively paid time off because no documentation is required,” Micheli said.
Business leaders also are concerned about how the mandate of paid sick leave will be enforced and if it could lead to more lawsuits. Micheli said that when the 2014 legislation was enacted, the state labor commissioner was charged with enacting labor laws and would also enforce alleged violations.
“An employee would file a complaint with the labor commissioner and the labor commissioner’s staff would investigate it,” Micheli said.
He said that a California Court of Appeals decision last year ruled that the administrative enforcement by the labor commissioner would allow employees to file civil lawsuits.
“We asked the author if she would be willing to make it explicit in the paid sick leave law that alleged violations are only enforceable by the labor commissioner’s office, and she refused to do so,” Micheli said.
Micheli also said an unintended consequence of the bill will be increased employer costs.
EDITOR’S NOTE: This story was produced by Professor Philip Reese’s Sacramento State journalism students.