Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Governor vetoes bills expanding family leave
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 10/16/7 | Ilana DeBare

Posted on 10/16/2007 7:41:38 AM PDT by SmithL

Saying that California's family leave laws are already too confusing, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed two bills that would have expanded family leave to include care for ill siblings, in-laws and grandparents.

"While some expansion of existing law may have merit, these laws in combination are too expansive and also fail to recognize the need for reforms to current law," Schwarzenegger wrote in a veto message shortly before his Oct. 14 deadline to act on bills from the 2007 legislative session.

California now requires firms with 50 or more workers to provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for serious personal illness, bonding with a new baby or caring for a seriously ill dependent child, parent, spouse or domestic partner.

California also provides up to six weeks of paid family leave - funded through employee contributions to the state's disability insurance program - for baby bonding or care for an ill spouse, child, parent or domestic partner.

The two bills vetoed by the Republican governor - AB537 and SB727 - would have expanded both the unpaid and paid leave programs to include care for a sibling, mother- or father-in-law, grandparent or grandchild.

Schwarzenegger also vetoed a third bill, SB836, that would have prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of family responsibilities such as caring for a sick relative.

Family leave advocates, who had hoped he might sign at least one of the bills, called the vetoes "greatly disappointing."

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: familyleave; schwarzenegger; vetobait

1 posted on 10/16/2007 7:41:41 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

12 weeks of leave! If you can be gone from your job that long, do they really need you?


2 posted on 10/16/2007 7:42:41 AM PDT by Jack Wilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Schwarzenegger also vetoed a third bill, SB836, that would have prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of family responsibilities such as caring for a sick relative.

Law or no law, employers are going to do everything they can to avoid this liability. If an employer can hire somebody who is likely to disappear for months at a time while still being paid, or somebody who will not, who are they going to give the job to?

3 posted on 10/16/2007 7:51:17 AM PDT by gridlock (ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"...would have expanded family leave to include care for ill siblings, in-laws and grandparents."

Hey! What about pets??? Neighbors??? Illegal aliens??? And what about leave to protest whatever you feel like protesting???

4 posted on 10/16/2007 8:14:42 AM PDT by Savage Beast ("History is not just cruel. It is witty." ~Charles Krauthammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

I love Paid Family Leave. Being single, I get to pay $500/year in extra state taxes so that co-workers, some with family incomes of $200K+, can take paid time off to hang out with their kids. Pure socialism.


5 posted on 10/16/2007 12:43:18 PM PDT by jrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson