Clarity on AB 1949 – California’s New Bereavement Leave Law

California has enacted a new bereavement leave requirement into law, effective January 1, 2023. The new law requires employers with five or more employees, including those covered by a collective bargaining agreement, to provide up to five days of unpaid leave to eligible employees for the death of a family member. The bill defines “family member” as a spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, domestic partner, or parent-in-law of the employee.

There seems to be confusion within the industry on if the bereavement leave authorized under AB 1949 is paid or unpaid. Upon introduction, we worked with the author to ensure the leave was “unpaid leave” and that the proposed law was not changed to “paid leave” throughout the legislative process. To be clear, AB 1949 does not provide any new state mandated paid time off. With that in mind, while on bereavement leave, an employee can use other available paid time off such as vacation pay, personal leave, or sick leave that they may have accrued.

Under the new law, bereavement leave is only available to employees who have worked for the employer for at least thirty days prior to the commencement of the leave. The five days of leave do not need to be taken consecutively but must be completed within three months of the death of the family member.

Employers are allowed to confirm the need for leave by asking for documentation, such as a death certificate, a published obituary, or a written verification of death, burial, or memorial services from a funeral home or other applicable entity. The request from the employer for documentation must occur within thirty days of the employee’s first day of leave.

The bill includes enforcement provisions that allow employees to file claims against employers who prevent them from taking bereavement leave or who take adverse employment actions against employees who take their leave. However, an especially crucial point for employers is that the bill is codified under the California Government Code and not the California Labor Code. This means that, while employers may see retaliation claims stemming from this new law, employees will not be able to file claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) for any alleged violations.

Recent Posts

Brunch Break

Join us in an opportunity to get to know your fellow WPCCA members for brunch at the beautiful Old Ranch Country Club in Seal Beach! This event will feature a presentation by the Apprenticeship Director of Training, David Burtle, who…

March 28, 2023

WPCCA 2023 Employment Law Updates Webinar

With a new year comes new employment laws. Join us for an overview of 2023 Employment Law Updates. Our presenter, Shauna Correia, Esq., will highlight recent developments and changes to employment law pertinent to subcontractors in SoCal.   Date: Wednesday, April…

March 20, 2023

NLRB Imposes Broad Restrictions On Severance Agreements

On February 21, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) in McLaren Macomb  (372 NLRB No. 58) held that severance agreements containing broad non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions are unlawful under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the…

March 3, 2023

OSH Appeals Board Decision in Heat Illness Prevention Case Adds Clarity to Provision of Water Requirements

Sacramento—The Department of Industrial Relations’ Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board (OSHAB) has issued a precedential decision regarding the provision of water at outdoor worksites, affirming that it must be as close as practicable to the areas where employees are…

February 27, 2023

Appellate Court Rejects Neutral Time Rounding When Electronic Timekeeping is Used

California courts have long approved neutral rounding policies (See’s Candy Shops v Superior Court, 210 Cal App. 4th 889 (2012). However, the California Court of Appeals recently in Camp v. Home Depot USA, Inc. No. H049033, 2022 WL 13874360 (Cal…

February 3, 2023
MORE STORIES