The California Supreme Court recently ruled that employees are not entitled to unlimited time off to care for family members who are ill.
Under the California Kin Care law implemented in 1999, employers that offer accrued sick leave to workers must allow employees to use up to half their annual total to care for a spouse, child, parent or domestic partner who is ill.
Then as now, there is no requirement under the law that any California employer must provide sick leave to employees. However, for employers who choose to offer this benefit, the law addresses how it may be used.
In a rare unanimous ruling, the court found that the California Kin Care law applies only when a company awards a specific amount of sick leave, and that sick leave can be accrued.
The trend among some larger companies is to offer employees unlimited sick leave, especially under certain collective bargaining agreements.
Applauding the victory for California employers, attorney Anthony Oncidi noted that the law was a “perfect example” of a well-meaning law that resulted in abuse by employees. He noted that many California companies had actually reduced or eliminated sick leave policies, due to the previous restrictions.
In the test case involving telephone company AT&T, Inc., the employer provided up to 5 days of paid sick leave for a legitimate illness in any 7-day period. The sick leave period reset each time the employee returned to work, under a collective bargaining agreement. Employees who were off more than one week were eligible for short term disability, and employees could be disciplined for excessive absenteeism.
The employer argued that since sick leave was basically unlimited, it was excessive to expect the company to grant half of the sick leave to an employee taking care of a sick relative. That would theoretically result in unlimited time off to care for relatives, under the law.
Initially, the trial court agreed with the employer, but that was overturned on appeal. The California Supreme Court again found for the employer. In the majority opinion, Justice Carolos Moreno noted that if the court did not limit the law, it would permit an employee to claim as kin care much more time off than the employee would be entitled to personally.
