Last month, the California State Senate and Assembly passed Assembly Bill (AB) 568, which would mandate six weeks of paid maternity leave for public school and community college employees. The bill would apply to teachers as well as librarians, guidance counselors, and other certified staff. On September 19, it was sent to Governor Jerry Brown, who will decide whether to sign it into law.
AB 568 aims to promote gender equity by eliminating the need for female employees to put vacation and sick days towards pregnancy leave.
Introduced in February 2017 by Assembly member Lorena Gonzalez-Fletcher, democrat from San Diego, the bill was amended three times before passage by the Senate and Assembly. While existing legislation generally exempts charter schools from laws that apply to state public schools, AB 568 would extend to charter school employees.
Currently, any California employer with at least five workers must provide job-protected unpaid leave for up to four weeks before and six weeks after a normal pregnancy and delivery. Employees may receive up to four months of unpaid pregnancy disability leave for conditions like severe morning sickness and hypertension. Gonzalez-Fletcher’s office said the bill is not intended to extend the length of maternity leave.
The bill was co-sponsored by the California Federation of Teachers (CFT) and the Service Employees International Union. Other supporters include the American Civil Liberties Union of California, the California School Employees Association, and the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (FACCC).
Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) School Board member Judy Appel expressed support for the bill. She said, “Paid family leave is a matter of equity. In many places, birthing mothers often have to take sick time after their baby’s birth, creating a discriminatory system where women are forced to take sick time when men are not.” AB 568 would create the same sick leave expectations for employees of all genders.
FACCC Executive Director Jonathan Lightman said, “In many ways, the bill is overdue. Private employers are finding it beneficial to offer these benefits and it has taken too long for this aspect of the public sector to catch up.”
Opponents of the bill have expressed concern for the impact of paid maternity leave on school district budgets. The California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO) submitted a statement to the Senate Committee on Education in June 2017. In it, CASBO said that if the bill creates a minimum six week paid leave with no cap, it will be more difficult for school districts to predict their budgets and plan for the cost of substitute teachers and classified staff.
The California Constitution mandates that a minimum percentage of the state General Fund be allocated towards education. According to Derick Lennox, Legislative Representative for the School Employers Association of California (SEAC), “[Maternity leave] costs would reduce the … funding available for other [local educational agency] priorities.”
The California Department of Finance estimates that if one percent of K-12 and community college employees took six weeks of leave at full pay, it could cost between $43 million and $163 million annually. In addition to changing spending patterns, some worry that the bill would pressure the state to provide education funds beyond the required budget percentage.
Despite concerns about financial strain, AB 568 supporters state that the bill will result in district wide benefits. One proposed impact is higher teacher retention rates. This year, numerous California school districts, including San Francisco and Oakland, reported a shortage of new teachers. Some say the guarantee of paid maternity leave would encourage women to enter and stay in school positions. Appel said, “In the end, this increased pool of qualified workers will have a positive impact on our economy as well.”
If approved by Governor Brown, AB 568 will take effect in January 2018. Speaking on the bill’s social and cultural implications, CFT President Joshua Pechthalt said, “It certainly represents a change in consciousness by some workers about supporting mothers during this vital time. Whether it goes beyond that I’m not sure.”