Skip to content
NO FEE UNLESS YOU WIN

Using Sick Leave to Care for Family Members

In general, California does not require employers to provide paid sick leave to their employees nor are employers obligated to give employees unpaid sick leave.  Also, even if sick leave is provided, California labor law does not treat the leave as “wages” that must be paid out upon employment separation.  Accordingly, employers may institute a “use or lose it” sick leave policy setting limits on the amount of sick leave.  The exception is employees working within San Francisco city limits.

Sick leave at its most basic level allows an employee to take time off for the employee’s illness, injury or medical condition; obtaining professional diagnosis or treatment; or for other medical reasons.  If sick leave is offered, then employers are required to comply with California’s kin care law, Labor Code § 233.  Under this law, employers must allow employees to use “accrued and available sick leave” to care for family members such as children, parents, a spouse, domestic partner, or child of a domestic partner.  Employees may use up to one half of their accrued sick leave to care for family members.

In McCarther v. Pacific Telesis Group, the California Supreme Court determined that California’s kin care law “does not apply to any and all forms of compensated time off for illness,” but applied solely to sick leave defined in the statute.  In that case, the employer provided for sick leave at full pay for up to five consecutive days in a seven-day period and did not provide a cap on the amount of paid sick leave available to its employees.  So long as an employee returned from his or her sick leave, the employee could take additional sick leave in five-day increments for an indefinite period. The employer, however, did not provide paid sick leave for absences to take care of family members.

The Supreme Court concluded that unlimited or uncapped offers of sick leave to employers did not fall within section 233’s meaning of “sick leave.”  Since California Labor Code § 233 defines sick leave as “accrued incremented of compensated leave,” the Court concluded that the statute language was “limited to employers that provided a measurable, banked amount of sick leave.”  Accordingly, since unlimited sick leave policies do not accrue and are not “banked,” they are not covered by California’s kin care law.

Read more

wage and hour violation lawyer

Virgin America flight attendants get $78 million in wage and hour lawsuit

All employers are legally responsible for making sure their employees are paid the wages they are owed. Unfortunately, wage and hour violations can occur at small companies and large corporations alike. A…

READ ARTICLE
class action lawyer

Disclaimer: Macy’s class action lawsuit

Please note McCormack & Erlich is not handling this class action lawsuit. This blog post is simply reporting the case.

READ ARTICLE
workplace sexual harassment lawyer

California agencies aim to meet sexual harassment training deadline

All employees have the right to a workplace that is free from sexual harassment. There are numerous things employers can do to tackle sexual harassment at work, such as having a system…

READ ARTICLE
employment lawyer

More training and safety needed for California wildfire prevention workers

California struggled with devastating wildfires in 2018. The state now faces the daunting task of figuring out how to manage its forests so that such large-scale disasters do not occur again in…

READ ARTICLE
SEEN ON
bloomberg
sfgate
kpix
cnnmoney
marin-ij
dailypost
news10