Bill Text: CA AB569 | 2017-2018 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: Discrimination: reproductive health.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 8-0)
Status: (Vetoed) 2018-01-12 - Stricken from file. [AB569 Detail]
Download: California-2017-AB569-Amended.html
Amended
IN
Senate
September 01, 2017 |
Amended
IN
Senate
July 18, 2017 |
Amended
IN
Assembly
April 19, 2017 |
Assembly Bill | No. 569 |
Introduced by Assembly Member Gonzalez Fletcher (Coauthors: Assembly Members Chiu, Friedman, and Cristina Garcia) (Coauthors: Senators Atkins, Jackson, Stern, and Wieckowski) |
February 14, 2017 |
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
Digest Key
Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NOBill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
The Legislature finds that employees of religiously affiliated institutions are entitled to the same protections as any other employee under the California Labor Code, unless the employee is the functional equivalent of minister, and therefore subject to a “ministerial exception” as developed in First Amendment case law. The Legislature agrees with the concurring opinion of Justice Alito in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. E.E.O.C. (2012) 565 U.S. 171, 199, which argues that the ministerial exception should apply only to an “employee who leads a religious organization, conducts worship services or important religious ceremonies or rituals, or serves as a messenger or teacher of its faith.”SEC. 2.
Section 2810.7 is added to the Labor Code, to read:2810.7.
(a) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the(b)An employer shall not do either of the
following:
(1)Take any adverse employment action
against an employee based on
the employee’s reproductive health care decisions, including the timing thereof, methods, or the use of any drug, device, or medical service related to reproductive health by an employee or an employee’s dependent.
(2)Require an employee to sign, agree to, or adhere to a code of conduct or similar document that purports to deny any employee the right to make the employee’s own reproductive health care decisions, including the use of a particular drug, device, or medical service.
(c)
(d)For purposes of this section, “adverse employment action” includes, but is not limited to, termination, demotion or refusal to promote or advance, loss of career specialty, reassignment to a different shift, reduction of hours, reduction of wages or benefits, refusal to provide training opportunities or transfer to a different department, adverse administrative action, or any other penalty or disciplinary or retaliatory action.