September 12, 2017
The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
Governor, State of California
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE:

Assembly Bill 568 (Gonzalez Fletcher) School/Community College Employees:
Paid Maternity Leave
REQUEST FOR VETO

Dear Governor Brown:
On behalf of the local education agencies and statewide organizations represented on this letter, we are
writing to respectfully request that you veto Assembly Bill 568 (Gonzalez Fletcher). The bill would
require school districts, charter schools and community colleges to provide at least six weeks of full pay
for pregnancy-related leaves of absence taken by certificated, academic and classified employees.
None of us oppose the concept of granting employee leave for the purpose of pregnancy-related disability,
baby bonding or other related purposes. Our opposition to the bill is based on two factors: 1) the fiscal
impact that it would have on local education agencies; and 2) the complexity it would add to an already
complicated set of employee-leave programs.
We are interpreting AB 568 to require six weeks of paid leave in addition to the protected leaves currently
available under the Family Medical Leave Act, California Family Rights Act, Pregnancy Disability
Leave, and benefits that cover full pay illness and extended differential pay sick leave. The additional
costs of this duplicative paid leave would be borne by the local education agency, increasing retirement
contributions and other expenses, and competing with the costs of educational programs and student
services within finite budgets that are already facing increasing external cost pressures.
School employees are provided leave coverage through state and federal laws, including leaves related to
pregnancy disability, maternity and paternity leave, new child bonding and related issues. AB 568 is the
third bill in as many years that seeks to expand maternity/paternity related leave benefits. AB 375
(Campos), enacted in 2015, required certificated school employees on maternity or paternity leave to
receive differential pay after exhausting accrued sick leave. Last year, AB 2393 (Campos) was signed
into law to provide the same benefit to school district classified employees and community college
academic and classified employees.

 The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
Governor, State of California
September 12, 2017
Page 2

The interplay between these various leave-related statutory provisions, and the ability of employees to
receive pay while on these leave programs, has become increasingly complex. Based on current law, an
employee on leave for this purpose, depending on the level of sick leave and/or vacation they have
accumulated, could already be fully paid for a majority of the pregnancy-related leave. In its analysis of
the bill, the Department of Finance estimates the fiscal impact of AB 568 as follows:
“…This bill is likely to result in significant cost pressures in the tens of millions to hundreds of
millions of dollars Proposition 98 General Fund for LEAs to provide maternity leave for at least
six weeks at full pay and to provide substitute employees for that period, if needed. If one percent
of K-14 employees took six weeks of leave at full pay, the cost could range from $43 million to
$163 million Proposition 98 General Fund annually. These costs would reduce the Proposition
98 General Fund funding available for other LEA priorities...”
Further, the additional leave benefit provided by AB 568 creates the potential of an employee being out of
work and in a full or partial pay status from September through April – almost an entire academic year.
In conclusion, the enactment of AB 568 would increase the financial pressures on local education
agencies and community colleges, without a corresponding budget appropriation to cover the new
benefits. We must take into account the impact of this additional fiscal burden, as well as the impact on
our ability to fully staff classrooms and educational programs that are already threatened by a persistent
teacher shortage. Our primary goal is to educate students and provide them with the necessary support
and services so that they may succeed academically.
For these reasons, we respectfully request that you veto AB 568 when the bill reaches your desk.
Sincerely,

Elizabeth Munguia
Legislative Advocate
California Association of School Business Officials

Jeffrey A. Vaca
Chief Governmental Relations Officer
Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

Ruben L. Ingram
Executive Director
School Employers Association of California

Jeffrey Frost
Legislative Advocate
Orange County Department of Education

Faith Lane
Legislative Advocate
California Advocates on behalf of CAJPA

Eric J. Lucas, JD, CPCU, ARM
Chief Executive Officer
Schools Excess Liability Fund

 Lizette Navarette
Vice President, Strategy and Policy Development
Community College League of California

Susan K. Bray
Executive Director
Association of California Community College Administrators

Attachment

cc:

The Honorable Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher
Jennifer Johnson, Deputy Legislative Secretary for Education
Judy Cias, Chief Counsel, State Board of Education
Jeff Bell, Education Program Budget Manager, Department of Finance