Skip to content
Fact Sheet

Paid Family Leave Payments Don’t Add Up for California Workers

February 2022 | By Kristin Schumacher

Close up of african mom using ear thermometer to check temperature of little sick girl lying on bed. Ill indian daughter resting in bed while woman checking fever. Portrait of girl with cold and flu symptoms while mother sitting next to hear.

Californians should be able to take paid time off to care for themselves or their family without risking their jobs or financial security. The state’s paid family leave program was created to help workers balance these career and caregiving commitments, but many California workers are unable to utilize the leave because payment rates are too low. State leaders can ensure workers receive the full benefits of paid family leave by boosting payment rates and ensuring Californians do not have to choose between their job and caring for their family.

Most California workers contribute to paid family leave and are eligible for paid time off – up to eight weeks to attend to a sick family member or bond with a newborn or adopted child.1Workers are eligible for paid family leave if they earn at least $300 during the “base period” (a 12-month period ranging from five to 18 months prior to the claim) while contributing to the state’s Disability Insurance Fund. In addition to paid family leave, birthing parents can take an additional four weeks of paid time off before their due date and six weeks after the birth by using state disability insurance. Birthing parents that have had a Cesarean section receive an additional two weeks of disability insurance. After disability insurance ends, birthing parents can then take eight weeks of paid family leave. State disability insurance replaces wages at the same rate as paid family leave. However, California workers with very low wages receive payments that are equal to just 70% of their earnings, and all other workers receive payments that are equal to 60% of earnings.

Many Californians would struggle to pay their bills on a fraction of their earnings, and these low payment rates block access to paid family leave for workers. This is especially the case for workers with low wages who are disproportionately women, Black, and Latinx Californians.2“Low-Wage Work in California Data Explorer,” University of California, Berkeley, Labor Center (website), accessed February 7, 2022, https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/low-wage-work-in-california/. In 2020, more than 18 million workers in California contributed to paid family leave and were eligible to utilize the program. Of those who were eligible, 37% were workers with less than $20,000 in annual wages. Of these same workers, only 14% utilized paid family leave.

Chart Title: California Workers with Very Low Wages Are Underrepresented Among Those Utilizing Paid Family Leave

In 2020, just 608 out of every 100,000 eligible workers earning less than $20,000 annually took paid time off work to care for their family. Workers earning between $80,000 and $99,999 annually had a utilization rate that was nearly four times higher than for workers in the lowest wage bracket. Eligible workers in the highest wage bracket — earning more than $100,000 annually — also had a comparatively low utilization rate. Despite this, these high earners still utilized paid family leave at a rate that was nearly three times that of workers earning less than $20,000 annually.

Chart title: California Workers with Vary Low Wages Are Far Less Likely to Utilize Paid Family Leave

Policymakers temporarily increased payment rates for the paid family leave program in 2018.3Assembly Bill 908 (Gomez, Chapter 5, Statutes of 2016), https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB908. This change increased the payment rate from 55% of earnings to 70% for workers with very low pay and 60% of earnings for all other workers. This temporary increase was set to expire at the end of 2021, but state leaders extended the sunset date by one year in the 2021-22 budget agreement. Absent permanent action by state leaders, payment rates will revert to just 55% of earnings at the end of 2022, blocking access for even more workers in California.

“
Policymakers should follow the lead of other states with paid family leave programs and permanently implement a more progressive payment rate structure.
”

State leaders can support workers and families while also dismantling economic, racist, and sexist barriers blocking workers from thriving in their workplaces and homes. California policymakers should follow the lead of other states with paid family leave programs and permanently implement a more progressive payment rate structure. A more progressive payment rate structure would fully replace wages for lower-wage workers up to a higher earnings threshold. Currently, full-time workers paid the $15 minimum wage earn too much to receive the highest payment rate of 70%. Boosting payment rates — particularly for workers earning lower wages — would eliminate a barrier in accessing paid family leave and allow more Californians to utilize this critical program to help their families thrive.

Support for this report was provided by the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation.

Poverty & Inequality
  • 1
    Workers are eligible for paid family leave if they earn at least $300 during the “base period” (a 12-month period ranging from five to 18 months prior to the claim) while contributing to the state’s Disability Insurance Fund. In addition to paid family leave, birthing parents can take an additional four weeks of paid time off before their due date and six weeks after the birth by using state disability insurance. Birthing parents that have had a Cesarean section receive an additional two weeks of disability insurance. After disability insurance ends, birthing parents can then take eight weeks of paid family leave. State disability insurance replaces wages at the same rate as paid family leave.
  • 2
    “Low-Wage Work in California Data Explorer,” University of California, Berkeley, Labor Center (website), accessed February 7, 2022, https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/low-wage-work-in-california/.
  • 3
    Assembly Bill 908 (Gomez, Chapter 5, Statutes of 2016), https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB908.

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

COVID-19 has disrupted California Community College (CCC) students’ higher education plans, causing many to reduce their course loads or pause their education altogether. The CCCs serve high percentages of students of color and students with low incomes, and drops in enrollment can further narrow educational opportunities and undermine workforce development priorities statewide. While state and federal leaders have enacted policies to mitigate the pandemic’s effects on CCCs, the path forward for community college students requires more long-term investments that address their broader educational and economic needs.1

Chart title: American Indian, Black, and Latinx California Community College Students Experienced the Largest Drops in Enrollment

The number of full-time equivalent students (FTES) at the CCCs declined steeply compared to pre-pandemic levels — nearly 12% overall from fall 2019 to fall 2020, the largest year-over-year decrease in over a decade.2 An FTES represents one student who takes a full course load during an academic year.3 The decline in FTES reflects a drop in the number of students, a reduction in student course loads, or both. While all racial and ethnic groups experienced declines, American Indian or Alaska Native students had the largest drop (23%) followed by the drop in Black students (17%)­. Latinx students fell by 12%, representing over half of the total decline. Reductions from fall 2019 to fall 2020 vary across campuses and student groups. All but six colleges saw declines and ten colleges had drops greater than 25%, and the 19-or-under and the 20-to-24 age groups had declines of approximately 10% and 15%, respectively.

“
Loss of income due to job losses has particularly affected community college students.
”

Research shows that the pandemic affected students’ decisions to cancel or delay their education plans.4 Loss of income due to job losses has particularly affected community college students.5 The added financial stress on students’ budgets has disproportionately impacted Black and Latinx students, with many reporting increased food insecurity and having missed rent, mortgage, or utility payments.6 Moreover, online education challenges such as inequitable access to broadband have also made it more difficult for students to continue their enrollment.7

Policymakers can support community college students of color and those with low incomes by pursuing policies centered on robust retention, housing, food, health, access to technology, child care support, completing transfer requirements, and developing career training. State investments in community college students now will pay off as they continue building their careers, futures, and lives across the state, and ensure that a skilled workforce is available to support the California economy.

This work was made possible through the support of Lumina Fund for Policy Acceleration, a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.

Covid-19
Education

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted California students’ and families’ lives — affecting learning, upending social and emotional support systems, and creating a caregiving crisis. Students have also missed out on expanded learning opportunities, such as before and after school, summer, and intersession programs. Expanded learning programs offer academic enrichment for over 900,000 students throughout the year. These programs serve mostly students of color and low-income students as well as English language learners and students experiencing homelessness.1 Many parents rely on these programs for safe and supportive learning environments for their children while they work.

Chart Title: State Funding for Expanded Learning Programs Has Not Kept Pace with Rising Staff Costs

While demand for quality expanded learning programs and the needs of the expanded learning workforce were rising even before the pandemic, state funding stalled. California’s expanded learning system is funded with state and federal dollars.2 The After School Education and Safety (ASES) program provides state funds through grants that go directly to local educational agencies with priority for sites with higher percentages of students eligible for free and reduced-price meals.3 For a decade, starting in fiscal year 2006-07, annual state funding for ASES remained at $550 million. Policymakers increased funding to nearly $650 million in recent years, which allowed for an increase in the daily per student allocation, but that falls short of the level necessary to cover costs — largely due to the increasing minimum wage. Programs that receive ASES grants have struggled to keep their doors open with a per student daily rate that has increased by just 18% since 2006-07, from $7.50 to $8.88. During that same period, the minimum wage has increased by 93%, a much-needed and long-overdue increase that helps ensure that the expanded learning workforce is supported, but that significantly increases ASES program costs at the same time.

Growing demand for ASES grants exceeds available funds, and state and federal pandemic response funds for expanded learning are one-time dollars — leaving the workforce, students, and parents uncertain about their ability to return to school and work. Given the state’s strong fiscal condition, state lawmakers should provide a cost-of-living adjustment to support the expanded learning workforce and make long-term and sustainable investments in ASES funding that can support students’ academic and social-emotional development as well as families’ caregiving needs.

Covid-19
Education

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

Millions of California seniors and people with disabilities turn to Medi-Cal — known federally as Medicaid — for essential health care because ableist, ageist, racist, and classist policies and practices have blocked them from access to jobs, income, and wealth that can provide health coverage throughout their lifetimes. These Californians face further discrimination due to an asset test in Medi-Cal that unfairly applies only to people age 65 or older or who have a disability.1 The asset test has strict limits and complex rules that discourage savings, weaken households’ financial stability, and benefit homeowners while putting renters at a disadvantage.

Medi-Cal limits seniors and people with disabilities to assets of no more than $2,000 for individuals and $3,000 for couples — a restriction that has not changed since 1989. Assets include cash on hand, money in a checking or savings account, a second car, and other resources. In addition, seniors must have household incomes that do not exceed 138% of the federal poverty line — $1,482 per month for a single adult or $2,004 for a couple as of 2021.

“
State policymakers can eliminate the asset test and help to advance health equity for all Californians.
”

Policymakers have chosen to exempt certain assets from counting toward the limit. However, by treating resources differently, they have created an uneven playing field. In particular, a primary residence is exempted from the asset test, benefitting homeowners who may qualify for Medi-Cal even with substantial property wealth. In contrast, California renters — who may have other forms of wealth, such as cash savings — do not benefit from significant exemptions. They may be compelled to “spend down” much of their savings to qualify for Medi-Cal — money they could have used for other purposes such as moving costs, emergency expenses, and financing their retirement.

Among seniors who are income-eligible for Medi-Cal, nearly 2 in 3 Asian and Black Californians live in renter households, as do more than half of Latinx and other seniors of color. Homeowners are disproportionately white and renters are disproportionately Californians of color due to the legacy of racist policies and practices in housing, education, and employment.

Chart title: More Than Half of Seniors of Color with Incomes at or Below 138% of Federal Poverty Line Live in Renter Households

State policymakers can eliminate the asset test and help to advance health equity for all Californians. Nine states plus Washington D.C. have increased their Medicaid asset limits, and Arizona abolished its asset test entirely. California’s Legislature has taken similar action to eliminate or increase asset limits in other support programs and can build upon progress made to help families and communities lead healthy lives.

Support for this Fact Sheet was provided by the California Health Care Foundation.

Health

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

More than 6 in 10 California children under the age of 12 live in families where all parents are working.1 For this reason, child care providers are a critical component of the state and nation’s economic infrastructure, ensuring that children have a safe space to learn and grow while parents work. Many providers in California have stepped up to the challenge of delivering care and distance learning support for families during the COVID-19 pandemic and recession — particularly for children with parents who are essential workers. But the state’s child care system is on the verge of collapse.

Already operating on thin financial margins, child care providers are struggling with a loss of income due to reduced enrollment, while facing dramatically increased costs necessary to keep children and staff safe and healthy. Many providers report losing money and turning to personal savings and credit cards in order to sustain operations.2 Since the pandemic began, many providers have closed their doors in California and thousands will not reopen.3 In addition, nearly 3 in 10 jobs in the child care industry have been lost during the crisis.4 These business owners and workers are primarily women and Black, Latinx, immigrant, and other workers of color. The loss of small businesses and jobs coupled with a decrease in child care supply for working families only exacerbates the economic toll of the pandemic on workers of color, women, and their communities.

“
Child care providers are struggling with a loss of income due to reduced enrollment, while facing dramatically increased costs necessary to keep children and staff safe and healthy.
”

Both the state and federal government have provided emergency funding to support child care providers and families this past year, but total support falls far short of the estimated level necessary to sustain this critical industry. The federal COVID relief package enacted in late 2020 included $10 billion in federal Child Care and Development Block Grant funds. California received $964 million of this funding. Policymakers and the administration must ensure that these one-time federal relief dollars are distributed equitably and without delay to avoid additional closures and layoffs as well as to support working families.

The state’s fiscal health is unexpectedly strong despite the current crisis. Policymakers should also invest one-time funds to help strengthen California’s child care infrastructure and dedicate ongoing funding to help families afford care and to pay providers fair rates. Even prior to the pandemic, 60% of Californians lived in a child care desert with limited access to child care providers.5 California’s economy cannot recover from the shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic until children have a safe place to learn and grow, working parents can return to their jobs, and providers are supported in sustaining the critical child care industry.

Support for this Fact Sheet was provided by First 5 California. 

Child Care & Preschool

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

As families across California struggle with COVID-19, it is increasingly critical that children have the resources they need at birth to lay the foundation for lifelong well-being.1 Assets such as family, health, and financial resources are strongly associated with child health and resilience, and with fewer harmful experiences such as involvement in the child welfare system.2 When children are exposed to adverse experiences and toxic stress, early intervention tools like evidence-based home visiting can reduce or prevent negative outcomes.3 Home visitors, who are often social workers or nurses, provide parenting support and other assistance that can enhance child and maternal health and improve child development.

However, even before the COVID-19 crisis, too few California children were receiving home visiting support. In the 2018-19 state fiscal year, 41,800 children received federally and locally funded evidence-based or evidence-informed home visits, compared to the estimated 145,800 children ages 0 to 2 who would most likely benefit from such services.4

Now, with families facing significant long-term hardship due to the pandemic and recession, home visitors continue to provide critical support by connecting families to supportive services.5 State policymakers should provide funding to expand home visiting to more families and also increase support for televisits with current clients, many of whom have become less accessible to home visitors.6 Additionally, state policymakers should also support home visitors, who are also facing increased challenges related to COVID-19 and need additional mental health support as they serve families.7

Endnotes can be found in the publication PDF here.

Support for this Fact Sheet was provided by First 5 California. 

Health

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

As California students of all ages cannot fully return to classrooms due to the COVID-19 pandemic, learning from home and the technology needed exposes the state’s digital divide. Distance learning requires computers, tablets, or other devices as well as a reliable, high-speed internet connection, but inequitable access to this technology creates a persistent digital divide that disproportionately affects low-income, Black, and Latinx students. This digital divide was affecting students’ academic achievement before the pandemic, and distance learning has likely exacerbated these existing disparities.

Prior to the pandemic more than 1 in 5 students in California — roughly 1.4 million — did not have access to either a computer or high-speed internet. Black and Latinx students were more likely to lack access, nearly 3 in 10 — more than double the share of white (13%) and Asian and Pacific Islander (12%) students. Of the students affected by the digital divide, 57% spoke a language other than English at home and 56% were eligible for free and reduced-price meals ­— indicators that point to even greater need for educational assistance.

State and local leaders have made efforts to help students connect with their teachers and engage in distance learning. The 2020-21 enacted budget provided $5.3 billion in state and federal dollars to local education agencies (LEAs) for learning and student supports, including computers and hotspots. Currently, it is unclear how much LEAs allocated specifically for computers and internet connectivity and whether those funds were distributed equitably.

The number of students with computing devices has improved with fall 2020 estimates showing a 12 percentage point increase for households with school-age children as compared to the spring.1 But the disparities in access to a reliable internet connection for most student groups, including Latinx and low-income households, remain mostly unchanged.2 A Legislative Analyst’s Office analysis highlights the same inequities in broadband adoption rates between low-income households (53%) and higher income households (86%) even before the pandemic.3

The need for greater investment to address the inequities in distance learning is clear. California policymakers must consider options to invest in distance learning and carefully target resources for students most affected by the pandemic. This includes more data collection to better identify gaps in access and to ensure Black, Latinx, English language learners, and low-income students have the resources they need to learn. A device and high-speed internet access are necessary to engage in distance learning, and without both, the digital divide and academic opportunity gap will only grow wider for California students of all ages.

Endnotes can be found in the publication PDF here.

Covid-19
Education

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

Right now, many families do not have enough food on the table, and this problem is particularly acute for Latinx and Black families in California. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, about 1 in 10 Californians sometimes or often lacked access to enough food to support a healthy lifestyle.1 Struggling to have enough food affects people of all ages, but it is especially harmful to children, as inadequate nutrition can harm their health, development, and learning.2

Due to historic and ongoing racial discrimination, Black and Latinx families have always struggled to afford enough food, and the COVID-19 health and economic crisis has only made this problem worse.3 Data from the Census Bureau’s weekly Household Pulse Survey provides information on how COVID-19 is affecting families. In California, about 1.9 million households with children (15.9%) reported sometimes or often not having enough food to eat during a four-week period in late June and July. Latinx and Black households were more likely to lack enough food at home, with more than 1 in 5 Latinx households and Black households with children reporting sometimes or often not having enough to eat (21.9% and 20.2%, respectively).4

Latinx and Black Households With Children Are More Likely to Lack Enough Food During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Families struggling to afford enough food underscores the need for federal policymakers to help Californians during the ongoing health and economic crisis. Federal policymakers should ensure families have the resources they need to feed their families, including:

  • Increasing the maximum Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit, known as CalFresh in California, by at least 15%, which would boost benefits by about $25 per person per month.5 In addition, federal policymakers should expand food assistance to immigrants who are excluded from SNAP – many of whom are Latinx.
  • Extending Pandemic Electronic Benefits Transfer (P-EBT) through the 2020-21 school year. P-EBT is a one-time disaster response program that supports children who lost access to free or reduced price school meals due to school closures, but will expire at the end of September.6 P-EBT was one of the few programs that provided food benefits to children regardless of immigration status.
  • Helping families with younger children afford food by adding the Child and Adult Food Care Program to P-EBT, so those who lost access to federally funded meals when child care programs closed can receive support.
  • Investing in programs like virtual home visiting, which can connect families to food banks, food assistance, and other resources that help put food on the table.7

During this health and economic crisis, families should not agonize over having enough food at home. Children should never worry about when they will eat again. Policy inaction will only worsen racial health and educational disparities in California. It is critical that policymakers invest in programs that protect and promote children’s health and well-being.

Support for this Fact Sheet was provided by First 5 California.

Covid-19
Safety Net

1 Feeding America, Food Insecurity in California, accessed http://map.feedingamerica.org/county/2018/overall/california on September 1, 2020.
2 Feeding America, Map the Meal Gap 2020, accessed https://www.feedingamerica.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/Map%20the%20Meal%20Gap%202020%20Combined%20Modules.pdf on September 1, 2020.
3 Angela Odoms-Young, et al., “Examining the Impact of Structural Racism on Food Insecurity: Implications for Addressing Racial/Ethnic Disparities,” Family & Community Health 41 (2019), pp. S3–S6.
4 These figures represent multi-week average estimates from the Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey data: Table 3b Food Sufficiency for Households with Children, in the Last 7 Days. Data for Week 9 Household Pulse Survey were collected between June 25 – June 30, Week 10 data were collected July 2 – July 7, Week 11 data were collected July 9 – July 14, and Week 12 data were collected July 16 – July 21. Estimates do not include those who did not respond. Due to small sample sizes, some demographic groups were combined into the Multi-Race and Other Races category. This category reflects people identifying as American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, or more than one race. Race and ethnicity refers to the respondent who answered questions for the household.
5 Brynne Keith-Jennings, Heroes Act Provides Much-Needed SNAP Boost (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: May 18, 2020).
6 California Department of Social Services, Pandemic EBT, accessed https://www.cdss.ca.gov/home/pandemic-ebt on September 2, 2020.
7 Jennifer Marshall, et al., “Statewide Implementation of Virtual Perinatal Home Visiting During COVID-19,” Maternal and Child Health Journal 24 (2020), pp. 1–7.

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!