According to California Kincare law, is my employer violating my rights?

[MariaCA711]

According to California law employers must provide half of your yearly pto hours as Kincare. I receive 120 hours of PTO a year. So I should receive 60 hours of kincare. But since I am "part time" according to them because I work 38 hours a week, they are stating that I only receive 30 hours of kincare and are now trying to fire me due to not having enough hours to cover my absences. Please help me.

 

[FlyingRon]

According to California law employers must provide half of your yearly pto hours as Kincare. I receive 120 hours of PTO a year. So I should receive 60 hours of kincare. But since I am "part time" according to them because I work 38 hours a week, they are stating that I only receive 30 hours of kincare and are now trying to fire me due to not having enough hours to cover my absences. Please help me.

If your sick time is covered out of the banked PTO time, then half of all that should count. There's no provision for capping it based on the number of hours worked. You can try filing a complaint with the state Division of Labor.

 

[MariaCA711]

Law

According to California law employers must provide half of your yearly pto hours as Kincare. I receive 120 hours of PTO a year. So I should receive 60 hours of kincare. But since I am "part time" according to them because I work 38 hours a week, they are stating that I only receive 30 hours of kincare and are now trying to fire me due to not having enough hours to cover my absences. Please help me.

According to California law employers must provide half of your yearly pto hours as Kincare. I receive 120 hours of PTO a year. So I should receive an additional 60 hours of kincare. But since I am "part time" according to them because I work 38 hours a week, they are stating that I only receive 30 hours of kincare and are now trying to fire me due to not having enough hours to cover my absences. Please help me.

233.
(a) Any employer who provides sick leave for employees shall permit an employee to use in any calendar year the employee’s accrued and available sick leave entitlement, in an amount not less than the sick leave that would be accrued during six months at the employee’s then current rate of entitlement, for the reasons specified in subdivision (a) of Section 246.5. This section does not extend the maximum period of leave to which an employee is entitled under Section 12945.2 of the Government Code or under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2601 et seq.), regardless of whether the employee receives sick leave compensation during that leave.

 

[FlyingRon]

Again, not all PTO qualifies (as I described), but I suspect yours does (the operative requirements are that it is "banked" time and that the employer gives it to you in part to use to cover your sick time).

Note that it is based on what your CURRENT rate of accrual is. If you're still accumulating it such that you'd make 120 over the next year (or 60 over six months) that's the rate. If you're only accruing it at a rate of 60/year, you only get 30. It matters not how much you actually have "banked."

Anyhow, if you feel that given all this you are being treated wrongly, filing a complaint with the DOL as I suggested before is the next step.