If I am a exempt employee at my company in California, is my employer obligated to have a certain amount of sick days a year for me?

Not exactly. Assuming that you are an Exempt Salaried employee, then you are covered by the FSLA regulation 29 CFR 541.602. Under that rule, the employer is not allowed to dock you for entire sick days missed unless they have a "bona fide" sick pay plan that offers at least 5 sick pay days per year. It is perfectly legal for your employer to not have a sick pay plan, but they just lost part of their ability to dock your salary if they choose to do this.
http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_541/29CFR541.602.htm

While most Exempt employees are paid on a Salaried basis, there are indeed certain Exempt employees who legally are not paid on a Salaried basis and this rule does not affect them.

Alright, see this is where I am confused, I have read up on exempt and non exempt employees. They pay me a certain dollar figure an hour....on a semi monthly basis....It changes from pay period to pay period depending on the amount of days in the current period, this does not seem to be a "salary" position like they call it. Every month I have to take home a pager for 2 weeks, and yet they don't pay for it while I am on call...It seems to me that my company has it a little of exempt and non exempt....They do not have a sick plan instituted....Would someone clarify for me, what they think I am either exempt or non exempt or something entirely different?

It sounds like they are treating you as "salaried, nonexempt". Maybe.

What do you do in your job? Not your title, but your job duties.

Thanks for the response Patty, I handle all the billing for the company, all payroll, most of the accounts payable, all of the accounts recieveable.

I'd be voting for nonexempt, myself (of course, my opinion and $2 won't get you a grande latte at Starbuck's) :) ) Have you asked the employer under what exemption (Executive, Administrative, or Professional) they are using to classify your duties as exempt?

The federal rules are the minimum. California may have stricter guidelines, but if you don't meet the federal criteria for exempt status, you won't meet the California criteria either.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17a_overview.htm
http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWCArticle4.pdf

Thanks again Patty, I will ask my employers on Monday what I am classified as, so I shouldn't do this but [U]assuming[U] I am a non exempt employee... I therefore am entitled to overtime..and the pager phone every 2 weeks on the month for being on call 24/7 would be illegal without me getting paid? Also, I don't fill out a time card right now, so if I am non exempt, I would have to start filling out a time card.....Thank You

"On-call" is not necessarily compensable. It's very fact-specific. There are several threads here regarding on call time that you might want to check out.

California law requires the employer (however they wish to do it, which normally is the employee completing a time sheet) to keep records of all hours worked by nonexempt employees, including actual in/out times.

Don't be accusatory, just perhaps "I was wondering why I am not getting paid overtime. Have you classified my position as exempt?" If they say yes, say "Would that be under the Administrative exemption?" You'll scare 'em that you know so much about this. (grin)

Good luck.

Hi I am wondering, besides the laws that protect maternity leave, time off to care for sick relatives, does California law protect employees who call out for simply being sick one two or three days, and for something like a bad case of the cold... that is something you wouldnt go to the doctor for... I am concerned because my current employer has implemented a new policy whereby employees are disciplined for calling out sick - the system they are using is one in which you obtain a certain amount of points for calling off sick each time and once you reach a certain amount of points you are eligible for "discipline up to and including termination" Where does an employee stand between a company's attempt to deal with absenteeism and a simple sick day?

In the future, please start your own thread. But, because I can't sleep, I'll respond here.

FMLA is for a "serious health condition" (when applied to the employee him/herself). A "common cold" is not generally going to qualify, unless it directly aggravates some other condition that would qualify. If FMLA does not apply, then you can be disciplined, including points, for absences, if that is the company attendance policy.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/1421.htm#2f

If the OP resides in the San Francisco specifically, then there is a sick leave requirement. However it is not a statewide law.

http://www.sfgov.org/site/olse_index.asp?id=49389

If the OP resides in the San Francisco specifically, then there is a sick leave requirement. However it is not a statewide law.

http://www.sfgov.org/site/olse_index.asp?id=49389

Doesn't make it FMLA-qualifying, though.

And such is the problem when old posts are added to when a different situation is present.