A Banner Year for Fair Scheduling Practices
I've started this blog primarily as an outlet and peripherally as a mild awareness campaign, aimed at whatever small minority of my friends and family might be intrigued enough to occasionally read along as I share what I've been learning. The more I learn, the more I am seeing how much I didn't know! I am starting to become convinced that in the years to come, 2017 will be recalled as a major pivot point in the ongoing battles for fair labor practices on behalf of low-wage employees in the service industries. This year alone, 4 U. S. cities, and the state of Oregon, have passed legislation requiring employers in these sectors to follow fair/secure scheduling practices for their employees.
And yet, I say this even as some states pass legislation prohibiting their municipalities from passing such ordinances. But I do believe that the effects of the laws will continue to grow in their reach, both via more cities following suit, and via companies choosing to stay ahead of the laws for PR reasons. After all, with such a large concentration of these companies being headquartered in cities that have already passed such laws or cities most likely to pass such laws in the future, it can hardly reflect well on the company to do just enough to comply with the laws only where required. I don't think many companies have the line "doing the minimum required by law" in their mission statement. CEO's and executives like to see their companies as having a set of values and a sense of integrity. Some of them will prefer to change their policies across the board rather than having different policies in multiple different cities throughout the nation.
Today I want to begin a series of posts that will continue throughout next week, looking in a bit more detail at the particular ordinances from each of the cities that have passed them. I will start here with Seattle, which passed a Secure Scheduling Ordinance that took effect in July of this year. What follows is a summary of each of the ordinance's provisions:
Good Faith Estimate - The employer must provide a good faith estimate of the total weekly hours the employee can expect to work. The estimate must be projected for one year, and it can be broken down by quarter, with different estimates for each quarter. They must provide this to every potential employee during the hiring process, as well as to each employee once a year.
Right to Request Input - The employer must grant scheduling requests made in advance of the schedule being posted when the request is "related to a major life event" (examples would include doctor's appointments, moving, child care, classes, a second job, putting a car in the shop, etc.)
Advance Notice - Employer must post schedules a minimum of 14 days in advance
Right to Rest - Employer must pay time and half for any shift worked that starts less than 10 hours before previous shift.
Access to Hours - Employer must give qualified and eligible employees the opportunity to take on additional hours before new employees are hired to fill the gaps.
Premium Pay for Schedule Changes - If the employee is asked to work additional hours on a week for which the schedule has already been posted, employer must pay an additional hour of wages per shift. If hours are cut after the schedule has already been posted, employer must pay for half of all hours cut. (Exceptions to premium pay are outlined for situations such as employees voluntarily trading shifts or responding to mass communication for available hours.
And that covers it for Seattle's Secure Scheduling Ordinance. Next time we'll look at Emeryville, CA's Fair Scheduling Ordinance, which also went into effect on July 1st of this year.
And yet, I say this even as some states pass legislation prohibiting their municipalities from passing such ordinances. But I do believe that the effects of the laws will continue to grow in their reach, both via more cities following suit, and via companies choosing to stay ahead of the laws for PR reasons. After all, with such a large concentration of these companies being headquartered in cities that have already passed such laws or cities most likely to pass such laws in the future, it can hardly reflect well on the company to do just enough to comply with the laws only where required. I don't think many companies have the line "doing the minimum required by law" in their mission statement. CEO's and executives like to see their companies as having a set of values and a sense of integrity. Some of them will prefer to change their policies across the board rather than having different policies in multiple different cities throughout the nation.
Today I want to begin a series of posts that will continue throughout next week, looking in a bit more detail at the particular ordinances from each of the cities that have passed them. I will start here with Seattle, which passed a Secure Scheduling Ordinance that took effect in July of this year. What follows is a summary of each of the ordinance's provisions:
Good Faith Estimate - The employer must provide a good faith estimate of the total weekly hours the employee can expect to work. The estimate must be projected for one year, and it can be broken down by quarter, with different estimates for each quarter. They must provide this to every potential employee during the hiring process, as well as to each employee once a year.
Right to Request Input - The employer must grant scheduling requests made in advance of the schedule being posted when the request is "related to a major life event" (examples would include doctor's appointments, moving, child care, classes, a second job, putting a car in the shop, etc.)
Advance Notice - Employer must post schedules a minimum of 14 days in advance
Right to Rest - Employer must pay time and half for any shift worked that starts less than 10 hours before previous shift.
Access to Hours - Employer must give qualified and eligible employees the opportunity to take on additional hours before new employees are hired to fill the gaps.
Premium Pay for Schedule Changes - If the employee is asked to work additional hours on a week for which the schedule has already been posted, employer must pay an additional hour of wages per shift. If hours are cut after the schedule has already been posted, employer must pay for half of all hours cut. (Exceptions to premium pay are outlined for situations such as employees voluntarily trading shifts or responding to mass communication for available hours.
And that covers it for Seattle's Secure Scheduling Ordinance. Next time we'll look at Emeryville, CA's Fair Scheduling Ordinance, which also went into effect on July 1st of this year.
Comments
Post a Comment