Skip to main content

Predictive Scheduling Ordinance Introduced in Los Angeles City Council


Late last week, three members of the Los Angeles City Council announced a proposed ordinance that would provide many retail workers in the city with a predictive work schedule.  Under the proposal, employees at retail businesses with 300 or more employees would have the right to written and posted work schedules, two weeks’ notice of their work schedules, the ability to request a flexible schedule and the right to decline work hours without retaliation from their employer, predictably in pay (by requiring employers to provide a ‘good faith’ estimate of weekly work hours at the time of hire), the right to at least 10 free hours between shifts (so as to not have to close and then open the next morning), and access to additional work hours.

The crux of much of the support for the ordinance can be summed up by City Council President Herb Wesson:  “A retail job may not be a traditional 9-5, but these workers deserve scheduling consistency from their employers.  If you don’t know when or how often you’ll be working week-to-week, it’s impossible to plan for your day-to-day life.”  This ordinance seeks to remedy these concerns by providing retail workers in the city with the above referenced protections.

It is expected that once the city attorney drafts the precise wording of this predictive scheduling ordinance, business groups and employers will mobilize against it.  It is worth noting that while some cities in the state have already approved similar measures, a statewide ordinance has not managed to pass.  I find this to be somewhat surprising, given the employee friendly nature of the Legislature in California.  (After all, the state has previously approved a statewide $15/hour minimum wage rate for all hourly employees in the state by 2023, and Los Angeles has previously approved a progressive minimum wage hike for hourly workers in the city.). For the time being, labor advocates seeking a statewide predictive scheduling law will likely have to settle for these ‘incremental’ victories at the local level, until the Legislature can find enough support for a statewide predictive scheduling law.  With that being said, while this ordinance that has been introduced in the Los Angeles City Council is no sure thing, if I were a betting man, I would expect it will likely find enough support to pass sooner rather than later.


For additional information:  https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-retail-scheduling-20190302-story.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more