Skip to main content

Implimentation of San Antonio's Paid Sick Leave Ordinance Delayed


Recently, a coalition of business groups filed a lawsuit against the City of San Antonio, seeking to block the implementation of a paid sick leave ordinance that was set to take effect August 1st.  That ordinance requires businesses in the city with more than 15 employees to allow those employees to accrue 64 hours of paid sick leave per year.  For smaller businesses in the city, employees would be allowed to accrue 48 hours of paid sick leave per year.

Readers might recall that San Antonio, Austin, and Dallas had all approved paid sick leave ordinance for workers in their cities in recent years.  A fight over Austin's paid sick leave ordinance quickly commenced with that fight still ongoing in court.  As well, the Texas Legislature had been on the verge of outlawing local paid sick leave ordinances across the state, but those efforts stalled out before the Legislature ended its session earlier this year.  Texas Governor Greg Abbott does not appear to be willing to call a special session of the Legislature to take up the matter again (although he has the power to do so, if he wanted.)  Assuming no special session is called, the Legislature's next opportunity to consider a ban on these local paid leave ordinances will be when it meets again...in 2021.

With the filing of the lawsuit against the City of San Antonio, the business groups have argued that by requiring employers to pay employees for hours not worked (via a paid sick leave ordinance), this ordinance violates the Texas Minimum Wage Act.  The argument follows that because the Texas Minimum Wage Act prevents local cities and municipalities from requiring private employers to pay more than the minimum wage rate, this ordinance is unlawful.

After the lawsuit was filed, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a motion to join the lawsuit against the City of San Antonio.  Following that news, it was announced that all parties had agreed to stay the implementation of the paid sick leave law until December 1st in order to allow it to be potentially tailored in order to meet judicial approval.  (The approval of the request to delay the implementation was granted by Judge Sol Casseb, a Judge in San Antonio that I have practiced before many times.  In his Court, I have tended to see him encourage parties to work things out amicably before he will get involved.  In this instance, I am not surprised that he agreed to the request to delay implementation of the ordinance for several months while a potential resolution to the matter is discussed.)



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