Lawmakers, labor leaders, lobby for 'Fair Work Week' bill
Sten Spinella, The Day, New London, Conn.
5 min read
Apr. 13—HARTFORD — Ahead of a legislative session Tuesday, state legislators and labor advocates rallied for a "Fair Work Week" bill that would subject certain larger companies to stricter scheduling guidelines for employees.
According to an analysis of the bill, HB-5353 "generally requires employers with at least 500 employees within the U.S. or globally to pay certain types of employees (i.e., those employed in retail, food service, and hospitality establishments) half of their regular pay rate for any scheduled hours that the employer cancels or reduces (1) after the employee reports to work for the scheduled hours or (2) less than seven days in advance."
The bill applies to restaurants with at least 30 locations in the United States or elsewhere and to a franchisee "if the network of franchises in the U.S. or globally employs at least 500 employees total," the bill analysis reads. "The bill applies to employees who are paid hourly and not exempt from minimum wage or overtime rules."
Beyond providing other protections for employees meant to ensure they have predictable schedules, the bill allows for "relief to employees or former employees for violations of the bill" as well as "$200 civil penalties to be paid to the labor commissioner for each employee affected by a violation."
Labor leaders, advocates and legislators held a 45-minute press conference in the Capitol in support of the Fair Work Week bill.
"Advanced notice of the schedule benefits both the employer and the workers in managing their schedule so they don't have to call out because of last-minute changes," Sen. Julie Kushner, D-Danbury, a Labor and Public Employees Committee co-chair, said during the news conference. "If we're basing our economy and our recovery on part-time work, then we have to commit ourselves to making it work. That requires advanced notice, incentivizing workers who can pick up shifts and paying a nominal amount for workers who are called in and then sent home."
Fellow co-chair of the committee, Rep. Robyn Porter, D-New Haven, echoed what other labor leaders said during the news conference — this bill would largely affect Black and brown people with kids.
"Two-thirds of CT workers have unpredictable work schedules and most of them are women and Black and brown workers. Yet over 70% want a predictable work schedule," Porter said. "Therefore, we continue to demand a fair work week schedule because it's not just about a predictable schedule but a predictable paycheck."
The bill is expected to cover more than 140,000 retail, food service and hotel workers. Rep. Anthony Nolan, D-New London, is one of the bill's co-sponsors.
Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney, D-New Haven, said during the news conference that families need to be able to more predictably set their work schedules.
"Many times people are given shift changes very abruptly with very little notice or no notice," Looney said. "This bill would make sure that retail, food service and hospitality workers would have their schedules set in advance."
Pushback against the bill came mostly from business interests, including the Connecticut Farm Bureau Association and the Connecticut Restaurant Association.
"Our industry is known for its flexibility: flexibility for employers and employees alike," the restaurant association said in its public testimony opposing the bill. "Many employees specifically seek work in our industry for the flexibility it allows. This proposed legislation would eliminate that flexibility and mandate a new system that would hurt both the employers and employees."
During the news conference, Kushner and Porter both discussed why the legislation includes a threshold of 500 employees.
"We picked 500 because in the state of Connecticut, 500 or more doesn't constitute small businesses, and it has been said that this will hinder, or hurt, or harm small businesses, which it will not," Porter said.
"We know that corporations have the ability and do all kinds of computerized scheduling programs. This is particularly true of large corporations and businesses with 500 or more workers," Kushner said. "Big corporations, large employers ... have the ability to do so. ... They also have the profit margins to do so."
About a dozen people from New London and throughout the region submitted testimony in favor of the bill last month, including Frida Berrigan, Farrah Garland (Stonington), Jefferey Hart (a member of the New London Board of Education), Zak Leavy, Kristen Lennon, Timothy Frazier Manning, Sarah Mazzio, Laura-Ann Schafer, Jay Silva, Ronna Stuller, Joseph Trelli (Pawcatuck) and Connie Woods (Groton).
"It seems silly to have to support legislation that is so basic. We should have had this! But since so many workers don't have basic human rights, I'm writing to ask for your support on HB-5353," Berrigan said in her testimony. "Tens of thousands of workers in Connecticut begin their work week without a schedule. They work 'on-call,' with unpredictable, fluctuating workweeks which they have no control over. They cannot rely on their jobs to provide stability or a reliable paycheck. They are denied full-time hours, so they don't receive benefits — and they cannot seek another job, as they don't have a fixed schedule."
Senate votes to extend Lamont orders
The state Senate voted Tuesday to extend several of Gov. Ned Lamont's executive orders until June 30.
With positivity rates rising and Lamont as well as Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz testing positive for COVID-19 in the past week serving as examples, Democrats agreed the extensions are necessary because the pandemic continues to affect the state. Hospitalizations and infections are significantly down from the worst days of the pandemic.
Three of the laws the Senate voted to extend on Tuesday would allow the state Department of Public Health to disclose someone's vaccination status to local health directors and school nurses, among others; would allow the state to carry on with providing non-congregate housing to the unhoused; and would extend rental protections for tenants facing eviction for not paying rent.
If the House doesn't also vote to extend the laws, they will expire by Friday.
