SF Board passes "sensible schedule" law for workers.

[RandySF]

Last edited Sun Nov 23, 2014, 10:35 PM - Edit history (1)

PERSONAL NOTE: This is welcome news as the partner of someone who works such unpredictable shifts.

lso Tuesday, the board unanimously backed two pieces of legislation — over the opposition of business leaders — that will give most of San Francisco’s hourly workers more predictable schedules and the opportunity for full-time work.

The proposals by Supervisors Mar and Chiu apply to chain stores with more than 20 locations and 20 workers. If passed once more by the board and signed by Mayor Lee, they will require those businesses to pay employees who are on call or sent home early, or whose shifts are canceled or changed at the last minute; to offer extra hours to part-time workers before hiring new employees; to post schedules 14 days in advance; and to give part-time workers the same access as full-time workers to requests for time off and particular work schedules.

The new laws would also prohibit employers from discriminating against employees who have commitments such as caregiving or school.


http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/SF-supervisors-side-with-hourly-workers-pass-new-5902252.php

[RiverLover]

1. sensible schedule LAWS...sounds fantastic! I love San Fran!!!

I hope the mayor signs it. Thanks for sharing!

[RandySF]

3. Thanks.

[helpmetohelpyou]

2. I would have to read the details on this one .

"and to give part-time workers the same access as full-time workers to requests for time off and particular work schedules"


Seniority and full time status has to count.

[Gormy Cuss]

4. Same access doesn't necessarily mean that seniority is thrown by the wayside.

However, in companies that use part time status as a cudgel to deny long term workers' requests for time off or to deny reasonable access to better work schedules, this is an important protection.

eta: there are employers who use stingy scheduling to keep workers part time even though they are essentially full time. IOW, it's a stacked deck against workers who may have put in years of steady but just slightly below full time status through no fault of their own.