Wage and hour roundup

  • After Target, under pressure from activists, announced a $15 companywide minimum wage, “workers say they’ve had their hours cut and lost other benefits, such as health insurance.” [Eric Boehm, Reason]
  • New Chicago scheduling ordinance is “the ultimate intrusion of government in the workplace.” [Chicago Tribune editorial; Allen Smith, SHRM; Fisher Phillips]
  • “As predicted, the $15 wage is killing jobs all across the city” [New York Post editorial; Billy Binion, Reason; Michael Saltsman and Samantha Summers, Crain’s New York letter (defenders of hike playing fast and loose with numbers) ]
  • The Federalist Society held a teleforum with Tammy McCutchen of Littler Mendelson on the lower courts’ reception of the Supreme Court’s decision one year ago in Encino Motorcars on FLSA interpretation [earlier]
  • By next year I expect Left Twitter to be asserting in the alternative that this famous Seattle restaurant 1) never existed, 2) remains open and has no plans to close, and 3) was sunk by issues unrelated to the minimum wage. [Jason Rantz, KTTH (Sitka & Spruce)] More on restaurants: Legal Insurrection (closure of West Coast chain); Tyler Cowen (NBER working paper on what kinds of restaurants are most likely to be affected);
  • “In the past five years, nearly two-thirds of companies have faced at least one labor and employment class action and, overwhelmingly, companies report that wage and hour matters are their top concern in this category.” [Insurance Journal, Carlton Fields Class Action Survey]

One Comment

  • RE: Chicago Scheduling Ordinance.

    I worked as a manager for a company whose policy was to have schedules out 10 days before the work week. The employees loved it. The publishing of a schedule meant they could plan their lives and events outside of work without a fear of having to decide whether to come into work or go to their kid’s play when a schedule comes out a day or two before the work day.

    It made for happy workers and happy management.

    The unintended consequence was that if you suddenly needed people to come in because the scheduled person was sick, had a family emergency, etc., you could call employees who could agree (not forced) to come into work and handle the shift. There wasn’t a manager out there who failed to remember the employees who came in on short notice when the employee wanted a day off such as the day before Christmas, the day of the Super Bowl, etc. It was a case of “you scratched our back, we’ll scratch yours.”

    As a matter of policy scheduling 10 days out works, is great and benefits both the employee and management. As a matter of law, not so much as the burden is once again placed on business. It is a one sided law.

    I am always leery of laws concerning businesses made by politicians who have never managed or owned a company, division, location department, etc.

Join the Discussion

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.