To cheers and bows, City Council unanimously OKs predictable scheduling ordinance

After a two-and-a-half-year battle that spanned two administrations and pitted business against labor, Chicago’s low-wage workers finally have the advance scheduling notice they need to arrange for child care and give predictability to their paychecks.

And Mayor Lori Lightfoot has a hard-earned political victory to add to her list of 100-day accomplishments.

The City Council voted unanimously Wednesday to give Chicago what proponents call the strongest work scheduling ordinance of any large U.S. city.

The groundbreaking nature of the ordinance — and the key role Lightfoot played in prodding business and labor to give a little — was duly noted before the final vote.

“Mayor Lightfoot, without your leadership on this, this would have never, ever transpired,” said Workforce Development Committee Chairman Susan Sadlowski Garza (10th), who carried the ball over the political goal line and got a standing ovation from her colleagues.

“I can’t give you a bottle of champagne, but I’m going to give you a bottle of South Side hot sauce,” Garza told Lightfoot, holding up a bottle of the stuff.

That prompted Ald. Nick Sposato (38th) to shout, “As long as it’s [worth] under $50.”

Addressing aldermen from the rostrum, Lightfoot predicted the ordinance would be “truly transformative” to working parents. She recalled, yet again, the struggles her own mother had arranging child care and making ends meet as employers constantly changed her work schedule.

Lightfoot acknowledged the ordinance was a “big tough lift” for business, labor and aldermen and said the result of that hard work is the “most expansive” scheduling ordinance in the nation.

She acknowledged the city must use data analytics to build an “infrastructure” to monitor the effect of the ordinance on the impacted industries. 

They include: building services; health care; hotels; manufacturing; restaurants with at least 30 locations and 250 employees; nonprofits with more than 250 employees; retail and warehouse services.

When Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) warned about the impact on “safety-net hospitals” and his fear some might close, Lightfoot said their primary concern is Medicaid reimbursements. She promised to work with those hospitals to help solve that problem.

After the Council meeting, Lightfoot joined proponents of the scheduling ordinance for a triumphant news conference with a party atmosphere.

She was hailed as a hero for accomplishing what her predecessor Rahm Emanuel couldn’t — or refused to use his once-formidable political capital to achieve.

“This is a process that started two-and-a-half years ago. In this two-and-a-half months of this administration, we have worked very hard to bring as many voices as possible to the table so we could get this right,” the mayor said.

“It’s not a perfect ordinance. We haven’t made everybody happy. But I think that we’ve struck the right balance. ... The fair work week ordinance passed today touches thousands of Chicago’s working families providing the certainty that is vital — not only to their financial stability, but also their capacity to live their lives as parents and caretakers.”

LeCrisha Pearson is an eight-year veteran certified nursing assistant at Mount Sinai Hospital. She described herself as “one of the thousands” of hospital workers “whose life has been changed for the better” because Chicago chose to do what no other city has done. That is, include hospitals in its predictable scheduling ordinance.

“I earn just $13.53-an-hour. And that’s not nearly enough for the demands and skill set at my job. I have a hard time making ends meet for me and my son at this wage. And that’s when I have a full paycheck. But, the trouble has been I have not been getting my full paycheck,” Pearson said. 

“I’ve been sent home from a regularly-scheduled work shift with no notice. You have to either lose a third or more of your pay weekly or use your paid time up. [With] today’s ordinance, I’ll soon be able to get paid for my full schedule and so will half of the hourly hospital workers like me. It’s a huge victory.”

Chicago Federation of Labor President Bob Reiter applauded the City Council for, as he put it, “taking, yet another step to put this city on the side of working people.” 

“Health care, manufacturing and the warehouse industry have never been included in a predictive scheduling law—until now,” Reiter said. 

The Chicago Federation of Labor has an ownership stake in Sun-Times Media.

“Chicago is the hometown of the American labor movement,” Reiter continued. “And I am proud to see this city standing tall as a leader when it comes to protecting its workers. I look forward to continuing to make sure Chicago is the most pro-worker city in the country. And with a team like the one you see here with us today, I’m certain we’ll make that a reality.”

Fair Workweek law would help working students

For two years, I have been trying to balance a demanding school curriculum and my retail job. Coming from a single parent household, I have to handle my financial responsibilities alone.

Over the winter, I took three classes while working about 20 hours per week, and was proud that I saved up enough to get a car.

But recently, my hours have been cut down to only 12 hours a week — even though management continues to hire more staff. The difference between 20 and 12 hours may not seem like a lot, but it’s almost cut my income in half. I haven’t been earning enough to meet my basic needs and do the maintenance on my car necessary to stay safe on the road.

I have co-workers who face the same struggle, trying to balance rigorous academic classes and unreliable work schedules. Some of them had to quit college and move back home to work because they couldn’t get enough hours to support themselves through school. A survey of 1,700 workers across Illinoisfound that over half of the workers who were enrolled in educational programming missed classes due to unpredictable work schedules.

People think that if you’re determined and work hard, you can earn a degree, qualify for better jobs and have some financial security. But many of us are relying on hourly service-sector jobs to get through school, and we’re juggling a lot. Unreliable part-time hours make it much harder to reach graduation day.

Now our aldermen have a chance to help us by voting to pass the Fair Workweek law. With advance notice of our work schedules and the opportunity to work more hours, students like me will be able to show up for classes and for our jobs, and stay on track to get that diploma.

The brutal psychological toll of erratic work schedules

By Daniel Schneider and Kristen Harknett

Stacey, a single mother, was getting 30 hours a week when she first started working at a big-box store in the Bay Area, in early 2015. But her hours had grown erratic by the time we interviewed her, a few months later: 20 hours one week, 12 the next, then 12 again, and then only eight. The following week was even worse: just four hours, and on a Saturday — meaning she’d need to pay for child care for her 8-year-old son.

The one bright spot in that short week was that “now the pain is going away,” she said — the discomfort she got in her feet and her legs from standing all day. But even that wasn’t worth the chaotic schedule and resulting financial pressure.

When we talked with Stacey (a pseudonym, as required by the research-ethics rules we worked under), the single mother was making a little better than California’s minimum wage of $9, and she relied on ultra-high-interest payday loans to get through the slow periods.

The rallying cry for millions of workers is a $15 an hour minimum wage. But in addition to low pay, erratic schedules are another bane of American workers, particularly in food service and retail: They interfere mightily with family life and are associated, our research finds, with poor sleep, psychological distress and lower levels of happiness.

There’s a strong case for raising the minimum wage. But our research suggests that regulations that impose some semblance of order on workers’ hours could have an even bigger impact on workers’ well-being than a raise.

That’s obviously not to say that we should choose between these two reforms, but the finding demonstrates just how disruptive modern just-in-time schedules are to workers’ lives — and the problem isn’t getting nearly as much attention from policymakers as low wages.

It makes sense that unpredictable hours cause unhappiness, but until now there’s been no data to explore the question. Since 2016, through a study called The Shift Project, we’ve been exploring the contours and consequences of just-in-time scheduling across the country (zeroing in at times on certain cities including Seattle, New York, and Philadelphia). We’ve surveyed 84,000 people, focusing on workers in 80 of the largest food-service companies (usually fast food) and retail chains, because those sectors are notorious for their use of erratic schedules. We asked workers detailed questions about their schedules, economic security, health, and general well-being. (Nationally, 14 million people are employed in food service, and 9 million in retail positions.)

Unpredictable schedules make sense from the employer’s point of view, from a purely economic perspective: The point is to precisely align staffing with demand, and thereby transfer risk from company payrolls to employees’ household balance sheets. But this approach has big costs in terms of employee welfare.

[How to put the long-term unemployed back to work]

Our survey affirmed the scope of the problem. Only about one in five of the people we surveyed work a regular daytime shift. About two-thirds of workers receive their weekly work schedule with less than two weeks’ notice, and one third get less than one week’s notice. Sixteen percent get less than 72 hours’ notice — a scenario that makes it basically impossible to plan child care, family meals or homework time.

A particular onerous task demanded of retail and food-service workers is to work a closing shift and then, immediately afterward, the opening shift (say, closing the store at 11 p.m. then returning to open a few hours later). That’s called a “clopening,” and half of our respondents said they’d worked one.

More than a quarter reported they’d been asked to be on call — meaning they set aside a block of time for the company but might not end up working or getting paid.

This kind of work exerts a toll. Forty-six percent of the people in our sample at least some psychological distress (defined in the survey as nervousness, feelings of hopelessness and worthlessness, and a sense of being overwhelmed). That appears to be significantly higher than for the typical low-income worker, though precise comparisons are difficult. And our analysis of the data showed that the distress increased as notices of scheduled hours grew shorter, when workers had shifts canceled with little notice, and when they worked “clopenings.” Sixty-four percent of workers who had had shifts canceled reported psychological distress, for example, compared with 43 percent of those who did not.

The picture was similar with sleep. Seventy-four percent of our respondents reported “poor” or “fair” sleep — and the more irregular hours, the worse the reported sleep.

Because of a lack of data, we don’t have a clear picture of change over time, although it seems clear that companies have gotten much more aggressive on this front. One exception to the lack of information involves work-hour variation. In the Great Recession, week-to-week work hour variation spiked, especially for low-wage and less educated workers, and remains high. In our data, workers report a 32 percent variation, in hours worked, month to month, even as their bills come with ruthless regularity.

Some cities are waking up to this problem. Since 2014, San Francisco, Seattle, New York City, and Philadelphia have passed laws regulating scheduling practices, to varying degrees, in retail and food service — as has Oregon. Seattle’s legislation requires such employers to provide at least two weeks’ notice of work schedules. If they make a change within that window, they must pay extra for added hours, and give half-pay for subtracted hours. Employers must also give workers 10 hours’ rest between shifts. If they ask workers to do a “clopening” shift tighter than that, they pay time-and-a-half for hours worked during the rest period. New York’s law requires that fast-food workers get 72 hours’ notice of shifts, bans last-minute shift cancellations, and forbids on-call shifts. (New York has separate rules for retail employees.)

[Poverty is moving to the suburbs. The war on poverty hasn’t followed.]

These provisions don’t require truly stable schedules, but they do meaningfully increase the predictability of working hours. Similar laws are being considered in Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington state and Connecticut. At the federal level, a “Schedules that Work Act” was last introduced in Congress, in 2017, but it languished.

Based on the connection we identified between schedule uncertainty and psychological distress, we estimated what would happen if certain policies changed in a city or state currently lacking any schedule regulation. If companies were required to give at least 72 hours’ notice of a shift change, up from less than that, average rates of psychological distress would drop by 4.5 percentage points for the affected workers. Eliminating on-call work would reduce distress by an impressive 15 percentage points. Meanwhile, raising the minimum wage by $4 would cause distress to drop by only 2 percentage points.

Again, the point is not to diminish the importance of a minimum wage, but to provide a fuller picture of the challenges low-income workers face.

We often hear calls to “make work pay,” but for workers’ lives to be manageable, employers — possibly with a strong push from lawmakers — also need to make work predictable.

Employers and workers battle over Chicago's proposed predictable scheduling law

Employers and workers battle over Chicago's proposed predictable scheduling law. 'You never know what your paychecks are going to be like.'

Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz

A proposal that would require large Chicago employers to give workers at least two weeks advance notice of their schedules and compensate them for last minute changes will have to wait for the incoming City Council before it can move forward.

The proposed "fair workweek" ordinance aims to add Chicago to the growing list of cities imposing regulations that protect employees against unpredictable work hours that make it difficult for them to plan for child care, go to school, work a second job or have confidence that their paychecks will cover their bills. It was staunchly opposed by a coalition of major business interest groups that termed it the "restrictive scheduling" ordinance and warned that it would reduce flexibility valued by both employers and workers.

After months of negotiations over compromise legislation in advance of the City Council's final meeting Wednesday, the council's workforce development committee, chaired by outgoing Ald. Patrick O’Connor, 40th, adjourned Monday night without taking a vote to advance the measure because it lacked quorum, kicking it to the next administration.

The pro-business Work Your Way coalition hailed the deferral so it can continue negotiations to make the legislation more employer-friendly.

But labor groups supporting the regulations vowed not to back down.

“While we are not surprised by today’s maneuver to sabotage a vote on the Fair Workweek Ordinance, we are eager to continue working on an even stronger set of workplace protections for hourly workers who have been abused and mistreated for too long," said a statement from the Chicago Federation of Labor and the Chicago Fair Workweek Coalition. "And we’ll be met by a more progressive City Council and a mayor who has already said she supports the concept of fair workweek regulation."

A spokeswoman for Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot, who will preside over her first City Council meeting May 20, said she is reviewing the current draft of the ordinance. Lightfoot "believes that Chicago needs a Fair Work Week that will guarantee stable schedules to hundreds of thousands of our workers," her spokeswoman's statement said. "Too many Chicagoans are either saddled with workweeks that never end, or are working too few hours to make ends meet."

The proposed ordinance would apply to employers with at least 100 workers and to restaurants with more than 250 employees and 30 locations globally, though there are exemptions for the construction industry, the city and other governmental agencies. Franchisees who own four or fewer locations also would be exempt.

Covered employees include all hourly workers and salaried employees earning less than $50,000 a year, but not those who work in sports stadiums or as live-in staff at residential institutions for the disabled. Workplaces with collective bargaining agreements would be exempt as long as they explicitly waive the ordinance in their contracts.

If it's approved, employers would have to give at least 10 days advance notice of workers' schedules starting April 1, 2020, and that would grow to a minimum of 14 days two years later. If an employer changes a worker's schedule less than two weeks before the shift, it would have to give the worker an hour of "predictability pay" at their regular wage rate. If an employer cancels or reduces hours within 24 hours of the start of a previously scheduled shift, they would have to pay the worker half of what would they have made had they worked.

The proposed ordinance does not prevent workers from trading shifts or requesting changes to their schedule. Employers can also change an employee's hours without penalty when it is mutually agreed upon in writing.

The ordinance includes a "right to rest" provision that gives employees the right to decline work hours that start less than 10 hours after the end of a shift. If an employer doesn't get written consent from workers willing to work such shifts, they have to pay them time and a half.

It also requires that employers offer existing part-time workers extra hours before hiring new people, meant to address underemployment that makes it hard for low-wage workers to make ends meet.

Chief sponsor Ald. John Arena, 45th, who introduced the ordinance last summer and has 29 co-sponsors, said employees need the protections. In a survey of more than 1,700 workers conducted by the University of Illinois, over a third said they get their schedules with less than a week's notice and 40 percent said they want to work more hours. More than 70 percent said unpredictable work schedules interfere with time for family and home lives.

"We know that there are not enough employees under collective bargaining agreements and that is why this ordinance is necessary," Arena said last week during a committee hearing on the proposal. "We need to protect good workers from bad employers and make sure good employers are not victimized by this ordinance."

But the pro-employer Work Your Way coalition -- which counts the Illinois Restaurant Association, the Illinois Health and Hospital Association and the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce among its more than two dozen members -- says the latest version of the bill is overly broad and punitive.

“The conversations that we’ve had with labor have been under the framework that the employer is bad, that the employer is out to get the employee,” said Tanya Triche Dawood, vice president and general counsel at the Illinois Retail Merchants Association. “It is really hard to reach a compromise with someone you see as the enemy.”

The business coalition has offered an alternative proposal that would limit the scheduling restrictions to restaurants, retail and hotels, and allow employers to establish a voluntary standby list of employees willing to have their schedules changed without penalty. It also wants to nix the requirement that existing employees be offered extra hours before an employer can make new hires, a provision that could be costly because employers are required by the Affordable Care Act to offer health insurance to full-time employees.

"It would not allow us to control our part-time versus full-time base," Triche Dawood said at the committee hearing Thursday. "If we lose control over that delicate balance in our workforce, then we lose control of our expenses."

The Work Your Way coalition has called the ordinance "a solution in search of a problem," pointing to a survey it commissioned of low-wage hourly workers in Chicago that found 74 percent prefer flexible scheduling and 85 percent are satisfied with the advance notice they currently get of their schedules.

Some industries are particularly concerned about the ability to make abrupt staff changes as the need arises.

Susan Lopez, president at Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, said the rules are "unworkable and inappropriate" in health care environments that must staff up abruptly for events like flu outbreaks. She has estimated the hospital would be on the hook for $3 million in predictability pay per year if hospitals had to comply with the proposed law.

"Our hospital would be punished for responding to changes in patient census and severity of patient illness," she said.

Opposition is also strong from the hotel industry, where 60 percent of rooms are booked within two weeks and 15 percent are booked same day of check in, said Michael Jacobson, president and CEO of the Illinois Hotel and Lodging Association. The ordinance exempts hotel banquet events that see attendee counts increase by more than 20 percent last minute, but Jacobson said the measure still represents a significant burden.

Staffing agencies also are seeking an exemption from the law given that their business model is to provide temporary employees when businesses need last-minute fill-ins, said Paul Rosenfeld, a lobbyist for the Staffing Services Association of Illinois.

"Our folks don't want to be scheduled," Rosenfeld said. "They want to be able to have flexibility and have control of their own schedules."

But some workers in other sectors said the lack of control is the problem.

Loronzo Warren says the volatility of his hours makes it hard to budget. (Terrence Antonio James/Chicago Tribune)

Loronzo Warren Jr., 18, works part-time at a clothing store at Chicago Ridge mall to pay for college, and says the volatility of his hours makes it hard to budget. He gets anywhere from 10 to 22 hours a week and the schedule isn't posted until the day before the week begins.

"You never know what your paychecks are going to be like or how much money you can actually spend to take care of yourself because you don't know much you're going to make the next week," said Warren, who lives with his dad on Chicago's southeast side and helps pay for food and basic household supplies. As a result, he has not been able to keep up with his car's maintenance, and he worries that if he doesn't cover his college expenses by June he won't be able to transfer his credits to a four-year college.

Zach Koutsky, legislative and political director of United Food and Commercial Workers union Local 881, said it's often women and people of color who are subject to erratic schedules.

"All we're asking for is a little bit of stability, a little bit of dignity and a little bit of thought put into how they are brought into work and utilized as workers," he said.

But Ald. Tom Tunney, 44th, who owns Ann Sather restaurants, said legislating how employers schedule workers may be over-regulation and suggested finding other solutions to address the “bad apples.”

"My gut tells me that we need to get to the root of some of the bad employment practices," Tunney said during last week's hearing. "I do feel that this ordinance is an over-reach that will have more unintended consequences that will really in the long term I think hurt employees."

aelejalderuiz@chicagotribune.com

Twitter @alexiaer

How a Fair Workweek Could Change the Lives of L.A.’s Retail Workers

A Target employee says erratic hours, unpredictable paychecks, and tenuous healthcare coverage make getting by in L.A. a pain

Steven BlumMarch 11, 2019

For many Angelenos laboring in retail, there’s no such thing as a “normal” work week. Hours are erratic, employees are expected to be on call at all times, and a vast majority—77 percent—receive a week or less notice of their schedules.

But earlier this month, City Council members in L.A. introduced a Fair Workweek measure that could bring a degree of stability to the lives of some 77,000 retail workers affected by volatile work hours.

The ordinance would require large retailers in the city of L.A. to provide workers with two weeks’ advance notice of what days and hours they’re scheduled to work, while allowing employees to request changes and decline shifts without threat of retaliation.

The new measure would also do away with “clopening” shifts, dreaded situations that require employees to work an opening shift shortly after a closing one, by mandating a ten-hour break between scheduled shifts. Forty-four percent of retail workers in L.A. County have had to “clopen” and 61 percent had fewer than ten hours between shifts, according to a 2018 UCLA study. Similar comprehensive fair workweek laws have already been adopted bycities like New York, San Jose, and San Francisco, as well as the state of Oregon.

For some in the Southland, having a set schedule can mean the difference between having healthcare coverage and going without it. Adrian* has been working at Target for nine years, and is fighting for the reform because he wants to keep his health insurance. He explain to us how more predictable work hours would affect his life.

What does a typical work week look like for you?

My schedule fluctuates wildly. I could have a night shift one day, a morning shift the next. You’re at the employer’s whim. They want you to work seven-and-a-half hours because once you hit eight hours they have to give you a second break and they don’t want you to get overtime.

At the same time, the store is always trying to figure out how they can decrease hours. Sometimes they even shave off hours last minute—they’ll call you the day of your shift and say, “Hey, don’t bother coming in” or “You can just work half a day.”

[A Spokesperson for Target told Los Angeles that the company strives to offer “a variety of schedules to meet the needs of our diverse populations.” They added, “Hourly team members establish the hours they are available to work and Target works to build schedules around their availability.”]

How does that affect your ability to plan your life?

You just never quite know when you’re going to be leaving. You’re constantly at the behest of your company, especially on days when you’re trying to pick up shifts. You can’t plan anything on those days.

You don’t have 100 percent certainty about anything unless you’re off on a day that you requested. Other than that, it’s hard to have a typical life. It’s not like a 9 to 5 where you know that you’re off on the weekends.

Are you still able to secure health insurance?

You have to hit 32 hours a week, or more, in order to maintain your health insurance at Target. If you don’t hit those 32 hours, you could lose your insurance. Some weeks, they only schedule me for three days — that can be around 24 hours. At that point, I have to go out and ask someone for their hours. I kind of beg people for a shift sometimes so that I can reach my minimum of 32 hours.

People ask, how can you still work there? But why should I have to leave? I’ve put in my time, and I’ve gone to work even when I was sick. Why shouldn’t I be treated like a human being?

How can anyone survive on such an unpredictable paycheck?

Well, HR automatically throws out any application from someone who has “availability issues.” If you go to school, for example, they completely disregard your application. They only like to hire people who have open availabilities—that tends to be someone who is fresh out of high school, who still lives at home, and who is applying to Target as their first job.

[Forty percent of Target’s workforce is made up of students and retirement-age people, according to a spokesperson.]

I used to get my five days of work a week, or 40 hours. But things have changed so drastically in L.A. that even if I was still a full-time employee, I wouldn’t be able to sustain a regular life in the city I was born and grew up in. You’d need the salaries of three or four full-time Target employees to live here.

Target is profitable. The money is going somewhere but it’s not going to the worker ants, and yet we are the ones that maintain these companies. We break our backs and get paid the least.

Are your coworkers forced to rely on government assistance to get by?

Of course, especially those with kids. I can’t even afford my own food sometimes. There are times when I’m eating bologna sandwiches every day, or I have to go to Jack in the Box or McDonald’s and order off the 99 cent menu. That’s how bad it gets—all you can eat is some unhealthy crap, because that’s all you can afford.

Sometimes this group comes in called Life Resources, which is supposed to assist the team with life issues. If you tell them that you can’t afford something, they just direct you to whatever government agency can provide you with assistance. It defeats the whole purpose of having a job. You’re there, you’re able-bodied, and you can work. Why are you being directed to a social program?

How would having a fair work week impact your life?

I’d get more hours, more stable work weeks. No clopening shifts. I’m not going to have to worry that my hours will be cut one week to the next. It would change a whole lot for me.

*Adrian asked that his last name be withheld, citing fear of retaliation.

Philly is now the second-largest U.S. city with a ‘fair workweek’ law

After months of laborious debates, City Council on Thursday passed a major regulatory bill that will force fast-food chains, retailers and hotels to provide advanced scheduling to their workers, among a slew of other protections. The big reason? So workers can better plan their lives and, according to the bill’s sponsors, escape the cycle of poverty.

The approach is affectionately referred to as a “fair workweek,” and Philly is the latest city to adopt the practice. New York, San Francisco and other large municipalities have been implementing similar laws since 2014.

“[Philly’s] will be the most expansive in the country,” Councilwoman Helen Gym told a packed Council chambers.

The bill, introduced by Gym in June, passed 14-3. It will raise scheduling standards for any Philly business with more than 30 locations and 250 employees — think national fast-food chains and retailers, from McDonald’s to Target. Per the final language, the law will impact more than 130,000 workers in the city, affecting a cohort who are predominantly paid low wages.

Despite Gym’s claim, experts say certain aspects of the newly-passed bill are weaker than comparable laws in other cities — though others are seen as stronger. Philly’s fair workweek package will secure:

  • Two-week advance notice of employee schedules

  • Compensation for last-minute schedule changes, aka “predictability pay”

  • Shifts offered to part-time workers before a company hires new workers

How’d we get here?

Labor groups and workers who make low wages have been rallying Council to introduce fair scheduling legislation for over a year now. They detailed the rampant scheduling chaos at fast-food joints, big-box retailers and certain hospitality restaurants and hotels, and sold lawmakers on how the work schedule creates a ripple effects into other facets of a person’s life.

Last-minute schedule changes deeply impact parents who juggle work and children. Plus, a chaotic work schedule can be a barrier to more long-term goals, like going to college or a training program.

Annie Ellison, a housekeeper at the Marriott hotel in Philadelphia for 18 years, testified in Council about the difficulties of getting childcare as a working parent.

“A lot of mothers come to work at 8 [in the morning] and don’t get out in time to get their kids from daycare,” Ellison said. “All day long we worry about it.”

Gym and the bill’s seven co-sponsors sold it as an “anti-poverty measure,” a cry largely echoed throughout the hours of public testimony Thursday. Chambers were full of people from a range of organizations — labor, religious, political — all testifying to the need for the fair workweek protections.

“Workers deserve to know when and how long they will work,” said Rev. William B. Moore, pastor at Tenth Memorial Baptist Church in North Philly. “Sensitivity to the needs of the worker is crucial to a stable workplace and … helps break the cycle of poverty.”

“The cry in the city is for a fair workweek,” said Minister Rodney Muhammad, president of the local NAACP.

Surprising no one who’s followed the mascot’s press so far, Gritty was co-opted as the de facto figurehead for the campaign — at least online. The real-life orange hellion was reportedly scheduled to appear for Thursday’s vote, but cancelled because of another commitment. (He’s kinda popular.)

GOP and Chamber of Commerce: It’s bad, because reasons

Every sitting Democrat on City Council voted for the bill. Gym said the bill was not rushed and went through several amendments over the last year.

Council’s three Republican members were the sole no votes on the bill. Attendees met Councilman Brian O’Neill’s opposition with a chorus of boos, but the Northeast Philly lawmaker said he could not vote for the bill because it unnecessarily extends to unionized workers.

“It does not exempt collective bargaining agreements — and it should,” O’Neill said.

Unions have been carved out of previous labor regulation bills, like the controversial paid sick leave bill that passed in 2014. O’Neill said plainly that unions should not be covered because they do not need the extra protections that could be afforded through the bill. Several unions, including the Philly chapter of the AFL-CIO, backed the legislation and urged Council to keep unionized workers covered. As written, unions may write the exemption into their contract if they wish.

The Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce was also among of the bill’s fiercest opponents.

Chamber President Rob Wonderling said the regulations would stifle business growth and ultimately kill jobs across the city. In a statement sent out Thursday, he commended Council for ironing out some of the more onerous aspects of the bill, but raised concerns about regulations going forward.

“While some amendments helped ease the regulatory burden on some employers, we are hopeful that the regulatory process will provide further relief to owners of hotels and franchise establishments,” Wonderling said in a statement.

Fair workweek won’t actually happen until 2020

The bill heads to Mayor Jim Kenney’s desk for final passage — a sure thing, given his office’s open support of the law. But as implementation, there will be a one-year delay until workers can expect big changes to the way employees set their hours. So the first actual “fair workweek” will begin January 1, 2020.

In the meantime, city officials will figure out how to enforce the laws. As with the paid sick leave law, the Mayor’s Office of Labor Relations will be tasked with keeping businesses in compliance with the fair workweek law.

Bonus legislation from Thursday’s session: Council passed a bill on behalf of Mayor Kenney that will raise the minimum wage for city contractors and subcontractors from $12 to $14 an hour. It’s unclear how many workers will be impacted by the change.

A vote for Philly’s Fair Workweek legislation is a vote for decency

Too many people in this country have a big problem with the folks they consider the Other.

They're the folks who don't look like them, behave the way they would, think thoughts they agree with, or worship in ways they find familiar.

Over four obscene days in October, we saw the worst of what can happen when contempt for the Other overpowers reason, respect, and humanity.

The massacre of Jews in a Pittsburgh synagogue. The mailing of pipe bombs all around the country. The murder of two shoppers in a Kentucky supermarket, just because they were black.

My social media feed has been jammed with exhortations to counter all that contempt with soul-restoring acts of civility and fairness in our own communities.

Be good to each other, they say. Be compassionate toward friend and stranger alike. It's the only way to embody the decency that Americans are supposed to be known for.

Well, allow me to get the Decency Train rolling.

There's a bill about to come up for a City Council vote that would go a long way toward dismantling indecent treatment of some of the most disrespected workers in the city: The 130,000 men and women who toil in Philadelphia's retail, food-service, and hotel industries.

It's called the Fair Workweek Scheduling bill. You'd take a giant leap for decency if you'd call your Council representative and ask him or her to vote it into law on Nov. 29, when the bill comes up for a vote before the full Council.

If passed, Fair Workweek would require companies with more than 250 employees and more than 30 locations to give workers their schedules 10 days in advance, and pay them if changes are made after the fact.

It's the decent thing to do. How can anyone manage life without that kind of predictability?

Yet that's the reality for so many of Philly's retail and food-service employees, most of whom are among the working poor, earning minimum wage. They spend their shifts making our hotel beds, picking up the clothes we leave on the dressing-room floors of our stores, or bagging our burgers at fast-food places we hope our own kids will never have to work at.

Symphony Hurst, a 24-year-old single mom from Overbrook, is one of them. In the retail and food-service jobs she has held, she has never known definitively how many work hours she'd be given or on which days she'd work them.

So she couldn't accurately schedule day care for her daughter, Allena, 5, or even know whether she'd earn enough money that week to pay a sitter at all. She once lost her chance at full-time employment at a department store when her manager – who'd been impressed by Hurst's hustle and teamwork as a part-timer – went frosty when she learned Hurst was a mom.

Since then, when Hurst applies for a job, she says, "I try to withhold the fact that I'm a mother. When employers hear they have a mom employee, they side-eye her and assume that if they give her 30 or more hours a week, she won't come in because she has to take care of her child.

"But if moms like me got consistent hours, we could adequately plan for whatever may come up for our children."

She finally found consistent hours at a Starbucks at Philadelphia International Airport, where she currently works. But it should not have taken her years to find such reasonable accommodation. As she spoke, I thought of how frequently we demonize people like Hurst – young, unwed urban mothers – as lazy or irresponsible, or a drain on the taxes that harder-working folks pay to keep society afloat.

And yet there they are, trying like mad to create lives that will deny those stereotypes while the structure of their employment scheduling pretty much guarantees they'll fail. And so they stay mired in the 25 percent of Philadelphians who live in poverty – the highest rate for any American city.

That's not just indecent. It's cruel.

The Fair Workweek bill, if passed, will show 130,000 employees that they matter, they're needed, and they're worthy of the basic dignities their better-paid bosses enjoy: Respect for their time, regard for their circumstances and fair compensation when either is compromised.

Because Philadelphia's retail, hotel and food-service workers are not the Other. They're Us.

To learn more about the Fair Workweek Bill, click here.

To find the name and contact information for your City Council representative, click here. Urge members to vote on Nov. 29 to approve passage of the Fair Workweek bill 

—————
Posted: November 5, 2018 - 5:00 AM
Ronnie Polaneczky @RonniePhilly | polaner@phillynews.com

City Council votes to move 'fair workweek' scheduling bill forward

by Juliana Feliciano Reyes, Posted: October 30, 2018

The "Fair Workweek" scheduling bill for retail, fast-food, and hotel workers in Philadelphia got one step closer to becoming law Tuesday.

After a three-hour City Council hearing in a room that was filled to capacity with a sometimes rowdy crowd of workers and advocates, its Committee on Law and Government voted, 6-2, in favor of moving the law to a full Council vote, with Council Members David Oh and Brian O'Neill voting against it. The law proposes requiring companies with more than 250 employees and more than 30 locations to give workers their schedules 10 days in advance, and pay them if changes are made after the fact. (An earlier version of the law listed two weeks' notice; the proposed 10 days for the first year of implementation was a last-minute amendment.)

Championed by advocates, union leaders, and researchers as a way for workers to gain more control over their lives and break out of a cycle of poverty, "Fair Workweek" laws have been implemented in such cities as San Francisco, New York, and Seattle. But Philadelphia, the poorest big city in the nation, has not seen job growth like other cities have, as deputy commerce director Sylvie Gallier Howard pointed out during the hearing, warning of laws that might hinder job creation.

The law, if passed and enforced — the latter is an enormous "if" — could have a broad effect on the 130,000 Philadelphians working in retail and food service. In a survey of nearly 700 of those Philadelphia workers, 66 percent said they had unpredictable schedules, according to a February 2018 report from the University of California, Berkeley's hourly work research center.

Lekesha Wheelings, a cook who has worked at the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown for 11 years, said she saw her hours fall in 2017 and made $5,000 less than she did the previous year. "You can see that the city is growing in so many ways," she said. "But sometimes it feels like we're not getting ahead."

This bill, she said, is "a way forward for our city."

The hearing depicted recent shifts in the national labor movement. With union representation at a historic low, organizers and politicians have set their sights on fighting for the rights of workers who aren't backed by organized labor. Union leaders and their membership showed up to support the bill regardless.

"We realize that the 130,000 workers in the retail, food, and hospitality workplaces do not have the benefits and protections that we receive as members of AFSCME," said Fred Wright, president of municipal workers' District Council 47.

Industry leaders and business groups testified against the law at the hearing, saying it would hurt their bottom line when they already face thin profit margins. These industries are inherently unpredictable, business leaders said at the hearing.

In Seattle, Aramark staffs every event and location covered by the law "as leanly as possible," according to Brian Hastings, Aramark's district manager. Before the law there was passed, when business was good, workers would get more hours, he said. Now, because of the "predictability pay" penalty for last-minute shift changes, the company can't do that.

Managers representing the Greater Philadelphia Hotel Association also spoke out against the law, saying that it could drive up prices and make rates less competitive. Julie Coker Graham, president and CEO of the Philadelphia Convention and Visitors Bureau, reminded Council that the city's tourism industry is booming. It's the city's second-largest employment sector overall, she said.

In other cities that have passed "fair workweek" laws, hotels have not been covered. But hotel workers, too, deal with unpredictable scheduling, as workers at the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown have said.

The retail and hospitality industries compose about 20 percent of the jobs in Philadelphia and are among the fastest-growing in the city, according to data from Mayor Kenney's workforce plan.

Since Council Member Helen Gym introduced the bill with seven other sponsors in June, she has met with lobbyists from national corporations, including Target, according to city lobbying data. She's also hosted business round tables to get feedback from the  community.

Earlier this month, Gym hosted Seattle Council Member Lorena Gonzalez, one of the officials who championed the scheduling bill there, to speak to City Council about the merits of the law.

The bill is scheduled for a full vote Nov. 29.

—————

Philadelphia Media Network is one of 21 news organizations producing Broke in Philly, a collaborative reporting project on solutions to poverty and the city's push toward economic justice. See all of our reporting at https://brokeinphilly.org

Juliana Feliciano Reyes @juliana_f_reyes |jreyes@phillynews.com

Marc Lamont Hill: Black folks suffer most without fair workweek protections | Opinion

Marc Lamont Hill, For the Inquirer

I grew up in North and West Philly, where I was taught, by my Uncle Bobbie, to do what's right — not because it's easy, but because it matters. It's why I named my business after him. It's why I know that treating working people with basic dignity by telling them when and how much they're going to work is common sense. And it's why I hope City Council passes Fair Workweek legislation that would do right by 130,000 working families in our city.

My Uncle Bobbie never had access to formal higher education, but he was committed to lifelong learning. His house introduced me to the world of critical analysis. Uncle Bobbie read every paper, magazine, and book that he could get his hands on — because learning how the world works teaches us about what is right and what needs to be done. I watched as Uncle Bobbie questioned everything, in hopes of changing things for the better. He challenged us to follow suit. It's why I committed my life to being an activist-scholar, struggling to produce new ideas that create justice on the ground for real people in real communities. It is also why, in my business, I make sure that my employees are guaranteed dignity, respect, and support.

We are living in a historical moment of disinvestment in our neighborhoods. Uncle Bobbie's Coffee & Books is a community space designed for sharing, building, learning, laughing, debating, eating, and building. It's a replication of Uncle Bobbie's house: a space where folks come together and know that there's mutual respect among everyone who walks through the doors — customers, employees, visitors, and myself.

Black business owners have less capital, less mentorship, and fewer resources than other entrepreneurs. Black bookstores, once a staple in our communities, are now few and far between. They are special because they approach their customers and staff with compassion, empathy, and a commitment to justice. Owning a small business isn't easy. My business model presumes that black people do read, that black people will support a black business, and that black people can support other black people by treating employees well.

ADVERTISEMENT

Uncle Bobbie's is true to its namesake because of the dignity and respect provided to my employees, who have helped make my dream of opening a black bookstore in Germantown a reality. My employees know when they'll work. I approve requests for time off. I pay them a living wage. I make sure that they have the security that they need to care for themselves, their families, and their communities. This costs me a little extra. I do it because it's what's right.

My employees get enough rest between shifts, so they're in a good mood when they come into work. My employees get plenty of time off to spend time with their families, so they're engaged while at work. They work regular, set shifts and know their schedules, so they can build relationships with Uncle Bobbie's regulars. When you combine those three things — employee satisfaction, engagement, and relationships — you create a unique space where people feel welcome.

In Philly, the majority of folks working in food service and retail are black. It's black folks who are suffering because schedules are constantly shifting. It's black folks who are called in to work at the last minute. It's black folks who are suffering when shifts are cut short and their paycheck isn't what they expected. And it's black folks who stand to benefit from the basic protections that the fair workweek bill provides.

If a new, small business in Germantown can provide basic protections for its employees, my Uncle Bobbie's wisdom has taught me that large corporations undoubtedly can, too. I don't have ultra-complex scheduling software at my disposal. I don't have lobbyists taking meetings on my behalf. I just have the values of my family, and the drive to do right by my employees and by the people in my community. A fair workweek is the least we can do.

———————-

Marc Lamont Hill is the owner of Uncle Bobbie's Coffee & Books and a professor of Media Studies and Urban Education at Temple University. 

Posted: October 30, 2018 - 9:30 AM
Marc Lamont Hill, For the Inquirer

Workers push for City Council approval for Fair Workweek legislation

By Emily Neil

Philadelphia City Council will hold a hearing on Fair Workweek legislation on Tuesday that will potentially grant more than 100,000 workers who work at some of the largest companies in the retail, hospitality and food sectors in the city the right to advanced notice of their schedules.

“It means everything to me,” said Juan Mulet, 23, of the proposed legislation, introduced by City Councilwoman Helen Gym in June.

Mulet, a college student working to support himself, said that his experiences working retail at Skechers and Forever 21 made it difficult to plan anything in his life.

While at Skechers, his boss would often text him the schedule and say that he was working this or that day, but would not tell him the exact hours until that same day, he said.

“I’m a human being. I have to worry. And that isn’t fair,” said Mulet. Being able to know his schedule ahead of time would help Mulet be more present to help care for his mother, who is ill and often has doctor’s appointments. It would also aid him in his acting career - he often can’t plan to go to auditions because the schedule at his current workplace, which he declined to name, doesn’t send the week’s schedule until Sunday of that week.

The hearing with the City Council Law and Government Committee, to be held on Oct. 30 at 2 p.m. at the City Council, is the next step in the process of passing the bill. 

Kati Sipp, principal at New Working Majority LLC — a consulting company that works with labor unions, community organizations, and social enterprises committed to fighting for racial, economic, and gender justice — said that workers are most supportive of the legislation’s requirement that employers let their workers know their schedules two weeks in advance, as well as the stipulation that employers must offer any additional hours that arise to employees that are already working for them.

“[These] are the two things that I think workers are very excited about, because the combination of those two things will add much more stability to their lives,” said Sipp.

Knowing your schedule two weeks in advance means you could schedule a doctor’s appointment for your kid, or know if you’re going to make it to back to school night, Sipp explained: “If you are a person who has two part-time jobs, or is balancing a school schedule and a work schedule, you’ll know your work schedule and that gives you that scheduling stability.”

“The idea that they’ll also be offered new hours before employers are hiring new people means that greater chance for economic stability because, obviously, if you are able to work more hours and you’re not getting offered those hours by your employer right now, you’re earning less money than you might want to be able to earn,” she added.

Sipp said that, though there has been lobbying against the bill by some of the industries that would be covered under it, it has been on the legislative agenda for less than a year.

“We’re really counting on the fact that the City Council will respond to sort of the fact that there are 130,000 workers in the city who could potentially be covered by this bill and experience the improvements — that the voices of those 130,000 workers should be louder than the voices of individuals that manage a hotel in Center City,” Sipp said.

The bill would exclude the majority of food establishments: City Councilwoman Gym noted in a September interview with AL DÍA that the bill “eliminates probably 98 percent of food businesses in Philadelphia, so they won’t even be impacted.”

“We’re talking about large-scale employers, McDonald’s, chain restaurants, those that have...the technological capacity to get to zero food waste, every single month. I have a hard time believing that they can’t treat their employees with that same kind of respect,” she said.

After meeting an organizer from OnePA, a statewide activist coalition, Mulet decided to become involved in the Fair Work Week Campaign, and plans to attend the rally, organized by OnePA and others, to be held outside of City Hall on Tuesday afternoon prior to the hearing. 

“I’ve been trying to get my friends to come because it’s important,”Mulet said.

Philly needs higher wages, better hours and a broader and deeper safety net

Posted: October 26, 2018 - 5:00 AM
Mark Price, For the Inquirer

The Census Bureau's September release of data on incomes and poverty in 2017 was startling for many: Household incomes were up in nine of the 10 largest cities in the country, the exception being the city of Philadelphia. This begs the question: Is the city's newfound prosperity a mirage?

Consider the numbers. Philadelphia's August unemployment rate was 6 percent, the lowest August unemployment rate in the city since 2000, when it was 5.8 percent.

The city's employment growth has been stronger than the state's since the end of the Great Recession, growing at an average annual rate of just over 1 percent, compared to the statewide average of 0.85 percent. This growth has reduced unemployment by almost half from its post-recession peak of 10.9 percent.

The share of city residents with employment in 2017 at 53 percent is higher than before the recession began.  The city's good job growth numbers have reduced the poverty rate in Philadelphia, which has fallen from its 2011 peak of 28.4 percent to 25.7 percent in 2016.  Of course, as incomes fell in 2017, the poverty rate was unchanged while deep poverty climbed.

This is troubling news, but it is also important to remember that in 2007 — the best year for the U.S. and Philadelphia economy prior to the start of the Great Recession, when the city's unemployment rate was 6.2 percent — just under one in four (23.8 percent) of the city's residents had incomes below the poverty line.

Poverty will remain stubbornly high because economic growth on its own is not sufficient to lead to large reductions in the poverty rate or for broadly shared income growth. For example, we find that incomes for the top 20 percent of Philadelphia households are up over 2007 by 13 percent while incomes after adjusting for inflation for the bottom 60 percent of household remain at or below their levels in 2007. Internal Revenue Service data suggest that income growth among the top 20 percent has been concentrated among the top 1 percent of the city's families, who have seen their average income climb 32 percent since 2010.

Official poverty thresholds understate the degree to which Philadelphia families struggle to get by.  While the official poverty threshold in 2017 was $16,895 for a single adult with one child, data on the costs that families in the city face for rent, food, childcare, and health care reveal that a basic family budget for a single parent requires an annual income of $56,912.  Median earnings in the city of $32,011 suggest that for, many Philadelphia families, work doesn't pay enough to provide a decent standard of living.

What Philadelphia needs is higher wages, better hours, and a broader and deeper safety net.

The most direct route to raising wages is a minimum wage that's higher than $7.25 per hour, but the city is blocked by state law from setting a higher minimum wage and by reluctance by the leadership of the Republican majority in Harrisburg to move legislation to raise the state's minimum wage.

In addition to low wages, many residents in Pennsylvania continue to work part-time jobs when they would prefer full-time work,  a fact that has kept the state's underemployment rate at 9.4 percent, which is higher than following the aftermath of the dot-com recession in 2002. The challenge of insufficient hours is felt most acutely by Philadelphia's service-sector workers, just 17 percent of whom are employed full-time.  Just under three in four of Philadelphia's part-time service workers report needing additional hours to better make ends meet.

Philadelphia City Council this week takes up Fair Workweek Legislationthat, in addition to providing workers with more notice on scheduling of work hours — a key requirement for all working parents — it also requires employers, when expanding their schedule, to offer hours first to incumbent part-time employees, rather than hiring new ones. Expanding hours for the underemployed is an important step toward helping more working Philadelphians move out of poverty.

—————

Mark Price is a labor economist at the Keystone Research Center and author of the State of Working Philadelphia, which is available online.

Governor Kate Brown says she'll continue to protect the Oregon residents love

As Oregon’s governor, I led bipartisan work on transportation, Medicaid funding and ensuring all kids have health care. Working together, urban and rural, we built a better Oregon.

I’m committed to continuing our work to move our state forward at a time when our Oregon values are under attack.

I fought back when politicians tried to cut Oregonians’ health care. I fought to protect our pristine Oregon Coast from offshore drilling. And at a time when women’s rights are under attack across the country, I made sure every woman in Oregon can access reproductive health care.

Some background: Three Views: Why I should be elected governor of Oregon

Another perspective: An Independent can be elected governor in Oregon

A different look: State's schools can be saved, but it will require reforming PERS

I have been clear during my time as governor that I will do what I say and say what I do. My record is clear. I will stand up and protect the Oregon that we love.

Over the last three years, we’ve faced tough challenges. I have led our response to some of the state’s worst wildfires. We helped the Roseburg community heal from the tragedy at Umpqua Community College. And we stood strong with the people of Burns during the Malheur Wildlife occupation. Oregon needs a strong leader who will stand up for all Oregonians, no matter who they are, and defend our values.

Earlier this year when cyanotoxins were found in Salem’s drinking water, I activated the National Guard to provide drinking water until the threat had passed. I made sure that emergency responders had the resources they needed to respond to the crisis and I’ll fight in the Legislature to build the infrastructure we need to protect our water supply.

I believe in the Oregon way. It’s how we took on complex problems like fixing our roads and bridges and making sure that Oregonians have access to health care.

●       We passed a transportation package that will reduce traffic, create 16,000 new jobs and make our roads safer.

●       We passed a first-in-the-nation pay equity and fair scheduling bill with bipartisan votes.

●       We worked together to ensure that 430,000 Oregonians have access to affordable health care because everyone should be able to see the doctor when they’re sick.

I got those passed with both Democrat and Republican votes. And I’m committed to continue working for all Oregonians over the next four years.

I pushed for the construction of Amazon’s Salem fulfillment center, which will bring good jobs to this region. And we’ve been supporting the Salem-Keizer Career and Technical Education Center because of the critical role it plays in ensuring Oregonians have the skills they need to compete in our global economy.

I want to close the gap between the workforce that we have and the workforce we need to compete in a global economy, and I launched Future Ready Oregon to expand job training for Oregonians statewide.

I want to keep protecting health care and expand access. And I’ll continue to protect our clean air and water.

Now is not the time to move our state backward. Now is the time to keep Oregon moving forward.

Incumbent Gov. Kate Brown, who has served since 2015, is running on the Democratic ticket. Reach her at info@katebrownfororegon.com 

To help Philly kids, make sure their parents can be there


 Abram Taber
Published: Oct. 10, 2018, 9:00 a.m.

As a music teacher, I get to interact with every child in my school. I know that some of the best music students are not necessarily the strongest academically, or those who have perfect behavior. To succeed in school, kids need to be able to find some place to shine, and for many students the arts offer that opportunity.

Last year, I had an elementary-aged choir student who got so sick with stage fright that he couldn’t sing during our winter concert. So before the spring concert, I met with his mom, to see if she could attend. Having a parent in the audience can really help calm a kid down. Performing can be nerve-wracking, and it’s good to see a friendly face.

I know this firsthand. I played saxophone in the band and sang in choir all through my primary school years, and in all that time my mom only ever missed one concert — for the birth of my sister. I don’t hold that against her, obviously, but it still sticks out in my mind. It was the first time I publicly played a solo, and my mom wasn’t there to watch. My parents’ pride in my musical ability was one of the reasons I stuck with it during the challenging times; the seemingly endless hours practicing the same piece over and over again. I wanted to make them proud.

But it’s not always easy for parents to attend their kids’ performances, even if they have the best intentions.

In the case of my student who had bad stage fright, his mother really wanted to come to the spring concert, she said, but she’d just gotten a new job, and wasn’t sure if she could make it because she didn’t have her schedule yet, and didn’t know if she’d be able to get the time off (all of our concerts take place during the school day). She also seemed very worried about possible retaliation if she called out, even if it was because she didn’t want to miss an important event in her son’s life.

In Philadelphia, over 130,000 retail, foodservice and hospitality workers don’t know if they’ll be able to come to their kids’ concerts, because they may not get their work schedules more than a few days in advance.

These parents don’t know if they’ll make it to Back to School Night to meet their children’s teachers and start to develop a rapport with them. They don’t know if they’ll be able to volunteer for the PTA bake sales, or see the soccer games, or come to the art show.

When parents can’t participate in the life of their kids’ school, it makes school this “other place” that isn’t connected to the family, or the community.

There are other school-related side effects of parents’ unpredictable work schedules as well. At some schools, when students are suspended, they aren’t allowed back in the building until a parent comes in to meet with the administrator. If a parent is constantly getting called in to work on an ad-hoc basis, that means a one-day suspension can turn into three or four days — and that is bad for kids, academically.

It’s time that City Council passes Councilwoman Gym’s Fair Workweek legislation, and gives all of Philly’s working parents the chance to be involved in their kids’ activities. Don’t all our kids deserve that?

————

Abram Taber is a music teacher in South Philly. He has worked as a teacher for 13 years and in the School District of Philadelphia for 4 years.

Students, low-wage workers rally to demand consistent work hours, advance scheduling

A big focus was how the demands of the Fair Workweek Initiative would help students.

PHILADELPHIA (KYW Newsradio) — College students, Philadelphia school employees, and low-wage workers in the city gathered along Spring Garden Street outside the Community College of Philadelphia on Thursday afternoon to demand a fair work week and speak out against economic injustice. 

Marissa Johnson-Valenzuela is part of the Faculty & Staff Federation at CCP. That group helped organize the rally. She says The Fair Workweek Initiative focuses on schedules — "insisting that people should get two weeks notice of their schedule, that people should have accees to 40 hours a week."

Andrew Kramer✔@Philly_Kramer

Students and Philadelphia school employees are speaking out right now outside @CCPedu against economic injustice and calling for a fair workweek #fairworkweekphl @fairworkweekPHL @KYWNewsradio

4:28 PM - Oct 4, 2018

6See Andrew Kramer's other Tweets

RELATED: In growing national trend, fair work week bill introduced in Philly council

Also, Johnson-Valenzuela said, "It's definetly still about wages."

A big focus of this rally was how the demands of Fair Workweek would benefit college students.

"Their employers aren't respecting the fact that they're in college," Johnson-Valenzuela said. "They're not giving them consistent schedules, so we see that in our classrooms as well, the need for that kind of respect in the workplace."

Rymir Vaughn, a student, says that his managers schedule him when he's supposed to be in class at CCP, even though he tells them not to.

"And I don't want them to fire me because I'm late." 

Work schedule reforms can help employees — and businesses

Fair is Fair

To the editor: This is in response to the recent editorial “Would the Chicago City Council Punish the Cubs?” For the second time, the Tribune has published an editorial reiterating the opinions of business groups that lobby against laws to improve working-class jobs, in this case against the proposed Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance.

Sure, there are details yet to be worked out in the proposed ordinance, but the editorials get its purpose wrong. The goal is not about punishing business, but about treating workers fairly. If being able to adjust employees' schedules at the last minute is as essential to profitability as the Tribune asserts, then businesses should be willing to pay for it. Workers and families certainly do.

Currently, all of the costs of just-in-time scheduling are put on the shoulders of workers as they scramble to arrange last-minute child care, miss their trains or buses, or come up short on their rent. The proposed Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance does not prohibit employers from adjusting employees' hours. It just helps ensure that employers limit adjustments to only those that are literally worth it to the business.

— Susan Lambert, Chicago

Dire straits

To the editor: I am 77 years old and probably won’t have many more chances to vote for governor. I had hoped to have a clear choice as to which candidate would provide the leadership that would get our state out of the financial mess we have been languishing in for decades. However, it appears as if, again, I will have to hold my nose and vote for one of the major-party candidates, neither of whom have provided the voters with any plan to improve our state’s financial straits. How depressing!

— Richard Schultz, Crete

Bad behavior

To the editor: After watching the conduct of the Senate Democratsduring the Brett Kavanaugh nomination hearings, the next time I hear the word "civility" from a Democrat, I'll have a little chuckle.

— Neil Gaffney, Chicago

Unfit to serve

To the editor: Donald Trump spoke at a rally in Mississippi on Tuesday, Oct. 2. In the course of his speech, he mocked Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault when they were teenagers.

At this point, all we have is Kavanaugh’s word against Ford’s, so we don’t really know the full truth, but it is very clear that Ford was definitely a victim of sexual assault. For Trump to stand up in front of a crowd of people and make fun of Ford is just one more reason, in a long list of reasons, that he is not fit to be president of the United States.

— Judy Weik, Oak Park

A new low

To the editor: Donald Trump's recent speech mocking Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford was a new low, even for him. This is a man who has not an ounce of empathy for anyone but himself. That the Republican Party continues to enable him so it can get another nominee on the Supreme Court and more tax cuts for the rich is a tragedy for our democracy.

Trump's base will support him no matter what he says or does, but its members are a steadily shrinking minority — not enough to stop the blue wave of Democrats from winning office in November. Once we have control of the House, the subpoenas for Trump's taxes will be the beginning of a real effort to hold this president accountable to the rule of law.

— Richard Keslinke, Algonquin

Free trade fail

To the editor: It seems reasonably clear that President Donald Trump will require surgery for the injuries incurred while patting himself on the back with regard to what was formerly called NAFTA. What is totally unclear is why Trump — or anyone else — could credibly claim that much has been accomplished, except for a lot of publicity, something which Trump obviously covets.

Let’s see. NAFTA has been renamed, such that the U.S. appears first. Is that all that Trump meant by his slogan “America First”? Then, it is said, Canada will relax — but not eliminate — its quotas on certain dairy products. That move primarily will help Canadian consumers, but it may be of modest assistance to the U.S. dairy industry. Is that what Trump promised in his campaign rhetoric? Next, and quite likely off-setting any possible benefit to the U.S. from the Canadian dairy trade changes, is the increase in the domestic content requirements for the auto industry — a clear step backward.

Trump’s views on trade restraints have been, and are, demonstrably horrible economics, and this “redoing” of NAFTA does not detract in any way from that conclusion.

— William P. Gottschalk, Lake Forest

A great food scene needs to support food service workers

SEPTEMBER 25, 2018

IIf you live in the city, you’ve seen it — the vast expansion of places to eat and drink, from small cafes to 70,000-square-foot breweries. Philadelphia’s food scene has really grown up; our restaurants easily could (and do) rival that of New York and D.C. As someone who ran a restaurant here for four years, and who continues to work with local restaurateurs, I’m excited to see how the city has matured beyond cheesesteaks and soft pretzels.

With all of this, we've been given the opportunity to change the way we do business and many restaurateurs are getting on board. This industry is a grueling one. It’s hard, honorable work but many workers are left struggling to make ends meet, even when working over 40 hours a week. In recent months, there’s been a lot of conversation about how Councilwoman Helen Gym’s proposed Predictable Scheduling bill (sometimes called the Fair Workweek bill) will impact restaurants in the city. I thought it'd be helpful to share my perspective from my own experience in practicing ethical employment in an industry that isn’t always fair to the workers that make it run.

When we opened Girard Bruncherie in November 2014 we were inspired by our own experiences of being on the front line. We knew that restaurant workers deserved a fair wage, and we’d seen firsthand the restaurant scene in San Francisco, where owners paid at least $15/hour and benefits. As of this month, 42 states still have a sub-minimum wage for tipped workers where employers can pay as low as $2.13/hour.

There is little to no enforcement for wage theft/violations. In a study done by ROC United, tipped restaurant workers are nearly three times as likely, to live below the poverty line as the rest of the employed population. Eighteen percent of tipped workers live below the poverty line, compared to 8 percent of all employed workers. In the eight states without a sub-minimum wage, food service workers don’t have to scrape by solely on tips, customer service is not only surviving, but thriving — and so is business.

When we opened, we committed to paying a fair wage based on a fair schedule, which we did by including a 20 percent hospitality fee in the price of our meals. Just like when you go to the auto mechanic and they bill you for parts and labor.

Our staff were guaranteed a 40-hour schedule if they wanted one, and schedules were predictable from one week to the next. While we generally maintained the same schedule from week to week, we’d shift around if someone requested off. During our entire time in business I never declined a single RTO, because these are people with lives that don't revolve solely around work.

What I found over time is that, while treating restaurant workers ethically required a little bit more of an investment up front, it cut down on turnover so much that in the end it paid big dividends. Because our staff felt valued, they took the time to really know the product and the clientele, and that showed in the bottom line, year in and year out. There was considerable cohesion between the front of house/wait staff and the back of house/cooking staff—everyone worked as a unit to deliver an exceptional experience for our customers.

Over the course of her four years with us, our sous-chef got engaged, had her first child, and eventually became the general manager of the restaurant. In the food service industry, maternity leave rarely exists, and many working moms struggle to retain their job.

I am proud to have been able to keep her position for her, along with some pay while on leave. I couldn't imagine the stress of a new baby on top of having to look for a new job. Yet, the reality is most workers are at risk of losing their job when they do anything that doesn't fit into the restaurant’s schedule and own particular needs — whether it be a much needed vacation or family planning.

Another one of the staff decided that he wanted to get certified as an emergency medical technician. The staff collectively worked out the schedule to accommodate his classes. Everyone had each other’s backs, in no small part because they knew that if they ever needed a similar accommodation, it would be the norm, not the exception. Even when I was hospitalized and out of work for an entire month, my team pulled together and did a great job on their own.

After spending four years running the Bruncherie, I decided to sell the restaurant in the spring of 2018 in order to prioritize my personal well-being.

At the end of the day, it’s all about respect. As owners and operators we must acknowledge the effort and sacrifice our employers put forth to make our business a success. They deserve so much more from us. I’m confident that other restaurants can succeed with an ethical, highroad model as well. The restaurant industry should be lining up in support of Councilwoman Gym’s Fair Workweek bill, and proving that we can support our staff at the same time that we continue to make Philly’s restaurant scene one of the best in the nation.

Brian Oliveira was the owner and head chef at Girard Bruncherie for four years, until selling it this spring. He is currently working as a food industry advocate and consultant to other restaurants.

Law regulating scheduling would help both workers, economy

SEPTEMBER 04, 2018

A long-standing myth that pits business interests against workers’ rights goes something like this: Every gain made by workers — think wages, working conditions or hours — automatically diminishes employers’ ability to turn a profit and keep their businesses afloat.

This tired argument has been trotted out for decades by economic conservatives and big business. Child labor laws that prevented children under 14 from working full-time jobs? Bad for business — not only did the labor pool shrink, but employers also had to pay adult workers higher wages than they paid children. Pay parity for women workers? Minimum wage? Those things are nice ideas, but they’ll simply cost businesses too much, and the ripple effects will slow down the economy.

The modern incarnation of this anti-labor tactic surrounds an ordinance up for a vote in Chicago’s City Council over predictive scheduling, the latest innovation in the workers’ rights movement. The Chicago Tribune called the Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance, a “boneheaded proposal” because it would be too onerous for employers, despite the fact that a similar ordinance has been in place in San Francisco since 2014. Others have subsequently been passed in Seattle, New York City, Emeryville, Calif., and Oregon without disaster striking any of their economies.

The Chicago ordinance protects workers by regulating how employers schedule hourly shift workers in companies with more than 50 employees. Employers would be required to provide employees with their scheduled shifts two weeks in advance and offer “predictability pay” for any changes to the schedule inside that window, including adding or subtracting hours. The ordinance also protects workers’ “right to rest” — to refuse to be scheduled for the opening and the closing shift in the same 11-hour period — as well as their right to decline additional hours added to a shift without fear of repercussions from the employer.

Research shows that workers with the lowest income are most likely to work irregular hours, with at least 10 percent of American labor working in jobs with unpredictable schedules. Indeed, 41 percent of hourly workers report receiving their schedules one week or less in advance of their shifts. This uncertainty leads to instability across the board: income volatility, increased work stress, and heightened work-family conflicts. Together, these obstacles plaguing low-wage workers exacerbate rising inequality, which is arguably the
biggest actual threat to our economy.

It works like this: Predictability pay accrues on top of an employee’s wages per shift and is equivalent to her hourly wage. If an employer changes the schedule with less than two weeks’ notice but more than 24 hours’ notice, they are only required to pay the employee one hour of predictability pay; if they provide less than 24 hours’ notice, employers could owe up to four hours of predictability pay for reducing hours in a shift. In other words, employers are incentivized to plan ahead, but they’re not prevented from making game-time scheduling changes.

To help businesses, the tech sector has stepped up and created multiple platforms to allow employers to easily schedule workers, helping them to limit the additional bureaucracy the Fair Workweek Ordinance entails. These tools will hardly break the bank for the vast majority of businesses affected, namely fast-food chains and large scale retailers.

Opponents say that if, for example, there’s a heat wave and more people are stopping into a drugstore to buy water, owners will face burdensome costs to add workers to the shift to cover increased demand. But don’t workers deserve a greater share of the increased profits made by the store that day, since they provided the means necessary to sell the product? Predictability pay ensures that workers get a bigger piece of a bigger pie.

These protections are a necessary step as business owners and labor adapt to the gig economy, where more people work multiple jobs and retailers are open for longer hours. Some have pointed out that the labor insecurity inherent to the gig economy is not a product of technology, but of policy. Policy, then, is needed to ease the transition away from the old nine-to-five workday. Workers are often juggling multiple jobs, school, and taking care of their families. Balancing these various priorities is practically impossible without being able to predict when you’ll be working, and how much you’ll earn every two weeks. Workers shouldn’t have to worry that they won’t make rent on time or be able to buy their kids school supplies if their boss cuts back their hours.

The Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance will make for happier, more loyal workers, which is good for business. It will reduce income inequality, which is good for the economy. Businesses should work hand-in-hand with labor to accomplish something great for Chicago.

Isabelle Dienstag is a research fellow with Innovation Illinois.

Fair Workweek first step in better working conditions for Philadelphians

SEPTEMBER 03, 2018

This Labor Day, workers deserve much more than our words. They deserve our actions.

We don't need to look any further than our own city to see the power of working people leading on critical issues in our economy and society.

Long before this year's teacher strikes in West Virginia, Oklahoma, and Arizona rocked the nation, I marched alongside Philadelphia teachers who fought for and won a contract to restore essential classroom resources and keep middle-class jobs in our city. I've met with hotel workers and nurses who are unionizing for better care by keeping client ratios at sustainable levels, and I've supported Philadelphia's airport workers who won a multiyear battle for a living-wage contract that offers them a path out of poverty.

For the last year, I've been listening to Philadelphians who work at some of the largest retail and fast-food chains in the country, yet make among the lowest wages in our economy. Retail, hospitality, and food service are the second-largest sector of Philadelphia's economy and growing fast. There are more than 130,000 workers in hourly jobs that have little predictability in scheduling or guarantee of hours. As a result, these are Philadelphians struggling to make ends meet, trying to go to school and gain new skills, juggling multiple jobs, and scrambling for affordable childcare.

A recent Philadelphia study of these workers showed that almost 80 percent don't have a regular daytime work schedule and 45 percent have schedules so chaotic that they cannot predict a weekly income. The stakes are especially high for working parents: Many lose out on childcare subsidies or access to benefits when their hours fluctuate dramatically. And a significant percentage of workers say they forgo school or other employment in order to keep their schedules open in case they are called into work.

This doesn't just impact workers. There's a big hit on businesses as well, in terms of high turnover, low customer satisfaction ratings, and threats from e-commerce. A recent study at the Gap showed that when their retail stores provided predictable and stable scheduling, productivity and profitability improved and employee turnover declined. 

After hearing these stories from our constituents, our City Council took action.

We held a hearing and met with dozens of businesses, worker organizations, students, and nonprofit advocacy groups. And in June, eight council members introduced a bill that would require large corporations to give workers a two-week notice of their schedules, a right to rest between shifts, and a pathway to gain more hours. This "Fair Workweek" bill is one of the most powerful tools municipalities can use to both support workers and encourage sustainable growth for business.

In passing our Fair Workweek bill, Philadelphia will join 17 states and municipalities who recognize that stable and predictable schedules are smart for business and smart for workers.

We have a long way to go.

This Labor Day, we must build a renewed sense of worker power through new forms of organizing and new policy solutions.  From gig workers, like those who deliver our food and packages, to the retail, food service, and hospitality workers who are rallying for "Fair Workweek" legislation, I am committed to supporting the next phase of the labor movement and the fight for economic justice.

Helen Gym is an at-large member of Philadelphia City Council.

A fair work week is the fair price of doing business right

AUGUST 21, 2018

For the life of us, we don’t understand why a minimum-wage worker shouldn’t have a regular schedule and get an extra hour of pay if asked to come in at the last minute.

Is it really too costly to pay a single parent a little extra for saying “no” to their kid’s ball game because they need to say “yes” to flipping burgers at a fast-food restaurant?

Is it really too hard on the bottom line to shell out an extra $12 to a son or daughter who scrambles to reschedule their aging parent’s medical appointment so they can work an extra shift as an overnight security guard?

We don’t think so. We call it the cost of doing business, of treating workers like human beings. We also believe it’s good for business to cultivate loyalty by treating workers fairly.

Our counterparts at the Chicago Tribune claim it’s bad for business to require that workers be given a more predictable schedule, and to sweeten the pot just a bit when employees put aside their private lives at the 11th hour to accommodate the boss’s needs. The Tribune says Chicago’s proposed Fair Workweek Ordinance is a “bone-headed idea” that belongs “in the trash can.” 

We couldn’t disagree more. We think the City Council should follow Seattle, San Francisco and other cities, and pass the ordinance.

First introduced last year by Ald. Ameya Pawar (47th) and Ald. John Arena (45th), the ordinance now has the support of some 30 aldermen. It was championed by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 881, whose members are primarily retail and food industry workers.

The ordinance would require businesses with more than 50 workers to schedule hourly workers two weeks in advance. The requirement would apply only to those workers earning less than $50,000. If an employer adds extra time to a worker’s schedule, the worker would get one extra hour of “predictability” pay. If a worker’s shift is canceled at the last minute, the worker would be paid up to four hours as compensation.

“The instability it creates when you have no idea what day you’re even going to work is detrimental,” Pawar told us. “When you treat people with respect and dignity, it transforms what happens in the workplace.”

Unpredictable, last-minute scheduling is a widespread problem in Illinois, “resulting in underemployment and work-life conflicts with child care, parenting and other family obligations,” according to a study from labor researchers at the University of Illinois. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve Board’s latest Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households points out the detrimental impact of unpredictable schedules on workers’ ability to earn a decent living. Greater predictability would foster “greater labor-force engagement,” the report found.

No surprise there. Workers want to work for a company that treats them well. In this “gig economy,” with an increasing percentage of people working multiple jobs to make ends meet, predictability is a must. 

A job at a restaurant or retail store is often a steppingstone to something better. But a worker can’t climb that economic ladder if he or she can’t schedule classes because they have no idea when they might have to work — or when a shift might be canceled, reducing their paycheck.

Another provision in the ordinance would require businesses to offer additional hours to existing workers before hiring more employees. A common practice among companies now is to limit the hours of workers so as to avoid paying full-time worker benefits. “They’re gaming the system to stay below the benefit threshold,” Pawar said.

A business, to be sure, can’t entirely predict the future. Customer demand ebbs and flows. Machinery breaks down. Weather is unpredictable. Workers call in sick and have to be replaced at the last minute.

But none of that is an excuse to treat workers like serfs at the beck and call of management.

In America’s expanding gig economy, there’s nothing “boneheaded” about demanding that employers respect that workers have other lives

Predictable work schedules are better for employees — and employers

AUGUST 17, 2018

Michael Ortiz is a wheelchair attendant at Midway Airport.

He works about 35 hours a week, but when his employer Prospect Airport Services assigns him mandatory overtime at the last minute, it means he has less quality time to spend with his 6-year-old son.

“Sometimes the schedules aren’t available with enough time for me and my coworkers to know whether we have to work mandatory overtime, and that can make arranging child care a big challenge for many of us. Sometimes I miss my son’s after-school activities because I’m required to work overtime, and I need the money to pay for the things my family needs,” says Ortiz. “If I had a set schedule, with advance notice of my overtime, I could better support my family.”

The City Council has the chance to make life more stable and predictable for hundreds of thousands of workers like Ortiz.

Thirty aldermen and a broad coalition of organized labor, workers and advocacy organizations are supporting the Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance, which would create common sense rules about how and when work schedules can be changed.

This ordinance would give workers the right to request more flexible or predictable work arrangements and, in some cases, to receive a more customized schedule. Workers would have the right to refuse shifts with 11 hours or less between them, since workers are often expected to work a closing shift and then an opening shift just a few hours later, without even enough time to go home and change or rest.

The ordinance would guarantee workers at least two weeks advance notice of their schedules, and require employers to first offer existing employees additional hours prior to hiring additional workers. This will help in combating underemployment and underscheduling of Chicago workers. If an employer changes an employee’s schedule with less than 24 hours’ notice, the employer would have to provide one additional hour of pay for each changed shift, except when changes are due to unforeseen causes beyond the control of the employer.

The bill also would require clear expectations about hours and schedules from the start. Employers would have to provide a good faith estimate in writing of the employee’s work schedule and minimum hours prior to or on commencement of employment.

The Chicago Tribune Editorial Board slammed the ordinance in an Aug. 8 editorial, saying it would hurt business. But the truth is, this ordinance is a compromise. After hearing from business owners and employees from across Chicago, aldermen amended the bill to exempt businesses with fewer than 50 employees. This ordinance focuses on the largest sectors of our economy, such as retail, food service, hospitality and health care.

The reality is, in light of the national trend around fair workweek laws, companies such as the Gap and Starbucks have already done away with on-call scheduling. They provide two weeks notice or more, and have done so to great success to their bottom line. Most labor contracts negotiated by unions have significant scheduling clauses in them. Hundreds of companies in all industries across the Chicago area are already making this work.

The Tribune also overlooks new data that shows that for the Gap, enacting many of these changes sparked a 7 percent growth in sales and a 5 percent increase in worker productivity. The data, from the Center for WorkLife Law, a research and advocacy organization at University of California Hastings College of the Law, shows that fair scheduling policies have helped reduce costs to companies who have to deal with increased hiring, training and retention costs for a workforce that gets burned out because they can't predict their schedules week to week.

Protecting workers who bear the brunt of last-minute changes to their schedules, some even after they've shown up to work, is a practice that many businesses already do. If you hire a catering company or book an event space, and cancel at the last minute, most caterers or event spaces keep deposits to cover the built-in costs of doing business. The same protection should be granted to workers who are told to go home or have to set up extra child care coverage, or skip a class or training program, when their schedules change. There are costs associated with getting to work: think parking, public transportation charges, paying for gas, setting up child or elder care or telling your other job or schooling that you can't make it because you're committed to upholding your end of the employment bargain.

Michael Ortiz and others like him can have a voice in their workweeks, so when they clock out they can be with their families, take vocational or college courses or volunteer in their communities.

All aldermen have to do is pass the Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance.

John Arena is alderman of Chicago’s 45th Ward. Ameya Pawaris alderman of Chicago’s 47th Ward.