Mandated Predictability Jeopardizes Workplace Flexibility
The topic of predictable scheduling has become a national issue for labor groups over the last several years. The groups have focused primarily on five main areas:

  • Lack of adequate notice of work schedules, referenced as “just-in-time scheduling”;
  • “Clopening,” which is working a closing shift and an opening shift back-to-back;
  • On-call shifts;
  • Last-minute requests to work a shift or last-minute cancellation of shifts; and
  • Guaranteed hours, or a lack thereof.

Proponents of predictable scheduling have stated that these issues have an impact on low-wage workers and part-time employees who try to work multiple jobs, as well as women who struggle with child care.

Opponents argue that mandating scheduling requirements will limit an employer’s flexibility to accommodate employee requests for time off, limit offers of additional hours for employees who seek or want to work more, and significantly increase the cost of doing business. This national debate between predictability versus flexibility will continue to be a policy consideration in California in 2017. Predictable Scheduling

Family Leave in California One of Long List; Cumulative Burden on Employers
A paid family leave mandate under federal law was one of the topics of interest in the 2016 presidential debate that both the Republican and Democratic candidates supported. California has championed this issue for the past decade as the first state in the nation to implement a paid family leave program. Despite the significant advances in California on this issue, however, as well as the myriad of family-friendly leaves California offers, there continues to be a constant push for additional family leave and protections. While the California Chamber of Commerce certainly supports a work/family balance, new stringent, mandatory, protected leaves of absence imposed on California employers can disrupt the workplace and create an avenue for costly litigation. Accordingly, any new proposed leave of absence for employees should be considered in light of the existing leaves of absences employers already are required to provide in California. Family Leave in California One of Long List; Cumulative Burden on Employers

Workplace Safety: Rule Changes Ahead for 2017

  • Marijuana: Workplace Drug-Free Policy Update
  • Evolving Science of Drug Testing
  • Heat Illness Prevention
  • Workplace Violence Prevention
  • Hotel Housekeeping Musculoskeletal Injury Prevention Program
  • Permissible Exposure Levels (PEL)
  • California’s Adoption of Federal OSHA Rules

Workplace Safety

Related Issue Page:
Labor and Employment


Protect employers’ rights to organize, direct and manage their companies’ employees in an efficient, safe and productive manner.

Major Victories

Led coalition in 2016 to stop mandate to pay double the regular rate of pay on Thanksgiving (AB 67).

Secured amendments to legislation in 2016 that would have threatened employers with civil litigation for seeking an applicant’s prior salary and benefit information even though the applicant suffered no harm in compensation from the inquiry (AB 1676).

Led coalition in 2016 that defeated legislation adding to time off that employers must provide employees (AB 2405).

Led coalition in 2016 preventing passage of proposal to subject employers to random investigations for alleged retaliation against employees even when there are no employee complaints of retaliation (AB 2261).

Stopped new maternity/paternity leave mandate in 2016 for small employers with as few as 20 employees (SB 1166, SB 654).

Clarifying Leave Requirements. Sponsored legislation signed into law in 2011 to clarify the requirements of paid bone marrow and/or organ donation leave, to provide employers with certainty as to how this leave should be implemented (SB 272).

Recent News



Staff Contact

Jennifer-Barrera-2010-300x300Jennifer Barrera
Senior Policy Advocate,
Labor and Employment, Legal, Taxation