Schedules That Work Act

Bill Number

S. 3550

Origin Chamber

Senate

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Government Operations and Politics

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-12-17: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

Last Updated

2026-01-21T16:34:11Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The Schedules That Work Act aims to empower employees by allowing them to request changes to their work schedules—such as hours, timing, location, or predictability—without fear of retaliation from employers. It requires employers to seriously consider these requests through a good-faith discussion process. Additionally, the Act mandates more stable and predictable scheduling practices for workers in industries known for unstable hours, like retail and food service, to better support work-life balance, family responsibilities, and economic stability. Congress highlights findings on how unpredictable schedules harm low-wage workers, families, and communities, particularly affecting caregivers, parents, and workers of color.

Key Provisions

• Right to Request Schedule Changes (Section 3): Employees can request modifications to work hours, on-call time, location, notice periods, or hour fluctuations. Employers must engage in a timely, interactive discussion. Requests tied to serious health conditions (a major illness requiring ongoing care), caregiving (for children or family with health issues/elderly parents), education/training, or another job must be granted unless the employer has a bona fide business reason (e.g., significant cost increase or inability to meet customer demand). Other requests can be denied for lawful reasons.

• Advance Notice and Predictability for Covered Sectors (Section 4): Applies to non-exempt (hourly, non-managerial) employees in retail sales, food service, cleaning, hospitality (hotels), warehouses, or other designated occupations. Employers with 15+ employees must:
• Provide written work schedules at least 14 days in advance (or on the first day for new hires).
• Pay $75 per day if notice is late.
• Offer an annual estimate of minimum expected monthly hours.
• Post schedules visibly (electronically or physically) and allow employees to decline unposted hours without penalty.
• For changes with less than 14 days' notice, provide predictability pay: one extra hour's pay for added/changed shifts with no hour loss, or half-pay for reduced/canceled hours.
• Exceptions include employee-requested changes, mutual shift swaps, or emergencies (e.g., natural disasters).
• Pay an extra hour's wages for split shifts (non-consecutive daily hours, excluding short meal breaks).
• Include all extra pay clearly on pay stubs.

• Right to Rest Between Shifts (Section 5): Employees can decline shifts starting less than 11 hours after the previous shift ends (including "clopening" shifts: closing late and opening early). Written consent is needed to work such shifts, which can be revoked anytime. Violating this requires 1.5 times regular pay for the overlapping hours.

• Prohibitions (Section 6): Bans employer interference with rights, retaliation (e.g., firing, demotion, or hour cuts for requesting changes), or discrimination against those filing complaints or testifying.

• Enforcement and Remedies (Section 7): The Department of Labor (DOL) investigates violations, similar to wage laws. Employees can sue for lost wages/benefits, interest, liquidated damages (double the losses unless good-faith error), and equitable relief (e.g., reinstatement). DOL can seek penalties ($500–$1,000 for willful scheduling violations; $1,100–$5,000 for retaliation) and file suits. Actions must start within 2 years (3 for willful retaliation). Special rules apply for federal, congressional, and other government employees.

• Notice, Regulations, and Support (Sections 8–10): Employers must post notices about rights (fines up to $100 for willful failure). DOL issues rules within 180 days, including processes to add occupations based on unstable scheduling data (e.g., if 10%+ of workers get <14 days' notice). DOL provides education, technical assistance, pilot programs for fair scheduling, and surveys on work hours via the Current Population Survey.

• Exemptions and Interactions (Sections 11–13): Does not override stronger state/local laws or collective bargaining agreements that waive provisions and cover scheduling. Retains employee rights under existing laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act (wage/hour rules) or Family and Medical Leave Act (unpaid leave for family/health).

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This Act introduces new federal protections not directly covered by current laws:

• Unlike the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which focuses on minimum wage and overtime but not scheduling, it mandates advance notice, predictability pay, and rest periods.
• Builds on but expands the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) by covering schedule requests for broader reasons (e.g., education or second jobs) beyond just family/medical leave.
• Creates novel requirements like split-shift premiums and minimum hour estimates, absent in federal law, though some states (e.g., Oregon) and cities have similar rules.
• Applies to employers with 15+ employees (higher threshold than FLSA's enterprise coverage but lower than some anti-discrimination laws' 20-employee minimum).
• No preemption of stronger protections, allowing alignment with local laws.

Potential Impacts

• On Citizens/Workers: Improves work-life balance by reducing schedule unpredictability, aiding caregiving, health access, education, and financial stability (e.g., easier second jobs or benefits eligibility). Could lower stress, turnover, and family hardships, especially for low-wage and minority workers, per congressional findings.
• On Employers: Increases compliance costs (e.g., pay premiums, record-keeping) but may boost productivity, job satisfaction, and retention, as noted in studies of similar local laws and experiments (e.g., Gap Inc.). Small businesses with <15 employees are exempt.
• On Government Agencies: DOL gains enforcement duties, including investigations, surveys, and pilots, potentially requiring more resources. Other agencies (e.g., Office of Personnel Management) handle federal workers. No direct international relations impact, as it's domestic labor policy.
• Broader Economy: Targets key sectors (retail, food service) vital to the U.S. economy, potentially reducing poverty and inequality by stabilizing low-wage jobs.

Main Stakeholders

• Employees: Primarily non-exempt workers in covered sectors (e.g., retail salespersons, food servers, cleaners, hotel staff, warehouse workers) and all employees of larger employers eligible to request changes. Benefits caregivers, parents, students, and those with health needs.
• Employers: Businesses with 15+ employees, especially in retail, hospitality, food service, cleaning, and warehouses; must adapt scheduling and face penalties for non-compliance.
• Government: DOL for oversight/enforcement; federal agencies for their workers; states/localities with existing scheduling laws (e.g., Oregon, New York City) whose rules remain intact.
• Labor Organizations and Advocates: Gain tools to support fair scheduling; collective bargaining can exempt or enhance rights.
• Families and Communities: Indirectly affected through better worker stability, reducing child care issues and economic strain.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens labor rights by integrating with FLSA/FMLA enforcement, allowing private lawsuits and DOL actions with clear remedies (e.g., liquidated damages). Bona fide business reasons provide employer defenses, balancing interests. No conflict with anti-discrimination laws (e.g., Title VII), as it explicitly preserves them.
• Constitutional: Likely withstands challenges, as it regulates commerce (interstate businesses) under Congress's Commerce Clause power, similar to FLSA. No First Amendment issues, though posting requirements could be seen as compelled speech (minimal, as it's factual notices).
• Political: Pro-worker legislation sponsored by Democrats (e.g., Sen. Warren), emphasizing equity for low-wage and minority families; could spark debates on business burdens vs. employee protections. Builds on local successes, positioning it as a step toward national fair scheduling standards without overriding unions or states.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]

Cosponsors (20)

Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT], Sen. Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD], Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI], Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL], Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI], Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ], Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA], Sen. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT], Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI], Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT], Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN], Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL], Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT], Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY], Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI], Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR], Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR], Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA], Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA], Sen. Fetterman, John [D-PA]

Recent Actions

• 2025-12-17: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
• 2025-12-17: Introduced in Senate

Bill Versions

• Schedules That Work Act — issued 2025-12-17 — PDF (51 pages)