The Schedules That Work Act creates a federal baseline for employee scheduling: it gives workers the right to request changes to work hours, requires covered employers in occupations with unstable scheduling to post schedules in advance, and mandates pay for last‑minute schedule changes and short rest periods. The bill targets nonexempt workers in retail, food service, cleaning, hospitality, and warehouses (and allows the Secretary of Labor to add other occupations) while preserving collective‑bargaining opt‑outs.
For compliance professionals and employers, the bill replaces local patchworks of fair‑scheduling rules with a single federal regime that combines procedural obligations (an employer‑employee interactive process for schedule requests, written postings, recordkeeping) with monetary penalties (predictability pay, split‑shift premiums, statutory damages and administrative fines). The Act also creates a private right of action alongside DOL enforcement, increasing litigation and administrative risk for covered employers.
At a Glance
What It Does
It requires covered employers to post work schedules at least 14 days in advance, give employees written estimates of minimum expected monthly hours, and pay employees for employer‑driven schedule changes made with less than 14 days’ notice. The bill creates an employee right to request schedule changes, obligates employers to engage in a good‑faith interactive process, and imposes minimum rest rules with premium pay for violations.
Who It Affects
Nonexempt employees in retail, food service, cleaning, hospitality, and warehouse occupations and employers with 15 or more employees; the Secretary of Labor can add occupations that meet a 10% instability threshold. Federal legislative and certain public‑sector workforces are covered by parallel implementing authorities.
Why It Matters
The Act establishes a nationwide compliance floor that will change scheduling, payroll, and HR practices for thousands of hourly workers and their employers. It replaces ad hoc local laws with federal standards, pairs operational requirements with statutory damages and administrative penalties, and creates new DOL investigatory and recordkeeping obligations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill is structured to do two related things: give individual employees a procedural tool to seek schedule changes, and impose substantive scheduling standards and pay protections on employers in occupations shown to have unstable schedules. It defines the terms used throughout—covered employer (15+ employees), covered sector employee (nonexempt workers in named occupations), work schedule, on‑call and split shifts, and what constitutes a bona fide business reason for denying requests.
On the procedural side, any employee may request changes to hours, times, locations, notice amounts, or stability. The employer must engage in a timely, good‑faith interactive process that aims to grant the request or, if denying it, considers alternatives and states reasons (including whether denial rests on a bona fide business reason).
Requests tied to serious health conditions, caregiving, enrollment in career training, or another job must be granted unless the employer shows a bona fide business reason to deny.On the substantive side, the bill imposes scheduling rules on covered sector employees. Employers must provide posted work schedules at least 14 days before the schedule period (or on the employee’s first day for new hires), supply a written estimate of minimum expected monthly hours for the coming 12 months (with annual updates and triggers for change), and keep schedules accessible at the workplace (electronic posting allowed).
If an employer fails to post on time it must compensate the employee and, for changes made with less than 14 days’ notice, the bill sets out a predictability‑pay regime: added hours earn the worker their regular rate plus an extra hour at that rate; canceled or reduced scheduled hours require at least half the regular rate per lost scheduled hour. Split shifts trigger an additional hour of pay at the regular rate per day.
Employers must itemize these payments on pay stubs.The Act also protects rest by allowing employees to decline shifts that begin less than 11 hours after the prior shift ends (with a written consent process for opting in and the right to revoke), and it mandates 1.5× pay for hours that violate the minimum rest rule. To enforce the law, the Department of Labor gains investigatory and subpoena authority, employers must keep records, and employees obtain a private right of action with back pay, interest, liquidated damages (waivable for employer good faith), and equitable relief; the Secretary can also pursue administrative orders and civil penalties for willful and repeated violations.
The bill preserves stronger state or local protections and exemptions negotiated through collective bargaining.
The Five Things You Need to Know
14‑day posting rule: employers must give covered sector employees their work schedules at least 14 days before the schedule starts (new hires get their schedule by day one); failure to provide the schedule triggers $75 per affected employee per day in compensation.
Predictability pay formulas: if an employer adds hours or changes date/time/location with less than 14 days’ notice, the worker receives their regular rate for hours worked plus one extra hour at that rate; if the employer reduces or cancels scheduled hours, the worker receives at least 0.5× their regular rate for each scheduled hour not worked.
Minimum rest and premium: employees may decline shifts that start less than 11 hours after the prior shift ends; if they work such short‑turnaround shifts, the employer must pay 1.5× the employee’s scheduled rate for the hours that fall within the 11‑hour window.
Coverage and designation: the Act covers nonexempt workers in retail, food service, cleaning, hospitality, and warehouses at employers with 15+ employees, and authorizes the Secretary to add other occupations where at least 10% of workers experience short notice or volatile hours.
Enforcement and remedies: employees have a private cause of action for lost wages, interest, liquidated damages (unless employer proves good faith), and equitable relief; the Secretary can assess civil penalties ($500–$1,000 per violation for scheduling/pay rules; $1,100–$5,000 per violation for retaliation) and pursue administrative orders.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title and findings
Sets the Act’s purpose as addressing unpredictable scheduling and documents the evidence base Congress relied on—links between unstable schedules and family hardship, health, and turnover. The findings frame why the bill focuses on low‑wage hourly sectors and caregivers; they are not operative but signal legislative intent for interpretation.
Definitions that shape coverage and exceptions
Provides detailed definitions that drive who is covered (nonexempt workers, a 15‑employee threshold for covered employers, and a list of covered occupations) and what scheduling concepts mean (work schedule, on‑call, split shift, minimum expected hours). The definition of 'bona fide business reason' is broad and lists costs, staffing inability, and insufficiency of work—this is the employer’s primary defense in denials of requested schedule changes.
Right to request and the mandatory interactive process
Creates a statutory right for any employee to request changes to timing, amount, location, notice, or stability of hours and requires employers to engage in a timely, good‑faith interactive process that must either grant or deny the request and consider alternatives. Requests tied to serious health conditions, caregiving, career training, or another job must be granted unless the employer proves a bona fide business reason; other requests can be denied for any lawful (non‑discriminatory) reason.
Advance scheduling, minimum‑hours estimates, predictability and split‑shift pay
Imposes a 14‑day advance posting requirement, written notice obligations, and an obligation to provide a 12‑month estimate of minimum expected monthly hours (with annual updates and earlier revisions if availability or business needs change). The section prescribes monetary remedies: $75/day for failure to provide the schedule; predictability pay formulas for last‑minute additions/changes and cancelled hours; and one additional hour’s pay for each split shift day. It also permits limited exceptions (employee‑requested changes, mutually agreed shift trades, and force majeure events).
Minimum rest between shifts and premium pay
Allows employees to decline shifts that start within 11 hours of the previous shift’s end without penalty, but permits written consent (revocable) for working such shifts. When employees do work less than 11 hours apart, employers must pay 1.5× the scheduled rate for the affected hours. The consent and revocation mechanism aims to protect choice while allowing flexibility with a wage premium.
Prohibitions on retaliation and interference
Prohibits employers from interfering with rights, retaliating against employees who exercise scheduling rights or file complaints, and discriminating against individuals involved in investigations or proceedings. The bill makes adverse actions taken because an employee requested a schedule change (or was eligible to request) evidence of retaliation for requests tied to protected reasons.
Enforcement: DOL authority, private suits, remedies, and penalties
Grants the Secretary of Labor investigative and subpoena powers and requires employer recordkeeping and posting. Employees can sue for lost wages, interest, liquidated damages, and equitable relief; courts may waive liquidated damages on employer good faith. The Secretary can issue administrative orders, assess civil penalties for willful and repeated violations (categorized amounts for scheduling/pay rules and for retaliation), and bring civil actions on behalf of employees.
Regulations, research, and collective‑bargaining carve‑outs
Mandates that the Secretary (and specified administrative officers for congressional and federal workforces) issue implementing regulations within 180 days, including a process for designating additional occupations (using a 10% instability criterion). Directs DOL to run guidance, pilot programs, and survey questions to track scheduling instability. Section 12 exempts employees covered by collective bargaining agreements that expressly waive the Act’s provisions.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Employment across all five countries.
Explore Employment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Low‑wage hourly retail, food service, cleaning, hospitality, and warehouse workers — They gain an enforceable right to advance schedules, monetary compensation when employers change schedules at the last minute, and protections to request schedule changes tied to caregiving or training.
- Caregivers and parents — The statutory preference to grant requests motivated by caregiving, parental responsibilities, or training reduces scheduling conflicts that make stable child care and continuing education difficult.
- Employees seeking predictable hours — The minimum‑hours estimate and annual update create a predictable baseline that helps workers plan income, benefits eligibility, and secondary employment.
- Employers that adopt stable scheduling practices — Employers who invest in predictable schedules can see reduced turnover, improved retention, and clearer compliance risk (fewer ad hoc disputes) compared to competitors that face litigation or fines.
- Public programs and researchers — Required data collection (CPS questions and survey supplements) and DOL pilot programs improve the evidence base for policymaking and program design relating to workforce stability.
Who Bears the Cost
- Covered employers (15+ employees) in specified sectors — Must change scheduling practices, implement written posting and recordkeeping, calculate and pay predictability and split‑shift premiums, and potentially face higher labor costs and administrative burdens.
- Small HR and payroll teams — Need to track 14‑day windows, maintain written consent records, update minimum‑hours estimates, and reflect additional payments on pay stubs, increasing systems and compliance costs.
- Department of Labor and other implementing agencies — Will require additional resources to promulgate regulations, investigate complaints, and manage administrative hearings and enforcement actions.
- Employers with variable demand models (e.g., just‑in‑time staffing) — May face increased hiring, scheduling inefficiencies, or the need to redesign demand forecasting and cross‑training to meet minimum‑hours promises and avoid predictability pay triggers.
- Businesses near the 15‑employee threshold — Might restructure staffing arrangements or rely more heavily on contractors to avoid coverage, shifting costs and legal complexity.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between predictability for workers and flexibility for employers: the bill gives workers enforceable advance notice, minimum‑hours commitments, and pay for instability—measures that stabilize household planning but constrain employers’ ability to respond to short‑term demand and raise labor costs. The result is a trade‑off with no perfect solution: stronger predictability reduces worker precarity but increases operational and financial burdens on businesses that depend on variable staffing models.
The Act balances worker protections with a broad employer defense—the 'bona fide business reason'—but that standard is open textured. It lists many permissible business justifications (costs, inability to reorganize, insufficiency of work) without setting clear burdens of proof or examples of acceptable evidence; this invites disputes about when a denial tied to caregiving or training is legitimately necessary.
The Secretary’s role in designating additional covered occupations uses a 10% instability threshold tied to data; in practice, the quality and availability of industry‑level scheduling data will shape coverage and could delay application to occupations where instability is significant but under‑measured.
The remedies framework mixes administrative enforcement, civil penalties, and a strong private right of action that includes liquidated damages unless the employer proves good faith. That combination increases compliance incentives but also increases litigation risk and potential for costly discovery into scheduling systems.
Operationally, obligations such as the 14‑day posting, minimum‑hours estimates, and the pay‑stub line items create frictions for employers that rely on automated scheduling tied to daily demand; some employers may shift staffing models, reclassify staff, or augment use of subcontractors or gig arrangements to avoid coverage. Finally, several provisions leave implementation detail to regulation—timing, recordkeeping formats, and definitions of 'reasonable time' for clarifications—so outcomes will depend heavily on how the Secretary and other administrative officers write the implementing rules.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.