Search form

New York City Council Passes Retention Bill for Cafeteria Workers

By Jonathan L. Bing
  • October 18, 2016

The New York City Council has overwhelmingly passed a bill that mandates a 90-day transition period for displaced food service workers when a new owner or operator takes over a city building.

Corporate cafeterias, arenas, and cultural institutions, among others, are covered by the bill. Restaurants, however, are excluded. Mayor Bill de Blasio is expected to sign Int. 1011-A into law and the law will take effect immediately after signing.

Under Int. 1011-A, a former food service contractor must provide the successor contractor a full list containing the name, address, date of hire, and job category of each food service worker. The successor contractor must retain all workers for no less than 90 days and evaluate their performances and potential for continued employment. If a contractor terminates an employee before 90 days, it may be liable for attorney’s fees, along with back pay and the cost of benefits during the mandated retention period.

Passed by a vote of 47-3 on October 13, 2016, Int. 1011-A was sponsored by Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez (D – Manhattan). “Food service workers in buildings should have an opportunity to keep their jobs any time management changes, as they are most attuned to the needs of quality customer service,” Rodriguez said. Council Members Joseph Borelli (R – Staten Island), Steven Matteo (R – Staten Island), and David Greenfield (D – Brooklyn) voted against the bill.

The passage of Int. 1011-A is seen as another victory for unions in the labor-friendly New York City Council. In February 2016, Mayor de Blasio signed a similar City Council bill, protecting grocery store workers for 90 days after new management takes over an establishment. Int. 1011-A also builds on retention requirements passed in 2002 for other building service workers, including guards, cleaners, and maintenance workers.

Large food service contractors already have agreements with New York City’s food service workers union, UNITE HERE Local 100, and did not lobby against the bill.

Please contact Jackson Lewis with any questions about this and other legal developments.

©2016 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

June 13, 2018

Top Five Labor Law Developments for May 2018

June 13, 2018

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements do not violate federal law. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285; Ernst & Young LLP et al. v. Morris et al., No. 16-300; National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc., et al., No. 16-307 (May 21, 2018). The Supreme Court’s... Read More

June 5, 2018

The Wait is Over for Legalized Sports Gambling in New York

June 5, 2018

A provision in New York’s 2013 Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law authorizing casinos to take bets on sporting events had been held in suspension because of the federal ban on state-regulated sports wagering. Now, as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s striking down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (... Read More

May 21, 2018

Supreme Court: Class Action Waivers in Employment Arbitration Agreements Do Not Violate Federal Labor Law

May 21, 2018

Class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), the U.S. Supreme Court has held in a much-anticipated decision in three critical cases. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285; Ernst & Young LLP et al. v. Morris et al., No. 16-300; National Labor Relations Board v.... Read More