Search form

New York City Employers Must Grant Temporary Work Schedule Changes Beginning July 18

By Richard I. Greenberg, Jonathan L. Bing, Daniel J. Jacobs and Brian R. DeShannon
  • January 25, 2018

Starting on July 18, 2018, New York City employers will be required to provide temporary schedule changes to employees for a “personal event.”

Int. 1399-A became law on January 19, 2018, after Mayor Bill de Blasio failed to sign or veto the bill. 

Under Int. 1399-A, with limited exceptions, an employer must grant an employee’s request for a temporary change to the employee’s work schedule because of a “personal event.” The bill entitles employees to no more than two such requests in a calendar year, for up to one business day per request.

The employer also may fulfill its obligation by permitting an employee to use two business days for one request.

The law also protects employees from employer retaliation for making certain other schedule change requests. Int. 1399-A amends Chapter 12 of title 20 of the administrative code of the City of New York (commonly referred to as the “Fair Workweek Law”) by adding a new subchapter 6. For details of Int. 1399-A, including definitions, employee obligations, and exemptions, see our article, New York City Employers Must Grant Temporary Work Schedule Changes under Bill Passed by City Council.

Int. 1399-A’s employee protections will take effect on July 18, 2018. If employees are covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement in effect on that date, then the law will take effect on the date of termination of such agreement.

The Director of the Office of Labor Standards has the power to promulgate additional rules regarding the implementation of this law before the effective date.

Jackson Lewis will offer further updates on the law as agency guidance is available. Please contact the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work for assistance in modifying your organization’s practices to comply with the new law.

©2018 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm with more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries. Having built its reputation on providing premier workplace law representation to management, the firm has grown to include leading practices in the areas of government relations, healthcare and sports law. For more information, visit www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

February 11, 2019

California’s Reporting Time Pay Applies to Telephone Calls to Confirm Scheduled Shifts

February 11, 2019

For more than 75 years, California’s Wage Order No. 7 has required employers to compensate employees with reporting time pay if employees are required to report for work and in fact show up, but are then provided less than an established minimum number of hours of work or are provided with no work at all. Instead of actually requiring... Read More

February 1, 2019

New York Legislative Update — 2019 Starts With a Roar

February 1, 2019

The New York State Legislature gaveled in for the 2019-2020 Legislative Session on January 9, 2019, with Democrats in control of all three chambers of New York State government for the first time since the 2008-2009 session. As expected, the Democrats are flexing their muscles and progressive legislation traditionally stalled in a... Read More

January 31, 2019

Indiana Supreme Court Rules Driver Not Employee of Business Connecting Drivers with Customers

January 31, 2019

A driver who delivers recreational vehicles or trucks under a company’s authority is an independent contractor, not an employee, for purposes of the Indiana Unemployment Compensation Act, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled. Q.D.-A, Inc. v. Indiana Dep’t of Workforce Dev., No. 19S-EX-43 (Jan. 23, 2019). Resolving conflicting lower... Read More