California is proposing a "right-to-disconnect" law designed to balance work-life factors for workers better. State Assemblymember Matt Haney introduced AB 2751, a bill that would halt employers from contacting their employees outside of work hours.
What Does The Proposed Bill Entail?
The bill specifically focuses on redefining "compensated" hours and necessitates the creation of a company-wide policy that complies with the "right-to-disconnect" regulations. The state's labor commission could oversee the enforcement of this law to investigate and fine employers who infringe on their employees' personal time.
Speaking on modern work dynamics, Haney mentioned, "Work has changed drastically compared to what it was just 10 years ago. Smartphones have blurred the boundaries between work and home life". Haney expanded his thoughts, expressing that "Workers shouldn't be punished for not being available 24/7 if they're not being paid for 24 hours of work. People have to be able to spend time with their families without being constantly interrupted at the dinner table or their kids' birthday party, worried about their phones and responding to work".
The stipulations make exceptions for specific scenarios such as collective bargaining, emergencies, and scheduling, where employers can contact workers.
Which Businesses Will The Right-to-Disconnect Law Affect?
According to Haney, the bill is created in a way that suits all businesses across California. It also includes flexibility for sectors requiring on-call work or longer working hours. As Haney asserted, "Many of California's larger employers are already abiding by right-to-disconnect laws in other countries and choosing to grow their companies rapidly in those places."
Citing its benefits, Haney said, "We've crafted it in a way that addresses the recent changes to work brought on by new technology." That said, the California Chamber of Commerce is opposing the bill.
Opposition to the Bill
While Haney believes this proposed law would benefit Californian businesses, the California Chamber of Commerce holds contradictory views. In a letter, Ashley Hoffman, Senior Policy Advocate at the California Chamber of Commerce, expressed opposition to the bill. According to Hoffman, "The bill will effectively subject all employees to a rigid working schedule and prohibit communication between employers and employees absent an emergency."
Furthermore, Hoffman argued that this wholesale rule would mark a step back for workplace flexibility. Additionally, Hoffman criticized it for disregarding California's longstanding laws concerning hours worked, exempt employees, and the uniqueness of various industries and professions. She also suggested that this proposal would obstruct the Governor and State agencies from contacting their staff beyond regular work hours, which could hamper basic functions of the state.
When Will The Bill Be Heard?
While it was a point of contention, the bill was assigned to the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee. It's expected to be heard shortly, setting the stage for critical debates about work-life balance and the future of work in California. As the discussion unfolds, the fate of AB 2751 and its potential to shape the state's labor laws awaits to be seen.
It stands as a new chapter in the ongoing conversation about work-life balance, the ever-present balancing act between employers and employees. It could even be a precursor to similar laws in other states.
