OCT - DEC 202219GOVBUSINESS REVIEWSECURE SCHEDULING 101 not have the resources to cover every worker complaint it receives. OLS receives approximately 1,000 worker inquiries each year, most of which are reports of labor standards violations. Private litigants can and should bring claims under the Secure Scheduling Ordinance. The ordinance provides: "Any person or class of persons that suffer financial injury as a result of a violation of this Chapter ... or is the subject of prohibited retaliation ..., may bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against the employer or other person violating this Chapter...." The financial remedies are broad. Litigants may recover attorney fees and costs, backpay, 12% prejudgment interest on unpaid wages, liquidated damages of twice the unpaid wages, and a retaliation penalty of $5,000. Several aspects of the ordinance should motivate private litigations to pursue claims. First, the ordinance explicitly states that employees may sue in their individual capacity or on behalf of a class of employees. Second, there is a statutory "rebuttable presumption of retaliation if the employer or any other person takes an adverse action against a person within 90 calendar days of the person's exercise of rights" protected by the ordinance. This language places a significant burden on the employer to rebut the presumption of retaliation. Third, the ordinance's plain language permits the recovery of liquidated damages of twice the amount of unpaid wages, allowing employees to recover a total of three times the wages they are owed. While litigants have mixed success in obtaining triple damages under Washington'sWashington's wage-and-hour laws, the Secure Scheduling ordinance leaves no room for ambiguity.Finally, private litigants may be able to recover the civil penalties and fines outlined in the ordinance, including fines for specific violations and a $500 penalty per aggrieved party. Because of limited litigation on the merits of secure scheduling cases, Washington courts have not addressed this question. But the broad language regarding available remedies to litigants--" such legal or equitable relief that may be appropriate to remedy the violation"--leaves open that possibility. OLS Settlements Since the ordinance went into effect on July 1, 2017, OLS has resolved 27 investigations and currently has 12 open investigations involving secure scheduling violations. OLS has assessed significant ­ over $3.2 million ­ financial remedies for employees. Some notable settlements from 2020 include: · An almost $2 million settlement on behalf of 803 affected workers with Macy's to resolve allegations that the company failed to issue payment for schedule changes, failed to post schedules 14 days in advance in some instances, provided insufficient good faith estimates of hours to employees, provided insufficient notices of additional hours to existing employees, and failed to comply with the requirements around the right to request input into the work schedule for at least one employee. The employees received an average of $2,500, with some employees receiving over $10,000. Most of the financial remedies represented back wages and damages for pay for schedule changes (premium pay). · OLS recovered $27,954.31 for 89 affected employees to settle allegations against Euromarket Designs Inc. dba Crate & Barrel that the company failed to provide employees with 14 days' advance notice of their work schedules; required employees to work closing and opening shifts separated by less than 10 hours; and failed to offer additional hours to existing employees before hiring outside employees. · Dick's Sporting Goods settled allegations under the Secure Scheduling and Paid Sick and Safe Time Ordinances. Among other things, OLS alleged that the company failed to provide advance notice of work schedules and failed to provide pay for schedule changes for a short period of time. The total financial remedy was $45,864.48 to 120 affected employees. · OLS settled allegations against Fred Meyer that, among other things, the company failed to pay premium pay for work schedule changes. The total financial remedy was $616,437.63, which included $614,253.35 to 893 affected employees and $2,184.28 to the City of Seattle. · OLS settled claims under the Secure Scheduling and Paid Sick and Safe Time Ordinances with Emerald City Pizza, LLC dba Pizza Hut on behalf of 124 employees for $71,143.86 to 124. OLS alleged, among other things, that the company failed to provide 14 days' advance notice of work schedules and failed to pay premium pay for work schedule changes.Maria Bingham is a Senior Investigator with the City of Seattle Office of Labor Standards. The Office of Labor Standards' mission is to advance labor standards through thoughtful community and business engagement, strategic enforcement, innovative policy development, and a commitment to race and social justice. Seattle's Secure Scheduling Ordinance, SMC 14.22, grants scheduling protections for Seattle employees at large retail and food service employers. Seattle'sSeattle's Office of Labor Standards (OLS) administers this ordinance, providing outreach, compliance assistance, and enforcement services to workers and employers. Since the ordinance went into effect on July 1, 2017, OLS has received almost 600 worker inquiries and complaints about possible violations and provided technical assistance in response to 698 questions from employers. But noncompliance is common. OLS encourages practitioners, workers, and businesses to familiarize themselves with the ordinance so that they can ensure compliance and enforce violations when they occur
< Page 9 | Page 11 >