predictable shift laws

October 15, 2020June 29, 2023

Work schedule laws and enforcement to expect in 2021

timeclock, wage and hour, schedule, timesheet rounding

Predictive schedule laws began in San Francisco in 2013, and from there different cities and states have enacted legal protections as well. These work schedule laws have been gaining momentum ever since.

However, come COVID-19 and challenges it’s brought to organizations nationwide, the momentum has shifted. Both employers and employees are struggling in their own ways, and employers must manage this new normal while maintaining compliance with workplace laws.

Even in this state of uncertainty for employers, the reality is that fair workweek laws help bring stability to employees’ lives. Advocacy organizations stress the importance of this legislation that makes planning child care easier, makes it possible to take on a second or third job and often bans shifts so close to each other that employees lack a proper rest period, said Marta Moakley, legal editor at XpertHR. The idea here is that employers should learn boundaries and respect employees’ time outside work.

Also read: Shift scheduling strategies can be improved through technology

Moakley does not expect a huge push for new fair workweek laws in 2021, given how stressed so many industries and organizations are. That being said, there are still laws already in effect and opportunities to include flexible workweek provisions in other regulations.

Predictable schedule laws and COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic, certain work schedule laws have been especially difficult for employers to meet, Moakley said. For example, some predictable scheduling laws require a pay premium called predictability pay in which if an employee does not get advanced notice on their schedule, they get additional money. Depending on the location, employers may need to provide a schedule for employees up to 14 days in advance.

“There’s that additional payment and additional penalty on an employer. As you can imagine in the current pandemic condition, these kinds of onerous requirements for employers may be extremely difficult to meet, so a number of jurisdictions and local governments have been looking to provide employers some relief,” she said.

For example, Philadelphia passed a predictable scheduling ordinance that was originally supposed to go into effect Jan. 1, 2020 on an “extremely aggressive timeline,” Moakley said. The city ended up delaying the requirements until April 1, 2020 due to the pandemic, and while companies may need to comply with other portions of the law, certain provisions like the predictability pay premiums are still not being enforced because of pandemic conditions.

Which employers get relief may depend on what industry they’re in, she added. COVID-19 has affected the hospitality, retail and restaurant industries in different ways. A retail employer may have had to shut down operations for weeks or even months while restaurants, on the other hand, may have remained open in limited capacity as an essential provider of food.

“Looking forward to 2021, we really have to think about, what will be the market tolerance for enforcing these kinds of provisions, and [are they fair?] with respect to certain industries that may be greatly affected by the pandemic?” Moakley said. “If we’re still in a recession then, I think employers will have a really good argument that their focus should remain on safety and security at this time.”

On the other side, the pandemic has also illuminated the plight of the employee and some of the inequities between workers at the top and bottom of the ladder, she added.

There are advocacy organizations advocating for hourly employees and communicating to employers that “we know you’re having a tough time. We understand your argument, however, employees also have to deal with the effects of COVID-19, including unpredictability with respect to school and with respect to health,” she said.

She added that while there have been pending fair workweek bills in Illinois, New Jersey and Massachusetts in 2020, there has been no traction with new predictable schedule bills this year. “I think most of it has to do with the pandemic,” she said.

Still, employee-friendly scheduling provisions wouldn’t necessarily need to be packaged in a fair workweek law and could be included in other types of regulations, she said. For example, Tennessee has a pregnancy accommodations law that went into effect Oct. 1, 2020, and it includes modified work schedules and flexible scheduling for prenatal visits as an employee-friendly scheduling provision.

Rethinking common workplace assumptions

The genesis of these work schedule laws is lawmakers trying to correct the power imbalance between employers and employees when it comes to scheduling. Moakley said she is seeing more dialogue between employers and employees now with the consequences of the pandemic. The more forward-thinking employers are doing what they can to expand leave and allow more intermittent or flexible leave for employees.

The pandemic has led to greater acceptance of the reality of racial and economic inequalities, and these external drivers are leading to better workplace cooperation and communication, she added. Employers are appreciating employees more for being dependable and dedicated and coming to work even under hazardous pandemic conditions, and employees are appreciating that they have a job, can continue working and don’t need to rely on unemployment benefits.

Also read: Employee scheduling after COVID-19

“There is this greater acceptance of the reality of inequities within the workplace and a renewed sense of working toward a better tomorrow,” she said. “Intelligent minds will differ on their choice of policy — whether more broad regulation would solve it or whether more targeted regulation would get better results — but I think the fact that we haven’t really seen anything being adopted this year means that there is more cooperation along these lines.”

Rely on communication and best practices

Not just regarding predictable scheduling practices but with employment law overall, employers need to be looking at best practices now and really trying to retain their best employees, Moakley said. If they have a scheduling request — especially under the circumstances 2020 has introduced —consider what can be done for them. There may be an issue with child care or a health concern that isn’t covered by the company’s leave policy. This type of uncertainty is not uncommon now.

“Having an open avenue of communication with employees, relating to them and trying to work together works wonders for everybody’s benefit,” Moakley said.

Also read: Leave management should be as simple as submit, approve and hit the beach

She also suggested that organizations document what they are doing to support employees and offer flexibility to them, even if it is not required by law. Some employers may be genuinely trying to give employees flexible schedules whenever possible or to offer them shifts they wouldn’t otherwise have access to if they need extra hours, rather than seeking out outside workers. In any case, it’s still possible that an employee may file a lawsuit against this employer.

“Do yourself a favor and document, even if you’re not required to. Show that you are following the rules, that you’re a good employer, [and] that you’re doing right by your employees. And then in the event that somebody comes to check on you, you have the records to back you up,” Moakley said.

August 18, 2020June 29, 2023

Proper shift coverage requires more communication and better technology

Creating a good schedule can be difficult, and laws in certain states and cities may place restrictions on things like how far in advance you create a schedule or if employees can work back-to-back shifts. Meanwhile, various trends of the 2010s and disruptions in 2020 have shifted some of the scheduling norms that managers used to rely on.

David Kopsch, a principal at Mercer’s Atlanta office, discussed how managers can create well-staffed shifts. Whether in more stable or more uncertain economic times, this guidance can help managers.

Communication is key

At the most fundamental level, there must be clear means of communication between managers and employees about the basics of the shifts like: What are the hours of operation? How early must workers arrive before doors open? How late should workers expect to stay after closing?

Managers should also keep lines of communication open with employees, Kopsch said. They can learn the hours employees want to work and the hours they’re available. Listening to employee input when possible can help employees feel like they have a little more control over their schedules.

An uptick in technology solutions

There has been an increase in the adoption of technology that can help with determining staff coverage, especially in times of major disruptions, like COVID-19, Kopsch said. More organizations are either contracting with vendors or developing their own applications, which helps both managers and employees feel more confident that schedules are accurate and compliant with whatever scheduling regulations may apply to the worksite.

On-call shifts are getting a backlash

While employers may still be interested in on-call shifts to ensure that a shift is perfectly staffed, there’s been pushback recently on this practice, Kopsch said. And some new scheduling regulations have put restrictions on on-call shifts or require employers to pay an on-call employee even if they do not end up working.

More accurate labor forecasting is one solution to make managers less dependent on on-call shifts by more accurately determining how many employees are needed for a given time and making understaffing or overstaffing less likely.

You don’t need to rely on predetermined shift patterns

While there are shift patterns managers have historically relied on, they aren’t necessary for proper shift coverage, Kopsch said. Workers in general are requesting more flexibility with their schedules, when they’re available to work and when they want to work.

In the past employers may have offered an opening shift from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. and a closing shift from 3 p.m. to 10 p.m. But such set-in-stone shifts may not work for an employee who has to take their children to school in the morning. They may be available for an 8 or 8:30 shift but not the 7 o’clock shift, which is doable if managers rely on a more flexible scheduling system.

The pivot toward more flexible scheduling began about five years ago, Kopsch said. The more rigid shift coverage structure meant employers had a more difficult time finding employees, especially if employees worked second jobs, took classes or had child care or elder care responsibilities. Flexibility allows employees the opportunity to work somewhere they otherwise couldn’t because of these other responsibilities.

Ultimately, flexibility makes employees feel more respected and strengthens the employee value proposition.

This is especially true during times of disruption, like COVID-19. Businesses may now have different hours of operation and sanitation rules that impact an employee’s hours, and employers need to be even more flexible to employees in this new environment, Kopsch said.

Stay competitive even in times of high unemployment

Flexible scheduling is a competitive advantage for organizations interested in creating a high employee value proposition. This competitive advantage is important even when the unemployment rate is high, Kopsch said. While logic presumes that employees want to work more than ever in these times, the reality is that organizations still have to create a compelling experience and a positive environment for employees to want to work for them.

When someone is out of work, it may be because they have responsibilities like child care or parental care that inhibits them from finding a day job to pay the bills, Kopsch said. If an employer is competitive in how they schedule shifts and how much they take employee input into account when creating schedules, workers in situations like this may be able to take the job.

Also, employees appreciate choice. They want to work somewhere they can be themselves, feel safe and, as a result of employment, meet their needs. Then they will feel committed to the job and go to work, Kopsch said.

“But if they perceive that the employer’s brand does not resonate with them or the wages the employer pays are not going to meet their needs, then it’s likely the employer needs to take action on that,” he added.

August 5, 2020July 13, 2022

The risks of not utilizing labor forecasting

Labor forecasting promises many benefits to employers with a large amount of hourly workers. Still, many organizations have yet to utilize this process to inform their decisions on scheduling shifts.

The risks of overstaffing or understaffing are very real, and organizations should be aware of what exactly they’re risking by not trying to create smarter schedules.

Also read: Labor analytics: A how-to guide for company leadership

Exempt vs. non-exempt workers

Understaffing poses a significant risk pertaining to exempt/non-exempt classifications under wage-hour law, said Gary Pearce, chief risk architect at risk reduction platform Aclaimant. This is especially relevant when exempt, salaried staff members are working long hours because not enough people have been scheduled to work that day.

“These people will be far more willing to challenge their exempt status, and there will be no shortage of attorneys ready to convert their case to a class action,” he said.

Employers cannot silently stand by and knowingly allow wage-hour law violations to happen, Pearce added. They have the responsibility to do something about it.

Also read: Labor analytics add power to workforce management tools

“If frazzled employees are too busy to take uninterrupted meal or rest periods that they are entitled to, or the culture of the workplace is that it is acceptable for non-exempt workers to be asked to finish up work off the clock at home, or stay late but not record all work time in exchange for some future promise, then the employer is again highly susceptible to a class-action lawsuit,” he said.

Workers’ compensation concerns

Understaffing often leads to overworked and tired workers, which can increase the likelihood of people getting hurt on the job, Pearce said. Not only is this a worker safety risk, but it can open up the employer to workers’ compensation costs that could have been avoided.

Overstaffing also introduces its own risks. “Inexperienced workers are time and again shown to be far more susceptible to injury, and an overstaffing situation might make this more likely,” Pearce said.

He added that as staffing levels rise, employers need to spend more on workplace costs like training, protective equipment, benefits and whatever other support HR offers employees.

Impact on unemployment costs

Pearce said that the impact of staffing levels on unemployment insurance costs can be significant. Understaffing can cause turnover when workers start feeling stressed or burned out and overstaffing may lead to a situation where employees don’t feel they’re being challenged. In cases like this, an uptick in unemployment claims may follow, Pearce said.

“While truly voluntary resignations can be challenged, the system is structured to give claimants the benefit of the doubt and many employers lose challenges either because they are too busy to show up for hearings, or they don’t have sufficient documentation to back up their claims, or they fail to recognize the claimant’s side of the story,” he said. “Unemployment systems vary but there is an experience rating aspect to all of them, meaning that employers with higher claim volume will pay more in unemployment taxes than those with lower volume.”

Complying with the WARN Act and predictive scheduling laws

There are a few ways in which overstaffing or understaffing can get employers in a difficult situation regarding various laws, Pearce said. With overstaffing, an employer may face a situation where headcount is too high and they must do a mass layoff — thus triggering employer obligations under the WARN Act, which requires employers to provide advance notice in qualified plant closings and mass layoffs.

Understaffing may inspire a whole different range of legal hurdles with predictive scheduling laws. When managers want to bring people in with short notice due to headcount shortages, employers may have to pay penalties for unexpected schedule changes, for example.

Keeping workers engaged

Worker alienation is at the heart of these risks, Pearce said.

“If an organization is materially understaffed or overstaffed, it is promoting this alienation and risking becoming nothing more than a commoditized counterparty to be financially optimized in the short run, since the employee has no stake in the long run,” he said, adding that how a company treats its employees can make a difference. “Engaged, happy workers aren’t as likely to obsess with real or perceived harms or seek legal redress for their grievances.”

Here’s where labor forecasting software comes in, by making it easier for employers to avoid these legal risks and by making it more likely that employees can have an appropriate workload and feel satisfied with their schedule.

“Accurate labor forecasting can not only help to control costs while meeting changing customer needs, but [can] also be a key element in controlling unnecessary workplace risks and meeting the employer’s basic obligations to its employees,” Pearce said.

June 2, 2020March 29, 2021

The most common scheduling problems for employers and how to address them

shift scheduling, technology, custom fields

Hourly employees have common scheduling problems, which helped spur a series of fair workweek laws now in effect in the state of Oregon and in many cities across the United States. The impact of these laws on businesses should not be ignored, though.

The COVID-19 pandemic has also added another layer to the scheduling complexity environment. Industries like retail, food service and hospitality that have been greatly impacted by the pandemic are also the industries primarily affected by predictive scheduling laws.

Depending on state or local laws, businesses all face scheduling challenges. Here are some of the most common scheduling problems and how to address them.

Also read: Shift scheduling strategies can be improved through technology

The most common scheduling problems for employers

1. Overstaffing and understaffing

The clear problem for businesses with overstaffing is that they’re unnecessarily increasing their labor cost with no return on investment, said Ari Hersher, partner at law firm Seyfarth. And labor costs are already one of the biggest costs for businesses, along with real estate.

Meanwhile, if a shift is understaffed, the business is not efficiently meeting demand. Its employees may be overworked and need to work extra hours, and the business may have to pay these workers unplanned overtime, Hersher said. Meanwhile, in jurisdictions with predictive scheduling laws, an employer may need to pay additional wage to staff that are added last minute, he added.

2. TIme

Creating a schedule takes time, and managers already have busy jobs. Using technology solutions could help, yet the Sierra Cedar “2018-2019 HR Systems Survey” found that only 42 percent of organizations use labor scheduling applications.

Also read: 3 Steps to Navigating Effective Wage and Hour Compliance

3. The need for flexibility

Managers need flexibility to create schedules, Hersher said. Employees may quit, call in sick or simply not show up, and then managers must figure out how to quickly find a replacement.

Employers in jurisdictions with predictive scheduling laws may have further responsibilities, he said. Some of these laws have employers document that someone called out of their shift, offer proof that they called and store the information for three years in case of audits. For managers who supervise a large number of employees, the number of call outs they get in a week may be substantial.

Sometimes there are tech solutions, he said, but the patchwork landscape of predictive scheduling can complicate that. Employers with locations in cities or states with different laws need a way to take all laws that impact them into account.

Also read: Predictive Scheduling Laws — What Are They, Where Do They Exist and Employers’ Reaction

4. Compliance

According to XpertHR’s survey “Top HR Compliance Challenges for 2020,” 10.1 percent of employers surveyed said that pay and scheduling issues is their top compliance concern, topped only by benefits (16.2 percent) and recruiting/hiring (28.3 percent).

The most common scheduling problems for employees

1. Overstaffing and understaffing:

Understaffing has an obvious impact on employees, leaving them overworked and with low morale, Hersher said. And industries like retail and food service with many hourly workers already see high turnover.

Meanwhile, given the right context, overstaffing also may impact workers negatively. They may get sent home, therefore not getting paid for hours they expected to work. Employees who earn commission for sales or tips for service may also find this situation bad, Hersher added. If there are only six customers and seven servers or sales associates, they wouldn’t expect to earn a fair wage for their time.

2. Predictability and cost of living:

Many hourly employees work in cities with high costs of living, and they could be working multiple jobs, Hersher said. A lot of these may be part-time jobs. For these workers, advance notice in what their schedules will be has a lot of value.

As the Economic Policy Institute explained it in a 2018 article, “Volatile hours not only mean volatile incomes, but add to the strain working families face as they try to plan ahead for child care or juggle schedules in order to take classes, hold down a second job, or pursue other career opportunities.”

The power of analytics

Predictive analytics could help many of these issues, Hersher said. Retail has experienced an explosion of data studying people’s buying habits, how long they stay in a store and how much they purchase, which should allow employers to staff more efficiently.

This could benefit employers and employees in a few ways. With predictive data, employers could still create schedules in advance, which means predictability for employees. And if employers are able to create more accurate schedules, their risk of either understaffing or overstaffing decreases, which could help deter some of the negative impacts that understaffing and overstaffing may have on both employers and employees.

“The more you can spot trends, the better you can anticipate needs and the more you can reduce changes,” he said.

October 3, 2018September 5, 2023

Predictable Shift Laws Spread to More Cities, States

Gap Inc. was an early supporter of predictable schedules for hourly workers in its stores. In 2015, the San Francisco-based retailer started posting employees’ shifts at least 10 days in advance. It also stopped assigning on-call shifts, a practice that low-wage workers and their supporters claim makes income less reliable and things like child care harder to plan.

That was well before July 2017, when Seattle passed a citywide secure scheduling ordinance requiring that large employers in service industries like retail offer more predictable schedules. However, in the first 10 months the law was in effect, one of the 11 employers that the city investigated based on employee complaints was none other than the global clothing giant.

In February, Gap agreed to pay $20,186.24 in back wages to 268 employees at several of its Seattle stores to settle the complaint, according to city records. As part of the settlement order, Gap also agreed to put local store managers through mandatory training and to allow city inspectors to visit its stores to check shift-scheduling record keeping. In exchange, the city didn’t charge Gap with a violation and dropped further investigation.

The clothing retailer’s situation highlights the plight that service-industry employers could find themselves in as a growing number of cities and states pass laws to make hourly workers’ schedules more reliable and schedule changes less frequent.

Predictable scheduling laws passed in the past few years cover an estimated 740,000 workers and 1,000 employers in at least four cities and one state, according to a July research report from the Economic Policy Institute, an independent nonprofit think tank. In addition, San Francisco, New Hampshire and Vermont have passed laws that give more than 1 million workers the right to request scheduling accommodations, according to the EPI report.

Gap isn’t the only major U.S. employer forced to pay back wages or penalties after failing to comply with newer city or state requirements. Since early 2017, government agencies have collected at least $108,000 from multiple employers for running afoul of the laws.

Whether companies and their human resources departments are compelled to adopt predictable schedules because of the laws or decide to make the switch on their own to gain a competitive edge in a tight labor market, they may find that it’s one thing to embrace the policy in theory and quite another to implement it.

“There’s a gap in communication between corporate and HR and the managers on the ground carrying out the policies,” said Karina Bull, policy manager for Seattle’s Office of Labor Standards.

As the laws become more widespread, it remains to be seen whether they will spur employers to change how they create schedules, an often arduous undertaking that for many still relies on spreadsheets or pencil and paper. Currently, only 45 percent of employers use any type of electronic labor scheduling system, making it one of the least used workforce management applications, according to the 2018-19 Sierra-Cedar’s annual “HR Systems Survey.”

“Scheduling is one of those applications that are seen as a utilitarian tool like payroll, but can have a major impact on peoples’ lives and work environments,” said Stacey Harris, Sierra-Cedar vice president of research and analytics.

Part of the lag could be attributable to scheduling not having a clear owner within a company. Depending on an organization’s orientation, the function could be run by HR, IT, finance or a combination of all three, said Lisa Disselkamp, a longtime workforce management consultant and managing director at Deloitte who advised the Obama administration on labor-scheduling issues.

Regulations are prompting organizations to take more action, including making modifications to ensure they’re compliant, Disselkamp said.

Adopting better scheduling systems can pay for itself by eliminating costs associated with absenteeism, high turnover and a disengaged workforce, Disselkamp said. More efficient scheduling also provides top-line benefits in the form of additional revenue, especially at companies that have not reviewed labor standards and scheduling in a year or two, she said.

Aside from that, treating employees better by giving them better schedules can improve a company’s public image, Disselkamp said. “It becomes a brand issue. People don’t want to shop at places where they don’t think companies are treating their employees well, especially retail.”

Making Schedules Work for Workers

The past few years have witnessed an uptick in city and state laws meant to make work more equitable for low-wage earners and other workers, including laws enacting higher minimum wages, paid sick leave and paid family leave.

Predictable schedule laws are the latest manifestation of that trend. The laws generally require larger employers in retail, fast food, hospitality and other service industries to give hourly workers some amount of advance notice of shifts and shift changes — typically seven to 14 days. Depending on the jurisdiction, the laws may direct employers to offer additional hours to existing part-time employees before hiring new help or guarantee new employees the minimum hours they were promised when they were hired. Some laws also direct employers to pay employees extra for last-minute schedule changes. In addition to paying back wages, laws may direct employers that fail to comply to also pay fines and in some cases damages.

Anecdotal evidence shows that the laws are already starting to help low-wage earners. “Getting the hours I need means I can count on my paycheck. I always have enough money to buy groceries and save whatever’s left,” said Aubrie, a Starbucks barista, in a statement issued last summer by the activist group Working Washington about Seattle’s new law.

In New York, where a Fair Workweek law took effect in November 2017, “Workers have told us that just having the law in place meant employers’ attitudes changed and that they are already benefiting from it without any enforcement,” said New York City Department of Consumer Affairs Commissioner Lorelei Salas.

Academic researchers studying the impact of laws in Seattle and elsewhere expect to release some of the first data-backed findings later this year or in early 2019. “The real question is going to be whether these laws in general will be enforced and complied with,” said Kristen Harknett, an associate professor of sociology at University of California at San Francisco, and a collaborator on the Shift Project at University of California at Berkeley, which studies service-industry employment. “It’s no small task. Compared to minimum wage, this is much more complicated.”

Some cities have already begun bringing the hammer down on employers that failed to bring their scheduling practices in line with new laws. Since Seattle’s Secure Scheduling ordinance took effect in July 2017, the city has received 200 worker inquiries — not all of which became formal complaints — and investigated 13. By mid-July, the city’s labor standards office had collected close to $100,000 in back wages for 500 affected employees from Gap, Red Robin, Tesla, California Pizza Kitchen, and a Seattle location of pub chain Elephant & Castle. As of mid-September, another 18 investigations were active or pending.

Bull, the Seattle OLS policy manager, would not discuss complaints against specific employers, including Gap. A Gap spokesperson also declined to comment on the investigation, but said there are occasions when store teams go through a period of transition as they get up to speed on new regulations and compliance practices.

Gap “is fully committed to complying with all applicable laws and standards,” spokesperson Lauren Wilkinson said. “We hold our employees accountable for doing what’s right. We’re continually working to make meaningful improvements that benefit our employees and balance the needs of our business and customers.”

Laws Spreading to More Cities, States

Seattle is not the only area investigating complaints. Since New York City’s Fair Workweek ordinance took effect, the city’s consumer affairs department has followed up on more than 115 complaints that led to 69 investigations, and collected $6,175 in payments for workers and $2,000 in fines.

The city’s Fair Workweek law established different requirements for employers in retail and fast food because of those industries’ differing scheduling needs. To date, most complaints have been against fast-food employers, primarily for failing to give new employees an estimated number of hours they could expect to work, as stipulated by the law, according to Salas. Employers also have been fined for making schedule changes without notifying employees within the designated time period, she said.

But because the law is still so new, the city has focused on education rather than penalties. DCA has held 220 training events and had outreach teams walk door to door to hand out business background information and worker notices to post. “Our goal is to get employers to comply, not to fine people left, right and center,” Salas said.

San Francisco’s secure schedules law is part of a package of protections the city passed specific to retail workers. Since 2016 when it became the first city in the country to pass a predictable shift law, San Francisco has launched 11 investigations, all of which are ongoing, according to Patrick Mulligan, director of the city’s Office of Labor Standards Enforcement. He declined to share details about the investigations.

Oregon has investigated three complaints since becoming the first state to enact a predictable shift law, which took effect July 1. Employers under review include a Dollar Tree location in Warrenton for allegedly failing to post information about the new law; a Safeway grocery store location in Portland for an overtime pay dispute, and a Portland-area Domino’s pizza franchisee for allegedly failing to give enough advance notice of schedules, according to state records. As of mid-September, investigations by the state’s Bureau of Labor and Industry were ongoing.

In Washington, legislators were expected to hold hearings on a statewide measure in mid-October. “They’re keeping a close watch on what’s happening in Seattle,” Harknett said.

Creating More Predictable Schedules

Predictable schedule laws do not dictate how employers must create the schedules they are bound to offer, but could lead more of them to automate or improve the existing processes.

The scheduling systems that employers use to comply with the new laws are all over the map, according to city labor officials involved with training and enforcement. That includes bare-bones paper and pencil schedules, Excel spreadsheets and shift scheduling software that can be customized to comply with laws, or a combination of one or more of those, they said.

Larger employers are likelier to use electronic scheduling apps. Fifty-six percent of enterprises with more than 10,000 employees use some form of labor scheduling application, according to the 2018-19 Sierra-Cedar survey. That compares with 46 percent of midsized organizations with 2,500 to 10,000 employees, and 43 percent of organizations with 2,500 or fewer workers, according to the survey, which polled 1,636 global organizations representing 23.6 million workers.

Labor scheduling systems are the least used of any workforce management application with the exception of labor budgeting systems, according to the survey. For example, 90 percent of employers of all sizes use some kind of time and attendance system, twice as many as use a scheduling system.

Employers would be smart not to wait for cities to pass predictable shift laws to act, since they won’t get the employee-side recognition from making the change but will still have to do the work, said Clay Robinson, director of solution architecture at Shiftboard, a shift-scheduling software vendor.

The Seattle-based company has sold its shift-scheduling app to employers in and outside the city limits. Forward-thinking customers use it as a strategic advantage for attracting and retaining workers, Robinson said. “We had a customer that wasn’t inside the city who came to us after the city council approved the law and wanted to offer it to employees in order to be able to say they had taken care of it before they had to.”

Gap has continued to update its shift-scheduling management. After testing several options, last spring the company rolled out an app from Shyft that employees can use to swap shifts. The technology, which the company introduced to all its brands, “helps provide additional flexibility to our store employees while ensuring that our stores are staffed appropriately,” said C. David Ard, ‎senior vice president and global head of people for Gap Inc.’s Gap brand, in a prepared statement.

Among other actions, Gap also changed staffing levels to track traffic instead of projected sales. The company’s brands — which include Old Navy and Banana Republic — also are testing other scheduling systems based on store size and markets.

“There’s no question that store scheduling is an issue that challenges our entire industry,” Ard said. “As a company that seeks to attract and retain the best talent in the business, we recognize the importance of finding ways to enhance and improve the store experience for our employees and customers alike.”