Fact Check: Predictive Scheduling and Fair Workweek Laws by State: Oregon SB 828, NYC Fair Workweek, and 11 Covered Jurisdictions

Chapter 8 of Title 29 contains the FLSA. The statute reaches minimum wage (§206), overtime (§207), regular rate (§207(e)), and recordkeeping (§211(c)) without any advance-scheduling provision. The WHD Handy Reference Guide confirms the omission: scheduling is "a matter of agreement between an employer and an employee."

§778.208 text incorporates §7(e)'s eight excludable categories. Predictability pay is non-discretionary compensation paid pursuant to statute and does not fall within any (e)(1)–(8) exclusion.

Statute text confirms 14-day work period and the dual 8-and-80 thresholds. DOL Fact Sheet #54 confirms the prior-written-agreement requirement.

§3(m) text confirms the tip-credit framework. The $2.13 federal cash-wage floor has been in place since 1991 and remains the federal floor as of May 2026.

§778.209 governs apportionment of bonuses across workweeks. The mechanic applies equally to predictability-pay corrections that cover multi-week lookback periods.

§211(c) authorizes recordkeeping rules; Part 516 implements them. No scheduling-related advance-notice requirement appears in Part 516.

ORS §653.412 definitions section confirms 500+ employees worldwide threshold and the covered industries (retail trade, hotels, motels, food services). BOLI's employer page confirms the July 1, 2018 effective date.

ORS §653.428 requires the written estimate at the time of hire.

§653.480 permits CBA waiver of specific predictive-scheduling provisions when the CBA expressly references the waiver.

NYC DCWP page confirms the §§20-1201 et seq. citation and the November 26, 2017 effective date. The fast-food 30+ locations and retail 20+ employees thresholds appear in the DCWP guidance.

DCWP page confirms the 72-hour window and the prohibition-style mechanic (retail employers may not cancel, shorten, or postpone a shift, or require an employee to work outside posted hours, with less than 72 hours' notice).

DCWP page confirms the just-cause protection. It applies to fast-food employees only (not retail).

Seattle OLS Secure Scheduling page confirms the SMC Ch. 14.22 citation, the July 1, 2017 effective date, the 500-employee threshold, the 40-location-additional test for full-service, and the 10-hour clopening with 1.5× premium.

Seattle OLS Secure Scheduling page confirms the 3-year retention requirement; SMC §14.22.090 is the operative section.

Wages LA page confirms the LAMC Ch. 9.5 citation, the April 1, 2023 effective date, the 300-employee global retail threshold, and the $50/day/employee penalty. Full enforcement began September 28, 2023 after a 6-month grace period.

City of Emeryville Fair Workweek Ordinance page confirms the ordinance and the global-headcount coverage test. Effective date is the July 1, 2017 operative trigger.

Labor Code §351 confirms tips are the sole property of the employee and cannot be applied as credit against the employer's minimum-wage obligation.

§17208 sets the 4-year statute of limitations for Unfair Competition Law claims, including unlawful business practice claims that incorporate Fair Workweek violations.

Texas Labor Code §62.0515 preempts local minimum-wage ordinances. The broader preemption regime against local labor standards is captured across multiple Texas statutes. The structural effect — no Texas city can independently adopt a Fair Workweek framework — follows from the preemption regime.

§218.077 preempts political subdivisions from enacting wage and benefit ordinances applicable to non-public-sector employers.

OCGA §34-4-3.1 prohibits local governments from regulating private employment terms including scheduling. Enacted via HB 514 (2017).

§17208 confirms the 4-year statute of limitations. Application to Fair Workweek violations follows the broader UCL framework that incorporates statutory wage and hour violations as predicate "unlawful business practices."

Arithmetic confirmed: ($20 × 50 + $30) / 50 = $20.60; 0.5 × $20.60 × 10 = $103; without inclusion, 0.5 × $20 × 10 = $100; delta = $3 per OT workweek.

DCWP announcement confirms each component figure. Procedural posture: administrative settlements.

DCWP announcement confirms the ~$300K aggregate and the five-employer scope. Procedural posture: administrative settlements.

Arithmetic confirmed: 1 × 3 × 50 × 52 × 5 × 20 = 780,000. The example uses the 1-hour-at-regular-rate model (the modal predictability-pay structure across the cluster). Aggregate caveat in the research body acknowledges this is an upper bound assuming zero compliance; real-world exposure is the multi-quarter back-pay component when an audit lands.

ORS §653.436 specifies the 14-day window; the 7-to-14-day amendment took effect July 1, 2020 per BOLI guidance.

DCWP Fast Food FAQ confirms the graduated fixed-dollar schedule. The research now itemizes the timing-window x change-type table instead of summarizing only the four most visible values.

DCWP guidance confirms the 11-hour clopening and the $100 per-shift premium for consented clopenings.

SF page confirms the Police Code Articles 33F + 33G citation, the 40-worldwide/20-in-SF coverage thresholds, and the foundational "first predictive scheduling law" status. The July 3, 2015 operative date is the formal trigger; the underlying ordinance was adopted in 2014.

Chapter 9-4600 text confirms the 250-employee + 30-location coverage threshold, the 9-hour clopening rule, and the $40 per-shift premium. Philadelphia DOL Fair Workweek page confirms the 10-to-14-day notice amendment effective January 1, 2021.

MCC Ch. 1-25 confirms the seven covered industries (Building Services, Healthcare, Hotels, Manufacturing, Restaurants, Retail, Warehouse Services), the 100-employee global threshold and the 250-employee + 30-location restaurant test, and the 10-to-14-day notice change effective July 1, 2022. Chicago OLS page confirms operative enforcement scope.

LA County DCBA Fair Workweek page confirms the July 1, 2025 effective date. The June 2025 FAQs PDF confirms NAICS 44-45 coverage and the 300-employee global threshold.

Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 13.102 supplies the chapter-level citation; Berkeley's Workforce Standards page confirms the enforcement program and employer-facing guidance.

Evanston Mun. Code Ch. 3-34 confirms the Fair Work Week Ordinance citation. The September 2023 → January 2024 effective-date timeline is reflected in the city's Fair Workweek implementation guidance.

Consent order PDF confirms the $20M aggregate, the 13,000-worker scope, the $50-per-week formula, the November 26, 2017 to April 30, 2022 lookback period, and the $1M civil penalty. Procedural posture: administrative consent order, not a litigated court judgment.

DCWP announcement confirms the $38.9M total, the $35.5M restitution + $3.4M penalties split, the 15,000+ worker scope, and the 500,000+ violations finding. Procedural posture: administrative settlement. Currently the largest worker-protection settlement in NYC history.

Supreme Court 1946 opinion confirms the burden-shifting framework: employee makes a "just and reasonable inference" showing of uncompensated work and the burden shifts to the employer to disprove. Procedural posture: U.S. Supreme Court opinion of the Court, fully binding.

Each cited section in each cluster jurisdiction confirms a 3-year retention window for posted schedules, schedule changes, good-faith estimates, clopening consents, and predictability-pay payments. The aggregate claim is the sum of per-jurisdiction verifications: ORS §653.412 + BOLI rules (Oregon); Admin. Code §20-1207 (NYC); Articles 33F + 33G (SF); SMC §14.22.090 (Seattle); Phila. Code §9-4604 (Philadelphia); MCC §1-25-080 (Chicago); LAMC + DCBA rules (LA City and LA County); each Bay Area framework's recordkeeping section (Berkeley, Emeryville); Evanston Mun. Code Ch. 3-34.

Aggregate of the eleven individually verified jurisdictions. Each component appears in the state-by-state table with its primary-source citation.

MCC Ch. 1-25 explicitly lists the seven covered industries including Healthcare and Manufacturing. The other ten covered jurisdictions' industry-coverage lists were individually checked; none reaches healthcare and manufacturing in the same statutory way. Berkeley's expanded industry coverage (healthcare, warehouse) is the closest analog but is structurally different — Berkeley's coverage attaches at smaller-headcount thresholds and operates within a formula-retail framework.

Surveyed each state's labor code or wage-and-hour statute index. Oregon (ORS §§653.412–.485) is the only state-level predictive-scheduling statute. The remaining 49 states + DC have no state-level Fair Workweek statute.

LA County DCBA FAQs explicitly use the NAICS 44-45 framing for coverage. Census Bureau NAICS reference confirms 445 (Food and Beverage Stores) and 452 (General Merchandise Retailers) are within the 44-45 retail trade sectors.

Aggregate of three per-state preemption verifications above. Massachusetts, Connecticut, and other states have considered Fair Workweek frameworks without enactment but without preemption blocking future adoption.

ORS §653.480 expressly conditions CBA waiver on the agreement's specific reference to the Fair Workweek provisions. Other jurisdictions' implementing rules adopt similar express-reference requirements per the issuing-agency guidance pages.