In the past year, both Minneapolis and St. Paul have passed similar (but not identical) city ordinances mandating that employers provide paid sick leave to their employees. In addition, Minneapolis has considered passing both a “fair scheduling” ordinance and a minimum wage ordinance.
Many employers have objected to city attempts to regulate employment law in this fashion, in part because they are concerned about being buffeted by multiple and perhaps conflicting requirements in the different cities where they operate. Although a recent decision from Ramsey County Judge Mel I. Dickstein suggested that the ordinances may be lawful, lawmakers at the Capitol have introduced a bill that would take this sort of regulation out of the hands of Minneapolis, St. Paul and the other 852 municipalities around the state.
Preemption Legislation
H.F. 600 prohibits local governments from adopting and enforcing local laws and policies relating to the employment relationship in the private sector. Specifically, the bill would prohibit local governments from adopting or enforcing four types of regulations:
- a minimum wage higher than the state minimum wage;
- a requirement that a private employer provide paid or unpaid leave;
- a regulation relating private employee work hours or scheduling; and
- a requirement that a private employer provide particular benefits, terms of employment, or working conditions
The bill does not prohibit local governments from setting wages, benefits, terms, and employment policies with respect to local government employees.
The prohibition applies to local government policies enacted on or after January 1, 2016.
Status of the Bill
Yesterday, the House bill overcame its first hurdle when it was passed (13-9) by the House Committee on Job Growth. It has now been referred to the House Committee on Government Operation. A companion bill, S.F. No. 580, has also been introduced in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Jobs and Economic Growth.
Of course, to become law any preemption bill would need pass both the House and Senate and be signed by Governor Dayton or, failing that, garner sufficient support in both chambers to override the governor’s veto.
Bottom Line
If this bill becomes law, employers will be relieved of a potentially great burden. For example, consider how difficult it might be for a retailer with multiple outlets to juggle and keep track of all of the different and perhaps contradictory rules in various cities. A one-size-fits-all approach will be greatly appreciated.
We will continue to monitor this issue as it develops. In the meantime, you can watch the hearing on the bill by the House Committee on Job Growth here.