The D.C. City Council decided to push back consideration of job crushing “scheduling” legislation yesterday, as the voices from job creators across the city have clearly revealed the many drawbacks of this legislation. While the proposal will still be considered in July, there’s no doubt that businesses across the District are very concerned with how this bill would affect their ability to create jobs and continue to operate in the city. Here’s just a sampling of what they’ve said:
Wegmans: The Wegmans grocery store chain, for example, has long considered opening its first outpost in the District at the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center. But a spokeswoman for the New York-based chain said the scheduling legislation could be a deal-breaker.
“The proposed legislation is a significant factor for us to consider before locating a store within the District,” Marcie Rivera wrote in an email. “It would negatively impact our ability to meet the work-life balance needs of our employees through flexible scheduling, while also increasing our costs.”
Ben’s Chili Bowl: But Kamal Ali, co-owner of Ben’s Chili Bowl, said flexible scheduling is imperative for unexpected fluctuations, and advance scheduling would prevent him from increasing staff quickly if business gets heavy. Mr. Ali owns nine Ben’s-related eateries in the District, Maryland and Virginia, and is a member of the D.C. Jobs and Growth Partnership, a group of local businesses concerned with job creation.
“Essentially, I’d be left unable to communicate additional staffing needs in the face of any number of variables, from a late-night playoff game to a crippling snowstorm,” Mr. Ali said in a statement. “I worry that this not only hampers my ability to do business but also scares away potential investment from other businesses looking to set up shop in the District alongside me.”
These are just two anecdotes from employers that recognize how this bill would disastrously affect hiring and economic growth in D.C. With the very dangerous ramifications of this legislation so clear, the City Council needs to take steps to drop consideration of this bill all together.