Oregon 2022 Regular Session

Oregon Senate Bill SB1513

Introduced
2/1/22  
Refer
2/1/22  
Report Pass
2/14/22  
Engrossed
2/15/22  
Refer
2/16/22  
Report Pass
2/23/22  
Enrolled
2/24/22  
Passed
3/7/22  
Chaptered
3/11/22  

Caption

Relating to mandatory overtime shifts.

Impact

The introduction of SB1513 is expected to impact existing labor laws by imposing stricter regulations on employers regarding overtime work. The bill seeks to amend current statutes to prevent the abuse of mandatory overtime, giving employees greater control over their work schedules and potentially improving work-life balance. This change is anticipated to resonate particularly with healthcare workers, who often face long hours and high pressure, thereby contributing to the overall health of the workforce in the state.

Summary

SB1513 is legislation that addresses the practice of mandatory overtime shifts within certain sectors. The bill is aimed at regulating when and how employers can require employees to work overtime, particularly focusing on industries that are more heavily impacted by staffing shortages, such as healthcare. Proponents of the bill argue that limiting mandatory overtime is crucial for maintaining employee well-being and ensuring high-quality care for patients. They emphasize that overwork can lead to burnout and negatively impact the overall health sector.

Sentiment

Discussions around SB1513 have shown a division in sentiment. Supporters view the bill as a necessary safeguard that prioritizes the health and safety of employees, advocating for conditions that can prevent workplace fatigue and encourage sustainable employment practices. Conversely, there are concerns from some business stakeholders about the implications for operational flexibility and potential increases in labor costs. This opposition often stems from a fear of reduced workforce availability during peak demand periods, which could impact service delivery.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the balance between employee rights and employer needs. Critics of the bill often argue that imposing restrictions on mandatory overtime could hinder workplaces during critical times, especially in the healthcare sector where demand can fluctuate unpredictably. The bill’s supporters, however, counter that the protection of workers from excessive overtime should take precedence, suggesting that better staffing and resource allocation would mitigate any adverse effects on service delivery.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

OR HB3498

Relating to minimum conditions of employment.

CA AB2992

Employment practices: leave time.

NJ A5166

Revises law concerning family leave to extend protection by reducing, over time, employee threshold from 30 employees to five employees in definition of employer.

NJ S3825

Revises law concerning family leave to extend protection by reducing, over time, employee threshold from 30 employees to one employee in definition of employer.

CA AB1556

Employment discrimination: unlawful employment practices.

HI HB462

Relating To Employment Security.

CA AB1100

State employees: workweek.

CA AB3187

Employment: wages and hours: overtime.