As of May 2026, predictive scheduling laws now affect 11 U.S. jurisdictions. Oregon is the only statewide mandate. Ten cities and counties enforce their own rules. Eleven states have blocked local adoption outright.
This article is for general information and is not legal advice. Confirm obligations with qualified counsel.
As of May 2026, predictive scheduling laws now affect 11 U.S. jurisdictions. Oregon stands as the sole state with statewide requirements; the remaining ten are city or county-level ordinances. Eleven states have enacted preemption laws blocking local adoption, while at least nine states actively consider new legislation.
Which jurisdictions enforce predictive scheduling requirements?
The following jurisdictions have enacted and enforce predictive scheduling laws. Notice windows, employee thresholds, and penalty structures vary significantly across each.
| Jurisdiction | Effective | Coverage | Notice window | Key penalties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| San Francisco, CA | 2016 | Formula retail with 40+ global locations | 14 days | $500 per violation |
| Seattle, WA | 2017 | Retail and food service with 500+ employees worldwide | 14 days; 10-hour rest periods | Varies by violation type |
| New York City | 2017 | Fast food chains with 30+ locations nationally; retail with 20+ NYC employees | 14 days (fast food); 72 hours (retail) | $500 first; $750 second; $1,000 subsequent (within 2 yrs) |
| Oregon (statewide) | July 2018 | Retail, hospitality, and food service with 500+ employees | 14 days; 10-hour rest periods | Predictability pay + civil penalties |
| Emeryville, CA | 2018 | Retail and fast food with 56+ global or 20+ local employees | 14 days | $1,000/employee; $500/violation |
| Chicago, IL | 2020 | Employers with 100+ worldwide employees; restaurants with 250+ employees and 30+ locations | 14 days; 10-hour rest periods | Predictability pay + civil penalties |
| Philadelphia, PA | 2020 | Retail, hospitality, and food service with 250+ employees and 30+ locations | 14 days; 9-hour rest periods | $40 clopening premium + civil penalties |
| Los Angeles City, CA | 2023 | Retail with 300+ global employees | 14 days; 10-hour rest periods | Up to $500/employee/violation |
| Berkeley, CA | January 2024 | Building services, healthcare, hospitality, manufacturing, retail, and warehouse with 10+ local or 56+ global employees | 14 days | $1,000/employee + $500/violation + $50 reimbursement |
| Evanston, IL | January 2024 | Multiple industries with 100+ worldwide employees | 14 days; 11-hour rest periods | Predictability pay + civil penalties |
| Los Angeles County, CA | July 1, 2025 | Retail with 300+ global employees in unincorporated areas | 14 days; 10-hour rest periods | Predictability pay + civil penalties |
Which states have blocked local predictive scheduling laws?
Eleven states explicitly prohibit local predictive scheduling ordinances. Employers in these states face no city-level requirements, but also cannot rely on state-level protections advancing independently.
The preemption states as of May 2026 are: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Which states are actively considering new predictive scheduling laws?
Nine states have introduced or actively considered predictive scheduling bills in 2025 and 2026: Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and West Virginia.
Virginia illustrates the difficulty of state-level passage. HB962, prefiled in January 2026, received a 7-0 committee vote for removal in February 2026. State-level bills consistently face stronger industry opposition than city ordinances.
How is predictive scheduling enforcement changing?
Major enforcement actions demonstrate escalating compliance pressure. Two recent settlements define the current stakes:
- Chipotle (August 2022): Settled for $20 million, affecting approximately 13,000 New York City workers.
- Starbucks (recent): Agreed to a $38.9 million settlement over violations affecting more than 15,000 NYC workers.
The directional shift is significant. Enforcement has moved from complaint-driven investigations, where a worker files first, to proactive agency investigations where regulators audit employer records without a trigger complaint. Multi-location employers with large hourly workforces are the primary target.
"Enforcement has shifted from complaint-driven to proactive agency investigations."Predictive Scheduling Compliance, 2026 enforcement trend
How does predictability pay work?
Predictability pay is the premium employers owe when they change a posted schedule within the advance notice window. The payment structure varies by jurisdiction and by the type of change made.
Typical payment structures across active jurisdictions:
- Additions or changes to a posted shift: One hour at the employee's regular rate
- Reductions to a posted shift: Half the regular rate for the hours removed
- Cancellations within 24 hours: Up to four hours premium, with exact amounts varying by jurisdiction
- Clopening premiums (closing then opening shifts): Specific amounts in select cities, including $40 in Philadelphia
Payment obligation applies even when the employee agrees to the change. In most jurisdictions, a signed waiver does not eliminate the predictability pay requirement. The obligation runs to the employer, not to the employee's preference.
What should multi-location employers do now?
Three actions form the compliance baseline for employers operating across multiple jurisdictions:
- Audit jurisdiction exposure. Map all locations against current and pending jurisdictions. The 11-jurisdiction list as of May 2026 will grow. Locations near preemption-state borders are not necessarily safe if the employer has workers in covered cities.
- Implement centralized compliance systems. Location-by-location management breaks down at scale. When a rule in Berkeley differs from the rule in Chicago and both differ from Oregon state law, the only reliable approach is a compliance engine that applies the correct rule set by location automatically, at the point of scheduling.
- Monitor enforcement in existing jurisdictions first. Regulatory capacity and enforcement appetite in established jurisdictions (New York City, Oregon, Chicago) pose a higher near-term risk than pending bills in new states. Prioritize compliance depth over jurisdictional breadth.
WorkAxle's compliance rule engine applies jurisdiction-specific predictive scheduling rules at the point of schedule generation. Notice windows, predictability pay calculations, and rest period requirements are enforced before a schedule is published, not after a violation is filed.