SB 829 amends Connecticut’s wage-and-hour definition of “hours worked” to clarify when pre-shift, post-shift, waiting, and related on-duty time must be counted and paid. The bill specifies that hours worked include time an employee is required to be on the employer’s premises, on duty, at the prescribed workplace, waiting on the premises when no work is available, and undergoing employer-required security screenings. It also confirms that required on-call emergency service time at a designated location is compensable, and that certain call-in assignments begin when the employee is notified and end when the assignment is completed.
The bill also preserves and restates a special rule for third-party providers of companionship services when an employee is required to remain at a worksite for at least 24 consecutive hours. In that setting, the employer and employee may agree in writing to exclude up to eight hours of a regularly scheduled sleeping period from hours worked, if adequate sleeping facilities are provided and the employee gets at least five hours of sleep; interruptions count as work, and if the employee gets less than five hours of sleep, the entire sleeping period counts as hours worked.
Impact
The bill would amend Connecticut General Statutes section 31-76b(2), the state’s wage-and-hour definition of “hours worked,” effective October 1, 2025. Its practical effect is to make more pre-shift and post-shift time compensable under state law, especially employer-required waiting time, security screening time, and certain on-call or emergency-service arrangements. It would affect employers subject to Connecticut wage laws, particularly those using security checks, standby requirements, or live-in/extended-shift care arrangements, and it would reinforce wage obligations for third-party companionship-service providers under state law.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows unanimous support in the Labor and Public Employees Committee, with 13-0 votes to draft and to report the bill favorably. That suggests the measure was viewed positively within committee and did not face recorded opposition at that stage. No committee transcript is available here, so the broader public debate is not reflected in the provided materials.
Contention
The main policy issue underlying the bill is how broadly “hours worked” should be defined for pay purposes, especially for time that is not traditional productive labor but is nevertheless employer-controlled, such as waiting, security screenings, and on-call periods. Employers may be concerned about increased labor costs, administrative complexity, and compliance obligations, while workers and labor advocates are likely to support compensation for time spent under employer direction. The companionship-services sleeping-time rule is another potential point of interest because it balances wage protections with a limited exclusion for overnight shifts when specific conditions are met.