An Act providing for employee's right to request a flexible working arrangement; imposing duties on the Department of Labor and Industry; and imposing penalties.
HB367, the Flexible Working Arrangements Act, would create a statewide right for employees at employers with 50 or more workers to request a flexible working arrangement. Covered requests could include changes to hours, days, start or end times, telework, or job sharing, but not vacation, routine shift scheduling, or other forms of leave. Employees could make one request per year to the same employer, and employers would be required to consider the request in good faith and decide whether it can be granted without conflicting with business operations or legal or contractual obligations.
The bill also requires employers to respond in a reasonably timely manner and, if the request was made in writing, to provide any complete or partial denial in writing. Employers may set reasonable procedures for discussing requests, and they are prohibited from retaliating against employees who make them. The Department of Labor and Industry would be directed to issue regulations, investigate complaints, and enforce the act, including subpoena power and document production authority. The bill does not create a private right of action; enforcement would be administrative, with a warning letter for a first violation and possible administrative fees of up to $500 for later violations.
HB367 would add a new chapter of employee-request rights to Pennsylvania labor law for mid-sized and larger employers, while leaving the ultimate decision to the employer if the request would be inconsistent with business operations. It would impose new procedural duties on employers, create a regulatory and enforcement role for the Department of Labor and Industry, and establish administrative penalties for repeat violations. The bill expressly preserves existing rights under collective bargaining agreements and does not require employers to approve any request.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the available record does not show direct debate or formal support/opposition. Based on the bill text, the measure appears intended to be employee-friendly while still giving employers broad discretion to deny requests for operational reasons. The absence of recorded votes or discussion means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from the supplied materials, though the bill’s structure suggests an attempt to balance workplace flexibility with business concerns.
The main points of potential contention are the scope of the employee right and the breadth of the employer’s discretion. Supporters would likely favor the ability to request flexible schedules, remote work, or job sharing, especially for workers balancing caregiving, health, or transportation needs. Opponents or cautious stakeholders may focus on the administrative burden on employers, the subjective nature of the “inconsistent with business operations” standard, the requirement to provide written denials, and the possibility of Department of Labor and Industry enforcement and penalties. Labor organizations may also scrutinize how the bill interacts with collective bargaining agreements, while employers may be concerned about compliance costs and operational flexibility.