Rules Committee advances ‘right to request’ Family Friendly Workplace ordinance with amendments; continued for further review

President Chu presented the Family Friendly Workplace Ordinance to the Rules Committee on July 11, describing a three‑step "right to request" process: (1) an eligible employee makes a written request for a flexible working arrangement, (2) the employer may grant or deny for bona fide business reasons, and (3) if denied the employer must meet with the employee to reconsider. Chu said the measure is modeled on right‑to‑request regimes in several countries and aims to normalize workplace conversations about caregiving and scheduling.

City economist Ted Egan summarized a Prop I economic-impact report that analyzed a revised draft provided to the Controller’s Office. Egan said the ordinance would apply to private employers with 20 or more employees and employees who work at least eight hours per week and have caregiving responsibilities; he concluded the ordinance’s benefits are highly likely to exceed its costs because employers retain the right to deny requests for legitimate business reasons. Departmental presenters (Department on the Status of Women; Department of Human Resources; Office of Labor Standards Enforcement) described implementation issues and recommended some targeted exclusions (public-safety and certain public-health classes for operational reasons), noted meet-and-confer requirements for city implementation, and explained that OLSC enforcement would focus on outreach and procedural compliance; the draft contains no private right of action.

Public comment included dozens of speakers—low‑wage workers, nonprofit and small‑business employers, legal‑aid advocates and parent groups—who described caregiving hardships, workplace stigma, business-operational constraints, and suggestions to refine the measure. Several business groups and the Small Business Commission said initial drafts raised concerns but credited the sponsor for recent amendments; some urged the matter be resolved legislatively rather than by ballot. After extensive public testimony and departmental input, the committee agreed to adopt the sponsor’s set of amendments circulated that day and voted to continue the item to the July 18 Rules Committee meeting for further drafting and finalization prior to placement on the November ballot.