Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wage And Hour topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears broad support and concerns for bill letting employers set report‑to‑work minimums with written policies
Summary
House Bill 1043 would let private employers set a different report‑to‑work minimum (instead of the default two‑hour pay) if the policy is established and disclosed up front. Supporters say it modernizes out‑of‑date rules for remote work and small businesses; HR and labor witnesses urged clear written notice at hire and guardrails to avoid disparate impacts.
Representative Brian Labria introduced House Bill 1043 as a narrower update to a longstanding two‑hour "report to work" minimum. The bill would allow employers to adopt and disclose a written alternative policy (for example a one‑hour minimum for remote work or a four‑hour minimum for some on‑site roles), leaving the two‑hour default in place where no written policy exists.
The prime sponsor framed the bill as a modernization of a 1985 rule: "It modernizes the 1985 law, giving employees and employers greater flexibility when it comes to minimum pay scenarios for reporting to work." Supporters from the hospitality industry said the change would prevent unnecessary pay for remote employees who did not leave their homes and allow businesses to adapt reasonable thresholds for different job classes.
Labor and HR witnesses urged caution and clearer drafting. Allison Milloto (Blue Lion, HR consultant) recommended written disclosure at hire and a carve‑out that the two‑hour minimum still apply to regularly scheduled shifts unless the employer and employee have an explicit agreement. John Garrian, general counsel to the Department of Labor, recommended that any alternative policy be provided in writing at hire to enable consistent application and make enforcement clearer. Mike Summers (NH Lodging & Restaurant Association) testified the change helps businesses manage remote staffing and avoid paying two hours to someone who never left home.
Committee members pressed on collective bargaining implications and whether the bill would affect public vs. private employees; the sponsor said it is aimed at private employers and does not change existing exemptions for specific sectors. The hearing closed with the committee collecting stakeholder language proposals for potential amendments.
What happens next: Committee may request clarifying amendments (written policy at hire; treatment of collective bargaining agreements) before acting on HB1043.
