Tired of late messages from your boss? A new bill aims to make it illegal

This makes sense - workplaces differ enough that the it's best to negotiate these things based on the work situation.

In your case given that your work has flexible hours then you could negotiate to be contactable during your "on" hours and not when you're "off". This could be as simple as "you can call me on Slack when I'm logged on there".

I think most people would be happy to take an 11pm call if they could roll in late the next day. Generally, that’s not the expectation.

If this passes and California aggressively enforces it (and they normally do), employers will not be able to weasel out of it by using blatant bad faith rectus. Some will try at first and regret it when CA hangs them out to make an example of.

Precisely. The people this would (but doesn't) protect are those who don't have a strong position or one would describe as meek. Most often it is the latter or both. Those in a strong position, who had no problem ignoring work messages when it wasn't convenient or telling their manager to shove it if necessary didn't have the problem this tries to solve.

The only time these employers really change their behavior is when they are so afraid of the legal repercussions, they make it a point to adhere to the regulations and then some.

It doesn't help that this is fighting culture (weak separation of work and life).

Employees can simply ignore their bosses emails/calls after hours. No need to report anyone.

They make it clear that if we are off work, we don't have to answer any calls or respond to texts. Luckily, my supervisors are all about the policy and don't contact us during non-working hours.

The point is that when you quit you cite this as a reason and they pay severance.

Slightly better would be to fine the manager directly, not the employer.

Granted, the employer can then just reimburse the manager. But I still feel like this would be a better disincentive.

Of course, investigating each instance will cost more than $100.

I suspect the strength of CA's economy is more due to those worker protections than in spite of them.

Hopefully realizing that most of what they say requires an idealized world with perfect actors, perfect information, and perfect balance to actually be workable. And that of course we don't live in that world.

> Surely human autonomy and culture can "enforce" this idea over time.

Sure, just like the rest of the country doesn't have anti-compete agreements because "human autonomy" somehow overcame the inherent employer-employee power imbalance. Or just like "human autonomy" stopped exploitative child labor.

Wow, that escalated quickly.

So you think that a law that is supposed to enforce an idea that you and your company already practice (but sadly many, many do not)... is stupid? What a bizarre take.

> If passed, I hope the exodus of companies drives the California economy into the ground.

I think CA's experience enacting many of the best worker protections in the US suggests this won't harm our economy in the slightest.

Haney thinks the bill is already being misconstrued and said that it would only require that companies be transparent about their expectations for working hours. Employers would still have the freedom to dictate their policy, which could include that employees be available around-the-clock, he said.