There is no conflict of interest.
Citation
Harknett, K., Schneider, D., & Irwin, V. (2021). Improving health and economic security by reducing work schedule uncertainty. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(42), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107828118
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of Seattle's Secure Scheduling ordinance on worker health and safety.
- The study used a nonexperimental design to compare outcomes between hourly workers in Seattle and similar hourly workers in other states. The authors used self-report surveys and statistical models to compare the differences in the well-being between the groups.
- The study found a significant relationship between hourly service workers' schedule predictability and increased sleep quality and decreased material hardships.
- This study receives a low evidence rating. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Seattle's Secure Scheduling ordinance; other factors are likely to have contributed.
Features of the Intervention
Unstable work schedules negatively impact worker health, well-being, and economic security, especially in the service sector. In response, Seattle enacted the 2017 Secure Scheduling ordinance, known as the fair workweek law, targeting hourly workers in large retail and food service industries with at least 500 employees. This ordinance mandates that employers provide work schedules with a two-week advance notice. If employers alter an employee’s schedule with less than two weeks’ notice, they must pay additional “predictability pay.” Furthermore, the law stipulates that employees scheduled for back-to-back shifts must receive extra pay if they do not have at least 10 hours of rest between shifts.
Features of the Study
The study used a nonexperimental design to examine the well-being of hourly service workers in Seattle compared to those in 24 other large U.S. metropolitan areas. Study participants were recruited using online ads. The sample included 6,148 hourly service workers, with 754 from Seattle (treatment group) and 5,394 from other cities (comparison group). The treatment group was specifically covered by the Seattle Secure Scheduling ordinance and included workers from large food or service companies, while the comparison group consisted of similar workers from cities with higher minimum wages but without fair workweek laws. At baseline, the authors matched treatment group members with comparison group members on job characteristics, demographics, and socioeconomic variables. Both groups had similar demographic characteristics, predominantly consisting of White women, aged 20 to 39, with a high school education or some college experience. The authors investigated four aspects of worker well-being: happiness, quality of sleep, psychological distress, and the experience of one or more material hardships. These hardships included issues related to hunger or food insecurity, housing instability, trouble paying bills, and postponing necessary medical care. Data were collected through online surveys at three points: baseline, one year, and two years post-implementation. The authors used statistical models to analyze differences in outcomes between the treatment and comparison groups.
Findings
Health and safety
- The study found a significant positive relationship between schedule predictability and sleep quality, indicating that sleep quality improved with more predictable schedules.
- The study also found a significant negative relationship between schedule predictability and any material hardship, indicating that material hardships decreased with more predictable schedules.
- The study did not find a significant relationship between schedule predictability and happiness or psychological distress.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors compared Seattle’s Secure Scheduling ordinance on workers in Seattle compared to hourly workers in a cross-section of other large metropolitan U.S. cities. Because the analysis considered an ordinance operating in only one city, it is impossible to disentangle the effect of Seattle’s Secure Scheduling from the effect of the city itself; this is known as a confounding factor. While the individuals in the comparison group worked at the same companies as individuals in the treatment group, they came from 24 different states where it is possible that other socioeconomic and workplace policies not accounted for may also affect worker health, well-being, and economic security outcomes. We cannot attribute the estimated effects with confidence to Seattle’s Secure Scheduling and not to other factors. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the ordinance was implemented in only one city presenting a confounding factor. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Seattle's Secure Scheduling ordinance; other factors are likely to have contributed.