2.3 20-0369 Subject: Hospitality Worker Right To Recall Ordinance
From: Councilmember Thao, President Pro Tem Kalb & Councilmember Gallo
Recommendation: Adopt A Ordinance (1) Establishing A Travel And Hospitality Worker Right To Recall; (2) Amending Chapter 2.44 Of The Oakland Municipal Code To Include Enforcement Of Right To Recall As Part Of The Duties Of The Department Of Workplace And Employment Standards
I am a resident of District 3, and believe this is a reasonable and human-centric approach to re-hiring and emerging from the economic repercussions of the pandemic. Being asked to first offer previous employees their positions back is a basic courtesy. Few people enjoy being told how to run their businesses, but if this most basic courtesy is one that employers are upset about, I am all the more glad to support legislation that pushes them to consider people before profits.
My name is Ada Palotai and I live in district 6. I urge you to IMMEDIATELY extend Oakland's eviction moratorium until the state of emergency is lifted. Experts warn of a tsunami of evictions due to COVID-19. Like the pandemic and police violence, communities of color will bear the brunt of the crisis. Housing keeps us safe, not the police. City Council must Defund OPD by adopting Kaplan/Bas's cuts of at least an additional 11.4M and reimagine public safety. They must also extend the Eviction Moratorium until at least the end of the local state of emergency, pass the Tenant Protection Upgrades, and protect workers by passing the Right to Recall ordinance.
I'm Holly Fincke in District 4. I support the Right to Recall ordinance. It makes complete sense and it is a minimum step really. If we want stable and healthy communities we must make every effort to provide job security.
I live in D1 and I support the Right to Recall ordinance which will give laid off workers the right to return to work once Oakland reopens small businesses, restaurants, and the tourism industry again. This will ensure the financial security of our most vulnerable communities, which includes our essential service workers.
I live in D6 and strongly support this ordinance. Workers laid off due to the COVID-19 pandemic should have the opportunity to get their old jobs back before companies start hiring new employees!
I am an attorney representing an Oakland hotel owner. I believe this ordinance is ambiguous in numerous respects which, at a minimum, must be clarified before enactment. These ambiguities include:
1. There is no sunset clause for the ordinance. Should not any emergency ordinance have a sunset provision? How long are the obligations under this ordinance going to last? How long must a hotel maintain a list of former employees?
2. What if a former employee declines an offer of re-employment? Must that employee continue to be notified of new openings? How does this impact other eligible employees who did not decline employment?
3. What if a job requires a minimum of experience. Need only those employees with the requisite experience be notified?
4. Must all former employees be notified of "non-qualification" for all new positions that are filled (e.g. must a housekeeper be notified that a maintenance job was filled)?
5. Does the ordinance apply to temporary and part-time openings?
6. Why were restaurants worker removed from the latest version of the ordinance? What about other retail workers and service providers? Are they not equally deserving of protection? Why is this ordinance focused solely on hotels?
However well intentioned it may be, this ordinance appears to have been hurriedly drafted and inexplicably targeted at a single industry.
As everyone knows that these is driven by the union. This legislation is is driven by unite here and this another reason why ty Hudson will use this to his advantage to get all non union hotels to be union. Everyone knows that the union is funding council during election time and they are passing all of these union driven ordinances for their own gains. This city of not treating the small business owners fairly. Measure z and this legislation are both passed to pressure non union hotels to become union. These unions have the city by balls they cannot determine whats right and whats wrong. Why are the union always exempted from each and every new hotel ordinances and legislation? Cant the council members see whats going on here? While the city is supposed to promote small business they are now bent on closing their doors. With the union being so strong here there will be nonone to put money back in Oakland because Oakland doesn't know whats right and whats wrong. The city is discriminating by passing a parallel set of rules and regulations for non union hotels vs union.
I am a member of District 2, and I believe if our Councilmembers have the opportunity to ensure that some of our most vulnerable workers and neighbors can be given the opportunity to resume their employment, and remain housed, safe residents of Oakland!
My name is Ember and I live in Oakland District 4. I strongly support the Right to Recall ordinance which will give laid off workers the right to return to work once Oakland reopens small businesses, restaurants, and the tourism industry again. This will ensure the financial security of our most vulnerable communities, which includes our essential service workers.
My name is Jocelyn Cansino. I live in District 3. I strongly support the Right to Recall ordinance which will give laid off workers the right to return to work once Oakland reopens small businesses, restaurants, and the tourism industry again. This will ensure the financial security of our most vulnerable communities, which includes our essential service workers.
I am a resident of District 3, and believe this is a reasonable and human-centric approach to re-hiring and emerging from the economic repercussions of the pandemic. Being asked to first offer previous employees their positions back is a basic courtesy. Few people enjoy being told how to run their businesses, but if this most basic courtesy is one that employers are upset about, I am all the more glad to support legislation that pushes them to consider people before profits.
My name is Ada Palotai and I live in district 6. I urge you to IMMEDIATELY extend Oakland's eviction moratorium until the state of emergency is lifted. Experts warn of a tsunami of evictions due to COVID-19. Like the pandemic and police violence, communities of color will bear the brunt of the crisis. Housing keeps us safe, not the police. City Council must Defund OPD by adopting Kaplan/Bas's cuts of at least an additional 11.4M and reimagine public safety. They must also extend the Eviction Moratorium until at least the end of the local state of emergency, pass the Tenant Protection Upgrades, and protect workers by passing the Right to Recall ordinance.
I live in d5 and strongly support this ordinance. We must ensure that workers have the right to return to their jobs when re-hiring begins.
I'm Holly Fincke in District 4. I support the Right to Recall ordinance. It makes complete sense and it is a minimum step really. If we want stable and healthy communities we must make every effort to provide job security.
I live in D1 and I support the Right to Recall ordinance which will give laid off workers the right to return to work once Oakland reopens small businesses, restaurants, and the tourism industry again. This will ensure the financial security of our most vulnerable communities, which includes our essential service workers.
I live in D6 and strongly support this ordinance. Workers laid off due to the COVID-19 pandemic should have the opportunity to get their old jobs back before companies start hiring new employees!
I am an attorney representing an Oakland hotel owner. I believe this ordinance is ambiguous in numerous respects which, at a minimum, must be clarified before enactment. These ambiguities include:
1. There is no sunset clause for the ordinance. Should not any emergency ordinance have a sunset provision? How long are the obligations under this ordinance going to last? How long must a hotel maintain a list of former employees?
2. What if a former employee declines an offer of re-employment? Must that employee continue to be notified of new openings? How does this impact other eligible employees who did not decline employment?
3. What if a job requires a minimum of experience. Need only those employees with the requisite experience be notified?
4. Must all former employees be notified of "non-qualification" for all new positions that are filled (e.g. must a housekeeper be notified that a maintenance job was filled)?
5. Does the ordinance apply to temporary and part-time openings?
6. Why were restaurants worker removed from the latest version of the ordinance? What about other retail workers and service providers? Are they not equally deserving of protection? Why is this ordinance focused solely on hotels?
However well intentioned it may be, this ordinance appears to have been hurriedly drafted and inexplicably targeted at a single industry.
As everyone knows that these is driven by the union. This legislation is is driven by unite here and this another reason why ty Hudson will use this to his advantage to get all non union hotels to be union. Everyone knows that the union is funding council during election time and they are passing all of these union driven ordinances for their own gains. This city of not treating the small business owners fairly. Measure z and this legislation are both passed to pressure non union hotels to become union. These unions have the city by balls they cannot determine whats right and whats wrong. Why are the union always exempted from each and every new hotel ordinances and legislation? Cant the council members see whats going on here? While the city is supposed to promote small business they are now bent on closing their doors. With the union being so strong here there will be nonone to put money back in Oakland because Oakland doesn't know whats right and whats wrong. The city is discriminating by passing a parallel set of rules and regulations for non union hotels vs union.
I am a member of District 2, and I believe if our Councilmembers have the opportunity to ensure that some of our most vulnerable workers and neighbors can be given the opportunity to resume their employment, and remain housed, safe residents of Oakland!
My name is Ember and I live in Oakland District 4. I strongly support the Right to Recall ordinance which will give laid off workers the right to return to work once Oakland reopens small businesses, restaurants, and the tourism industry again. This will ensure the financial security of our most vulnerable communities, which includes our essential service workers.
I am a District 1 resident. I strongly support the Right to Recall ordinance. It is the right thing to do to protect our Oakland workers.
My name is Jocelyn Cansino. I live in District 3. I strongly support the Right to Recall ordinance which will give laid off workers the right to return to work once Oakland reopens small businesses, restaurants, and the tourism industry again. This will ensure the financial security of our most vulnerable communities, which includes our essential service workers.