The Business Council of New York State, on behalf of its more than 2.500 members, opposes adoption of S.3415/A.3702 due to its unnecessarily broad approach to remedying the predatory actions of a small number of employment agencies. The overwhelming majority of employment and talent agencies act lawfully in providing a valuable human resource tool to employers and employees.
This legislation imposes significant new paperwork and record retention provisions while significantly heightening the liability for employment agencies and the businesses that use them. These onerous provisions include:
- Mandating that employers provide information for a “bona fide order” (to be maintained for 45 days) that includes information including the employer name and location, hours of work per day, days per week worked, the circumstance under which the employee would be paid in excess of “established number of hours per day...or for working on designated nights, weekends, holidays,” etc. Often times this information is unavailable until and the employer conducts an interview with the applicant to determine their skill, abilities and availability. Employers will be challenged to accurately provide this information to an agency in advance of the interview process.
- An additional statement of “terms and conditions” for each applicant referred by the agency, signed by each employer and maintained by the agency for three-years. This additional paperwork requirement will be a burden to agencies, subjecting them to significant enforcement remedies as well as exposing the employer to civil liability. It is unclear how this form will be provided to the employer for their signature and – for applicants not hired – this represents an unnecessary paperwork burden.
- Employer exposure to new, potentially costly civil liability. The bill would allow any “person aggrieved” by a violation to bring civil action against the employment agency or persons alleged to have violated the provisions. Any employer failure under the proposed paperwork requirements (i.e., “bona fide order,” signed “terms and conditions,” etc.) could expose it to culpability, along with the employment agency, for civil damages.
Again, this legislation is overly broad – imposing significant paperwork, record retention, notices, fines and penalties – to address an issue that could be solved with simpler remedies. For these reasons, The Business Council OPPOSES this legislation.