New York City Council Header
Meeting Name: Committee on Consumer Affairs and Business Licensing Agenda status: Final
Meeting date/time: 9/15/2021 3:00 PM Minutes status: Final  
Meeting location: REMOTE HEARING (VIRTUAL ROOM 4)
Published agenda: Agenda Agenda Published minutes: Minutes Minutes  
Meeting video:  
Attachments: CLICK ANY FILE # BELOW (in blue) TO ACCESS LEGISLATION AND ATTACHMENTS
File #Ver.Prime SponsorAgenda #Agenda NoteNameTypeSummaryActionResultAction DetailsMultimedia
            Roll call Not available
Int 0499-2018 *Karen Koslowitz  Allowing corporations, partnerships and other business entities to obtain newsstand licenses, and to repeal section 20-241 of the administrative code.IntroductionThis bill would amend existing law to allow current and new licensees to hold a newsstand license as a corporate entity, as long as each shareholder, partner, member or principal does not have another source of income exceeding what is earned by operating the newsstand. Existing law only allows newsstand operators to hold their license in their personal capacity. The bill also contains deeming provisions that would help the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) to enforce a limit on two newsstand locations per licensee. This bill would also prohibit any licensee from renting or attempting to rent out their newsstand; doing so would be a basis for license revocation. Finally, the bill also requires DCWP to mail current newsstand licensees, before their next license renewal, a letter explaining important legal requirements that may be applicable if holding a newsstand license as a corporate entity. Additionally, Section 20-241 would be repealed and subsequent sections in the subchapter renumbered, to consolidate the requirements and protections in the subchapter.Hearing Held by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 0499-2018 *Karen Koslowitz  Allowing corporations, partnerships and other business entities to obtain newsstand licenses, and to repeal section 20-241 of the administrative code.IntroductionThis bill would amend existing law to allow current and new licensees to hold a newsstand license as a corporate entity, as long as each shareholder, partner, member or principal does not have another source of income exceeding what is earned by operating the newsstand. Existing law only allows newsstand operators to hold their license in their personal capacity. The bill also contains deeming provisions that would help the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) to enforce a limit on two newsstand locations per licensee. This bill would also prohibit any licensee from renting or attempting to rent out their newsstand; doing so would be a basis for license revocation. Finally, the bill also requires DCWP to mail current newsstand licensees, before their next license renewal, a letter explaining important legal requirements that may be applicable if holding a newsstand license as a corporate entity. Additionally, Section 20-241 would be repealed and subsequent sections in the subchapter renumbered, to consolidate the requirements and protections in the subchapter.Laid Over by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 0508-2018 *Helen K. Rosenthal  Requiring low-wage workers to enter into covenants not to compete and also to require employers to notify potential employees of any requirement to enter into a covenant not to compete.IntroductionEmployers are increasingly requiring their employees to sign non-compete agreements as a condition of employment, even in low-wage jobs where such provisions do not serve an obvious purpose. These covenants can lead to low-wage employees being unreasonably restricted in finding new jobs. This bill would prohibit employers from requiring low-wage employees to enter into covenants not to compete as a condition of their employment.Hearing Held by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 0508-2018 *Helen K. Rosenthal  Requiring low-wage workers to enter into covenants not to compete and also to require employers to notify potential employees of any requirement to enter into a covenant not to compete.IntroductionEmployers are increasingly requiring their employees to sign non-compete agreements as a condition of employment, even in low-wage jobs where such provisions do not serve an obvious purpose. These covenants can lead to low-wage employees being unreasonably restricted in finding new jobs. This bill would prohibit employers from requiring low-wage employees to enter into covenants not to compete as a condition of their employment.Laid Over by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 0974-2018 *Helen K. Rosenthal  Disclosure in employment advertisements of mandatory arbitration and non-disparagement clauses in employment contracts.IntroductionMany employers require their employees to sign contracts that include mandatory arbitration clauses and non-disparagement clauses. This bill would require employment advertisements to disclose if the person hired will have to sign an employment contract with either an arbitration or non-disparagement clause.Hearing Held by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 0974-2018 *Helen K. Rosenthal  Disclosure in employment advertisements of mandatory arbitration and non-disparagement clauses in employment contracts.IntroductionMany employers require their employees to sign contracts that include mandatory arbitration clauses and non-disparagement clauses. This bill would require employment advertisements to disclose if the person hired will have to sign an employment contract with either an arbitration or non-disparagement clause.Laid Over by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 2318-2021 *Diana I. Ayala  Licensing of construction labor providers.IntroductionThis bill would require certain businesses that supply their employees to clients for the performance of construction work or manual labor on the client’s construction site, in exchange for compensation, to be licensed. The term “construction” in this bill explicitly excludes handyman work. Applying for a license would require certain signed statements and select information on business operations, and each covered business would have to supply their workers with a series of notices: on their rights as workers covered by this bill; training and certifications the employees would need to perform their work duties; and information on the employees’ work assignments. The businesses’ clients would also receive some of these notices, and these clients could be subject to civil penalties if they use the services of an unlicensed business that is required to be licensed by this bill. Businesses that violate the bill’s subchapter would also be subject to penalties. Employees of the businesses aggrieved by a violation of the bill’s subchapter would be able to initiate a private right of action against their employers for violations of the bill, including for retaliation against employees for availing themselves of rights provided by this bill.Hearing Held by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 2318-2021 *Diana I. Ayala  Licensing of construction labor providers.IntroductionThis bill would require certain businesses that supply their employees to clients for the performance of construction work or manual labor on the client’s construction site, in exchange for compensation, to be licensed. The term “construction” in this bill explicitly excludes handyman work. Applying for a license would require certain signed statements and select information on business operations, and each covered business would have to supply their workers with a series of notices: on their rights as workers covered by this bill; training and certifications the employees would need to perform their work duties; and information on the employees’ work assignments. The businesses’ clients would also receive some of these notices, and these clients could be subject to civil penalties if they use the services of an unlicensed business that is required to be licensed by this bill. Businesses that violate the bill’s subchapter would also be subject to penalties. Employees of the businesses aggrieved by a violation of the bill’s subchapter would be able to initiate a private right of action against their employers for violations of the bill, including for retaliation against employees for availing themselves of rights provided by this bill.Laid Over by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 2397-2021 *Francisco P. Moya  Severance pay for hotel service employees.IntroductionThe bill would require severance pay for hotel service employees in the event of: 1) the closure of a hotel to the public, provided that the hotel has not, by October 11, 2021, recalled at least 25% of employees and reopened to the public by November 1, 2021; or 2) a mass layoff of at least 75% of employees. Employees eligible for severance pay would be owed $500 per week, for up to 30 weeks. This requirement would not apply to a hotel that has closed permanently and has or is in the process of converting to an alternate use, provided that employees are offered severance of at least 20 days pay per year of service and provided that the severance is specifically tied to the conversion. The obligation to provide severance would end when an employee is recalled, or, for a closed hotel, when the hotel reopens to the public and recalls 25% of employees.Hearing Held by Committee  Action details Not available
Int 2397-2021 *Francisco P. Moya  Severance pay for hotel service employees.IntroductionThe bill would require severance pay for hotel service employees in the event of: 1) the closure of a hotel to the public, provided that the hotel has not, by October 11, 2021, recalled at least 25% of employees and reopened to the public by November 1, 2021; or 2) a mass layoff of at least 75% of employees. Employees eligible for severance pay would be owed $500 per week, for up to 30 weeks. This requirement would not apply to a hotel that has closed permanently and has or is in the process of converting to an alternate use, provided that employees are offered severance of at least 20 days pay per year of service and provided that the severance is specifically tied to the conversion. The obligation to provide severance would end when an employee is recalled, or, for a closed hotel, when the hotel reopens to the public and recalls 25% of employees.Laid Over by Committee  Action details Not available