A New Bill in Congress Proposes a Shift to a Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Without Reducing Salaries

Kassius Andersen, Associate

A proposed amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) would change the standard workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours without reducing salaries, a move that the authors of the bill state would reflect the current work landscape. Opponents say such a move would drastically increase labor costs.

H.R. 10323 and it’s hope for change

            On September 8, 2026, Representative Mark Takano (D-California) and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) introduced to Congress the “Thirty-Two-Hour Work Week Act.”[1] The proposal, House Resolution 10323 (“H.R. 10323”) is very much what the title says: a proposal to shorten the standard workweek for millions of Americans without reducing their pay or benefits.

            This is not the first time Representative Takano has introduced this type of legislation. In 2023 he introduced H.R. 1332, a similar bill, however it did not advance from committee and became inactive at the close of Congress’ session in 2024. H.R. 10323 is a renewed attempt for a reduction of hours in the standard workweek. 

            H.R. 10323 would amend the FLSA so that employers would be required to pay employees overtime for any work completed over 32 hours, striking the language currently in place that sets that threshold at 40 hours. If employees work beyond that 32-hour limit in a workweek, employers would be required to pay overtime wages at a rate of time and a half. H.R. 10323 also explicitly states that employers cannot reduce an affected employee’s weekly compensation, regular pay rate, or benefits because of the shorter workweek standard.

            Should the H.R. 10323 pass, the standard workweek would shorten gradually over the period of three years from 40 hours to 32 hours. The workweek would shorten two hours over periods of 180 days, meaning that during the first year, the workweek would drop to 38 hours, then after 180 days it would drop to 36 hours and so on until it reaches 32 hours.

            The argument for change, as put forth by Takano and Sanders, is that the federal labor standards have not kept pace with worker productivity and developments in technology (specifically AI and automation). According to Takano “[w]ork has fundamentally changed. It’s time labor standards caught up.”[2]

            Critics of the bill argue that such a shift would hinder the economy and slow hiring. Further such a change would present problems if applied universally, as certain types of jobs would undoubtedly find such a shift inappropriate. Small businesses in particular would face the greatest challenge with implementation, as such a bill would increase the strain upon their finances to pay or hire new staff to remain at their current operating hours.

            Jay Aldebert, the chief growth officer at International Services also points out that “[o]ne risk is that we turn five days of work into four days of stress. If making the model work requires higher prices, fewer employees, reduced hours, or asking the same workers to carry a heavier workload, then the cost did not disappear. It just moved somewhere else.” [3]

Has Colorado or Any Other State Enacted a 32-Hour Workweek Statute?

            No state has enacted statutes or regulations regarding a 32-hour workweek, however lawmakers in roughly a dozen states have introduced legislation or proposed a state-level four-day workweek program, including California, New York, Washington, and Maryland. However, none of those proposals have been codified into law. In the case of California, the bill failed to pass through committee, with lawmakers acknowledging that it needed significantly more time to study the wide-ranging economic and logistical impacts on business,[4] while in Maryland, the proposed “Four-Day Workweek Act of 2023” was withdrawn by its sponsors due to concerns with the high administrative and tax credit costs (exceeding $900,000 annually to establish such a program).[5] In New York a bill proposing a change to a 32-hour workweek was introduced in January of 2026 and remains in committee at this time.[6]

            There has been no legislation introduced in Colorado for a 32 hour work week, but in 2023 a bill was introduced that would prohibit employers from discriminating or taking adverse action against an employee based on the hours they are scheduled or actually worked. However, that bill (HB23-1118) did not advance to committee.[7]

            For Colorado, the standard for a full workweek for non-exempt employees remains at 40 hours. The Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards Order (“COMPS Order”) issued by the Department of Labor Standards and Statistics defines that overtime begins for any work that exceeds 40 hours per week or 12 hours per day.[8] While states may allow shorter workweeks, they may not create a workweek any longer than what is designated in the FLSA.[9] If the FLSA is amended, and a 32-hour workweek is the new standard, Colorado would be required to adopt that standard.

Employer Considerations/Key Takeaways

            This proposal faces an uncertain future in Congress. It was referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on September 8, 2026, where it has remained. At the moment, employers need not make any changes to operations regarding workweek hours. Employers should keep an eye on the bill as it progresses, and Campbell litigation will continue to monitor and provide updates.

[1] See H.R. 10323; https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-119hr10323ih/xhtml/BILLS-119hr10323ih.html.

[2] See https://takano.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/rep-takano-sen-sanders-reintroduce-32-hour-workweek-act.

[3] Aliss Higham, These Places Already Tried a 32-Hour Workweek. Here’s What Happened., Newsweek, (Sep 15, 2026) https://www.newsweek.com/these-places-already-tried-32-hour-workweek-what-happened-12443107.

[4] Daniel P. Hoffer and Rudolph G. Klapper, 32-Hour Workweek? Not Just Yet, California Legislature Says,  Venable LLP, (May 6, 2022).

[5] Bryan P. Sears, Four-day Workweek Bill Withdrawn as Costs, Tradition derail proposal, Maryland Matters, (Mar. 6, 2023) https://marylandmatters.org/2023/03/06/four-day-workweek-bill-withdrawn-as-costs-tradition-derail-proposal/.

[6] See https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/S5629.

[7] See https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1118.

[8] See COMPS #40, adopted December 8, 2025, effective February 1, 2026, https://cdle.colorado.gov/sites/cdle/files/adopted_2026_comps_order_%2340_7_ccr_1103-1_12.8.25.pdf.

[9] 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1).