Ithaca's "Just Cause" Proposal- What Is It?

What is the Proposal?

The just-cause job protection law is designed to ensure that employees—especially in lower-wage or hourly roles—cannot be fired without a legitimate, documented reason. It would:

• Require employers to show “just cause” for termination or reduction in hours.

• Likely offer additional protections for workers subject to unpredictable scheduling or job insecurity.

• Be similar to legislation passed in New York City in 2021 for fast-food workers, which was the first of its kind in the country.

Timeline

• April 2024: Mayor Laura Lewis’s administration (with support from Alderperson Jorge DeFendini) formed a working group of Common Council members to study and draft the policy.

• The group included Alderpersons Kayla Matos, Tiffany Kumar, Robert Cantelmo, David Shapiro, and Patrick Kuehl.

• Only four meetings were held, as councilmembers cited scheduling conflicts, part-time status, and competing responsibilities.

• The working group’s authority expired at the end of 2024, with no progress made in 2025 so far.

Why It Matters

This type of policy would make it harder for employers to terminate employees at-will, offering more job security. It’s particularly relevant in service sectors like retail, hospitality, and food service, which have high turnover and inconsistent scheduling.

Supporters argue it would:

• Reduce arbitrary firings.

• Help stabilize incomes and housing for vulnerable workers.

• Encourage fairer workplace practices.

Business groups and some city officials have raised concerns about:

• The administrative burden on small businesses.

• Potential legal challenges or enforcement issues.

Recent Activity

• A public rally was held at City Hall on June 23, 2025, with around 25 supporters urging action.

• Jorge DeFendini, now running in a primary race, was among those pushing for renewed focus.

• A new memo is being drafted by Matos, Kumar, Kuehl, and Shapiro to revive the effort, possibly starting with a public forum.

Pros of a Just-Cause Job Law

1. 

Worker Protection & Stability

• Prevents arbitrary firings and retaliatory terminations.

• Encourages employers to provide clear expectations and fair warnings before letting someone go.

• Particularly valuable in industries with high turnover, like food service, retail, and hospitality.

2. 

Income & Housing Security

• Protects workers from sudden job loss, which can lead to loss of housing, food insecurity, and debt.

• Helps stabilize the local economy by giving workers a more secure financial foundation.

3. 

Workplace Morale & Retention

• May reduce fear among employees, leading to higher morale and increased loyalty.

• Could help retain experienced workers and reduce rehiring/training costs for employers.

4. 

Public Health & Equity

• Especially beneficial for marginalized and low-income workers who are more likely to be impacted by job insecurity.

• Can reduce stress and improve mental health outcomes for vulnerable populations.

5. 

Accountability for Employers

• Encourages better documentation, communication, and performance management practices.

• Discourages discriminatory or biased terminations.

Cons of a Just-Cause Job Law

1. 

Burden on Small Businesses

• May increase administrative load: employers need to document infractions, provide progressive discipline, and potentially face legal challenges.

• Smaller businesses might lack HR infrastructure to easily comply.

2. 

Reduced Flexibility

• Employers might feel restricted in managing staff based on evolving business needs, especially in seasonal or lean-budget times.

• Could disincentivize hiring if termination becomes more complicated or costly.

3. 

Legal Gray Areas

• Defining “just cause” can be legally complex. Disputes over what qualifies could increase litigation or arbitration costs.

• Enforcement requires clear policy language and likely city resources (legal, HR, mediation).

4. 

Potential for Unintended Consequences

• Employers might respond by making hiring more selective or limiting hours to avoid conflict.

• Could lead to an increase in at-will layoffs during probationary periods before protections kick in.

5. 

Opposition from Business Interests

• Business advocacy groups (like chambers of commerce) often oppose these laws, viewing them as anti-growth or anti-entrepreneurial.