Bill would let employers skip paying for worker training time

What it does

This bill amends the Fair Labor Standards Act to exclude time spent attending education or training programs from 'hours worked' — meaning employers do not have to pay workers for time spent in voluntary training outside regular work hours, provided the employee is not performing work during that time and faces no retaliation for declining to attend. The bill preserves existing carve-outs for changing clothes and washing.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is to exclude training time from compensable hours, reducing employer payroll obligations. While framed as 'flexibility for workers,' the substantive effect is a carve-out that permits employers to avoid paying for training time.

What the text implies

• Workers in low-wage sectors with high training demands (retail, hospitality, healthcare) may face pressure to attend unpaid training to remain competitive or avoid implicit career penalties, even though the bill nominally prohibits 'adverse action.'
• The 'voluntary' standard is subjective and difficult to enforce; employers can create cultural or promotional incentives that make training feel mandatory without formal retaliation.
• Collective bargaining agreements may be the only reliable way to preserve paid training time, potentially widening the gap between unionized and non-unionized workers.
• The bill does not define 'similar activity' or 'education or training program,' leaving ambiguity about what qualifies for the exclusion and creating litigation risk.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Workers lose the right to be paid for time spent in employer-facilitated or employer-encouraged training programs, even when that training is job-related or required for advancement. The 'voluntary' and 'no adverse action' language creates a nominal protection but does not prevent subtle pressure or career consequences for non-participation; employers gain a mechanism to shift training costs to workers' unpaid time.

Who stands to gain

• employers in training-intensive sectors (retail, hospitality, healthcare, technology)
• large corporations with structured onboarding and professional-development programs

Named in the bill

Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, Section 3(o), Sections 6 and 7 (minimum wage and overtime), collective bargaining agreements

Where it stands

2 cosponsors: 2 Republicans.

• Mar 21, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Mar 21, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Education and Workforce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce”
• Apr 9, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Apr 9, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 18 - 13”
• Jan 13, 2026 — Failed · Congress.gov: “On passage Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 209 - 215 (Roll no. 19)”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

4 lobbying clients named this bill on 6 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $19,121,730 in lobbying spend. A filing names 16 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 72% of bills with at least one filing.

Ashley Hinson, the sponsor, reported $963,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $17,960,000 on 1 filing
• AFL-CIO — $760,000 on 1 filing
• International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers — $326,730 on 2 filings
• Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council (sbe Council) — $75,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.