PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 27, 2017
Layoff Prevention Act of 2017
This bill requires each state that has already enacted a short-time compensation program to be paid 100% of the amount of short-time compensation paid under such program. Under a short-time compensation program, an employer may avoid a layoff of one or more employees by reducing the hours of all workers in the employer's workforce. Employees affected by a reduction in hours may receive a partial short-time compensation payment to compensate for lost wages. This is a voluntary and temporary program, beginning upon the enactment of this bill and ending five and one-half years later.
The bill imposes certain limitations on payments to states and requires employers to pay their states one-half of the short-time compensation paid under the employer plan.
The Department of Labor must: (1) award grants to states that enact short-time compensation programs to implement or improve the administration of such plans, (2) develop model legislative language for states in developing and enacting short-time compensation plans, and (3) provide technical assistance to states and establish reporting requirements for such programs.
People & committees
Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3468 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3468 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3468 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3468 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.