ReportWire

Tag: Workers' rights

  • Denver Public Library workers move to unionize in 2026

    [ad_1]

    Jade Kelly, president of Communications Workers of America Local 7799, speaks as Denver Public Library workers meet at the City and County Building to celebrate the next step in their effort to unionize. Jan. 2, 2025.

    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    Workers at the Denver Public Library took a big step toward forming a union, potentially making them the first city employees to take advantage of new labor organizing rights.

    An organizing group, Denver Public Library Workers United, filed a formal request on Jan. 2 to become a city-recognized union. The group hopes to collectively bargain on behalf of library workers.

    Eyklipse Baca speaks as she and her Denver Public Library colleagues meet at the City and County Building to celebrate the next step in their effort to unionize. Jan. 2, 2025.
    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    The action came just a day after a new law took effect, allowing thousands of city employees to join unions and engage in collective bargaining. 

    “Now more than ever we need to, as workers, whether you’re a public-sector worker, private-sector worker, now is the time to unionize,” said Juan Manuel Ramirez Anzures, administrative assistant for the children’s library. “Now is the time for solidarity and all power to the workers.” 

    Juan Manuel Ramirez Anzures, an administrative assistant at Denver Public Library Central Children’s Library, stands beneath the City and County Building as he and his colleagues celebrate the next step in their effort to unionize. Jan. 2, 2025.
    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    Denver’s library workers have been organizing since 2020

    They say they are seeking formal recognition now because of the change in the law, as well as recent city layoffs and budget cuts. In 2024, Denver voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure to grant the new labor rights, which took effect Jan. 1.

    Hundreds of library staff members have been working together under the guidance of the Communications Workers of America Local 7799, according to DPLWU. 

    “We are all uniquely screwed by Colorado labor law. For the past 90 years, the Colorado Labor Peace Act has forced us as the public-sector workers to sit in silence as our health, as our civil rights, as our workplace protections are dismissed in boardrooms without us,” said Jade Kelly, president of CWA Local 7799.

    DPLWU says it filed a supermajority of worker authorization cards, with 65 percent of eligible employees signing. A worker authorization card is a document signed by an employee to officially designate a union as their representative for collective bargaining. 

    Management at the Denver Public Library could voluntarily recognize the union

    If they don’t, then a union election would be held with the library staff.

    “We support our staff’s right to unionize and we respect the city’s process,” wrote a spokesperson for the Denver Public Library in an email.  

    The affected staff includes shelvers, clerks, facilities, security, librarians, library assistants, custodians, delivery drivers and other positions.

    City Council member Sarah Parady speaks as Denver Public Library workers meet at the City and County Building to celebrate the next step in their effort to unionize. Jan. 2, 2025.
    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    “I’m feeling hopeful. I’m feeling supported by the public, by my coworkers, and by all these wonderful CWA organizers who have been there holding our hand every step of the way,” Manuel Ramirez Anzures said. “Once we get to that final contract, that will be a really great day.”

    DPLWU says it wants to work with library management to increase transparency around library decisions, address staff concerns about safety and ensure fair wages.

    Denver Public Library workers meet at the City and County Building to celebrate the next step in their effort to unionize. Jan. 2, 2025.
    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Strip club performers are strip club employees, Denver judge rules

    [ad_1]

    The Denver City Auditor’s office ruled earlier this year that two strip clubs were mistreating their employees.

    Inside the Diamond Cabaret, Feb. 15, 2018.

    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    A Denver District Court judge has upheld a ruling that strip club workers have protections under the city’s wage and employment laws, rejecting the companies’ attempt to shut down a city investigation that had resulted in millions of dollars in penalties.

    The ruling follows a Denver Auditor’s Office investigation into four strip clubs that operate in the city. Investigators used newly expanded subpoena powers to attempt to obtain documents from the strip clubs, and issued daily fines when they refused.

    The investigation found hundreds of workers at two strip clubs, Diamond Cabaret and Rick’s Cabaret, had their wages stolen because they were misclassified in order to exempt them from labor laws and forced to pay fees to work. In February, the auditor ordered the strip clubs to pay $14 million in back pay and penalties to those workers, which neither has paid. 

    The clubs subsequently appealed the decision, saying it was a “reckless abuse of power”

    The four strip clubs challenged the legality of the investigation, arguing that strip club entertainers are “licensees” and therefore not subject to Denver wage laws. They also alleged other flaws and that a hearing officer had a conflict of interest. 

    Judge Jon J. Olafson issued an order on Nov. 20, affirming two previous decisions from a hearing officer that allowed the investigation and fees to stand. The club’s appeal alleged that the hearing officer overstepped her jurisdiction in multiple ways by allowing the investigation to stand, which Judge Olafson disagreed with. 

    “I’m thrilled the District Court recognized our legal authority to enforce sex workers’ rights. We remain steadfast in doing what’s right for all workers in Denver,” Denver Labor Executive Director Matthew Fritz-Mauer said in a statement. 

    The legal team for the strip clubs did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The club owners have appealed to the state Court of Appeals and sued in federal court.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Almost all worker protections you can think of are threatened’: Donald Trump’s potential second presidency could catastrophically doom laborers’ rights

    ‘Almost all worker protections you can think of are threatened’: Donald Trump’s potential second presidency could catastrophically doom laborers’ rights

    [ad_1]

    Attorney Brian Petruska warned The Huffington Post that a second Donald Trump presidency could deal a devastating blow to workers’ rights and labor protections in the United States: “The changes—not to engage in hyperbole—are potentially catastrophic. Almost all worker protections you can think of are threatened.”

    “We’re looking at going back to pre-1930s labor law in this country,” claimed Petruska, an attorney for the Laborers’ International Union of North America. “I’m not exaggerating. That’s literally what’s happening.”

    Trump’s first term already saw significant rollbacks of Obama-era labor policies through the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). A Republican-controlled NLRB under Trump reversed key decisions that expanded worker and union rights during President Obama’s administration. These decisions included making it easier for smaller groups to unionize, speeding up the union election process, and holding parent companies accountable for labor violations by contractors and franchisees.

    If re-elected, according to Petruska, Trump would likely appoint an anti-worker general counsel to lead the NLRB, replacing Biden’s highly consequential pro-labor appointee, Jennifer Abruzzo. This would halt and reverse the agency’s recent worker-friendly reforms. Trump could also flip control of the NLRB’s five-member board to Republicans as terms expire, enabling further erosion of labor protections.

    Beyond staffing changes, Trump and Congressional Republicans may attempt to slash the NLRB’s budget and let the agency wither, as occurred in his first term. This would cripple the enforcement of existing labor laws/protections and leave workers more vulnerable to exploitation.

    Perhaps most alarmingly, Trump-appointed federal judges are already receptive to constitutional challenges against the NLRB’s structure brought by companies like Elon Musk’s SpaceX. With conservatives holding a 6-3 Supreme Court majority, shaped by Trump, there is a legitimate possibility the Court could eventually rule the entire agency unconstitutional—erasing nearly a century of labor law precedent and overhauling any concept of work fairness.

    This anti-worker agenda aligns with the goals of conservative think tanks and corporate interests, including Musk, who have long sought to weaken unions and worker protections in whatever ways possible under the law—the magic key. Whatever changes they seek need to be made under the guise of legitimacy. A second Trump term, backed by a Republican-friendly Supreme Court, would be an absolute disaster. It could finally allow them to achieve their vision of gutting labor rights through feigned legality.

    Another four years of Trump could mean dismantling decades of hard-won protections. As union membership has declined, so have the wages of average workers relative to the wealthy. Further eroding labor rights accelerates this dangerous trend. It would exacerbate inequality, reduce worker safety, and leave workers with little to no recourse against unfair treatment by emboldened corporations salivating at the chance to violently squeeze more profit out of each employee.


    The Mary Sue is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy

    [ad_2]

    Kahron Spearman

    Source link

  • How will Trump’s plans to deport undocumented migrants impact US economy?

    How will Trump’s plans to deport undocumented migrants impact US economy?

    [ad_1]

    Gloria Solis moved to the United States from Mexico in 1998. To put food on the table for her four children, she works in the agricultural sector in Washington state. She’s one of the estimated 31 million foreign-born workers in the US — documented or otherwise — who are helping to drive the US economy.

    She’s worried that if Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump gets elected, the life she has built for her and her family could be in jeopardy.

    Trump has made immigration, a hot-button issue this election, one of the pillars of his campaign. The role of immigrants in the startup economy is well known – 55 percent of US startups valued at $1bn or more were founded by immigrants, and some of the most famous names in Silicon Valley are those of foreign-born entrepreneurs, including Tesla chief Elon Musk and Google co-founder Sergey Brin.

    But what is often overlooked is the importance of immigrants, including undocumented ones, in other sections of the US society and economy.

    In his comments, Trump has drawn a stark line defining who would be welcome in the US should he be elected the next US president. In June, he promised “to staple a Green Card to anyone who graduates from any college, even 2-yr community colleges” — a claim that the campaign later walked back on.

    He has also publicly stated that he wishes to deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US. His plan, championed by loyalists like Stephen Miller, who served as a top adviser during his first term, is inspired by a policy from the 1950s put in place by then-President Dwight Eisenhower who, during his time in office, deported more than a million undocumented migrants, primarily from Mexico.

    Much like human rights groups, economists too have slammed Trump’s plan.

    A report earlier this year from Moody’s said that Trump’s immigration policy would cause “significant tightening in the already-tight job market” and would greatly affect sectors of the economy such as healthcare, retail, agriculture and construction that depend on many of these workers.

    Workforce shortage

    Trump has argued that deportations would increase job opportunities for native-born workers, but a look at any of these sectors suggests that is not how things would necessarily pan out.

    Between farms, food-processing facilities and supermarkets, for instance, an estimated 1.7 million undocumented migrants work in the food supply chain, according to the Center For American Progress.

    According to a study from the University of Arkansas, 73 percent of agricultural workers are immigrants and 48 percent of them are unauthorised. In California, nine out of 10 agricultural workers are foreign-born like Solis.

    Miller, who before his stint in Trump’s administration was an aide to lawmakers, now runs American First Legal, a legal organisation which focuses on conservative causes. He told the New York Times in an interview last November that “Mass deportation will be a labour-market disruption celebrated by American workers, who will now be offered higher wages with better benefits to fill these jobs.”

    But “farmers have said again and again that they can’t find a local workforce”, Teresa Romero, president of the United Farm Workers, told Al Jazeera.

    In 2019, more than half of Californian farmers said they had trouble finding workers. It’s largely expected that if Trump gets his way, those shortages will only get worse.

    A study published in the Journal of Labor Economics found that for every one million deported migrant workers, there would be a loss of 88,000 jobs for US natives. That’s because businesses are less likely to expand labour opportunities if they lose their workforce and more likely to use the savings to invest in technology that can automate their work.

    “Estimates of the impact of that policy are vast and have a negative effect on the US economy … including [on] American natives,” Michael Clemens, professor of Economics at George Mason University, told Al Jazeera.

    Trump’s deportation plan “not only is going to impact the lives of farm workers, but is going to impact all of us. We depend on their work to make sure that we have food on our table,” Romero added.

    One study suggests that a total ban on immigrant labour would raise the cost of milk by 90 percent.

    The role of such workers is not restricted to the US food supply chain. Undocumented migrants account for more than 346,000 workers in the healthcare sector, 236,300 of whom are filling roles like personal health and home aides and nursing assistants.

    The US already has a healthcare worker shortage. For instance, according to Mercer Health, there are roughly 12,000 open nursing assistant jobs in Texas alone and more than 14,000 in California.

     

    Similarly, the construction sector overwhelmingly relies on foreign-born labourers. In immigrant-heavy states like Texas and California, migrant workers make up 40 percent of the sector’s workforce. And a National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index (HMI) report found as much as a 65 percent construction labour shortage in some jobs like finished carpentry. Mass deportation would exacerbate that shortage.

    Trump has also blamed migrants for the current housing shortage, arguing they are taking up portions of the limited supply that would otherwise go to documented immigrants or native-born Americans.

    In a speech for the Economic Club of New York, Trump said he would ban mortgages for undocumented migrants, but as Al Jazeera has previously reported, those mortgages are a tiny fraction of overall mortgages. On the contrary, his proposal of across-the-board tariffs will raise construction costs on imports of lumber and steel, among many other items, further shooting up home prices.

    Trump’s policy proposals impact other sectors, too, including the transportation sector, where undocumented workers make up 6 percent of the workforce, and leisure and hospitality, where they comprise 8.4 percent.

    The Trump campaign did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request to clarify how the former president would address the exacerbated worker shortage if he is re-elected in November.

    Household incomes tumble

    A key part of Trump’s plan is to get rid of a programme known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). It is a law which was introduced during the administration of former US President Barack Obama and which shields from deportation those who came to the US without documentation as children.

    Trump’s attempts to end DACA as president were blocked by the Supreme Court, but he has vowed to try again if re-elected. That would impact the more than half a million people living in the US under DACA protections and their families.

    “The biggest impact would be the potential separation of my family. If Trump does what he says he’s going to do, which is try to clear out all the undocumented people, obviously that would leave my kids who are US citizens without their parents,” Solis told Al Jazeera.

    Apart from impacting Solis and families like hers, this would drastically affect the average household income amongst immigrant communities.

    A report from the Center For Migration Studies published during the 2017-2021 Trump administration shows that removing undocumented migrants from mixed-status households would cause a 47 percent reduction in average household income.

    An estimated 33 percent of unauthorised immigrants have at least one child who is a US citizen, according to the Migration Policy Institute. The Solis household fits this mould. Gloria has four children – all of them native-born US citizens.

    Revenue void

    It’s not just migrants who would be affected, but also the tax revenue they bring in.

    Undocumented immigrants paid $96.7bn in taxes – almost $60bn of which went to the federal government – in 2022. Migrants paid $25.7bn towards US Social Security programmes that they are unable to use themselves. Trump’s plan would undermine these workers and limit tax revenues that help fuel the US economy.

    “We would not only be missing out on the hard work that they do if they were to potentially be deported, but we’re also missing out on that additional revenue,” Marco Guzman, senior policy analyst at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, told Al Jazeera.

    According to a report from the non-partisan Peterson Institute, deporting 7.5 million migrants would result in a 6.2 percent reduction in the US gross domestic product (GDP). And these estimates are still far short of the impact of Trump’s ideal plan, which would deport 11 million migrants.

    Alternatively, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office forecasts that based on current trends, new immigrants would bring in $788bn in tax revenue over the next 10 years.

    In March, Goldman Sachs noted that increased migration would cause a slight increase in economic output – three-tenths of a percentage point.

    Neither Miller nor the Trump campaign responded to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Amazon’s focus on speed, surveillance drives higher warehouse worker injuries, study finds

    Amazon’s focus on speed, surveillance drives higher warehouse worker injuries, study finds

    [ad_1]

    An employee looks for items in one of the corridors at an Amazon warehouse.

    Carlos Jasso | Reuters

    Amazon warehouse workers are suffering physical injuries and mental stress on the job as a result of the company’s extreme focus on speed and pervasive surveillance, according to a new study.

    The study, released Wednesday by the University of Illinois Chicago’s Center for Urban Economic Development, includes responses from 1,484 current Amazon workers across 42 states and 451 facilities, in what the authors are calling the largest nationwide survey of Amazon workers to date.

    Nearly 70% of Amazon employees who participated in the survey said they’ve had to take unpaid time off due to pain or exhaustion suffered on the job in the past month, while 34% have had to do so three or more times. The most common injury reported by workers was sprains, strains or tears, and nearly half of respondents said they had moderate or severe pain in the leg, knee or foot in the last three months on the job. More than half of workers said they’re burned out from their work at the company, and that response rate intensified the longer the employee had worked at Amazon.

    The data adds to a drumbeat of scrutiny around Amazon’s workplace safety and treatment of warehouse employees. Regulators, lawmakers, rights groups and employees have criticized Amazon — which is the second-largest employer in the U.S., behind Walmart — over its labor record. The researchers estimate Amazon is the largest warehouse employer in the country, accounting for an estimated 29% of workers in the industry.

    Amazon had roughly 1.46 million employees globally, as of the quarter ended June 30, and the majority are warehouse and delivery workers.

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the U.S. Attorney’s Office are investigating conditions at several warehouses, while the U.S. Department of Justice is examining whether Amazon underreports injuries. In June, a Senate committee led by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., also launched a probe into Amazon’s warehouse safety.

    Amazon has said it has made progress on lowering injury rates and that the company has made adjustments to working environments in order to reduce strain and repetitive movements. It has begun to automate some tasks and is also rolling out more robotic systems in warehouse facilities that the company claims can improve safety, although that prospect has been debated.

    Workers fulfill orders at an Amazon fulfillment center on Prime Day in Melville, New York, US, on Tuesday, July 11, 2023. 

    Johnny Milano | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    About 64% of workers who participated in the survey said they feel the safety of workers is a high priority at Amazon, but that sentiment is lower among those who reported negative impacts to their physical health from the job.

    The survey was funded by Oxfam America, and advocacy groups the Ford Foundation and the National Employment Law Project.

    Amazon spokesperson Maureen Lynch Vogel disputed the study findings in a statement and said “there’s nothing more important” than employees’ health and safety.

    “This is not a ‘study’ – it’s a survey done on social media, by groups with an ulterior motive,” Vogel said. “If anyone actually wants to know the facts, they can read the data that we publish each year and submit to OSHA, which shows that rates in our buildings have improved significantly and we’re slightly above the average in some areas and slightly below the average in others.”

    Amazon said musculoskeletal disorders, or problems like sprains and strains are the most common type of workplace injury across all industries, adding that employees get adequate breaks and that the company provides mental health resources for staffers. Amazon also said it informs managers that productivity or speed shouldn’t be pressed at the expense of worker safety.

    Role of speed and surveillance

    Safety critics have increasingly zeroed in on Amazon’s speedy pace of work and close monitoring of employee productivity as factors that lead to a heightened risk of injuries.

    The survey results underscored that point, finding that those who reported injuries on the job while working at Amazon are more likely to say that keeping up is hard than workers who have not been injured.

    Approximately 44% of workers surveyed said they couldn’t take breaks when they need to, according to the study. “A key mechanism for workers to maintain a fast pace of work without injury is the ability to take breaks and recover from periods of intense work,” the researchers said.

    Amazon packages move on a conveyer belt at a fulfillment center in England.

    Nathan Stirk | Getty Images

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How A.I.-powered robots are changing retail

    How A.I.-powered robots are changing retail

    [ad_1]

    Eager to boost sales, relieve workers from mundane tasks and respond to the ongoing labor shortage, retailers and supermarkets are adding robots to their store aisles.

    Outfitted with cameras and sensors, autonomous inventory robots that can verify price signs and look for out-of-stock items are being deployed at big box stores like BJ’s Wholesale and Walmart-owned Sam’s Club.

    related investing news

    CNBC Pro

    Inventory is one of the biggest challenges retailers face. Missed sales from empty shelves and out-of-stock items cost U.S. retailers $82 billion in 2021, according to NielsenIQ.   

    “Retailers are spending a lot of money to know what’s coming into their stores through their inventory systems and through their point of sale systems,” said Jarad Cannon, chief technology officer at inventory robot maker Brain Corp. “But in their stores on a daily basis, they don’t have a very good model of what’s actually happening on their shelves.”

    Other companies in the space include Simbe Robotics and Bossa Nova Robotics.

    So what impact will inventory robots have on U.S. retailers and the livelihood of its workers? CNBC got a behind-the-scenes look at Brain Corp. to find out.

    Watch the video to learn more.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • There’s A Big New Ruling On What You’re Allowed To Say About An Ex-Employer. Here’s What It Means For You.

    There’s A Big New Ruling On What You’re Allowed To Say About An Ex-Employer. Here’s What It Means For You.

    [ad_1]

    When companies lay off or fire employees, they often include nondisparagement provisions as a standard part of any separation agreement. If you’ve ever been in that vulnerable position and agreed to a severance package that included a nondisclosure agreement, you are all too familiar with the scary silencing effect that this language can have.

    But this month, the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency in charge of protecting private sector employees’ rights, clarified that there’s a limit to how much an employer can make you keep quiet.

    In a February ruling involving McLaren Macomb Hospital in Michigan, the NLRB said that furloughed workers had been asked to sign severance agreements with nondisparagement clauses that were overly broad, as those agreements violated the employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act to talk about their working conditions.

    Making very broad nondisparagement clauses has been a general and intentional practice, said California-based employment attorney Ryan Stygar.

    “The gray area between a truthful statement which is unflattering for the employer and a ‘disparaging’ remark can be hard to understand,” he said. “Employers want workers to think, ‘I should keep my mouth shut about labor issues because I might get sued.’”

    But the National Labor Relations Act, first passed in 1935, protects the rights of eligible employees to join forces and engage in “concerted activities” against an employer’s union-busting behavior, wage theft and other unfair working conditions.

    So in a March memorandum to regional offices, Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB’s general counsel, clarified that the decision in the hospital case had “retroactive application.” This means any severance agreements that were made prior to February in the U.S. by employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act, and that asked employees to “broadly waive” rights provided by it, are no longer valid, either.

    In fact, any “employer communication” that violated an employee’s rights under the National Labor Relations Act is now on notice, according to the memo.

    “For employees, the guidance signals that they cannot be lawfully precluded from making public statements on protected ‘concerted’ workplace issues, such as by criticizing an employer’s stance on union organizing,” said James M. Cooney, a labor and employment law expert in the Rutgers School of Management and Labor Relations.

    This new clarification sends the message that preventing employees from talking to each other about their working conditions is no longer allowed, according to Florida-based employment attorney Donna Ballman.

    Ballman said companies used overly broad NDAs to keep people from finding out about complaints made by fellow employees and then bringing similar claims of their own.

    “And that’s what the NLRB says is now illegal,” she told HuffPost. “Employees should be free to discuss working conditions with co-workers and former co-workers.”

    You may be wondering what exactly this means for you, especially if you’ve ever signed a severance agreement. Legal experts weighed in on pressing questions about how freely you can now talk about bad employers from your past.

    Am I now free to talk badly about my horrible former employer? I have some things I want to get off my chest.

    Lawyers caution against using the new NLRB guidance as carte blanche approval to break an old NDA and start posting negative things about your old bosses on social media.

    “Truthful statements about employers’ labor practices are usually protected,” Stygar said. “But — and this is crucial — defamatory statements are not protected. Any false statement, or any statement made with ‘reckless disregard’ for the truth, could land an employee in legal trouble.“

    At the very least, talk with a lawyer first before making any public statement, attorneys said. “You should carefully review the purpose of the statement and what goal you want to achieve,” Stygar said.

    Beyond the threat of being sued for violating your nondisparagement clause, bad-mouthing a previous employer is generally frowned upon because future employers may believe you will one day speak ill of them, too.

    “I generally think it’s a bad idea because it makes you look unprofessional and undesirable to potential employers,” Ballman said.

    Are all severance agreements now void, too?

    “Lawful severance agreements may continue to be proffered, maintained, and enforced if they do not have overly broad provisions that affect the rights of employees to engage with one another to improve their lot as employees,” Abruzzo stated in her memo.

    In other words, employers can still protect trade secrets and confidential information and can prohibit defamation in the agreements they ask you to sign while onboarding or offboarding.

    “I’m seeing more narrowly tailored nondisparagement provisions since this decision,” Ballman said. “Some employers are now just saying employees can’t defame them or say anything maliciously untrue, and that should be OK with the NLRB.”

    So what does ‘overly broad’ employer communication look like?

    Watch out for employer communication language that infringes upon your legal rights.

    “An overly broad nondisparagement clause occurs when protected speech, such as your right to report unlawful harassment to the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] or to a lawyer, appears to be prohibited by the agreement,” Stygar said.

    “Examples of illegal and overly broad provisions to watch for in a nondisparagement agreement would include language seeking to silence an employee from disclosing information on workplace health and safety violations or a discriminatory work environment in violation of federal, state or local civil rights laws,” Cooney said.

    Is this guidance from the NLRB set in stone?

    Maybe. Abruzzo’s memo could be challenged in court by an employer appealing the decision.

    “NLRB rulings are not self-enforcing, and therefore an employer could appeal to the federal courts any case applying the standards announced in the McLaren Macomb decision,” Cooney said. “However, the board did not create new law in that case, but rather returned to long-standing precedent, so it is probably not likely that a court would overturn a board ruling.”

    At the same time, Cooney noted that actual cases will need to be litigated in front of the NLRB to see if it will adopt all aspects of the guidance.

    Who is serving on the NLRB could make a big difference too, because it is common for presidential administrations to make new appointments and roll back NLRB policy decisions from their predecessors.

    “The current NLRB is focused on scaling back some of the policy decisions from the [President Donald] Trump era. In this case, that includes policies which could enable employers to get around the statutory purpose of the National Labor Relations Act,” Stygar said.

    “If Mr. Trump or another Republican candidate returns to the Oval Office … we can and should expect reversals in some form or another. How far those would go is anyone’s guess. But for now, I am optimistic of the direction the current NLRB is taking on these issues.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • South Korea orders striking cement truckers back to work

    South Korea orders striking cement truckers back to work

    [ad_1]

    SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s government issued an order Tuesday for some of the thousands of truck drivers who have been on strike to return to work, insisting that their nationwide walkout over freight fare issues is hurting an already weak economy.

    Despite facing the threat of delicensing or even prison terms, the strike’s organizers said they would defy the order and accused President Yoon Suk Yeol’s conservative government of suppressing their labor rights and ignoring what they described as worsening work conditions and financial strain caused by rising fuel costs and interest rates.

    The order was approved in a Cabinet meeting called by Yoon and targeted the drivers of cement trucks among a broader group of truckers participating in the walkout. It marked the first time a South Korean government has exercised controversial powers under a law revised in 2004 to force truckers back to their jobs.

    A failure to comply without “justifiable reason” is punishable by up to three years in jail or a maximum fine of 30 million won ($22,400). Critics have denounced the law as unconstitutional, saying it doesn’t clearly define what qualifies as acceptable conditions for a strike.

    Yoon said the truckers’ strike is threatening to “devastate the foundation of our industries,” citing delays in deliveries of materials such as cement and steel to construction sites and factories. He accused the strikers of illicit activities such as disrupting the work of colleagues who have refused to participate in the strike.

    “There’s no way to justify the act of taking the lives of people and the national economy as hostage to accomplish their own interest,” Yoon said in the Cabinet meeting. It wasn’t immediately clear whether the government was planning to expand the order to drivers transporting steel and other supplies if the strike continues.

    Thousands of members of the Cargo Truckers Solidarity Union have been striking since last Thursday, in their second nationwide walkout since June, calling for the government to make permanent a minimum freight rate system that is to expire at the end of 2022.

    While the minimum fares are currently applied to shipping containers and cement, the striking truckers are calling for the benefits to be expanded to other cargoes including oil and chemical tankers, steel and automobile carriers and package delivery trucks.

    Yoon’s government has offered to temporarily extend the minimum freight fares for another three years but balked at the demand to widen the scope of such payments. Officials say the truckers’ strike is threatening to inflict serious damage to the country’s economy and logistics systems.

    According to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, nearly 8,000 truckers participated in the strike on Monday, and container traffic at ports was at 21% of normal levels as of 10 a.m. It said the strike slowed shipments and deliveries of cement, steel and refined oil products. Lee Sang-min, minister of the interior and safety, said Monday that the strike is estimated to cost the economy 300 billion won ($224 million) each day but didn’t specify how the government calculated that amount.

    The strike’s damage so far has been largely limited to domestic industries such as construction and there have been no reports of substantial disruptions of key exports such as computer chips and automobiles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge orders Amazon to stop retaliations against organizers

    Judge orders Amazon to stop retaliations against organizers

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A federal judge has ordered Amazon to stop retaliating against employees engaged in workplace activism, issuing a mixed ruling that also hands a loss to the federal labor agency that sued the company earlier this year.

    The ruling came in a court case brought by the National Labor Relations Board, which sued Amazon in March seeking the reinstatement of a fired employee who was involved in organizing a company warehouse on Staten Island, New York.

    In its lawsuit, the agency argued Amazon’s termination of the former employee, Gerald Bryson, was unlawful and would have a chilling effect on organizing. It said that not reinstating Bryson to his role would make workers think the agency would not be able to protect their labor rights under federal law.

    On Friday, U.S. District Judge Diane Gujarati ruled there was “reasonable cause” to believe the e-commerce giant committed an unfair labor practice by firing Bryson. She issued a cease-and-desist order directing the Seattle-based company to not retaliate against employees involved in workplace activism.

    But Gujarati denied the agency’s request to reinstate Bryson. She determined that the NLRB did not present evidence that Bryson’s termination is having considerable effect on organizing efforts by employees or the Amazon Labor Union, the nascent group in connection to Bryson that ultimately pulled off the first-ever labor win at an Amazon warehouse in the U.S. in March.

    In her ruling, Gujarati also noted Bryson was fired before the union was formed, which makes it different from other cases where a slowdown of organizing support was shown after the firing of a union activist.

    Bryson was fired in April 2020, weeks after participating in a protest over working conditions during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. While off the job during a second protest, he got into a dispute with another employee. Amazon did its own investigation into the dispute and cited a violation of the company’s vulgar-language policy for terminating Bryson. The company denies the firing was connected to organizing activities.

    Shortly after Bryson was fired, he filed a complaint with the NLRB. An administrative law judge concluded earlier this year the company pursued a “skewed investigation” into the dispute designed to blame Bryson. Amazon has said it would appeal that ruling in the NLRB’s own administrative process. Friday’s court ruling came from a separate federal case filed by the agency, which doesn’t have enforcement powers.

    On Friday, Gujarati ordered Amazon to post English and Spanish copies of the court order at the Staten Island facility that voted to unionize. She also ordered the company distribute electronic copies to employees and hold a mandatory meeting where the order can be read aloud.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Apple workers in Oklahoma vote to unionize in 2nd labor win

    Apple workers in Oklahoma vote to unionize in 2nd labor win

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Workers at an Apple store in Oklahoma City voted to unionize, marking the second unionized Apple store in the U.S. in a matter of months, according to the federal labor board.

    The vote on Friday signaled another win for the labor movement, which has been gaining momentum since the pandemic.

    Fifty-six workers at the store, located at Oklahoma City’s Penn Square Mall, voted to be represented by The Communications Workers of America, while 32 voted against it, according to a preliminary tally by National Labor Relations Board. The approximate number of eligible voters was 95, the board said.

    The labor board said Friday that both parties have five business days to file objections to the election. If no objections are filed, the results will be certified, and the employer must begin bargaining in good faith with the union.

    The union victory follows a vote to unionize an Apple store in Towson, Maryland, in June. That effort was spearheaded by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers in Maryland, which is preparing to begin formal negotiations.

    In a statement emailed to The Associated Press on Saturday, Apple said, “We believe the open, direct and collaborative relationship we have with our valued team members is the best way to provide an excellent experience for our customers, and for our teams.”

    Apple also cited “strong compensation and exceptional benefits,” and noted that since 2018, it has increased starting rates in the U.S. by 45% and made significant improvements in other benefits, including new educational and family support programs.

    The Communications Workers of America could not be immediately reached for comment.

    Worker discontent has invigorated the labor movements at several major companies in the U.S. in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which triggered tensions over sick leave policies, scheduling, and other issues.

    In a surprise victory, Amazon workers at a Staten Island warehouse voted in favor of unionizing in April, though similar efforts at other warehouses so far have been unsuccessful. Voting for an Amazon facility near Albany, New York, began on Wednesday and is expected go through Monday. Well over 200 U.S. Starbucks stores have voted to unionize over the past year, according to the NLRB.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Apple workers in Oklahoma vote to unionize in 2nd labor win

    Apple workers in Oklahoma vote to unionize in 2nd labor win

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Workers at an Apple store in Oklahoma City voted to unionize, marking the second unionized Apple store in the U.S. in a matter of months, according to the federal labor board.

    The vote on Friday signaled another win for the labor movement, which has been gaining momentum since the pandemic.

    Fifty-six workers at the store, located at Oklahoma City’s Penn Square Mall, voted to be represented by The Communications Workers of America, while 32 voted against it, according to a preliminary tally by National Labor Relations Board. The approximate number of eligible voters was 95, the board said.

    The labor board said Friday that both parties have five business days to file objections to the election. If no objections are filed, the results will be certified, and the employer must begin bargaining in good faith with the union.

    The union victory follows a vote to unionize an Apple store in Towson, Maryland, in June. That effort was spearheaded by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers in Maryland, which is preparing to begin formal negotiations.

    In a statement emailed to The Associated Press on Saturday, Apple said, “We believe the open, direct and collaborative relationship we have with our valued team members is the best way to provide an excellent experience for our customers, and for our teams.”

    Apple also cited “strong compensation and exceptional benefits,” and noted that since 2018, it has increased starting rates in the U.S. by 45% and made significant improvements in other benefits, including new educational and family support programs.

    The Communications Workers of America could not be immediately reached for comment.

    Worker discontent has invigorated the labor movements at several major companies in the U.S. in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which triggered tensions over sick leave policies, scheduling, and other issues.

    In a surprise victory, Amazon workers at a Staten Island warehouse voted in favor of unionizing in April, though similar efforts at other warehouses so far have been unsuccessful. Voting for an Amazon facility near Albany, New York, began on Wednesday and is expected go through Monday. Well over 200 U.S. Starbucks stores have voted to unionize over the past year, according to the NLRB.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pay bumps coming for more farmworkers, long denied overtime

    Pay bumps coming for more farmworkers, long denied overtime

    [ad_1]

    STUYVESANT, N.Y. — Harvest season means long days for U.S. farmworkers — but usually no overtime pay. Federal law exempts farms from rules entitling most workers to 1.5 times their regular wage when they work more than 40 hours in a week.

    New York is now joining several states that have begun to change the rule.

    The state’s labor commissioner on Friday approved a recommendation to phase in a 40-hour threshold for farmworker overtime over the next decade. Right now, farmworkers in New York qualify for overtime pay only after they have worked 60 hours in a week.

    Labor Commissioner Roberta Reardon called the plan “the best path forward” for farmworker equity and success for agricultural businesses.

    Washington, Minnesota, Hawaii and Maryland have also granted forms of overtime entitlements to agricultural workers. California, an agricultural giant, this year began requiring farms to pay overtime to employees who work more than 40 hours in a week.

    The changes have excited workers, who say they sorely need the extra money, but alarmed some farm owners, who say extra labor costs could wipe out thin profits.

    Some labor movement advocates fear workers’ hours will be capped.

    That’s what Elisabeth Morales says happened at the grape vineyard where she works in California’s Central Valley. After the state’s overtime rules changed, the vineyard cut her hours to no more than 40 per week, and hired more laborers so it could get needed work done without having to pay overtime.

    Morales, a mother of four, said she had to take on a second job at McDonald’s to supplement her wages at the vineyard, which are $15 per hour for tasks like weeding plus 40 cents for every box of grapes she picks.

    “I would prefer to work the extra hours even though they don’t pay us overtime,” Morales, 43, said in Spanish.

    There isn’t much national data yet to say for sure whether lowering the overtime threshold will be as bad for farms’ bottom line as agribusiness predicts, or as good for workers as the labor movement hopes.

    Farm workers were excluded from overtime pay in the federal 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, and some labor advocates say its a legacy of Jim Crow.

    The overtime rule change is aimed at people like Doroteo, a farmhand at a Long Island vineyard who works almost 60 hours a week during harvest season, supplementing his pay with landscaping jobs on the side.

    Doroteo prunes and weeds crops for $15 an hour. His pay peaks at $800 a week in the summer, when the most work needs to be done. He makes less in the fall, making it tougher to send money to his three children in Guatemala. He asked that his last name not be published because of worries he might be fired for talking about his job.

    But farm owners say agriculture has been exempt from overtime rules for a reason.

    “There has to be some common sense about what people expect when they go to work on a farm, and that it’s quite unique from other areas of work. It’s not something that can be done 40 hours a week and have weekends off,” said Nate Chittenden, the owner of a midsize dairy farm in Stuyvesant, New York.

    Besides members of his family, his farm has 10 full-time employees.

    “No farm wants to see people taken advantage of. We value people working on our farms. We want to provide for them a living while they work on our farm,” said Chittenden.

    New York state government created a tax credit intended to defray the cost of overtime for farm employers, which Chittenden said would help somewhat.

    In Washington state, this year saw the first harvest where farm workers could qualify for overtime pay after 55 hours worked. That threshold will drop in a phase-in that will make workers eligible for overtime after 40 hours worked by 2024.

    In California, as more workers became eligible for overtime, some farms have switched to less labor-intensive crops like walnuts and almonds, which can be harvested efficiently using man-operated equipment, said Brian Little, the director of employment policy at the California Farm Bureau, which represents farmers.

    He also said some growers are moving towards machines, rather than people, to do things like prune trees.

    “It can run for hours. It doesn’t care if it’s 95 degrees outside. It doesn’t take a lunch break, and it doesn’t care if it’s working nine and a half hours in a workday,” Little said.

    ———

    Maysoon Khan is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Maysoon Khan on Twitter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link