Yesterday, Travis Kalanick resigned from his post as chief executive at Uber following a series of scandals concerning the company’s workplace culture and legal problems. Earlier on Tuesday, a group of investors insisted Kalanick step down in a joint letter. Kalanick will continue to serve on Uber’s board. Read more here.
The White House announced that President Trump will nominate Marvin Kaplan to the National Labor Relations Board. Kaplan currently serves as independent counsel at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. Previously, he served as counsel on the Republican staff of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. With two vacancies at the Board and Democrats controlling two of the three filled seats, this announcement puts President Trump on the path to creating a Republican majority at the NLRB. A Republican controlled Board could rollback many Obama era decisions. President Trump will also nominate Patrick Pizzella to fill the role of Deputy Secretary at the Department of Labor.
In international news, the New York Times reported that Laurent Berger, the leader of the French Democratic Confederation of Labor, might be willing to work with the French government to update the country’s labor code. Berger suggests that President Emmanuel Macron’s victory may provide an opportunity for reform. Macron has championed “flexible security,” an economic model originating in Denmark. The system aims to foster agreement between management and labor and reduce unemployment. While some of Macron’s proposed reforms are likely to face stiff opposition from unions, Berger’s belief that “‘in a globalized world, the economy must be able to adjust” provides hope for the reform effort. Read more here. Continue reading
The Department of Labor has taken formal steps towards repealing the ‘persuader rule,’ a regulation that has been in full effect for less than a year. As we summarized last May, the persuader rule was the Obama Department of Labor’s attempt to plug a loophole in the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act: it extends reporting requirements to management consultants who are involved in anti-union campaigns but don’t have direct contact with employees.
President Trump released his proposed budget on Tuesday, and analyses continue to emerge. Sharon Block argues in Democracy Journal that proposed allocations for the National Labor Relations Board and the Office of Labor-Management Standards confirm President Trump’s anti-union stance. The New York Times observes that the proposed budget–and the Trump Administration more generally–see unemployment as the result of choice. This explains the budget’s cuts to public benefits and limited appropriations for support and job training. We recapped early coverage yesterday.
Emmanuel Macron won the French presidency on a platform emphasizing pro-business reforms to the labor market. Now, he is trying to deliver. His proposal would make it easier to hire and fire workers and would replace sector-wide negotiation with company-wide negotiation. Employers are urging speed while union leaders have called for slower consideration. Reuters notes that France’s private sector has grown quickly since Macron’s election, with companies attributing that growth to optimism associated with his victory.
“The big divide in America is not between the coasts and the interior. It’s between strong communities and weak communities.” The New York Times’ Thomas Friedman makes this pronouncement in a travelogue-style op-ed about three communities in middle America. Friedman visited towns and cities in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Indiana and found three main sources of optimism: forward-thinking local governments, collaboration between business and educational institutions, and the potential for emerging technologies like 3D printers to decentralize manufacturing.
Companies in Utah are struggling to find workers to fill job openings thereby slowing economic growth. While companies are eager to hire more workers to meet increased demand, Utah’s unemployment rate of 3.1% means there are relatively few workers looking for jobs. Companies have begun raising wages to attract more workers; however, automation may also increase as a means to substitute for labor.
Connecticut Governor Daniel Malloy is trying to balance the budget with budget cuts and public-sector layoffs; however, the Service Employees International Union Local 1199 is airing an ad opposing this. The Union’s ad argues that rather than cutting services to the disabled or laying-off middle class workers, the Governor should consider higher taxes on the wealthy.
The Economic Policy Institute released a report finding that annually 2.4 million U.S. workers lose $8 billion because of minimum wage violations. Women, people of color, and youth are the most likely to report being paid less than the minimum wage. Although the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division investigates such violations, the report’s authors note that it has limited staff and is thus unable to fully examine all minimum wage violations.
Michelle Russell with BCG and Lori Lepler with BRANDspeak have a piece in the Harvard Business Review explaining the importance of high-quality apprenticeship programs. They find that such programs led to a 22-percentage-point rise in promotions of female workers, a 5-percentage-point decline in attrition of female workers, and a 20-percentage point-rise in job satisfaction for female employees.
The Supreme Court will soon be presented with the opportunity to decide whether unions can constitutionally charge non-members “fair share” fees. According to Bloomberg BNA, “the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation intends by the end of May to file a petition asking the high court to review a Seventh Circuit decision dismissing a lawsuit by two Illinois government workers who challenged the fees on First Amendment grounds.” The Supreme Court heard a similar challenge in 2016, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, but ultimately ruled 4-4 following the death of Justice Scalia, thus affirming a lower court decision finding that public-sector unions may continue to collect “fair share” fees from nonmembers. The Seventh Circuit similarly upheld such fees in the case at issue now.
Using colorful language about a boss does not deprive a worker of the protections of the National Labor Relations Act, according to the Second Circuit. Consumerist reports that the Second Circuit found that the operator of restaurants at New York’s Chelsea Piers illegally terminated a worker in retaliation for engaging in protected activity when, two days before a unionization vote, the worker posted a colorful Facebook post about his boss in urging support for unionization. The Second Circuit concluded that “the NLRB could reasonably determine that the server’s “outburst was not an idiosyncratic reaction to a manager’s request but part of a tense debate over managerial mistreatment in the period before the representation election.”
America’s male-dominated industries want to diversity. Per the Chicago Tribune, the “Iron Workers union this month leaped to the cutting edge of the effort, becoming the first building trades union to offer up to eight months of paid maternity leave to pregnant women and new moms” despite only 2 percent of union members being women. The union and other traditionally male-dominated employers are driven to recruit women by the aging of baby boomers, a decline in enrollment in vocational education, and other factors.
Why don’t all jobs matter? The provocative question is posed by Paul Krugman in today’s New York Times. Krugman questions why so much focus is on mining and manufacturing jobs, when the service sector—a much bigger slice of the economy—is dwindling. He points to several possible reasons, though complicates them all: the importance of mining jobs to local economies, the “political footballs” they have become, and the fact that miners and manufacturers tend to be white and male. Krugman ultimately concludes that saving jobs that are being lost may not be the smartest tack; instead, we should be investing in reeducation and guaranteeing benefits like health care.
Dylan Matthews of Vox summarizes a number of ideas—inspired largely by Europe—for how to save unions. First, unions could be organized on the sector level instead of on the company level, so all workers in a particular industry are affected. With less cross-company labor competition, the argument goes, businesses will be less union-averse. But how do you avoid the “free rider” problem, where, as in France, nearly every worker is covered by a collective bargaining agreement but fewer than 10% of workers are actually in unions? Some countries, like Denmark and Finland, have systems where unions run unemployment insurance, increasing the contact between the labor organizations and possible members. As Professor Sachs notes in the piece, however, such a change might be very tough during the Trump years.
Fast Company Co.Design covers a recent report by the Center for Business and Human Rights at NYU Stern School of Business on migrant workers. The report highlights how many of these workers end up paying to work: agents and recruiters require trumped-up fees and many workers end up dishing out extra for airline tickets and other documents. As the piece notes, “When you finally get to work, you might already owe a year’s worth of wages.”
Minors in Texas may soon need parental approval to join a labor union. According to the Texas Tribune, “minors in the state may be required to obtain parental approval before they can join a labor union under a proposal the Texas Senate tentatively approved along party lines Monday.” The legislator who introduced the bill “said she filed the measure in response to concerns from a constituent whose daughter ‘was persuaded to join a union without fully understanding’ the terms of agreement.” For their part, “some union leaders argue the bill would target minors employed by grocery stores while unfairly limiting their freedom and opportunity in the workplace.”
Voters in Missouri may be deprived the opportunity to vote on the state’s right-to-work legislation, if a lawsuit is successful. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that “supporters of Missouri’s new ‘right to work’ law have filed another lawsuit seeking to scuttle an attempt by labor officials to put the issue before voters for an up-or-down vote.” Labor leaders “want to give voters the chance to weigh in on the issue after it was pushed quickly through the GOP-controlled Legislature this year and signed into law by Republican Gov. Eric Greitens.” The law is set to go into effect on August 28. Missouri residents “can call a referendum on a new law by collecting signatures totaling 5 percent of voters from two-thirds of the state’s congressional districts.”
The Fight for $15 has been incredibly successful – but not in Baltimore. Vox explores why the effort to raise the minimum wage in Baltimore to $15 an hour fell apart, noting the city’s financial problems and fear of ensuing job loss.
Jake Rosenfeld is Associate Professor of Sociology at Washington University-St. Louis and an OnLabor Senior Contributor. Patrick Denice is a postdoctoral researcher in the sociology department at Washington University in St. Louis. He received his Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Washington (Seattle) in 2016. His research examines stratification in education and the labor market.
A spate of labor-related election postmortems converged on one key theme: Donald Trump managed to cleave significant union support away from the Democrats. “Donald Trump Got Reagan-Like Support from Union Households,” ran one typical headline; “It Looks Like Donald Trump Did Really Well With Union Households,” declared another. But what if these prognoses have it wrong? Could it be that instead of Trump’s unique appeal to union household voters, the election results really suggest sagging enthusiasm among union households for the Democratic candidate?
It is true that the Democratic-Republican vote split among union households was narrower in 2016 than in any time since, well, Ronald Reagan’s re-election. In 2016, exit polls indicate that voters in union households supported the Democratic over the Republican candidate by only 8 points. In 2012, by contrast, the Democratic advantage among members of union households was a yawning 18 points. And 2016’s gap looks positively miniscule compared to the Democratic vote advantage among union households Bill Clinton enjoyed. In 1992, exit polls suggest that members of union households preferred Clinton to George H.W. Bush by over 30 points.
Below we display exit poll results from every presidential race dating back to Ronald Reagan’s defeat of Jimmy Carter in 1980. The figure shows the Democratic candidate advantage over the Republican candidate in the union household vote. In Reagan’s first victory, there was hardly any Democratic advantage: In 1980, Reagan managed 45% of the union household vote, compared to 48% for Jimmy Carter (the rest went largely to the 3rd party candidate in that race, John Anderson).
Based on this figure alone it sure appears that the postmortems have it right. In 2016 the partisan split among union households was smaller than at any time since Ronald Reagan’s re-election in 1984.
But there is another way of investigating the issue. Continue reading