The Paycheck Fairness Act, introduced by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and approved by the House in January 2009, would have strengthened the Equal Pay Act and closed loopholes that allow many employers to avoid responsibility for discriminatory pay. Today, it received only 58 of the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster with all Senate Republicans voting to block the bill from being considered.

“Senate Republicans dealt a blow to all working mothers, wives, and daughters today by blocking a bill to help women win equal pay for equal work. Because of loopholes in current law, women who are paid less than men doing the same work don’t have the same rights to bring employers to justice as with other forms of discrimination,” said Miller. “It is outrageous that Senate Republicans continue to allow women to be treated as second-class citizens.”

“Wage discrimination against women continues to be a persistent problem, and it is deeply frustrating that a partisan minority has prevented this important bill from coming to debate and vote,” said Woolsey.  

Specifically, the Paycheck Fairness Act would:

•    Require that employers seeking to justify unequal pay bear the burden of proving that its actions are job-related and consistent with a business necessity;
•    Prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who share salary information with their co-workers;
•    Put gender-based equal pay discrimination sanctions on the same footing as other forms of discrimination – such as race or disability – by allowing women to sue for compensatory and punitive damages;
•    Require the Department of Labor to enhance outreach and training efforts to work with employers in order to eliminate pay disparities;
•    Require the Department of Labor to continue to collect and disseminate wage information based on gender; and
•    Create a new grant program to help strengthen the negotiation skills of girls and women.

The GAO found that for the last two decades, the Labor Department has not provided adequate management attention to the whistleblower program. The independent watchdog agency said the program’s training for investigators and their supervisors is inconsistent from region to region, that internal controls are lacking to monitor compliance with policies and procedures, and that few of the GAO’s previous recommendations from 2009 have been implemented.

The GAO also noted that despite an increased workload over the years, the number of inspectors has remained relatively flat, and urged the program establish a separate budget for the whistleblower program. In fiscal year 2009 more than 2,100 whistleblower complaints were filed with OSHA.  Congress provided the Labor Department with funds for 25 additional whistleblower investigators in fiscal year 2010 to deal with a growing caseload.

In hearings in both the House and Senate on a number of recent workplace tragedies – such as the Upper Big Branch mine, the Tesoro refinery explosion and the BP Deepwater Horizon explosion – Congress heard  how workers’ voices were routinely silenced from speaking up on significant problems for fear of job loss. Witnesses said that increased whistleblower protections might have prevented some or all of these tragedies.

“As we have seen all too often, workers pay the tragic price when companies retaliate against workers who raise legitimate safety concerns. Strong and effective whistleblower protections are essential to ensuring a safe workplace since safety regulators can’t be on every jobsite,” said Rep. Miller, chair of the House Education and Labor Committee. “At the same time, I will continue to work with my colleagues and the Secretary of Labor to modernize anti-retaliation protections as part of the Robert C. Byrd Miner Safety and Health Act.”

“Workers are the first line of defense against dangerous working conditions,” said Sen. Harkin, chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.  “We have an obligation to protect those who courageously risk their careers to protect the safety of others.  In light of the GAO’s findings, OSHA should take swift action to remedy the problems in this important program.  Even with these steps, however, many whistleblower laws remain inadequate. I’m committed to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to strengthen them so all of America’s workers are fully protected.”  

“No worker should ever be discouraged from reporting a potentially dangerous situation in the workplace to an employer or an oversight agency for fear of retaliation,” said Sen. Murray, chair of the Senate HELP Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety.  “We are working closely with our Republican colleagues to bring about some critically needed improvements to worker protection laws, including the need to update the OSHAct’s whistleblower programs. And it is our goal to work together on a bi-partisan bill to protect all of America’s workers.”

“We look forward to working with the Department of Labor to address the shortcomings in the Whistleblower Protection Program outlined in this report,” said Rep. Woolsey, chair of the House’s Workforce Protections Subcommittee. “We will, however, continue to exercise rigorous oversight and will act if the department fails to do so.”

Both the House and Senate are currently working on legislation to ensure that workers have a voice on the job by strengthening out-of-date whistleblower laws. Among other provisions, the Robert C. Byrd Mine Safety and Health Act would modernize 40-year-old anti-retaliation provisions in the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act, which is the oldest and least protective out of the 19-whistleblower laws administered by the Department of Labor.

More information on the Robert C. Byrd Mine Safety and Health Act

“Labor Day is a time to reflect on the achievements of the American worker and our nation’s commitment to helping all families pursue the American Dream.

“As today’s jobs numbers show, while there are hopeful signs on this Labor Day, it remains a difficult time for many families, especially for millions still looking for a job. The 111th Congress and Obama administration have made great progress in turning our economy around, but more must be done to create jobs. This is not the time to turn back.

“The economic policies of the past that led to stagnating wages, rising inequality and eroding rights at work were not just bad for workers, but these policies were disastrous for the entire economy.  The lesson of the Great Recession is that when you turn your back on working people and weaken America’s middle class, you undermine economic growth. We must not turn back to the reckless policies that brought us economic catastrophe. American workers deserve better.  

“On this Labor Day, we continue our commitment to all workers who contribute to the nation’s success by pushing for good jobs with fair pay, decent retirement, safe working conditions, and dignity and rights on the job. When American workers are allowed to share in the prosperity they help create, they rebuild the middle class and our country’s economy.”

***

BACKGROUND
Here are just some of the accomplishments made on behalf of American workers by the 111th Congress and Obama administration:

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (enacted January 29, 2009)
The first major piece of legislation signed by President Obama, ensured that women and other workers who receive discriminatory pay have access to a remedy. The new law reversed the May 2007 Supreme Court decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear and restored prior law which treated each discriminatory paycheck received by a worker as a violation of the Civil Rights Act. As long as workers file their charges within 180 days of a discriminatory paycheck, their claims for a remedy would be considered timely.

Affordable Care Act (reforms enacted March 23 and March 30, 2010)
The reforms signed into law will protect Americans from the worst insurance company practices, offer the uninsured and small businesses the opportunity to obtain affordable health care plans and cover 32 million uninsured Americans, all while reducing the deficit by $143 billion over the next decade and more than a trillion dollars over 20 years.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (enacted February 17, 2009)
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has begun to rebuild our economy by creating or saving 3 to 4 million jobs – including hundreds of thousands of jobs in the education sector – and provide workers with the training and skills they need to succeed in green and other emerging industries. In addition to creating jobs in other sectors of our economy, education investments in the legislation will save or boost job growth well into the future.

Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (enacted March 30, 2010)
The law, which saves taxpayers $61 billion over  10 years by switching to the more efficient Direct Loan program, will help America reach President Obama’s goal of producing the most college graduates by 2020 by making college more accessible and transforming the way our student loan programs operate. It will strengthen community colleges and training programs to help build a highly skilled, innovative, 21st century workforce ready for the global economy.

Education Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act (enacted August 10, 2010)
The law will help save 161,000 teacher jobs and will discourage American corporations from shipping jobs overseas. The measure includes $10 billion to save teacher jobs and $16.1 billion in health assistance to the states. The funding will also keep police officers and firefighters on the job, at no cost to taxpayers.

Increase the Minimum Wage (July 24, 2009)
The national minimum wage increased by 70 cents per hour – from $6.55 per hour to $7.25 per hour – the final of three increases to take effect under legislation enacted by the Democratic Congress.  This last increase gave 4.5 million workers a badly needed boost in their pay.

401(k) Fair Disclosure for Retirement Security Act (language approved by the House May 28, 2010)
Passed by the House as part of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, 401(k) fee disclosure will help workers secure their retirement by helping them to shop around for the best retirement options by requiring simple fee disclosure on the investment options contained in their employer’s 401(k) plan.

Robert C. Byrd Miner Safety and Health Act (approved by the Education and Labor Committee on July 21, 2010)
The bill would provide stronger tools to ensure that underground coal mine operations with troubling safety records improve conditions, empower workers to speak up about safety concerns and give the Department of Labor the tools it needs to ensure that all workers go home safely at the end of the day. The bill would also extend similar worker protections to all workplaces in order to hold employers accountable if they knowingly put their workers in danger.

Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2010 (enacted July 22, 2010)
The legislation restored unemployment benefits to an estimated 2.5 million to the long-term unemployed whose benefits ended.

Offshore Oil and Gas Worker Whistleblower Protection Act  (approved by the House on July 30, 2010)
On a strong bipartisan vote of 315 to 93, the legislation will extend modern whistleblower protections to workers whose employers are engaged in oil and gas exploration, drilling, production, or cleanup on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Currently, individuals working on the OCS have no protection against retaliation by an employer for speaking up on hazardous conditions.

Strengthening Employment Clusters to Organize Regional Success Act (approved by the House on July 19, 2010)
The bill will help address local skills shortages by bringing employers in key industries together with education, labor, workforce, and other groups to identify and provide training tailored to meet the sector needs of that region’s economy

Affordable Health Care Coverage for Laid-off Workers (enacted as part of the Recovery Act)
A provision in the Recovery Act has helped millions of laid off workers in this recession with the cost of their health insurance coverage.   

Protecting Workers’ Wages (announced March 25, 2009)
As a result of increased funding in the Recovery Act, the Department of Labor announced that the agency plans on hiring 250 investigators for its Wage and Hour Division. A Government Accountability Office investigation found many investigations of wage theft, in which workers are not paid minimum wages or not paid at all, were inadequately handled by the Bush administration’s Wage and Hour Division, which had been starved of staff and resources.

Withdrawing Last-Minute Bush Proposal to Weaken Worker Health & Safety Protections (Announced May 15, 2009)
The Department of Labor announced that they will withdraw a Bush era proposal that would have dramatically weakened future workplace health and safety regulations and slow their enactment. The Washington Post reported that a proposal being developed by Bush political appointees in secret with little consultation with career agency health and safety experts would have added additional red tape to an already slow regulatory process.

Restore Workers’ Rights in Federal Contracts (Jan. 30, 2009)
President Obama overturned three Bush administration executive orders and reaffirmed that the interests of hard working Americans will not take a back seat to corporations and CEOs. Overturning these three Bush-era orders is an important step to restore a rational balance regarding the rights of employees in the workplace.

“Today’s announcement is a positive step forward and shows that the Obama administration is taking anti-labor union violence in Guatemala more seriously. I thank the AFL-CIO for initiating the complaint, and Secretary Solis and Trade Representative Kirk for taking this important action,” said Miller. “While Guatemala made significant strides to eliminate anti-labor killings leading up to CAFTA’s ratification, I have been concerned with the increased violence in the country since the treaty’s adoption. This action helps American workers by ensuring that our nation’s trading partners live up to their promises. It is unfortunate that we have to go back and correct fundamental problems that were supposed to have been resolved when this treaty was signed. That’s why future agreements must ensure that commitments on labor rights are visible, verifiable and enforceable.”

After Colombia, Guatemala is considered the second-most dangerous country in the world in terms of assassination of union leaders. Members of Congress raised serious concerns with the Bush administration and urged it to take action to address the rising violence against labor activists.

“With tonight’s vote, the House acted on behalf of American workers, teachers and students across the nation who have suffered in the recent economic downturn.

“The bill helps to close a multi-billion dollar shortfall in the Pell Grant program that could have deterred many low-income students from attending college, and allocates $10 billion in emergency spending to save hundreds of thousands of teachers from losing their jobs due to local budget shortfalls. This vote will ensure our teachers remain in the classrooms and our students don’t lose a year of learning.  We will not allow our children’s education to become a casualty of the state of the economy.

“Additionally, tonight’s vote represents a significant victory for America’s workers by providing additional funding for mine safety enforcement cases to help workers safe, and provides our communities’ first responders basic collective bargaining rights so they can keep our communities safe and strong.

“These are responsible, targeted investments that will create and secure jobs, and keep our promise to our nation’s children.

More information on provisions of H.R. 4899:

•    Education Jobs: The 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act creates a $10 billion Education Jobs fund to provide emergency support to school districts to prevent layoffs and keep 140,000 school employees on the job next year. The Department of Education will administer the fund and distribute the money to states through a formula based on total population and school age population. States will distribute the funds to school districts through their primary funding formula or through the Title I formula. The bill includes strict provisions that requires states to use this funding only to preserve, rehire or hire new employees in elementary and secondary education. The money can’t be used to supplant state education spending.

•    Pell Grants: The 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act invests $4.95 billion, fully offset, to address the current year shortfall in the Pell Grant Program. In the last academic year, more than 8 million students received Pell grants.

•    Miner Safety and Review Commission Backlog: The 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act would provide a $22 million down payment to reduce the backlog of mine safety enforcement cases and to ensure that there are sufficient resources for the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration to meet all of its legally mandated mine inspection requirements. In February, the committee found that a flood of mine owner appeals is undermining efforts to protect miners by delaying tougher sanctions. A dangerous mine cannot face tougher penalties or increased scrutiny by MSHA unless citations are fully adjudicated. Because of this backlog of appeals, cases now take several months or years to be resolved.

•    Public Safety Personnel Collective Bargaining: It will guarantee collective bargaining rights for first responders employed by states and localities. States would administer and enforce their own labor laws, while the Federal Labor Relations Authority would only step in where such laws do not exist or do not meet minimum standards. The language prohibits public safety officers from engaging in a lockout, sickout, work slowdown, strike, or any other organized job action that will disrupt the delivery of emergency services.

 “We see the consequences of mine operators that game the system in order to push production. Safety is compromised and miners die,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “Too many families have suffered a great loss recently as the result of callous mine operators, ineffective protections and outdated laws. It is time to provide effective protections to ensure that every miner is be able to return home safely to their families at the end of their shift. Congress has an obligation to make sure that is the case.”

In May, the House Education and Labor Committee heard testimony in Beckley, West Virginia from miners and families of those who died in the Upper Big Branch Mine about serious shortcomings in miner protections, including threats and intimidation of miners who brought up safety concerns to their bosses.

“In this year when so many miners and others have lost their lives in workplace accidents, it is more important than ever to extend protections to those brave miners and workers who want to speak out about unsafe conditions,”  said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), chair of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee. “This bill will save lives in a number of ways, but none more important than by strengthening whistleblower and other worker protection provisions.”

The Upper Big Branch explosion also highlighted serious flaws in existing laws that undermines MSHA’s ability to bring tougher sanctions against our nation’s most dangerous mines. The bill would revamp the criteria for ‘pattern of violations’ sanctions to ensure that dangerous mine operations fix chronic problems. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) would have authority to close down the mine once a ‘pattern of violations’ status is triggered, and in order to reopen, mine operators have to comply with a remediation plan and be subject to more mine inspections and additional reporting requirements.

Responding to a number of recent deadly explosions at refineries, power plants and food processing facilities, the bill would also extend similar worker protections to all workplaces in order to hold employers accountable if they knowingly put their workers in danger.

Among other provisions, the reforms outlined include:
•    Making Mines with Serious and Repeated Violations Safe – Criteria for ‘pattern of violations’ sanctions would be revamped to ensure that the nation’s most dangerous mine operations improve safety dramatically.
•    Ensuring Irresponsible Operators are Held Accountable – Maximum criminal and civil penalties would be increased and operators would be required to pay penalties in a timely manner.
•    Giving MSHA Better Enforcement Tools – MSHA would be given the authority to subpoena documents and testimony. The agency could seek a court order to close a mine when there is a continuing threat to the health and safety of miners. MSHA could require more training of miners in unsafe mines.
•    Protecting Miners Who Speak out on Unsafe Conditions – Protections for workers who speak out about unsafe conditions would be strengthened and would guarantee that miners wouldn’t lose pay for safety-related closures. The bill would provide underground coal miners with protections from dismissal unless the employer has just cause. In addition, miners would receive protections allowing them to speak freely during investigations.  
•    Modernizing Safety Requirements in Coal Mines – Increased rock dusting would be required to prevent coal dust explosions. Pre-shift reviews of hazards and violations in the mine must be communicated to incoming miners to ensure that they are not caught unaware.  Protocols for continuous atmospheric monitoring for methane and carbon monoxide will be developed by NIOSH and adopted by MSHA through regulations.
•    Increasing MSHA’s Accountability – The legislative outline provides for an independent investigation of the most serious accidents.  It would require that mine personnel are well qualified, and ensure that inspections are comprehensive and well targeted.
•    Guaranteeing Basic Protections in All Other Workplaces – To ensure that all workplaces have basic protections, whistleblower protections would be strengthened, criminal and civil penalties would be increased, and hazard abatement would be sped up. In addition, victims of accidents and their family members would be provided greater rights during investigations and enforcement actions.

More information on these reforms

“Last month, we watched as the tragic events unfolded at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia. The memory of the 29 miners who lost their lives in that disaster must stand as a reminder of the work that remains to keep our nation’s miners safe,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chair of the committee. “In the wake of the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster and other tragedies, I am deeply concerned about how various coal mining conglomerates have encouraged or discouraged safe mining practices within their mines.”

The committee has standing authority to subpoena documentary evidence and to compel witnesses to appear at committee hearings. A deposition serves as an intermediate step between a full public hearing and an informal staff interview. It creates a formal record and allows the committee to explore issues in a more sustained manner than would be practical at a hearing.

While not unprecedented, the granting of deposition authority is rare. It has been granted to the committee once before, during the Crandall Canyon Mine investigation in the 110th Congress. That investigation led to a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, in large part because of evidence obtained in depositions.

The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, introduced in October 2009, would restore vital workplace protections under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 to what they were before the Gross v. FBL Financial Supreme Court decision. The 5 to 4 ruling has resulted in victims of age discrimination facing a higher legal burden of proof than those alleging race, sex, national origin or religious discrimination.

“Today we heard testimony calling on Congress to reject the Supreme Court’s misguided decision in the Gross case and restore justice for American workers of all ages,” said U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, chair of the subcommittee. “Older workers, who are already struggling enough to keep their jobs in this economy, deserve the same protections as those discriminated against on the basis of race, ethnicity or religion. The Supreme Court turned decades of well-established law on its head when it held that age discrimination is permissible if it is merely a motivating factor in an adverse employment decision. H.R. 3721 prevents claims like Mr. Gross’ from being dismissed based on sheer semantics  and guarantees that all legitimate victims of age discrimination will not be shut out of the courthouse.”

In 2003, Jack Gross was demoted by FBL Financial with lower pay and his duties were reassigned to a younger colleague. Gross claimed that the demotion was because of his age. A jury agreed that the company unlawfully demoted him and awarded him $46,945 in back pay. However, an appeals court overturned the verdict, which was reaffirmed in a June 2009 Supreme Court decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas.

 “The court essentially hijacked my case and used it as a vehicle to water down the ADEA, a law written by the branch of government closest to the people,” said Gross. “Editorials and bloggers dubbed me this year’s Lilly Ledbetter. I take that as a compliment.”

Last year, President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which overturned a 2007 Supreme Court decision that severely restricted the rights of employees to challenge unlawful pay discrimination based on gender.  

In Gross’s case, a narrow Supreme Court majority said that it was not enough to show that age was a motivating factor of the employer’s discriminatory action, but a plaintiff must show that age was the ‘but-for’ reason to win a case. The new standard made it more difficult for older workers to hold employers accountable than those alleging race, sex, national origin or religious discrimination. In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority of the court had “engaged in unnecessary lawmaking.”

“[The Supreme Court decision] undermined Congress’s legislative intent and immediately impacted older workers, relegating them to second-class status among victims of discrimination,” said Michael Foreman, director of the civil rights appellate clinic at Penn State’s Dickenson School of Law. “Congress should take positive steps to ensure that our civil rights and employment laws protect all American workers.”

Witnesses testified that these protections are especially important for older workers because they often face an uphill battle of holding onto jobs in a struggling economy and can have a harder time finding new employment opportunities – often at lower pay than their previous jobs.

“Once out of work, older job seekers face a prolonged and often discouraging job search,” said Gail Aldrich, member of the board of directors of the AARP. “Once out of work, older persons are more likely than the younger unemployed to stop looking for work and drop out of the labor force.  If they do find work, they are more likely than younger job finders to earn less than they did in their previous employment.”

More information on the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act

“In the name of tens of thousands of miners and their families who put their lives on the line every day, we call on mine operators to make the safety and health of their workers their top priority,” the lawmakers wrote. “In the coming weeks Congress will be working on reforms to the Mine Act to close enforcement loopholes, strengthen MSHA’s oversight and provide more federal resources to close the growing backlog of citation appeals.  We urge the mining industry to drop its historic record of opposing critical mine safety improvements and instead work with Congress and the Obama Administration to pass overdue reforms.”

This afternoon two miners were reported dead after becoming trapped last night after a roof collapse at Alliance Coal’s Dotiki Mine in Kentucky.

The full text of their letter appears below:
 
***

April 29, 2010

Open Letter to the Nation’s Mine Owners:

During the past month our nation has witnessed four mine tragedies, including the Upper Big Branch mine explosion, which killed 29 miners, the death of one miner at the Beckley Pocahontas Mine, the death of a contract worker at M-Class Mining, and two deaths at the Dotiki Mine today.  Sadly, each of these tragedies was preventable.

In the name of tens of thousands of miners and their families who put their lives on the line every day, we call on mine operators to make the safety and health of their workers their top priority.

In addition to these recent tragedies, the number of mine citations for serious violations has skyrocketed, revealing a dangerous pattern of neglect and failure of commitment by too many operators to comply with the nation’s mine safety laws. Spot inspections just completed by the Mine Safety and Health Administration at 57 coal mines found 1,436 violations and resulted in a staggering 105 closure orders.

The government does not have sufficient resources to be at every mine every day.  Mine operators must take responsibility for ensuring the safety of their employees.    

Today, we call on all of the country’s mine operators to take actions and responsibility immediately to ensure their operations are actively in compliance with all mine safety laws; that adequate resources are being allocated to mine safety; and that managers and employees have full confidence that they may report dangers internally or to regulators without any fear of retaliation or penalty.  

We request that non-union mines give their employees and their families an opportunity to meet with management to suggest additional safety measures and to report dangerous or potentially dangerous conditions. We request that union mine owners do the same with their unions, and work with them to monitor and develop additional safety procedures as needed.  

We also request that each mine employee be given a card in the next three days with MSHA’s toll free number so they can confidentially report potential hazards in the event they fear retaliation.

In the coming weeks Congress will be working on reforms to the Mine Act to close enforcement loopholes, strengthen MSHA’s oversight and provide more federal resources to close the growing backlog of citation appeals.  

We urge the mining industry to drop its historic record of opposing critical mine safety improvements and instead work with Congress and the Obama Administration to pass overdue reforms.   

We look forward to hearing through the mine associations what specific actions each mine operator is taking in response to this letter.      

Sincerely,

GEORGE MILLER
Chair, House Education and Labor Committee

LYNN WOOLSEY
Chair, House Workforce Protections Subcommittee

The hearing took place on the 21st anniversary of Workers Memorial Day, which honors workers who lose their lives, become injured or develop an illness on the job each year.

“A safe workplace depends on workers reporting unsafe conditions to their employers or the government without fear of retaliation, and with the knowledge that the government will be there to back them up if the employer does retaliate,” said U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), chair of the subcommittee.

The Protecting America’s Workers Act (H.R. 2067) and proposed changes to legislation, would update workplace whistleblower protections by mirroring other modern whistleblower statutes, such as the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act. The bill would also ensure that victims and their families are kept informed about investigations of fatalities and incidents involving serious injuries or illnesses.

“I believe stronger whistleblower protections and more substantial rights for victims and their families can lead to safer jobsites and ultimately, more men and women who go safely home to their families at the end of the day,” said Jordan Barab, the deputy assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health. “This administration strongly supports the whistleblower provisions of the Protecting America’s Workers Act.”

Under the bill, a seriously injured worker or family member would have the right to meet with OSHA prior to the issuance of a citation, receive copies of a citation at no cost, be informed of any notice of contest and receive pleadings regarding appeals, and make a statement on the record before an agreement to change a citation is finalized.

On January 29, 2009, Robert Fitch died after a fall from a faulty manlift at a Lincoln, Nebraska Archer Daniel Midland pant. Although OSHA cited ADM for operating a dangerous manlift, ADM was not fined for the faulty device that resulted in the death of Fitch. Family members were not included in the investigation and only learned of the final penalty through the media.

“This piece of equipment caused my uncle’s death, and we have since been informed it was inherently unsafe and very scary to use,” said Fitch’s niece, Tonya Ford. “Nine months after hearing about the zero penalty assessed to ADM, my family still did not have answers.”

Celeste Monforton, an assistant research professor at The George Washington University’s Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, said she learned during the Sago mine explosion investigation that family members can make a significant contribution to an accident investigation.

“There is no one more interested in finding the truth about the cause of an on-the-job death than a worker’s loved one,” Monforton testified.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act is also supposed to protect workers who raise concerns with their employers or to ‘blow the whistle’ by reporting unsafe practices to government agencies. However, the 1970 law lacks protections afforded to whistleblowers under modern whistleblower laws and it imposes numerous hurdles that result in many meritorious claims being dismissed.

“The reason I am here to tell my story today is that my employer got away with firing me without any consequences,” said Neal Jorgensen, a whistleblower formerly employed with Plastic Industries in Preston, Idaho. “Although OSHA investigated the facts of my case, found it was sound, and tried to collect the wages I would have earned if I had not been fired, the government lawyers decided not to go to court on my behalf to enforce the law. I found out that I could not have taken the company to court even if I could have afforded it.”

The Protecting America’s Workers Act would strengthen and modernize federal whistleblower statutes. The bill would provide subpoena powers to OSHA investigators, a critical tool in any investigative process, and establish administrative remedies for successful complainants, including preliminary, payment of back wages, and compensatory and punitive damages. It also allows workers to file a lawsuit if the Department of Labor fails to address the case in a timely manner.

“It is essential that Congress incorporate these sound and proven protections into the Occupational Safety and Health Act, so that workers who raise concerns about hazardous working conditions receive the same basic protections against retaliation as those who complain about corporate malfeasance, environmental or transportation hazards, or health care fraud,” said Lynn Rhinehart, general counsel of the AFL-CIO.

In March,  U.S. Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and George Miller (D-CA), introduced The Work-Life Balance Award Act of 2010 (H.R. 4855), legislation to recognize workplaces that provide employees the ability to achieve work-life balance.

Balancing work and family is a challenge for many, witnesses told the subcommittee.

“This legislation comes at a critical time. Women now make up half of America’s workforce, and their incomes are increasingly important to families’ economic survival, testified witness Portia Wu, vice president of the National Partnership for Women & Families. “Working men are also investing more time in child care. And many more Americans are assuming eldercare responsibilities—a trend that will intensify as our country’s population ages.”

Currently, 31 million American women struggle to balance work with the needs of their young families, explained Carol Evans, president of Working Mother Media. Evans continued, “The award proposed in the Woolsey-Miller Bill will add to the tremendous spotlight we shine on the needs of working families.”

“Workers should not have to choose between work and family,” said Woolsey, the chair of the subcommittee. “The Work-Life Balance Award will send a clear message to employers that the federal government recognizes companies that develop family-friendly policies for their workers. In fact, providing work-life benefits has been shown to increase retention, decrease absenteeism, and increase productivity.”

The Work-Life Balance Award Act would establish an annual Work-Life Balance Award at the Department of Labor to be given to employers with exemplary work-life workforce policies.  These policies would be defined as workplace practices “designed to enable employees to achieve a satisfactory work-life balance.” These practices include, but are not limited to: paid sick leave to care for oneself or a sick family member and for the birth or adoption of a child, time off to attend children’s extracurricular activities and school conferences, telecommuting, and job-sharing.  

Any public or private employer of any size is eligible for the award, as long as they comply with federal and state labor and employment laws.

“As we continue working to rebuild our economy and get every American who has lost a job back to work, we must also work to restore the promise of equal pay for equal work. Equal pay for equal work isn’t just a matter of basic fairness, but a smart strategy for economic growth: Paying women the higher incomes they have rightfully earned will boost families’ purchasing power and consumer spending. In the year 2010 there simply is no moral or economic justification for paying women less than men for doing the same job.  

“There are two steps that can finally put an end to this injustice. The Democratic Congress and the Obama administration took the first step last year by enacting the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. It’s time for the Senate to join the House in taking the second step by passing the Paycheck Fairness Act. If we’re serious about restoring the American Dream, then we have to ensure that every American who works hard for a living can earn a fair and decent wage.”

Equal Pay Day commemorates how far into the year a woman must work in order for her wages to equal those of a man in the previous year.

During the first few weeks of the 111th Congress, the House passed both the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act, but the Senate passed only the Ledbetter legislation. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act became the first major bill signed by President Obama.

Learn more about the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

Learn more about the Paycheck Fairness Act

“President Obama was right to put aside partisanship and delay to ensure the proper operations of important government functions. The National Labor Relations Board has not had a working majority since 2007 and has been unable to carry out the board’s duties. During this time, scores of cases have been awaiting adjudication. Craig Becker and Mark Pearce are extremely qualified, and both business and workers should welcome a fully functioning board.”

“Achieving a work-life balance is essential for families today,” said Woolsey, the chair of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee. “The Work-Life Balance Award will send a clear message to employers that the federal government recognizes companies that develop family-friendly policies for their workers.”

The Work-Life Balance Award Act of 2010 (H.R. 4855) would establish an annual ‘Work-Life Balance Award’ within the Department of Labor that would recognize employers with exemplary work-life balance policies.

A bipartisan advisory board – selected by the Secretary of Labor based on recommendations by congressional leaders of both parties that represent both private and public employers, labor, and family advocates – will develop the award’s criteria. No more than four members of the advisory committee may belong to the same political party.

Any employer, public or private, of any size may apply for the award. The Department of Labor will publish the list of awardees on its website.

“In an especially difficult economy, a responsive Department of Labor is essential to assisting and standing up for workers,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “Thanks to Secretary Solis, the Department of Labor is playing a central role in our nation’s economic recovery and laying the groundwork for a stronger middle class.”

More than seven million jobs have been cut over the past two years as the result of the financial collapse. From day one of the new Obama administration, Congress worked with the administration on a recovery plan to save the economy from total devastation. Economist from left to right agree that the Recovery Act added real growth to the economy and predicted that without these investments, more than a million more Americans would be out of work.

 “While I came to lead the Department of Labor at a tumultuous and challenging time, I know that we have already made a real difference in the lives of America’s workers and their families,” said Solis. “We successfully implemented the Recovery Act and have seen how these investments have saved and created jobs in communities across the country.”

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act made historic investments in American workers and provided vital resources to families deal with the financial collapse. Among other things, the Department of Labor is responsible for administering increased unemployment benefits, health care premium support for laid off workers and significant investments made in workforce development programs including more than 300,000 summer youth jobs. 

While the Department of Labor has been working on an ambitious agenda to promote economic recovery and train workers for the careers of the future, Solis’ department has also revamped agencies suffering from years of neglect.

“In a labor market where jobs are difficult to find and workers are glad to have the jobs they hold, it is too easy for workers to be exploited,” Solis continued. “We are strengthening our efforts to be vigilant in protecting the rights and safety of workers by hiring additional enforcement personnel and reviewing and improving our regulatory efforts.”

The Recovery Act and the department’s new priorities have allowed agencies to increase their capacity to protect workers’ health and safety, pay, and benefits after nearly a decade of cuts. For example, additional resources have allowed the department to hire an additional 250 investigators to ensure compliance with our nation’s wage and child labor laws.

“Especially in this economy, every dollar an employer steals from a worker is a dollar a family loses to pay for basic necessities,” Miller said.

Solis outlined five key priorities for her department:

(1)        Significantly reduce fatalities resulting from the most common causes at workplaces covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and mining sites.
(2)        Reduce the number of repeat violators of minimum wage, overtime, and workplace safety laws.
(3)        Raise labor standards low-wage trading partners in order to create a more balanced playing field for American manufacturing employees. Create a program to help workers injured on the job return to work so that they can continue to be productive members of America’s workforce.
(4)        Increase opportunities for America’s workers to acquire the skills and knowledge to succeed in a knowledge-based economy.

“The Department has outlined these high-priority goals to focus our agencies on the most critical needs affecting the safety, health, and economic security of workers,” Solis said.

“The report documents questionable labor practices plaguing T-Mobile and highlights the clear need to better protect workers’ fundamental rights in the United States. While the parent company, Deutsche Telekom, promotes positive labor relationships with its workers in Germany, and while many expected a similar approach to its workers in the United States, today’s report indicates that T-Mobile is not a chip off the old block. American workers deserve better.”

To read the report, click here. (pdf)

Airline pilots and flight attendants currently face unexpected hurdles to qualify for FMLA. These hurdles are unique to airline employees since their non-flying hours are not counted toward their total hours of service. To remedy this situation, Bishop introduced the Airline Flight Crew Family and Medical Leave Act to clarify the original FMLA 1993 law. Senator Patty Murray introduced a companion bill, which was passed by the Senate last month and came before the House for a final vote today. 

“Because of the unique way that airline personnel’s hours of work are counted, many workers have been unable to take advantage of the leave under the Family Medical Leave Act,” said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, Chairwoman of the Committee on Education and Labor’s Workforce Protections Subcommittee.  “This legislation which the House has passed today, changes that, and airline workers will now be able to take much needed time to care for a sick child, parent or spouse.”

“When airline crewmembers need to take time away from serving passengers in order to care for themselves or family members, they face unexpected hurdles. This bill would prevent crewmembers from being losing out on their FMLA benefits, which have helped so many working families in this country,” said Bishop, a member of the House Education and Labor Committee.

"We are very pleased at the passage of Congressman Bishop's FMLA bill, which finally addresses loopholes in the current language that have denied many flight attendants from qualifying for coverage," said Patricia Friend, President of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA. "Every flight attendant in this country is so grateful to Tim Bishop for passing this legislation on such a strong bipartisan basis."

The FMLA requires most employers to provide job-protected unpaid leave to employees who have worked 60 percent of a full-time schedule over the course of a year. However for flight crews, non-flight hours on the job, between flights or on mandatory stand-by do not count toward their FMLA credit. The Airline Flight Crew FMLA would correct this unintended oversight of the original legislation.

“The same conservative Supreme Court justices responsible for the backward ruling against Lilly Ledbetter have now thrown another legal barrier in front of hard-working older Americans,” said Rep. Miller.  “Workplace discrimination based on age is just as wrong as discrimination based on any other irrelevant factor -- and it should be treated as such in the court of law. The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act will ensure that all workers are treated fairly and not subject to decisions based on an employer’s prejudice, especially in this difficult economy.”

“For decades we have had a consistent standard, whether based on race, sex, national origin, religion or age.  The Gross decision established a far higher standard of proof for age than for other forms of discrimination, without any rationale or justification,” Senator Harkin said.   “Today we will introduce the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act with the simple purpose of reversing the Court’s decision and restoring the law to what it was for decades.  We intend to make certain that, once again, Jack Gross and all older workers in this country enjoy the full protections of the law.”

“Preserving the Age Discrimination and Employment Act is important to ensure that the great progress we have made in widening the doors of opportunity for all Americans continues in the future.  I am concerned that the Gross decision will allow employers to discriminate on the basis of age with impunity as long as it is paired with other reasons,” Senator Leahy said.  “I fear that in the wake of Gross few, if any, of these victims will achieve justice.  The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act will restore vital protections that have long secured the promise of equal rights and equal opportunity for older workers.”

"Thanks to the leadership of Chairmen Harkin, Leahy and Miller, this legislation will protect older workers from being relegated to second class status when they try to vindicate their rights under the ADEA," AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond said.   "For more than fifty years, AARP has been fighting against age discrimination and working to promote the value and experience older workers bring to the job. AARP is proud to endorse this legislation, and we urge Congress to quickly approve this bill as a critical first step to restore protections under our age discrimination laws.”

The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act will restore fundamental fairness.

• The Act reverses the Gross decision and restores the law to what it was for decades before the Court rewrote the rule.  The Act makes clear that when a victim shows discrimination was a “motivating factor” behind a decision, the burden is properly on the employer to show it complied with the law.
• The Act is modeled on the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which passed the Senate on a bipartisan basis 93-5.  Among other things, the Civil Rights Act of 1991 codified the “motivating factor” framework for race, sex, national origin and religion discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
• The Act makes clear that this “motivating factor” framework applies to all anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws – treating all workers, and all forms of discrimination, equally.
 

The bill is supported by the AARP, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the National Senior Citizens Law Center and the National Women’s Law Center.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 3017), introduced by Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) - who testified on behalf of the bill - and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), would prohibit employment discrimination, preferential treatment, and retaliation on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by employers with 15 or more employees. Currently, it is legal to discriminate in the workplace based on sexual orientation in 29 states and to discriminate based on gender identity in 38 states.
 
“Because the current patchwork of state laws leaves big gaps in coverage, federal government action is necessary to provide protection against employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity,” said Stuart J. Ishimaru, Acting Chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. “Protecting valued members of our workforce from discrimination should not be left solely to the states - discrimination in Washington State is just as wrong as discrimination in Florida.”
 
New research presented to the committee also emphasized that state government workers are just as likely to be subject to widespread employment discrimination as private sector employees. Brad Sears, executive director of the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School,presented original research and examined previous surveys that show no difference between discrimination in private industries and government agencies.

 
“There is a widespread and persistent pattern of unconstitutional discrimination against LGBT state government employees, as well as against local government employees,” said Sears.
 
In one instance, a Georgia state legislative aide was fired when a superior discovered her planned transition from a man to a woman. Although many co-workers and her immediate supervisor came to accept the transition, the head of her office immediately fired her once he was informed. Court documents filed by state of Georgia said that potential prejudices were good enough to fire an employee.

“He told me that my transition was unacceptable. Then he fired me,” said Vandy Beth Glenn. “I was escorted back to my desk, told to clean it out, and marched out of the building. No one should ever get fired for the reason I was fired, and no one should have to wonder if the law protects them.”
 
William Eskridge, a Yale Law School professor, testified that state and local governments have had a long history of discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender workers, including himself.

“Such employees have been excluded and harassed because of their sexual orientation or gender identity throughout the 20th century,” Eskridge said.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act would exempt any corporation, association, educational institution, or society that is exempt from the religious discrimination provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This religious exemption language was added to the bill in the last Congress and overwhelmingly approved by vote of 402 to 25. A number of religious organizations while not expressing support for the bill itself have nonetheless voiced support for the religious exemption provision in the bill, including the U.S. Catholic Bishops, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, and the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

“ENDA simply ensures that workers are judged and rewarded based on their qualifications and performance, rather than on irrelevant and prejudicial factors,” said Rabbi David Saperstein, the director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. “At the same time, it protects the right of religious communities to make their own employment decisions in this sensitive area.”
 
For more information on the hearing, click here.

# # #

The Wage Theft Prevention Act (H.R. 3303) is based on a GAO recommendation made in a report released today. The bill would ensure that delays in investigating claims of wage theft will not result in a permanent loss of back pay for workers. The GAO found many investigations of wage theft were inadequately handled by the Bush administration’s Wage and Hour Division and were dropped because the statute of limitations is too short and investigations took too long.  To ensure that workers do not lose their hard-earned wages, the bill would freeze the statute of limitations from the date an employer is informed of an investigation until the agency notifies the employer that the investigation has concluded.

“This legislation is a simple solution to the very real problem of workers’ pay being stolen by unscrupulous employers,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “Especially in this economy, hard-working Americans shouldn’t have to worry about whether they are being paid properly. This bill will hold those responsible for stealing workers’ wages by helping to ensure that legitimate complaints can be properly investigated.”

“Wage theft is a serious problem in this country and affects those who can least afford to lose their pay,” said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), co-sponsor of the bill and chair of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee. “These same workers generally cannot afford a private attorney to recover their wages and must rely on Department of Labor to pursue these claims. This bill will give the Department time to do this.”

An undercover investigation by the GAO found that the Wage and Hour Division’s complaint intake, complaint resolution, and investigation processes were ineffective and discouraged workers from lodging wage theft complaints. In several of the division’s regional offices, staff were directed to only record successful complaint resolutions in its database, making the Wage and Hour Division statistics appear better than they were. In addition, the GAO found that because of the lack of resources and staff, investigations on wage theft and child labor violations were frequently delayed by months or years.  

Under the Obama administration’s leadership, Department of Labor has announced that the agency plans on hiring 250 investigators to the Wage and Hour Division.

 “The Supreme Court’s ruling will make it even more difficult for workers to stand up for their basic rights in the workplace. A narrow majority of the Supreme Court has once again overturned decades of precedent and congressional intent and sided with powerful corporate interests on a workplace discrimination case. Like with the Lilly Ledbetter case, Congress may be forced to clarify the law’s intent so we can prevent the damage this decision will have on workers’ civil rights. The court’s ruling was unacceptable, and this Congress will work to protect all Americans’ ability to be treated fairly on the job. Employment decisions should be based on merit, not prejudice.”

BACKGROUND OF GROSS V. FBL FINANCIAL SERVICES

On June 18, the Supreme Court overturned a jury trial verdict that found that Jack Gross, 54, was demoted by his employer in part because of his age. The court said Gross had to prove not just that age played a role in his demotion but that age was the motivating factor in his demotion. The ruling overturns decades of case law and Congressional intent, which forces employers, after a plaintiff has shown that age was a factor, to show evidence that the employment decision would have been made anyway, regardless of the plaintiff’s age. Under the Supreme Court’s ruling, workers will now carry an extremely difficult burden when it comes to an employer’s internal motivations, having to prove both that age was a motivating factor for an employment decision and that no other factor would have motivated the decision without age.  

 “Workers deserve more than just a pink slip when they lose their job because of our nation’s economic difficulties,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “Current protections for workers being laid off are both confusing and rarely enforced. While an early warning may not save their job, a meaningful early notice will help them prepare to find a new job or upgrade their skills for new employment.”

“Across our country, communities and families have been devastated by mass layoffs.  We have seen this acutely in Northern and Central New York and know all too well the lasting and fundamental impacts mass layoffs and plant closures have on individuals, families, and communities.  In the two decades since the WARN Act was enacted, our nation’s economy has changed markedly,” said U.S. Rep. John McHugh (R-NY).  “It is time to modernize the WARN Act to fit today’s economy, and thereby ensure workers and communities get the fair notice they deserve and need to prepare and adjust to their change in job status.  Thus, I am pleased to have had the opportunity to work with Chairman Miller and Senator Brown to develop the Forewarn Act.”

“Mass layoffs send shockwaves through individual households and entire communities,” U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said. “This bill is about protecting workers and helping communities respond to mass layoffs. The WARN Act was supposed to give employees time to find a new job. Unfortunately, fair notice has become the exception not the rule. This bill will modernize the WARN Act by closing loopholes and strengthening its enforcement. Workers and communities should be armed with best arsenal of protective measures during these challenging economic times.”

Over the past several months, laid-off employees have filed lawsuits over violations of the WARN Act against companies as varied as Lehman Brothers, retailers like Sam’s Club and Goody’s, the electronics chain Tweeter, ABX Air, USA Jet Airlines, and major law firms.

Congress passed the WARN Act in 1988 to give workers and communities 60 days advance notice to adjust to an impending “plant closing” or “mass layoff.”  Compelling evidence demonstrated that retraining and other readjustment efforts have the greatest success when advance notice is provided.

The WARN Act’s effectiveness has been undermined by existing loopholes and weak enforcement. First, the WARN Act only covers 24 percents of all layoffs, according to a report by the by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Of those layoffs, employers only provided notice approximately one-third of the time. The WARN Act has several exceptions that employers can invoke— both legitimately and illegitimately— including unforeseen business circumstances and whether a company is trying to attract capital to avoid a shutdown. Furthermore, the WARN Act is only invoked at companies with at least 100 employees that layoff 33 percent or more of their workforce.

Second, weak penalties and enforcement measures may prevent employers from providing notice. GAO found that employers failed to provide notice to employees in two-thirds of layoffs and closures where the WARN Act applied.  The WARN Act requires violating employers to pay an employee a day’s pay for every day of notice not provided and does not provide the federal government the authority to enforce workers’ rights.

The FOREWARN Act would give the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) the authority to enforce the WARN Act, and would increase penalties for violation to double back pay. In addition, it would reduce the mass layoff figure from 50 to 25, reduce the employer size from 100 to 75 employees, and lower the mass layoff trigger. The lower thresholds would protect employees in both manufacturing and services firms. It would also lengthen the notification period from 60 to 90 days and require employers to provide written notification to the Department of Labor that includes the reason for the plant closing or mass layoff, whether the employer has jobs elsewhere, and a statement of each employee’s right to wages and benefits. The bill would also expand recipients of notification to Secretary of Labor, elected officials including the governor, member(s) of Congress, and state representatives, and the appropriate labor union(s) when applicable.

“I commend Labor Secretary Hilda Solis for suspending this destructive midnight regulation that slashed already low wages for farm workers,” said Miller. “I look forward to working with the Obama administration to improve all our nation’s guest worker programs by increasing oversight and labor protections for guest workers and U.S. workers alike.”   

The Bush regulation affects workers in the U.S. Department of Labor’s H-2A guest worker program. Under this program employers are allowed to hire foreign workers only if they can’t first find American workers, and only if the wages and working conditions they provide don’t have a negative impact on U.S. workers. Last year the committee heard testimony from witnesses about fraud and abuse in guest worker programs under the Bush administration’s watch.

Among other things, the December regulation weakened oversight of the H-2A program, making it much easier for employers to hire foreign workers over available American workers.

The suspension will go into effect in 30 days.

For more information on the regulation, click here.

While this was a historic step forward in our fight for equal pay, it was just the beginning. I hope the Senate joins us in taking the next step to close the gender wage gap by passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation that has won House approval that President Obama has made clear he supports. Ensuring basic fairness and respect for all workers is essential to strengthening our middle class and building a lasting economic recovery that benefits all Americans.”

In January, the House approved the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which President Obama signed during his first week in office. The House also passed Paycheck Fairness Act, which has yet to be considered by the Senate. President Obama urged Congress to send him the bill during the Ledbetter signing ceremony.

For more information on the Ledbetter Act, click here. For more information on the Paycheck Fairness Act, click here.

Created with flickrSLiDR.

The GAO found that the Wage and Hour Division’s complaint intake, complaint resolution, and investigation processes were ineffective and discouraged workers from lodging wage theft complaints. In several of the division’s regional offices, staff were directed to only record successful complaint resolutions in its database, making the Wage and Hour Division statistics appear better than they were. In addition, the GAO found that because of the lack of resources and staff, investigations on wage theft and child labor violations were frequently delayed by months or years.  

“This investigation clearly shows that the Department of Labor has left thousands of actual victims of wage theft who sought federal government assistance with nowhere to turn,” said Gregory Kutz, GAO’s managing director of forensic audits and special investigations, “Far too often many of America’s most vulnerable workers find themselves dealing with an agency concerned about resource limitations, with ineffective processes, and without certain tools necessary to perform timely and effective investigations of wage theft complaints. Unfortunately, far too often the result is unscrupulous employers taking advantage of our country’s low wage workers.”

Over a period of several months, GAO investigators filed ten fictitious complaints with agency district offices across the country, posing as both the employee and the employer. Of the ten complaints that were made, only one was successfully resolved. The GAO also reported that after reviewing the agency’s complaint database, only five of ten fictitious complaints were logged into the system weeks later.

In one case, an undercover investigator called the agency to complain about children working with saws and meat grinders, illegal under child labor laws, during the school day. Although the agency states that investigating child labor violations is a top priority, the call was never investigated or logged into the complaint database.

To listen to this call, click here.

In another undercover call, a Wage and Hour employee told the GAO investigator that they could not follow up on the complaint because the IRS said that his employer was not big enough to be covered under the law. As the GAO testified, though the company was a fictitious and had never filed a tax return, Wage and Hour employees do not have access to IRS data. The Wage and Hour employee was referred to the Department of Labor Office of Inspector General for administrative action.

To listen to this call, click here.

In addition, the GAO audited Wage and Hour Division’s database and sampled several dozen cases to determine whether they were properly handled. Just as the undercover calls highlighted, many times, when employers declined to pay back wages – even if employers admit wages were owed – the division was likely to drop the investigation and inform the complainant the right to sue in court.  

Also, the GAO found that Wage and Hour employees often took the word of employers that they paid workers back wages owed, even if the employee never got paid.

“While some investigators wait for proof of payment before closing the conciliation, others told us that they close conciliations as soon as the employer agrees to pay,” said Kutz. “Even if the employee later tells the investigator that he has not been paid, investigators told us they do not change the outcome of a closed case in the WHD database.”

Today’s hearing follows a July 2008 Education and Labor hearing on wage theft where the GAO presented 15 case studies where the Wage and Hour Division ineffectively enforced the law. The GAO reported then that actions initiated by the Department on wage and hour violations dropped from approximately 47,000 in 1997 to fewer than 30,000 in 2007. And, the use of fines that punish repeat or egregious offenders declined by nearly 50 percent from 2001 to 2007.

To read more about the July 2008 hearing, click here.

To read the GAO’s testimony, click here.

“This proposal maintains the status quo by denying workers a real say in the workplace. It denies workers the ability to choose majority sign-up, the one method for organizing proven to reduce coercion and pressure from all sides on workers. It rejects a tried and proven method for ensuring good faith bargaining, denying workers a fair chance to gain the same kind of enforceable contracts that CEOs always take for themselves.

“It even increases the power of CEOs to dominate workers’ choices by allowing CEOs to initiate drives to get rid of a union – a choice that should belong to workers, not CEOs.  It is nothing more than a classic Washington lobbying campaign intended to confuse the issues and disguise the real agenda of maintaining the status quo.

“Strengthening and growing America’s middle class depends on the ability of employees to exercise their democratic rights at work. In these economic times it is more important than ever for workers to have a say about their job security, their wages, their retirement savings, and their health care. The Employee Free Choice Act is simple: it will help our economy work for everyone again by giving workers, not CEOs, the choice of whether and how to join together to bargain for a better life. Workers will not benefit if CEOs continue to have a veto over their rights at work.”

The notice that will be published today withdraws a last-minute Bush action that would have significantly slowed the implementation of rules limiting workers’ exposure to diacetyl, a chemical used in artificial food flavoring for microwave popcorn and other foods. Scientists have linked diacetyl exposure to bronchiolitis obliterans, a severe lung disease often known as “popcorn lung.”

“This is good news for the thousands of workers who handle this dangerous food flavoring, all of whom have up until now done so at the risk of their own health.  The unfortunate reality is that because of the Bush Administration’s foot dragging on this issue, this disease has already sickened and killed a number of workers nationwide.  That’s why today’s decision is so important.  It sends a strong message that under the Obama administration, protecting the millions of workers in our country will once again be an urgent priority. I look forward to working with the administration and my colleagues to make sure that diacetyl receives the attention that it deserves.”

The House of Representatives approved legislation in 2007 to force the Bush administration to issue protections for workers who handle diacetyl. For more information on the legislation and a hearing held by the subcommittee, click here.

“The current crisis has shown us the dangers of an economy that leaves working families behind. The people who work in our factories, build our roads, and care for our children are the backbone of this great nation. The Employee Free Choice Act will give these hardworking men and women a greater voice in the decisions that affect their families and their futures. It’s a critical step toward putting our economy back on track, and I hope that we can act quickly to send it to the President’s desk," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

“Just as the National Labor Relations Act, the 40 hour week and the minimum wage helped to pull us out of the Great Depression and into a period of unprecedented prosperity, so too will the Employee Free Choice Act help reinvigorate our economy,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.  “Today is one of those defining moments in history as we introduce legislation that puts power back into the hands of the people who are truly the backbone of this economy.”

“Americans’ wages have been stagnating or falling for the past decade. For far too long, we have seen corporate CEOs take care of themselves and shareholders at the expense of workers,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “If we want a fair and sustainable recovery from this economic crisis, we must give workers the ability to stand up for themselves and once again share in the prosperity they help to create.”

<

Since 1935, workers have been allowed to form a union either through majority sign-up or through a National Labor Relations Board election.

While the NLRB election process uses slanted rules that dramatically favor employers, studies have found that the majority signup process reduces pressure and coercion in the workplace.  Currently, however, employers can veto workers’ decision to organize through majority signup and force them into the divisive NLRB election process where, according to a recent study, a pro-union worker is illegally fired in a quarter of all organizing drives.

The bipartisan Employee Free Choice Act simply gives workers the choice of whether to form a union either through majority signup or an NLRB election.

In addition to allowing workers to form a union through majority sign-up, the Employee Free Choice Act would also:

• Stiffen penalties against employers that illegally fire or discriminate against workers for their union activity during an organizing or first contract drive, including requiring employers to pay treble back pay to workers whom they are found to have illegally fired; and
• Allow employers and newly formed unions to refer bargaining to mediation and, if necessary, binding arbitration if they are not able to agree on a first contract.

Both President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden believe the Employee Free Choice Act is a critical part of what must be done to build an economy that works for everyone again. In separate speeches last week, they made it clear that the legislation is a priority and that Congress must pass it.

For more information on the Employee Free Choice Act, click here.

“What we have heard today makes it clear that during good times and bad, employees and employers workers benefit from family-friendly policies,” said U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), chair of the subcommittee. “These policies will help people who desperately need them; they make good economic sense; and they will help us catch up to the rest of the world.”

Many workers often have to choose between their paycheck and taking a day off because of an illness or a child who needs to see a doctor. In light of the economic downturn, witnesses said that this choice has become a much higher stake balancing act for workers.

“Now, more than ever, workers cannot afford to lose a job due to work-family balance challenges,” said Heather Boushey, senior economist at the Center for American Progress Action Fund. “Establishing job-protected family and medical leave for more workers would help to ensure that no worker is pushed into the masses of the unemployed simply because they needed to care for a sick child or need time to recover from an illness.”

Although more than 60 percent of private-sector workers already have access to paid sick days, lower income workers are much less likely to be offered paid sick leave.

Rebia Clay Mixon, a homecare worker from Chicago whose job is to take care of her brother who is disabled found it difficult to care for her husband when he because terminally ill. She frequently had to choose between a paycheck – the only income in her household – and taking care of her dying husband.

“I had to care for him and my brother at the same time,” said Mixon, whose husband died last April. “I couldn’t afford to take any unpaid time off to focus on my husband, because the three of us were surviving only on my income.”

Many studies have found that providing some form of paid sick leave not only benefits workers, but also helps the employer’s bottom line because turnover is lower and workers are more satisfied on the job.

“Access to paid sick days and to family leave insurance increases employee productivity and reduces turnover,” said Eileen Appelbaum, director of the Center for Women and Work at Rutgers University. “Turnover is costly for employers, and access to paid time off to care for yourself or a family member significantly improves retention and reduces these costs.”

Woolsey introduced “The Balancing Act” in the last Congress to encourage family-friendly workplaces that would, among other incentives, guarantee paid leave and expand eligibility for family and medical leave. Woolsey said she will be looking at additional ways to encourage employers to adopt paid leave policies.


Created with flickrSLiDR.

As a result of the lack of resources and proper tracking of complaints, whistleblowers who call out illegal activities are not adequately protected from retaliation from their employer, the GAO concluded in a report released by Democratic lawmakers today. In fact, only one in five complaints is successful.  

Whistleblowers provide a valuable – and federally protected – service when they call attention to practices that violate federal law. At the same time, workers who blow the whistle often face retaliation from their employers for speaking out. The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration is charged with receiving and investigating whistleblower claims covering 17 laws from workplace health and safety issues to Wall Street mismanagement.

“OSHA faces two key challenges—it lacks a mechanism to adequately ensure the quality and consistency of investigations, and many investigators have said they lack some of the resources they need to do their jobs, including equipment, training, and legal assistance,” the GAO found. GAO last investigated OSHA’s whistleblower protections program twenty years ago.

“It’s deeply troubling that workers who risk everything to blow the whistle on fraud and other serious matters remain exposed to employer retaliation and other harms,” said Rep. Miller, the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “With the enormous investments now being made to save or create jobs, and the reforms intended to shed Wall Street of its culture of reckless greed, waste and mismanagement, we must protect workers who come forward at great risk trying to save lives and stop corruption.”

“Every day workers are fired and blacklisted for exposing practices in the private sector which violate federal law,” said Rep. Woolsey, the chair of the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.  “While a handful are lauded in the press for their actions, most whistleblowers face a lifetime of hardship for their willingness to speak up.  This is unacceptable.  I will continue to work with my colleagues on the committee, along with our partners in the Senate, to develop a streamlined and efficient review process that protects the rights and reputations of those brave enough to speak out.”

“In the face of intimidation and retaliation, whistleblower protections are often the only thing that give workers the strength to stand up and speak out,” said Senator Murray. “While I’m troubled by the GAO’s findings, I was glad to see that President Obama proposed increased funding for Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in his budget, which will help strengthen its ability to enforce whistleblower protections. As this report makes clear, the new OSHA leadership will have some serious work to do to ensure it properly investigates and documents complaints of employer retribution. Turning the page on the Bush Administration’s dismal record of protecting workers means giving workers back the confidence they need to help root out illegal activities.”

According to OSHA’s data, of the more than 1,800 cases the agency looked at in 2007, only 21 percent of all investigations resulted in a favorable outcome for whistleblowers. The GAO cautioned that as a result of inadequate tracking of all complaints, the actual proportion of favorable outcomes for whistleblowers may actually be lower.

In addition, almost half of whistleblower investigators reported they don’t have the resources and equipment needed to do their jobs, lacking supplies as basic as laptop computers, cell phones and portable printers.

Woolsey also announced that she plans on reintroducing legislation soon to expand and simplify protections for workers in the private sector who expose illegal actions by their employers. The bill would extend already established whistleblower protections for employees who report violations of critical food safety, drug safety, consumer protection, environmental protection, health care, and homeland security laws.

For more information on the Private Sector Whistleblower Protection Streamlining Act, click here.

The view the full GAO report, click here.

“President Obama today reaffirmed that the interests of hard working Americans will not take a back seat to corporations and CEOs. Overturning these three Bush-era orders is an important step to restore a rational balance regarding the rights of employees in the workplace.

“Also, today’s announcement of the creation of the Middle Class Task Force is another welcome sign that this administration will put the interests of hardworking Americans first. As our nation strives to rebuild the ailing economy, families must be able to share in the increased prosperity. The Middle Class Task Force is an important step towards ensuring that federal laws and regulations support the growing and sustaining of the middle class.”

BACKGROUND

President Obama overturned three Bush administration executive orders today:

• Companies receiving government contracts would have to post unbiased information on workers’ rights. Under Bush administration rules, contractors were only required to post information about union dues and not about any other worker rights under the National Labor Relations Act;
• Federal contractors cannot be reimbursed for their union-busting campaigns by the federal government; and
• Qualified workers and service contractors at federal buildings would have a chance to retain their jobs even if a contract changed or expired.

 

“I am proud that the first major piece of legislation signed by President Obama reaffirms the basic and fundamental American value of equal pay for equal work. Unfortunately, the outrageous employment practice of paying workers differently based on prejudice was sanctioned by a sorely misguided Supreme Court decision in May 2007 and demanded immediate attention.

“With President Obama’s signature today, we ensure that women and other workers who are discriminated against while on the job have the ability to receive a fair remedy. Ongoing pay discrimination is an attack on all working Americans and must be stamped out.  The Congress and the President restored the law today and ensured that discriminatory paychecks are not immune from challenge.

“I also commend Lilly Ledbetter’s incredible courage and perseverance over the past couple of years in making her voice heard in this debate. Thanks to Lilly Ledbetter’s efforts, even though it is too late for her to receive justice, millions of Americans will be able to once again fight against the despicable practice of workplace discrimination.”

For more information on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, click here.

Photos taken by staff members at the signing:


Created with flickrSLiDR.

By a 250 to 177 vote, the House approved the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which would clarify that every paycheck or other compensation resulting from an earlier discriminatory pay decision constitutes a violation of the Civil Rights Act. As long as workers file their charges within 180 days of a discriminatory paycheck, their charges would be considered timely. This was the law prior to the Supreme Court’s May 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear.

“The Supreme Court simply told bad employers that to escape responsibility for pay discrimination, all they need to do is keep it hidden for the first 180 days,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee and chief House sponsor of the bill. “But today, thanks to Lilly’s incredible courage and perseverance, Congress rejected this ruling for the millions of Americans suddenly now subject to legal discrimination.”

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would also apply to workers who file claims of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, or disability.

“The passage of the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in the House today is a rejection of the Supreme Court's ill-conceived Ledbetter decision and a restoration of an American worker's right to reasonably seek restitution against pay discrimination,” said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), chairman of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee.

According to a report from the New York Times, the Ledbetter decision has already been cited in more than 300 discrimination cases. Not only have pay discrimination cases been adversely impacted, but protections guaranteed by the Fair Housing Act, Title IX, and the Eight Amendment have also been affected.

Lilly Ledbetter worked for nearly 20 years at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company facility in Alabama. She sued the company after learning that she was paid less then her male counterparts at the facility, despite having more experience than several of them. A jury found that her employer had unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of sex.

However, the Supreme Court said that Ledbetter had waited too long to sue for pay discrimination, despite the fact that she filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as soon as she received an anonymous note alerting her to pay discrimination.  
 
While Ledbetter filed her charge within 180 days of receiving discriminatory pay, the court ruled that, since Ledbetter did not raise a claim within 180 days of the employer’s decision to pay her less, she could not receive any relief. Under this Supreme Court decision, employees in Ledbetter’s position would be forced to live with discriminatory paychecks for the rest of their careers. To view Ledbetter’s letter of support, click here.

Contrary to claims from critics, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2007 that since the bill would essentially return the law to where it stood before the Supreme Court ruling, the legislation will not lead to an onslaught of costly new litigation. Click here for the CBO estimate.

 

“I applaud the Senate’s swift approval of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Our nation is one step closer to correcting a disastrous Supreme Court decision that allows bad employers to engage in illegal employment discrimination so long as they keep it hidden for 180 days. Illegal employment discrimination in any form is an attack on all working Americans and must be stamped out.

“The 2007 Ledbetter Supreme Court decision has already had a chilling impact on hundreds of discrimination claims. It wasn’t Lilly Ledbetter’s fault that Goodyear decided to pay her less because she was a woman. But a narrowly divided, ideological Supreme Court said that even though her company had engaged in illegal pay discrimination in secret for decades, she would have to live with a smaller pension and Social Security benefit for the rest of her life. This isn’t just or fair by any measure.

“It is well past time to reset the law to where it was before the ruling. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act will do just that. I expect the House will quickly pass the Senate’s version and send it to President Obama for his signature.”

BACKGROUND

Lilly Ledbetter worked for nearly 20 years at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company facility in Alabama. She sued the company after learning that she was paid less then her male counterparts at the facility, despite having more experience than several of them. A jury found that her employer had unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of sex.
 
However, the Supreme Court said that Ledbetter had waited too long to sue for pay discrimination, despite the fact that she filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as soon as she received an anonymous note alerting her to pay discrimination.  
 
While Ledbetter filed her charge within 180 days of receiving discriminatory pay, the court ruled that, since Ledbetter did not raise a claim within 180 days of the employer’s decision to pay her less, she could not receive any relief. Under this Supreme Court decision, employees in Ledbetter’s position would be forced to live with discriminatory paychecks for the rest of their careers.

Contrary to claims from critics, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2007 that the legislation will not lead to an onslaught of costly new litigation.  Click here for the CBO estimate.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 11) would clarify that every paycheck or other compensation resulting from an earlier discriminatory pay decision constitutes a violation of the Civil Rights Act. As long as workers file their charges within 180 days of a discriminatory paycheck, their charges would be considered timely. This was the law prior to the Supreme Court’s May 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear.

“The Supreme Court’s misguided decision is already having very harmful consequences far beyond Ms. Ledbetter’s case and must not stand,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “This issue is about basic fairness for our nation’s workers. Americans shouldn’t be treated differently based on the color of their skin, gender, disability or faith.”

“The passage of the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in the House today is a rejection of the Supreme Court's ill-conceived Ledbetter decision and a restoration of an American worker's right to reasonably seek restitution against pay discrimination,” said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), chairman of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would also apply to workers who file claims of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, or disability.
 
According to a report from the New York Times, the Ledbetter decision has already been cited in more than 300 discrimination cases. Not only have pay discrimination cases been adversely impacted, but protections guaranteed by the Fair Housing Act, Title IX, and the Eight Amendment have also been affected.

Lilly Ledbetter worked for nearly 20 years at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company facility in Alabama. She sued the company after learning that she was paid less then her male counterparts at the facility, despite having more experience than several of them. A jury found that her employer had unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of sex.
 
However, the Supreme Court said that Ledbetter had waited too long to sue for pay discrimination, despite the fact that she filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as soon as she received an anonymous note alerting her to pay discrimination.  
 
While Ledbetter filed her charge within 180 days of receiving discriminatory pay, the court ruled that, since Ledbetter did not raise a claim within 180 days of the employer’s decision to pay her less, she could not receive any relief. Under this Supreme Court decision, employees in Ledbetter’s position would be forced to live with discriminatory paychecks for the rest of their careers. To view Ledbetter’s letter of support, click here.

Contrary to claims from critics, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2007 that since the bill would essentially return the law to where it stood before the Supreme Court ruling, the legislation will not lead to an onslaught of costly new litigation. Click here for the CBO estimate.

The House-passed bill is the same as the bill approved in 2007. President-Elect Obama has indicated his strong support for the measure. The legislation is supported by a broad coalition of civil rights, worker, religious and business groups. To view supporters of the legislation, click here.

By a 256 to 163 vote, the House passed the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 12), introduced by U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), a bill that will strengthen the Equal Pay Act and close loopholes that have allowed many employers to avoid responsibility for discriminatory pay. The measure, along with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, was among the first to be considered by the 111th Congress.

“This is a historic step forward in the fight for equal rights for women. It’s a shame that so many women still struggle to receive equal pay for equal work,” said Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “Any wage gap based on gender is unacceptable, especially as we work to rebuild our economy during these tough economic times. If we are serious about closing the gender pay gap, we must get serious about punishing those who would otherwise scoff at the weak sanctions under current law.”

“In this economy, families are struggling to make ends meet. Not one of them deserves to be shortchanged, but because women still earn 78 cents for every dollar men earn, many unfortunately are. But this does not need to be,” said Rep. DeLauro. “Today, by passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, we send a strong message that gender discrimination is unacceptable and women will have the tools they need to combat it. We are standing up for working women and their families. It is our moment to fight for economic freedom and eliminate the systemic discrimination faced by women workers. With this legislation, we begin the change, make history, and change lives.”

“As millions of workers continue to struggle during this economic downturn, it is more important than ever to ensure that every American – regardless of gender – receives equal pay for equal work,” said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections. “Today’s passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act is not only symbolically important, but makes real changes to the law which will in turn raise thousands of women out of poverty, especially those who are single parents. The Equal Pay Act was passed over 45 years ago with the best of intentions. It is fitting that we now update the law so that we can renew our commitment to tackle equal pay head on.”

Although the wage gap between men and women has narrowed since the passage of the landmark Equal Pay Act in 1963, gender-based wage discrimination remains a significant problem for women in the U.S. workforce. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, women only make 78 cents for every dollar earned by a man.

The Institute of Women’s Policy Research concluded that this wage disparity will cost a woman anywhere from $400,000 to $2 million over her lifetime in lost wages.

Specifically, the Paycheck Fairness Act would:

Require that employer seeking to justify unequal pay bear the burden of proving that its actions are job-related and consistent with a business necessity;
 
Prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who share salary information with their co-workers;
 
Put gender-based discrimination sanctions on equal footing with other forms of wage discrimination – such as discrimination based on race, disability or age – by allowing women to sue for compensatory and punitive damages;
 
Require the Department of Labor to enhance outreach and training efforts to work with employers in order to eliminate pay disparities;
 
Require the Department of Labor to continue to collect and disseminate wage information based on gender; and
 
Create a new grant program to help strengthen the negotiation skills of girls and women.
 
The legislation is supported by a broad coalition of civil rights, worker, religious and business groups. To view supporters of the legislation, click here.

“As documented by OSHA, Cintas has a history of repeated safety violations nationwide, and allowing them a full two years to address pre-existing and well documented hazards is unacceptable.  As the Chair of the Subcommittee on Workplace Protections, it will be one of my top priorities to reform OSHA, strengthen its oversight and enforcement capabilities, and hold employers more accountable to America’s workers.  I look forward to working with the President-Elect, as well as his newly announced Labor Secretary, my friend and colleague Hilda Solis, to ensure that workers are protected, and that companies who chose to threaten their safety through violations of labor laws are held accountable.”

 “On its way out the door, the Bush Labor Department has granted serial offender Cintas a despicable pardon for their failure to protect its workers from hazardous machinery,” Hare said. “The death of Eleazar Torres-Gomez last year was tragic and preventable. In the Tulsa plant where he worked, Cintas failed to install the guarding necessary to prevent him from being dragged into a 300 degree dryer. Workers have complained of the same hazards across the country. Yet this settlement gives Cintas an unacceptably long window to make the necessary improvements, with many plants having up to 2 years.  How many lives will be lost before this company is required to gets its act together? Cintas and the Labor Department may have settled, but I will not rest until justice is served for Mr. Torres-Gomez and every other worker endangered by this company’s lackluster working conditions. I plan to bring this case to the attention of the incoming Labor Secretary and will work with my colleagues on the Workforce Protections Subcommittee to further investigate this matter and achieve a more appropriate resolution.”

“We are also upset that the Department of Labor has changed all of the willful citations to ‘unclassified citations,’ despite the fact that Cintas knew about these hazards and OSHA originally found the company to be negligent,” the members added. “There is nothing in the law that even allows unclassified citations and we are determined to take legislative action to prohibit the declassification of willful citations.”

Among other things, they would create strong new criminal laws to penalize foreign labor recruiters and U.S. employers who lure guest workers into employment under false pretenses. They would also provide foreign workers with vital information on their legal rights when applying for employment or education related U.S. visas.

“For too long, employers and labor recruiters have escaped scot-free when exploiting and abusing guest workers. Not only do these actions take advantage of guest workers, but they also drive down wages and benefits for American workers,” said Miller. “At a time when too many Americans are seeing their jobs and wages slip away, I’m glad that Congress took this important step to start holding crooked employers and labor recruiters accountable, and want to thank Reps. Berman, Conyers and Lofgren for their leadership in making this happen.

“However, imposing criminal penalties is just one part of the equation,” Miller continued.  “We’ve got to do more to improve working conditions and wages for both guest workers and U.S. workers. I hope that the next Congress and new administration will take a comprehensive approach on labor and immigration issues.”

Hundreds of thousands of guest workers come to this country each year, often mortgaging their lives to pay thousands of dollars in fees to recruiters who promise them a good job. In too many cases, these workers arrive here only to work for unlivable wages, in deplorable working conditions – a far cry from what they were promised. Under the Bush administration, guest worker programs have been allowed to operate with little oversight from the Department of Labor.

Miller is also the author of legislation, the Indentured Servitude Abolition Act of 2007, (H.3. 1763), that would more comprehensively put a stop to these practices. Among other things, the bill would discourage employers from using disreputable guest worker recruiters and prohibit foreign labor recruiters from charging workers fees or misleading workers about the type of job, wages or working conditions they could expect.

The Bush administration is expected to release new regulations shortly that would leave both American workers and guest workers in the Department of Labor’s H-2A agricultural and H-2 B non-agricultural programs with fewer labor protections and lower wages.

For more information on Miller’s efforts to root out these abuses, click here.