Workplace Fairness

Menu

Skip to main content

  • print
  • decrease text sizeincrease text size
    text

Why COVID-19 Will Strain the Safety Net for Homeless Vets to the Breaking Point

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is conway1.png

Under normal circumstances, Jerry Porter would be spending his time helping the veterans he finds in tent camps and run-down housing.

But the escalating threat of COVID-19 forces the community activist and retired Steelworker to remain at home for now, even though vulnerable vets need him more than ever.

As the coronavirus spreads across America, the poor bear the brunt of a pandemic that’s exposed the deep class lines in U.S. society.

The rich have big savings accounts and quality health care. They’ll emerge from the crisis just fine.

But Americans at the margins, including homeless vets who rely on a frayed safety net stretched to the breaking point by COVID-19, now face an even greater struggle to survive.

“I don’t know where they end up,” said Porter ruefully. Porter, 75, is a Vietnam veteran and longtime member of United Steelworkers (USW) Local 105 who worked more than 40 years at the aluminum plant in Davenport, Iowa, now owned by Arconic.

Porter and a group of friends work together to help veterans in the Quad Cities area of Iowa and Illinois.

But now, they’re heeding the request of public health officials. They stay home to help their community slow the spread of COVID-19.

That prevents them from helping veterans like the one Porter found sleeping on a squalid mattress in a “junky” house. He got the man into a clean apartment and—thanks to a friend who owned a bedding store—a new mattress and box spring for just $180.

Just as alarming, COVID-19 halted the fund-raising supporting that kind of intervention. Local veterans groups just canceled a taco dinner and a poppy sale that together raise about $6,000 each year.

For some veterans, that money is the difference between sleeping indoors or on the street.

Porter and his friends use some of the funds to provide life’s basics to the homeless vets they move into government-subsidized housing with little but the clothes on their backs.

“There’s nothing,” Porter explained. “There’s no bedding, silverware, dishes, glassware, towels, sheets.”

Twice a year, advocates in the Quad Cities hold “stand down” events that serve as a one-stop shop for veterans needing anything from counseling to jobs.

Porter already worries that the three-day event planned for September will be canceled because of COVID-19, leaving veterans to face a long winter without important services.

Porter’s union job ensured good wages, a pension and affordable health care. He devotes his retirement to the less fortunate, feeling a duty to fellow vets with no one else to help them.

The federal government fails veterans who struggle to find adequate employment or wrestle with health problems, such as post-traumatic stress disorder.

For example, the nation hasn’t adequately addressed the challenges that doom many vets to unemployment or low-wage jobs. Among other problems, veterans have difficulty converting their skills to the private sectorfinding purpose in civilian work and obtaining occupational licenses enabling them to apply skills learned in the military.

Raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, up from the current $7.25, would benefit about 1.8 million vets, along with millions of other Americans, who barely scrape by. The House last year approved a bill to increase the minimum wage, but Senate Republicans refuse to act on it.

Although significant progress in combating veteran homelessness has been made in recent years, unemployment, low wages and health problems still force veterans onto the streets or into shelters. About 40,000 are homeless, and 1.4 million more are only a lost paycheck or other crisis away from losing the roof over their heads.

A collection of government agencies and nonprofits operates soup kitchens, shelters and other services to serve America’s homeless. But this underfunded system is strained to capacity even in ordinary times.

Volunteers like Porter provide crucial support, stepping in when government agencies don’t know who else to call for help.

A veterans hospital once contacted Porter and asked him to help a man who lived outdoors. His tent was broken, and rain kept getting inside.

Porter picked up the vet and drove him to see a friend who owned an awning company. The businessman fixed the tent for free.

In a crisis, like the COVID-19 pandemic, this patchwork system is easily overwhelmed.

Some service providers already reduced services or limited new admissions to slow the spread of the disease.

Agencies closed drop-in centers where homeless veterans can get out of the elements. Some now want to counsel clients remotely, even though homeless people may not have cell phones.

And in the Quad Cities, Porter and his crew are sidelined, too.

Homeless vets face even greater odds during the COVID-19 crisis even though they have a higher risk of contracting the disease than other Americans.

Many live in cramped quarters without the social distancing and sanitary measures vital to controlling the virus. The closing of libraries, malls and coffee shops deprived them of places to wash their hands. They have nowhere to isolate themselves if they get sick.

Some cities are scrambling to place homeless people in places such as unused motel rooms, vacant houses and recreational vehicles on public streets. The goal is to disperse the population and keep the disease from spreading like wildfire if someone contracts it.

While the COVID-19 crisis is unprecedented, the slapdash response underscores how fragile the safety net for America’s homeless really is.

As cities struggle to adapt, the ranks of the homeless likely will grow because of the economic slowdown, putting more stress on the overtaxed system.

The government’s response to COVID-19 must include injecting funds into programs that support homeless veterans and keep other vets from losing their homes.

But federal officials also must think about what the economy and social-service network will look like after the pandemic.

That means better funding a system now overly reliant on fundraisers like taco dinners and poppy sales. It means comprehensively addressing the problems servicemen and servicewomen face when they leave the armed forces.

Thoughtful interventions will save lives, says Porter, who recently ran into the veteran he rescued from the “junky” house.

“I’m on my feet,” the man told him. “I’m doing OK.”

This article was originally printed the Independent Media Institute. on March 27, 2020. Reprinted with permission. 

About the Author: Tom Conway is international president of the United Steelworkers (USW).

Coronavirus is a huge labor issue, this week in the war on workers

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is avatar_2563.jpg

Thanks largely to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats, workers’ issues are getting a lot of attention as the United States confronts coronavirus. We’ll see what Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell do with it, but Democrats (and COVID-19) have managed to get paid sick leave and paid family leave into the national conversation. Democrats are also pushing for emergency improvements to unemployment insurance and to food assistance, which is a workers’ issue when you consider how many working people rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Those aren’t the only concerns, though. Look below for a bunch of coronavirus-and-labor links, but also check out the Economic Policy Institute’s discussion of how to handle a coronavirus-related recession, which Josh Bivens warns could happen much more quickly than the 2008 Great Recession. He suggests “rapid direct payments to individuals,” similar to what President George W. Bush did in 2008, but with some improvements. State governments are also likely to be hit hard in ways that could be a strong anti-stimulus, so, Bivens suggests, the federal government could very quickly combat that: “A quick way to transfer resources to state governments is to pay states’ share of Medicaid for the next year. This was done as part of the Recovery Act in 2009, and it is possibly the single most-effective component of the Act (when combining scale and per-dollar impact).”

This article was originally published at Daily Kos on March 16, 2020. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is a Daily Kos contributor at Daily Kos editor since December 2006. Full-time staff since 2011, currently assistant managing editor.

Trump Labor Department gives big companies the go-ahead to exploit franchise workers

The Trump Labor Department is taking action to protect massive corporations from their low-wage workers seeking justice in court, because the Trump Labor Department, currently headed by Eugene Scalia, is all about putting a boot on the neck of workers. The department is finalizing a rule making it more difficult for workers at franchise businesses or contractors—like fast food workers or warehouse workers technically employed by staffing agencies—to sue the companies they actually work for for wage theft and other such violations.

The Labor Department is tightening up the joint employer standard that the Obama administration had made more worker friendly. Under Obama, companies would have counted as joint employers if they substantially set the terms of employment even if they only exerted indirect control over any individual worker. So McDonald’s, which exerts incredibly tight control over every detail of its franchisee-owned restaurants and has even told some franchisees they were paying workers too much, would count as a joint employer of McDonald’s workers. Under Trump, McDonald’s is off the hook unless it directly hires and fires workers, directly supervises the workers and sets their schedules, directly sets their pay, and manages their employment records.

But that’s the point—McDonald’s and other big companies that want to keep wages and working conditions at rock bottom while maintaining plausible deniability have gotten really good at getting franchisees and contractors to do their dirty work. They claim—and the Trump administration will back them up on this—that it’s not McDonald’s or Walmart engaging in wage theft and forcing workers into unsafe working conditions, even as the wage theft and working conditions are found across dozens of franchisees and contractors with McDonald’s or Walmart as the common factor. The common employer, in fact, exerting significant control over the places where its business is conducted.

This is a plan to let major companies abuse and exploit their workers without any legal risk for the labor law violations involved. Or, in Republican-speak via Scalia, “This final rule furthers President Trump’s successful, governmentwide effort to address regulations that hinder the American economy and to promote economic growth.” Economic growth for multi-billion-dollar companies at the expense of low-wage workers, that is.

This article was originally published at Daily Kos on January 15, 2020. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is a Daily Kos contributor at Daily Kos editor since December 2006. Full-time staff since 2011, currently assistant managing editor.

Greater Boston Labor Council Makes History with Latest Election

Kalina Newman

The Greater Boston Labor Council (GBLC), AFL-CIO, made history last week with the election of the first woman of color to its top office. Darlene Lombos takes over as executive secretary-treasurer, replacing Richard Rogers, who officially retired after leading the GBLC for the past 16 years.

Lombos brings more than 20 years of community and youth organizing experience in the labor movement to the position. She served as vice president of the GBLC and has been the executive director of Community Labor United since 2011. A vital asset to the greater Boston community, her work continues to protect and promote the interests of working-class families and communities of color in greater Boston and throughout the commonwealth.

“I am honored to lead such an amazing group of dedicated workers in the Boston area,” said Lombos. “Rich was a true mentor and I look forward to continuing his legacy of empowering working families for years to come.”

Rogers, a member of Painters and Allied Trades (IUPAT) Local 391, leaves behind an impressive legacy in the labor movement. Prior to leading the GBLC, Rogers served on the staff of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO for 21 years, 12 of those as the state federation’s political director. He was the chief organizer for several influential political campaigns, including Ted Kennedy’s 1994 U.S. Senate race and the elections of Jim McGovern and John Tierney to the U.S. House of Representatives. He played an integral role during his four terms as GBLC executive secretary-treasurer in growing and strengthening the Boston-area labor movement.

In recognition of his lifetime of hard work and dedication to the movement, The Labor Guild awarded the prestigious Cushing-Gavin Award to Rogers in December 2019.

This blog was originally published by the AFL-CIO on January 13, 2020. Reprinted with permission. 

About the Author: Kalina Newman is an editorial fellow for Washingtonian. Previously, she covered metro news for the Boston Globe. Her work has appeared in ARLnow, DCist, and the Washington City Paper. Kalina graduated from Boston University in 2019 with a degree in journalism.

House Democrats plan push to pass PRO Act strengthening workers’ organizing rights

House Democrats are getting ready to pass another pro-worker bill in the coming weeks, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced Friday, tweeting that “House Democrats are proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with working men and women across the country. I look forward to bringing the PRO Act to the House Floor for a vote prior to the President’s Day district work period to protect the right to organize and bargain collectively.”

The PRO Act would strengthen the right to organize in several ways. It would create real penalties for employers that fire workers for exercising their National Labor Relations Act right to organize, and get those workers their jobs back much more quickly than in the current system. It would streamline the union representation election process, preventing employers from holding captive-audience meetings at which they try to intimidate workers away from union support, forcing companies to disclose the money they spend on anti-union consultants, and “If the employer breaks the law or interferes with a fair election, the PRO Act empowers the NLRB to require the employer to bargain with the union if it had the support of a majority of workers prior to the election,” the Economic Policy Institute explains.

Once workers have a union, employers often drag out and delay the process of negotiating a first contract. The PRO Act cracks down on that, pushing employers into mediation and even binding arbitration if they won’t bargain in good faith. On top of that, it “overrides so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws by establishing that employers and unions in all 50 states may agree upon a “fair share” clause requiring all workers who are covered by—and benefit from—the collective bargaining agreement to contribute a fair share fee towards the cost of bargaining and administering the agreement.” It protects the jobs of striking workers and lifts the prohibition on secondary boycotts. And it cracks down on misclassification of workers as either independent contractors or supervisors to make them ineligible for union representation.

Rep. Mark Pocan and Kenneth Rigmaiden, the president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, offered an example of workers the PRO Act could help. “[D]uring a construction project in Nashville, Tenn., 120 misclassified drywall finishers were never compensated for overtime work and two weeks of work at the end of the project,” they wrote in The Hill. “The Painters Union and other labor groups are fighting back to win these workers their fair pay. The PRO Act would ensure that employers could no longer dodge wage and hour standards by misclassifying workers.”

As usual, House Democrats will do something good for working people and then Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will send it to his legislative graveyard. But when Republicans claim that Democrats are too busy with impeachment to do things for the American people, remember this and so many other bills. Democrats are getting shit done. It’s just that Republicans are determined to keep working people down.

This article was originally published at Daily Kos on January 10, 2020. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is a Daily Kos contributor at Daily Kos editor since December 2006. Full-time staff since 2011, currently assistant managing editor.

Michigan steel mill closure announced two days after Trump told Michigan crowd ‘steel is back’

Donald Trump, Wednesday in Michigan: “Look what I’ve done for steel. I mean, the steel is back. We taxed all the dumb steel coming in from China and other places, and US steel mills are doing great — they’re expanding all over the country, and they were gonna be out of business within two years the way they were going.”

Friday, CNN reported that US Steel is closing its Great Lakes Works mill near Detroit, with a loss of 1,500 jobs. The company will shift steel production to a mill in Gary, Indiana, and will also continue making sheets of steel outside of Pittsburgh and in Arkansas.

Trump’s steel tariffs did briefly give the industry a boost, but obviously things are not going so well recently, and 1,500 workers are getting some terrible news for the holidays, though the facility won’t close until spring.

This article was originally published at Daily Kos on December 20, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is a Daily Kos contributor at Daily Kos editor since December 2006. Full-time staff since 2011, currently assistant managing editor.

DNC expresses hope that labor dispute will be defused ahead of this week’s debate

Caitlin Oprysko

The Democratic National Committee said Monday that it expects parties involved in a labor dispute threatening to upend this week’s Democratic primary debate to “promptly” return to the negotiating table.

Xochitl Hinojosa, the committee’s communications director, cited Chairman Tom Perez’s experience as Labor secretary under former President Barack Obama, writing that he’d handled “several labor disputes” in that role and “understands how much of a priority it is to get people back at the table.”

She added: “We expect it to happen promptly. Stay tuned.”

Throughout the day Friday, all seven White House hopefuls who’d qualified for Thursday’s PBS NewsHour/POLITICO debate threatened to skip the event, pledging they would not cross the picket line of campus workers locked in a labor dispute.

UNITE HERE Local 11, a union representing 150 cashiers, cooks, dishwashers and servers at Loyola Marymount University, where the debate is scheduled to be held, said last week that it had not yet reached a collective bargaining agreement with Sodexo, a global services company that employs the workers and is subcontracted by the university to handle food service operations.

The union began talks with Sodexo this spring, but said the company recently canceled scheduled contract negotiations after workers and students began picketing on campus in November.

In a statement Friday, the DNC said both the committee and Loyola Marymount had only found out about the dispute that day, and would work to find a solution to allow the debate to go forward. Perez said then that he “would absolutely not cross a picket line and would never expect our candidates to either.”

On Sunday, union co-President Susan Minato said that the group hoped to resume negotiations on Tuesday “or sooner” in hopes of reaching a resolution by Thursday, and expressed gratitude for the Democratic candidates who’d offered their support.

The planned protests and candidates’ ultimatums represent the second time a campus labor fight has scrambled plans for the December debate, which will be the last such event of 2019. After announcing the University of California, Los Angeles, as the debate’s initial venue in late October, the DNC later announced the university would not host the event.

This article was originally published on Politico on December 16, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Caitlin is a breaking news reporter for POLITICO. She joined POLITICO Pro in 2016 as a web producer before moving into the senior web producer role, where she edited and produced Pro content daily in addition to authoring the Afternoon Energy newsletter and contributing to the Prescription Pulse newsletter. During a stint on POLITICO’s Legislative Compass team, she covered an omnibus spending bill, the farm bill and several appropriations bills from their introduction to the president’s desk.Before coming to POLITICO, Caitlin worked on the social desk for ABC News’ D.C. Bureau, where she used social media to monitor coverage areas, curated images and videos for broadcasts, pitched and reported out stories and collaborated on breaking news. Caitlin is a graduate of the University of Georgia, where she covered state and local news and worked for the student-run newscast Grady Newsource.

Trump appointees hand McDonald’s a win in labor case, this week in the war on workers

Donald Trump’s conflict-of-interest-plagued National Labor Relations Board handed McDonald’s a big win in the fight over whether the company shares responsibility for workers and working conditions in most of its restaurants. The board allowed a $170,000 settlement between McDonald’s franchisees and workers, overruling an administrative law judge who had said the settlement was inadequate.

The lone Democrat on the NLRB dissented, saying that the judge “reasonably exercised her discretion to reject settlements that fail to resolve the joint-employer status of McDonald’s, and instead serve to advance the policy view of the current General Counsel, who has attacked the Board’s current joint-employer standard at every opportunity as he litigated this case brought by his predecessor.”

Under Trump, the NLRB has moved to let companies like McDonald’s off the hook as a joint employer of workers who work in their facilities but on paper are employed by franchisees, temp services, or other third parties. McDonald’s notoriously exerts tight control over every detail in its restaurants, including details about workers, yet claims not to be their employer when it comes to labor law violations and other problems. And the Trump NLRB agrees.

This article was originally published at Daily Kos on December 14, 2019. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Laura Clawson is a Daily Kos contributor at Daily Kos editor since December 2006. Full-time staff since 2011, currently assistant managing editor.

Newsom has an organized labor problem

Angela HartMackenzie MaysJeremy B. WhiteSome of California’s most powerful unions are openly denouncing Gov. Gavin Newsom less than a year into his tenure, exposing early fractures in the Democratic governor’s base after he spurned proposals they considered a bellwether of his support for labor.

Simmering tensions erupted last month when Newsom vetoed three bills backed by the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. The governor has also come under fire from the California Nurses Association for backtracking on single-payer health care.

Unions suggest that losing their support will have long-term consequences if Newsom, widely known to have national ambitions, does run for president. For now, Newsom insists he’s focused on his governorship.

“National politics provides us a cautionary tale of what happens when the working class is forgotten by candidates who are steeped in the ambitions of unrequited presidential aspirations,” said Robbie Hunter, president of the trades organization that represents 400,000 people.

Newsom coasted into office last year on a wave of support from organized labor, earning key endorsements from unions that underpinned his early lead in the Democratic primary as the clear frontrunner, allowing him to amass a war chest that carried him unscathed through the general election. He defeated his toughest rival, Democratic challenger Antonio Villaraigosa, by more than 20 points in the 2018 primary.

While in office, however, Newsom has taken some moderate positions that unions fear may signal how he intends to govern for as many as seven more years. The governor has pointed to fears of an economic downturn to reject state spending. He also has blamed President Donald Trump for his meandering single-payer stance, a change that has frustrated the California Nurses Association.

The nurses group recently called Newsom’s veto of a hospital closure notification bill “shameful” and believes he has not been forthright on the single-payer issue. CNA was among Newsom’s earliest backers.

“I think what true reformers of this health care system want to see is transparency, honesty, action and cooperation,” head CNA lobbyist Stephanie Roberson told POLITICO. “Just because we support you, that doesn’t mean that buys our silence on calling you out when you are wrong or don’t keep your promise.”

The construction workers’ union backed Newsom during his gubernatorial run, but he angered the group by vetoing proposals that would have increased funding for affordable housing construction, boosted union pay on taxpayer-subsidized public works projects and required higher wages for workers building charter schools.

“This governor has added his voice into the chorus of politicians that disrespect the contribution of blue-collar workers,” Hunter said.

Following that rare public rebuke, the trades council came after Newsom again, paying for social media posts slamming him for dithering on an Occupational Safety and Health Administration board appointment and not doing enough to protect worker safety.

The widening dispute followed Newsom’s earlier removal of Hunter from a coveted committee charged with examining broad shifts in California’s workplace demands. Not having a trades voice on the panel is “highly concerning to all of us,” the group’s chief lobbyist, Cesar Diaz, told POLITICO.

The California Teachers Association has likewise grown restless, though it has not blasted Newsom the same way as CNA and the building trades council. Three major teachers unions in California this year went on strike, reflecting the growing anger that members have over pay, benefits and working conditions while California state government has a record surplus.

The group was instrumental last year in helping Newsom win the primary after battle lines were drawn between teachers and charter schools, which gave Villaraigosa more than $20 million. Given that dynamic, teachers unions were hopeful that the governor would block new charter schools and crack down on existing ones.

CTA was satisfied that Newsom signed charter school restrictions previously rejected by former Gov. Jerry Brown, who founded two Oakland charters. Rick Wathen, a CTA political director, said the union got further with Newsom than it did in eight previous years under Brown.

But members were hoping for more. CTA leaders believed the governor drove changes that watered down the charter bill to reach compromise with the California Charter Schools Association.

The governor also signed a bill mandating later school start times for middle and high school students in response to research showing that adolescents need more morning sleep. That rankled CTA, whose members believe start times should be negotiated with unions at the local level.

And the California Federation of Teachers was upset that Newsom vetoed legislation expanding paid maternity leave for teachers. The governor said he was concerned about additional costs.

“I don’t think he is prioritizing education as much as he should be,” said Ever Flores, president of the Healdsburg Area Teachers Association, a CTA affiliate. “CTA — we did a lot for Gavin Newsom, making sure he would get elected.”

To those outside the state, Newsom may seem a California liberal figurehead. He made national headlines in 2004 when he performed same-sex marriages as a new San Francisco mayor well before it became politically popular. He broke through the national noise as governor this year when he approved Medi-Cal benefits for undocumented immigrants through age 25, raising the hackles of Trump and conservatives across the country.

But within California, the governor has not always been considered a liberal through and through. In San Francisco, he was elected as a fiscal conservative and business-minded Democrat who founded a local wine store that has grown into a network of wineries and resorts under the brand PlumpJack. Those business roots may still run deep as he confronts the risks of leading California at the end of lengthy economic expansion.

Darry Sragow, a Democratic strategist and publisher of the nonpartisan California Target Book, suggested that Newsom is experiencing the normal transition from Democratic candidate to chief executive.

“I think there’s the sense that the governor made a lot of commitments when he ran for office, and predictably he’s tempering his agenda after assessing what the reality is,” Sragow said.

The governor appears to be playing a cautious hand not just because of recession fears, but also because a potential run for president may require moderation.

“This early, I think [labor unions] need him more than he needs them, but ultimately it could create vulnerabilities for Newsom,” said Republican strategist Rob Stutzman. “He’s exerting a certain amount of independence from labor that is not unusual for Democratic governors … it becomes impossible from an executive position to grant labor their every wish and be able to effectively govern.

“But labor will still be a constituency he’s going to want to court for national aspirations,” he said.

For all the outcry, it’s not as if Newsom has turned his back on unions. California’s umbrella labor group lauded Newsom for protecting gig worker rights and ending arrangements that shield employers from lawsuits in cases of alleged wrongdoing.

“Those were tremendous victories for us,” said Steve Smith, a spokesperson for the California Labor Federation. “He has three more years in his first term and we’re going to be looking at him to see how we can address some of the state’s thorniest problems like inequality and housing.”

Labor leaders also lauded a bill he signed allowing child care workers to unionize for the first time. At a celebratory Los Angeles rally last month, he stood alongside top labor officials to promote what will be the country’s largest union organizing campaign.

“Thank you to organized labor,” Newsom said to an adoring crowd. “Just know that this is the beginning. The best is yet to come.”

The governor also agreed this summer to significant salary increases for correctional officers, which drew a scathing report from the Legislative Analyst’s Office questioning if Newsom was actually doing too much for the California Correctional Peace Officers Association.

Newsom spokesperson Vicky Waters said the governor and lawmakers “achieved historic and long-sought victories for working families this year.” As evidence, she pointed to the charter school restrictions, gig worker protections and child care organizing bill, as well as an increase in the earned-income tax credit and paid family leave expansion.

“Organized labor and our vibrant workforce are part of what makes our state great, and Gov. Newsom looks forward to continued partnership with organized labor in the months and years ahead,” she said.

Still, the governor has to worry about his left flank, given how loud some of his allies are. The California Nurses Association has long been a thorn in the side of California governors, even the ones they appear to like best.

Newsom didn’t push through a single-payer health care bill this year after voicing strong support as a gubernatorial candidate for a 2017 bill that stalled in the Assembly. “I’m tired of politicians saying they support single-payer but that it’s too soon, too expensive or someone else’s problem,” Newsom said during the campaign.

CNA’s relationship with Newsom has soured since the election as he’s soft-pedaled the issue. Newsom now insists it’s impossible to accomplish single-payer as long as Trump is in office.

“He made it clear to us that he was with us on single-payer,” Roberson said of his campaign promises. “We didn’t need an interpreter to find out what he meant. But if you compare his actions with what he told us in December, I would say it’s not congruent.”

Nurses are still hoping its members will win appointments on Newsom’s single-payer health care commission, but the governor is already more than two months behind schedule on naming his picks.

The nurses union told POLITICO its relationship with Newsom is “shaky” also because he vetoed legislation that would have expanded public notification periods for hospital closures. Nurses called Newsom’s veto “shameful” on Twitter, and the union this month wrote an op-ed with the headline, “Newsom said he was a health care champion. But this action says otherwise.”

Teachers are preparing to do battle next year as well. In a sign of their unrest, CTA board members this summer ousted longtime Executive Director Joe Nuñez and will confront the business community next year with a November ballot initiative that would raise commercial property taxes to generate more school and government funding.

Union members say that how Newsom handles the 2020 “split-roll” ballot initiative — including a possible Capitol deal that averts a campaign fight — will make or break his relationship with CTA, especially after the charter bill was watered down. And Wathen said CTA will be back in the Capitol seeking a moratorium on new charters and cap on charters in particular districts.

Elsewhere, no issue will more directly test Newsom’s relationship with formidable unions than how he handles negotiations over newly enacted CA AB5 (19R), which enshrines in law a California Supreme Court ruling dictating that more workers — including gig laborers — should be treated as employees, not independent contractors.

Labor unions are anxious because Newsom has long sought a deal that could mollify unions and tech companies that rely on contract labor. The governor’s desire to find compromise, as with the charter school legislation, has frustrated union members who believe he is willing to give too much away. And tech companies are trying to leverage a deal by floating a ballot initiative that’s weaker than their legislative proposal to let gig workers unionize if they remain contractors — a sweetener that’s intended to entice unions but could split labor.

Union leaders say they are counting on Newsom as they push for more in his second year.

“I really have high expectations for this governor,” said Service Employees International Union California President Bob Schoonover. “I think we’re going to accomplish a lot with him.”

This article was originally published by Politico on November 4, 2019. Reprinted with permission. 

About the Author: Angela Hart covers health care for California Pro, focusing on political and policy developments in Sacramento. She is also part of the team covering the transition of Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom. Prior to joining Politico, she covered California politics and Gavin Newsom’s gubernatorial campaign for The Sacramento Bee and previously was the county government and politics reporter at the Santa Rosa Press Democrat in Sonoma County, Calif.

She is a Wisconsin native, military veteran and holds a master’s degree from the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism.

About the Author: Mackenzie Mays covers education in California. Prior to joining POLITICO in 2019, she was the investigative reporter at the Fresno Bee, where her watchdog reporting of Rep. Devin Nunes and other politicians — and the fierce push back it provoked — made national headlines, including being the subject of a feature in GQ. She is well-versed in California education policy, having started at the Bee as the education reporter, where she covered Fresno Unified, the state’s fourth-largest school district. She was a national finalist for the Education Writers Association’s reporting award in 2018.

About the Author: Jeremy B. White co-writes the California Playbook and covers politics in the Golden State. He previously covered the California Legislature for the Sacramento Bee, where he reported on campaigns, myriad nationally significant policy clashes and multiple FBI investigations of sitting lawmakers.

He has a bachelor’s degree in English from Tufts University and a master’s degree in journalism from Columbia University. A native of Bethesda, Maryland, one of his life dreams is to throw out the first pitch at a Washington Nationals game — although he would settle for winning a playoff series. He lives in Oakland with his partner and his cat, Ziggy Pawdust.

Trump Is Waging a War On Labor Unions, But You Wouldn’t Know It from CNN’s Dem Debate

Last night, CNN and the New York Times co-hosted a Democratic debate in Westerville, Ohio—and even by the standards of the mainstream media, the omissions were glaring. There were no questions about police violence, affordable housing, Israel, or the climate crisis. However, there was a softball question about friendship inspired by the bond between Ellen DeGeneres and George W. Bush.

Key labor battles were notably missing from the discussion. While a few of the candidates mentioned unions, the moderators didn’t meaningfully press any of them about the many work stoppages currently taking place throughout the country, except for a question about the General Motors (GM) strike, which mostly focused on the death of the auto industry and how we might be jobs back. The moderators failed to inquire about plans to strengthen worker power, or ask any questions about labor law, giving the impression that unions—and the entire working class—are tangential to the 2020 presidential race.

Surprisingly, there actually was one question about the GM Strike, which has left 50,000 workers without a paycheck for over a month, with the membership poised to vote on a tentative contract, according to breaking news this morning. But the question was framed in the context of a beleaguered industry that could potentially be saved via economic nationalism. The candidates were simply asked about the declining power of U.S. car companies and whether or not they had a plan to bring back jobs from Mexico. There was no mention of the fact that the current strike is directly connected to the restructuring of the company and the concessions that were forced upon workers by the Obama administration as part of the 2009 bailout, despite the fact that a leading Democratic candidate was Obama’s vice president.

That question was fielded by Senator Cory Booker and former Congressman Beto O’Rourke, who both referenced the importance of unions. Booker even said that he’d establish sectoral bargaining rights for workers. That promise might have come as a surprise to the Newark Teachers Union, whose president once declared that the goal of Booker’s state education plan was to “defang public teachers unions.”

No other current strike or worker battle was asked about or referenced in any of the CNN questions. Nothing about the 20,000 Chicago teachers who just voted to authorize a strike, and nothing about the 2,000 striking miners in Arizona or the sanitation workers in Massachusetts who have been on the picket line for a month. There was nothing about the many newsrooms that continue to organize, social workers fighting for a new contract in California, Harvard student workers casting ballots in a strike authorization vote, or the American Federation of Musicians agitating to receive residuals from streaming programs.

There was also nothing asked about the Trump administration’s war on labor unions. Nothing about Trump’s NLRB pushing a corporate agenda for the last two years, its rollback of Obama-era employee protections, its new anti-worker Secretary of Labor, its inadequate new overtime rules, or its dangerous decision to speed up the production lines of slaughterhouses. There was nothing about the state of unions in the wake of Janus Supreme Court decision, and nothing about how to strengthen them despite current legal restrictions.

There were references to the “middle class,” a term that has always possessed a nebulous definition and been used to flatten class divisions and erode working-class solidarity. The only reference to the “working class” was made by Senator Bernie Sanders.

After Warren spoke eloquently about breaking up tech companies, she faced a centrist onslaught of onstage opposition. O’Rourke even compared the plan to the policies of Donald Trump. “We will be unafraid to break up big businesses if we have to do that — but I don’t think it is the role of a president or a candidate for the presidency to specifically call out which companies will be broken up,” he said. “That’s something that Donald Trump has done in part because he sees enemies in the press and wants to diminish their power. It’s not something that we should do.”

Nearly every question posed to the candidates not named Sanders or Warren seemed to be punctuated with an explicit instruction: Tell us why the policies being pushed by a Democratic Socialist and a New Deal Liberal can’t work and why they can’t beat Trump.

However, while the fix might have been in for centrism, it still failed to win the evening. Warren was attacked as if she were the frontrunner and Joe Biden did nothing to suggest the other candidates had picked the wrong target. Despite his recent heart attack and polls that suggest he’s underperforming his 2016 showing, Sanders was strong and concise. While some pundits admitted that the debate might have been his, it was announced Tuesday night that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is endorsing the Senator. Shortly after that bombshell, sources revealed that Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) would also endorse. Bernie has now locked up 75% of The Squad.

Mainstream election coverage may largely omit the subject of labor organizing, but its importance can currently be felt in the labor battles being waged throughout the country. It’s a key component of defeating Trumpism, via the ballot box and beyond. The worker protections that have been eroded must be reinstituted. The labor power that’s been diminished must be built back up. The Democratic candidate must be pushed hard on these issues, whoever it ends up being.

This article was originally published at In These Times on October 16, 2019. Reprinted with permission. 

About the Author: Michael Arria covers labor and social movements.

Follow this Blog

Subscribe via RSS Subscribe via RSS

Or, enter your address to follow via email:

Recent Posts

Forbes Best of the Web, Summer 2004
A Forbes "Best of the Web" Blog

Archives

  • Tracking image for JustAnswer widget
  • Find an Employment Lawyer

  • Support Workplace Fairness

 
 

Find an Employment Attorney

The Workplace Fairness Attorney Directory features lawyers from across the United States who primarily represent workers in employment cases. Please note that Workplace Fairness does not operate a lawyer referral service and does not provide legal advice, and that Workplace Fairness is not responsible for any advice that you receive from anyone, attorney or non-attorney, you may contact from this site.