fortune--2019-05-20--The Job Market for Doctors Is Booming Heres What It Means for You

The Job Market for Doctors Is Booming. Here’s What It Means for You

America is benefiting from an historic bull market in employment, and no group is benefiting more than doctors. Newly-minted physicians are choosing from multiple job offers, getting paid more sumptuously than ever, and can practice pretty much wherever they want. At the same time, the way they practice is shifting radically, as more and more physicians choose salaried positions with hospital chains and group practices encompassing thousands of MDs.  But the new corporate model is so hamstrung by the trickle of newly-minted doctors entering practice each year that it can’t come close to meeting the needs of an America whose senior ranks will swell by 46% over the next two decades. The magic of the market is circumventing that roadblock by creating loads of fresh capacity in the form of walk-in clinics, dialysis centers, and other neighborhood venues, staffed by increasing ranks of nurse practitioners, that can provide the care and wellness for patients with chronic conditions who’d otherwise wait weeks to see a primary care doctor, or don’t even have one.  A new study by Merritt Hawkins, America’s largest physician search firm, points to seven trends that are reshaping the how healthcare is delivered. “2019 Survey: Final-Year Medical Residents,” polled doctors months from finishing their residencies and entering the job market. Here’s what they found–and what it means for you.  Merritt Hawkins found that two-thirds of the final-year residents received 51 or more solicitations from recruiters, hospitals, medical groups and others, and that 45% were presented 100 or more job opportunities.  How much did the residents expect their first jobs to pay, based on their conversations with potential employers? A lot. Eight-one percent expected to start at over $201,000, and 21% said they were looking at $326,000 or more. It was the specialists, including surgeons, who anticipated the richest packages, with more than half anticipating comp above $325,000. By contrast, only 24% of primary care residents, a category consisting of internists, pediatricians and family doctors, reckoned they’d make over $250,000. Based on Merritt Hawkins’ surveys of actual first year pay, both groups may be underestimating their initial pay. On average, Merritt Hawkins found, the three primary care groups earn an average of $250,000, while beginning pay is $386,000 in urology, $405,000 for otolaryngology, and $533,000 for orthopedic surgery.  It’s a famous failing of our medical system that rural communities struggle to recruit physicians. The survey provides cold comfort for America’s small towns. It found that where they work is the residents’ biggest single concern, and that 83% want to practice in cities with over 100,000 people; 60% of the primary care doctors are seeking destinations of 250,000 or more. Given that tremendous demand, new doctors can go where they want, and it’s seldom the heartland where the need is greatest. The wealth of choices also leads to lots of turnover. Merritt Hawkins finds that one in eight primary care practitioners changes jobs each year, and that the number is probably far higher for those in the first or second year out of residency.  A big reason that doctors change jobs so readily is the “corporatization” of healthcare. Small “Marcus Welby, M.D.”-style practices have mostly disappeared, and the market is now dominated by big group practices, many of them owned by hospitals. A notable example is Baylor, Scott & White in Dallas, combining a hospital chain and group network of 7,800 physicians. Eighty-three percent of the residents aspired to work for a hospital or group practice, compared with 61% in 2008, with all of the increase coming from preference to join a hospital. Only 9% sought to open an independent practice, versus one-quarter a decade ago.  Doctors are big revenue producers for hospitals. In another study, “2019 Physician Inpatient/Outpatient Revenue Survey,” Merritt Hawkins found that primary care doctors generated $2.1 million a year on average for their hospital-employers, and specialists did even better at $2.46 million, with cardiac and orthopedic surgeons contributing well over $3 million. On average, the revenue per doctor jumped 52% since 2016. That’s because costs per admission are rising, and since hospitals are merging, doctors on average work for bigger and bigger organizations, so they generate increasing income by referring patients to the chains that own their practices, and ordering tests at hospital-run labs.  The Merritt Hawkins report contains a succinct summary of the factors explaining the penury of physicians, and a study from the Association of American Medical Colleges (“The Complexities of Supply and Demand: Projections from 2017 to 2032”), offers a detailed analysis. All the doctors who enter the job market each year must all pass through a narrow opening, the number of positions offered by U.S. residency programs. Those programs are funded chiefly by federal grants from Medicare and Medicaid. In 1997, Congress froze that that funding at $14.5 billion a year, and it’s that cap that’s nearly frozen annual additions to the doctor supply. Hospitals and other programs now offer 32,194 residency positions. That’s up 15% from 2006 due to funding from states and private providers, but over those 12 years, medical spending has jumped 63% to $3.5 trillion.  The AAMC forecasts that today’s shortfall of 20,000 physicians will expand to a deficit of as many as 121,000 by 2032. By that year, the U.S. would likely have around 850,000 patient-care physicians––and need 14% more. For years, this writer has remarked that the official predictions have underestimated future shortages, and therefore, it’s highly possible that the future scenario could be far worse. For example, the AAMC observes that if the current trends toward early retirement continue, the doctor supply would barely rise at all over the next 13 years.  It’s often wrongly stated that the U.S. has a shortage of primary care doctors, and too many specialists. Not so. The AAMC study predicts that the specialist shortfall will be even worse than lack of primary care practitioners in the future. The reason is obvious: A rapidly aging, and longer-surviving, population that needs cardiac surgery, angioplasties, prostate operations and hip replacements.  The chronic doctor shortage is placing a predictable burden on patients: long wait times. In a 2017 study (“Survey of Physician Appointment Wait Times”), Merritt Hawkins examined the problem in fifteen major metros and fifteen mid-sized markets. In the big cities, the average time to see a doctor rose 30% in just three years, from 15 to 21 days, and in the smaller cities, the waiting period expanded 33% to 32 days. It takes 109 days to see a family doctor in Boston, and in Portland, the interlude has grown 8 to 39 days since 2009. In Albany, If you sign up in May for an appointment with a family doctor, you’ll be examined in September. Seeing an orthopedic surgeon takes 43 days in L.A. and 42 days in Atlanta.  It’s obvious that if America is to avoid rationing and price controls, its medical universe will need a lot more capacity. And capitalist ingenuity is now starting to fill the void. Retail clinics are sprouting in drugstores and as free-standing outlets in neighborhood malls. Although the scope of work they’re allowed to perform varies from state to state, nurse practitioners and physician assistants now provide much of the basic care once furnished only by those overbooked doctors. AAMC predicts that the ranks of the NPs and PAs. will swell from 400,000 today to 800,000 by 2032, growing from half the number of today’s patient care doctors to an almost equal size.  The leading pioneer is CVS Health, which has 1100 MinuteClinics in its drugstores from coast-to-coast, and plans a big network of outlets called HealthHUBs that specialize in managing patients with such chronic conditions as diabetes and asthma.  It’s a widespread misperception that healthcare isn’t really a market, and defies the laws of supply and demand. Quite the contrary, it obeys them completely, and that’s the problem. Demand is artificially inflated by subsidies that leave consumers spending just 20 cents for every dollar they consume from take-home pay and savings, and supply that’s artificially restrained by such practices as the vice grip on new physicians. Those practices have left a giant void––and created a retail revolution aiming to fill it.  —Warren Buffett’s best stock picks over the past year  —Subscribe to the new Fortune 500 Daily audio briefing  —“Staggered” boards are paying off for stock investors  —CVS Wants Your Drugstore to be Your Doctor  Don’t miss the daily Term Sheet, Fortune‘s newsletter on deals and dealmakers.


westernjournal--2019-05-01--Job Market Erupts in April Grows Well Beyond What Economists Expected

Job Market Erupts in April, Grows Well Beyond What Economists Expected

The U.S. job market smashed expectations in April, according to a new report that said private payrolls grew by 275,000 jobs.  Figures released Wednesday by ADP and Moody’s Analytics showed the strongest growth since July, when jobs increased 284,000.  Prior to the report being released, economists expected private payrolls to grow by 177,000 jobs, CNBC reported.  “April posted an uptick in growth after the first quarter appeared to signal a moderation following a strong 2018,” Ahu Yildirmaz, vice president of the ADP Research Institute, said in a statement.  “The bulk of the overall growth is with service providers, adding the strongest gain in more than two years,” he said, according to Fox Business Network.  TRENDING: Former ICE Director Sounds Off on Border Crisis: ‘Forget About Congress’  Jobs in the service sector rose by 223,000 last month, the report said. Goods-producing jobs in construction, manufacturing and mining increased by 52,000, with 49,000 of those jobs in the construction sector.  Medium-size and small businesses led the way in adding new jobs, the report said.  “The job market is holding firm, as businesses work hard to fill open positions,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said in a statement.  “The economic soft patch at the start of the year has not materially impacted hiring. April’s job gains overstate the economy’s strength, but they make the case that expansion continues on,” he said.  Zandi said the private data might paint a rosier picture than will official Labor Department figures that will be unveiled Friday.  President Donald Trump has been given widespread credit for the economic revival during his administration. A new NBC poll found 58 percent of voters approve of Trump’s handling of the economy.  Meanwhile, a Gallup found only 13 percent of Americans polled this spring listed the economy as the nation’s biggest problem. Those who said it was a top problem reached as high as 40 percent in 2016, the year Trump was elected to the White House.  The president recently tweeted that the economy can do even better if the right Federal Reserve policies are pursued.  Job growth during the Trump administration is a powerful force in his bid for re-election, Kayleigh McEnany, the press secretary for Trump’s 2020 campaign, said Monday on Fox News.  Speaking on “Outnumbered,” McEnany called the president a “savior” for blue-collar workers in contrast to former Vice President Joe Biden, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president in 2020.  “For Joe Biden, for his job, we might as well call him Job-killing Joe,” McEnany said. “He oversaw and voted for NAFTA — it killed a million jobs. He wanted TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) — it would’ve killed half a million jobs.”  She said Trump will have a big advantage over Biden on the jobs front.  “When you lose 211,000 manufacturing jobs under Biden, and President Trump in two short years has brought back nearly half a million — Job-killing Joe, best of luck going into Pennsylvania,” she said.  We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


zerohedge--2019-12-21--Class 8 Market Continues Collapse As Navistar Cuts 1,300 More Jobs

Job cuts and bankruptcies in the world of heavy duty trucking have been a way of life over the last 18 months, as we have documented, with the industry steeped in recession as it reflects a larger, global slowdown in manufacturing.  That trend looks to be well in tact, with major transportation company Navistar reporting this week that it was going to be eliminating more than 1,300 jobs in North American production.  The company reported lower net income and revenue during Q4 as the industry's falling demand for trucks continued. Net income also fell for the year. The maker of international trucks said it would lay off 10% of its workforce and slashed its forecast for 2020 revenue to below the lowest estimate among analysts, which sent its share down more than 10%.  It was the biggest drop for the company's shares since October 2018.  Troy Clarke, Navistar chairman, president and CEO, said: “We are taking actions to adjust our business to current market conditions, including reducing production rates and selling, general and administrative expenses while restructuring our global and export operations. Building on the strong gains achieved over the last several years, Navistar has a clear roadmap in place for sustained growth that will set it apart from the industry.”  Profits in the company's truck segment fell to $86 million in the fourth quarter, down from $197 million a year earlier. For the year, it posted net income of $221 million, down 58% from the $340 million it posted last year.  Recall, we noted at the beginning of the month that November's Class 8 order numbers across the industry were collapsing.  November culminated a dismal year that some thought had seen a reprive with October's improved bookings. But data from FreightWaves showed that the collapse had continued its trend, indicating that the sluggish economy is to blame for lackluster replacement demand.  Orders totaled 17,300 units for November, which marked the slowest November since 2015 and a 39% collapse from November 2018. The slowdown in orders is also prompting layoffs by companies like Daimler Trucks North America, Volvo Trucks North America and Paccar Inc.  Other names in the Class 8 supply chain are also dealing with these negative trends. For instance, engine manufacturer Cummins Inc. is "laying off 2,000 white-collar employees globally in the first quarter of 2020".  Meanwhile, November used to be a month when fleets would be busy placing orders for the upcoming year. After October's slight tick up in orders, many analysts thought November could follow suit. That didn't happen, and sequentially November's order book was down 21% from October.  Don Ake, FTR vice president of commercial vehicles commented: "The stalling of freight growth is causing fleets to exercise caution in placing orders for 2020. There will still be plenty of freight to haul, so we expect fleets will continue to be profitable and to replace older equipment. However, there won’t be a need for much additional equipment on the roads.”  “The industry thrives on stability, but we are now on a rocky road,” Ake concluded.


thenewyorktimes--2019-11-01--Job Market Shows Resilience, Quieting Recession Fears

The American jobs engine has been beaten and battered, but it just keeps chugging along.  Employers added 128,000 jobs in October, the Labor Department said Friday, and revisions to prior months’ data tacked on another 95,000. The figures for October would have been stronger had it not been for the strike at General Motors, which shaved close to 50,000 workers from the employment rolls, and for the layoff of some 20,000 temporary census workers.  The unemployment rate ticked up to 3.6 percent, still near a half-century low. Stocks rose Friday after the report reassured investors about the health of the economy, with the S&P 500 reaching a record high.  All told, the report and other recent data paint a picture of a job market that is weathering the storm of trade tensions and a cooling global economy. The manufacturing sector is in a slump, business investment is falling, and overall economic growth has slowed this year. But consumers are still spending, employers are still hiring, and fears of an imminent recession, which reached a fever pitch over the summer, have quieted for now.  “It helps reduce the concern that the slowdown was becoming more broad-based and recession risks were right around the corner,” said Michael Gapen, chief United States economist for Barclays . “I think most people have a slightly more positive view of the U.S. economy now than even two or three weeks ago.”


theindependent--2019-04-30--Supermarkets with no tills will they be the death knell for 200000 cashier jobs

Supermarkets with no tills: will they be the death knell for 200,000 cashier jobs?

At a small, central London branch of Sainsbury’s, one mainstay of the traditional supermarket is notable by its absence: checkouts.  Starting this week, shoppers in the High Holborn branch will simply scan their own items using an app and then walk out.  The supermarket giant plans to use the trial to develop the app which it says will make grocery shopping quicker and more convenient.  But it highlights a deepening trend towards fewer tills and ultimately fewer staff.  So what might a new till-less future mean for British supermarkets and, more specifically, for the 2.7 million people who work in the retail industry?  There’s little doubt stripping out tills from supermarkets will mean fewer jobs in retail, a sector that employs more than any other in the UK, comfortably ahead of the next largest employer, construction, with 1.8 million.  Sainsbury’s has said the new setup merely frees up staff to spend time on the shop floor helping out customers and stocking shelves.  But it would defy business logic to think retailers will keep on all of the 200,000 cashiers estimated to work in the UK when the need for them disappears.  Alongside rent, labour is one of supermarkets’ biggest costs and one which they need to cut if they are to face up to the looming challenge of online retailers, including the mighty Amazon.  The Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimates that around two-thirds of cashier jobs are at high risk of being replaced by technology. That would mean around 135,000 jobs disappearing.  The new store format is more evolution than revolution. Sainsbury’s has already trialled its self-service app in other convenience stores and rivals including Marks & Spencer and the Co-op have piloted their own equivalents.  Meanwhile, thousands of supermarket jobs have already gone at all of the big players as they battle discount chains like Lidl and Aldi which employ fewer checkout staff.  It won’t have escaped anyone’s notice that supermarkets increasingly rely on self-service checkouts. The self-scan app is the next step on that trend.  Why shell out on expensive till technology when most shoppers now have a portable barcode scanner in their pocket in the form of their smartphone?  So the trend towards automation is well established, but it still has a long way to go.  Large parts of the supply chain that brings food (and other products) to our doors could also be automated within the next decade or so.  With artificial intelligence, self-driving vehicles and robots, the technology to replace lorry drivers, warehouse workers and administrative staff is already here.  Perhaps half of jobs related to retail could be automated as that technology improves and costs comes down, according to some estimates.  This is not necessarily a bad thing. Improving the efficiency of one of the most important parts of the economy should be welcomed and new jobs will be created as old ones disappear. But the impact of these changes depends hugely on how the process is managed.  Automation is frequently referred to as the “fourth industrial revolution”.  The government must play a much more proactive role than in previous upheavals, actively forecasting the changes and proactively helping those affected into training and alternative employment rather than hiding behind the excuse that “market forces” will work their magic.  It seems likely that they will, but that shop floor workers will still have a significant, if reduced, part to play.  Ultimately it will come down to shoppers’ preferences. After all, supermarkets introduced (non-smartphone-based) self-scan apps in the 1990s but the idea never really took off.  Will we be willing to pay a little extra to go to a shop that has a few more staff that we can ask for assistance or will we go for the cheapest option?  There’s almost certainly room for both. As many retailers well know, price is an important determinant of consumer behaviour but it is far from being the only one.  Therefore, there will be room for a no-frills, no-tills shopping experience alongside more traditional offerings, perhaps with a relatively small number of highly knowledgeable retail assistants that online rivals can’t offer.  Traditional retailers are increasingly switching on to the fact that our experiences of shopping in a real-life store – the sights, sounds, textures and personal interactions – are their key advantage.  So a future where we glide in solitary fashion through the aisles filling up our baskets without ever interacting with anyone seems – thankfully – a little way off yet.


birminghammail--2019-05-04--MI5 and MI6 are hiring for these job vacancies RIGHT NOW

MI5 and MI6 are currently recruiting - and you can apply for a string of roles RIGHT NOW.  The Security Service, also known as MI5, is the United Kingdom's domestic counter-intelligence and security agency and is part of its intelligence machinery alongside the Secret Intelligence Service, Government Communications Headquarters and Defence Intelligence.  Its headquarters is at Thames Bank in Central London but the service recruits nationwide.  Currently, they want a linguist, software engineer, project managers and intelligence cops.  They also have internships, to boot.  The service is directed to protect British parliamentary democracy and economic interests, and counter terrorism and espionage within the UK.  Our sister title the Manchester Evening News is reporting some of the jobs currently advertised online.  "Your language skills could open a fascinating role in intelligence," the agency says.  "The UK Intelligence Agencies are looking to recruit flexible hours linguists on a contract basis to use rare language skills to provide intelligence insights, working alongside our operational teams.  "You'll work as an integral part of an operational team, sifting language materials against requirements to identify reportable intelligence that will be forwarded to analysts to help shape and influence their operational decision-making.  "You'll also have the opportunity to verbally brief colleagues across the intelligence agencies."  "These are openings for language skills to support MI5, SIS and GCHQ."  "Technology sits at the heart of everything we do at MI5, enabling us to disrupt serious threats to UK security.  "Engineering is the heart of MI5, developing and maintaining tools and capabilities that support all aspects of our business.  "We solve problems that you don’t see elsewhere, in a unique context that comes with a satisfaction nobody else can offer you.  "We’re looking for engineers with fresh skills to build, maintain and enhance a wide variety of software products.  "You will work as part of a team, engineering new and existing products that drive our investigations, analysis and corporate functions."  £25,240 per annum which will then be pro-rated over the course of the 11-week programme  "We offer penultimate year students studying a STEM related degree a unique opportunity to improve their technical and analytical skills through our 11 week paid summer internship.  "Supported by experienced, professional and innovative colleagues in technical teams, you will have the opportunity to work on live projects you won’t find anywhere else and make a direct impact on how we use technology to protect the UK from serious security threats, such as terrorism and espionage.  "Combining problem-solving skills with a proficiency for working with technology, you’ll be a confident communicator with the ability to explain technical concepts clearly to different audiences.  "In some areas you’ll need basic coding skills, while in others your logical approach, interest in data flows or knowledge of computer security or computer forensics, will be more important.  "With basic computer skills, you’ll be comfortable working at a computer for long periods and handling a range of written, numerical, image-based and audio data."  "Intelligence is at the heart of what MI6 does.  "It is the secret information that the British government requires to keep the country safe and prosperous.  "As an intelligence officer your focus will be gathering, delivering and utilising intelligence.  "These are fascinating and unique roles.  "As your career develops, you will have ample opportunity to broaden your skills and to move into management and operational leadership positions."  "Project Management sits at the heart of everything we do here at MI6 – or as we’re more formally called, the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS).  "It is the enabler for changing the way we work to make us more effective and efficient and to keep us ahead of those who seek to do harm to our country and our citizens, wherever they are in the world.  "Our Project Managers take responsibility for translating business needs into credible, achievable plans, with a focus on incorporating the appropriate standards of performance, reliability and security whilst looking for novel and creative solutions."


birminghammail--2019-10-09--These are your rights if you're working a night shift when the clocks go back

British Summer Time is coming to an end this month as we are all forced to alter the clocks once more.  Then we are back on standard Greenwich Mean Time.  Many people will be tucked up in bed at 2am when the clocks go back an hour, so they'll have to remember to make the adjustments before they go to sleep.  But others will be working in nightclubs or late-opening bars; doing a night shift in a factory, hospital, fire station, ambulance depot or elsewhere; or scheduled to work on Sunday morning.  So what does this mean for staff who are working through the period when the clocks go back ? Should they be paid for working an extra hour? Or can they go home when they’ve worked their usual number of hours, even when the clock says they have an hour to go?  Alan Price, CEO and HR expert at BrightHR, explains your rights on the night:  "The first thing you should be aware of is how the clocks going back affects working hours. You need to check your employees’ contracts to see how their working hours are detailed.  "A contract which states the employees’ shift starts at midnight and finishes at 8 am will require the employee to work a shift of nine hours.  "In contrast, a contract which says the shift lasts eight hours starting from midnight will allow the employee to leave at 7 am as they will have technically worked eight hours. In this situation, you may wish to agree with the employee that they will work an extra hour and leave at their standard finishing time."  So the bottom line is to check your contract, especially if you're new to your job and haven't had to think about this situation in the past.  He adds: "In relation to paying staff, a contract that states an individual is entitled to hourly pay will mean that they should be paid extra if they work the additional hour.  "Generally, salaried workers will receive their normal salary regardless if they work extra, although you should consider if your company’s overtime rules would be applied here.  "Salaried workers still need to receive the legal minimum wage for this period so, if they are paid National Minimum Wage or just above, they may have to be paid the extra hour to receive their legal minimum entitlement.  "Organisations can choose how they treat the extra hour, subject to any contractual entitlements, but should act consistently and fairly.  "One option to consider is allowing employees to go home an hour later when the clocks go forward in the spring, cancelling out the extra hour worked now in the autumn."  He further advises: "The extra hour has the potential to affect the working time rights of night shift workers.  "Night workers must not work, on average, more than eight hours in any 24 hours and are entitled to a 20-minute rest break when working more than six hours a day.  "Adult workers must also be allowed a minimum rest period of 11 consecutive hours in any 24 hours. If you require staff to work the extra hour, you should consider these rights to ensure there is no breach of any legal requirements."  And he urges bosses: "Finally, you should pre-warn workers who are on the rota to come in on Sunday about the clocks going back to ensure they are attending work on time."


bbc--2019-04-16--EU law fixes minimum rights for gig economy workers

EU law fixes minimum rights for 'gig economy' workers

The European Parliament has approved new EU rules to protect workers in the so-called "gig economy".  The law sets minimum rights and demands increased transparency for those in "on-demand" jobs, such as at Uber or Deliveroo.  It proposes more predictable hours and compensation for cancelled work, and an end to "abusive practices" around casual contracts.  Member states will now have at most three years to enforce the new rules.  The European Parliament says the new legislation will apply to "the most vulnerable employees on atypical contracts and in non-standard jobs" - including those on zero-hour contracts.  Employees in EU member states already enjoy a wide range of protections to working hours, minimum breaks and holiday entitlement.  But casual employees in the "gig economy" - who may work multiple jobs on a flexible basis, or on erratic hours - have fallen into a grey area.  The UK will only be obliged to implement the law if it is still a member state of the EU three years after the new regulation enters into force. But it has already introduced similar legislation at a national level.  The EU law will require employers to inform all workers about "essential aspects" of their employment on their first day, including:  The new rules should apply to all those who work at least three hours a week, averaged over four weeks - at least three million people, though it is a growing category of workers.  The rules will also apply to trainees and apprentices in similar circumstances.  Enrique Calvet Chambon, the MEP responsible for seeing the law through, said it was the first EU legislation setting minimum workers' rights in 20 years.  "All workers who have been in limbo will now be granted minimum rights thanks to this directive... from now on no employer will be able to abuse the flexibility in the labour market," he said.  EU officials say the new rules will not apply to "genuinely self-employed" people who work for themselves.


bbc--2019-09-19--World Cup 2022 Qatar still failing to protect workers rights says Amnesty International

World Cup 2022: Qatar still failing to protect workers' rights, says Amnesty International

Workers in Qatar continue to be mistreated despite promises to improve rights ahead of the 2022 World Cup, Amnesty International says.  A new report from the human rights group says thousands of workers are going unpaid.  It adds that a new commission set up to help improve workers' rights is failing to protect them.  Amnesty has urged Qatari authorities to "end the shameful reality of labour exploitation".  "Despite the significant promises of reform which Qatar has made ahead of the 2022 World Cup, it remains a playground for unscrupulous employers," said Stephen Cockburn, Amnesty International's deputy director of global issues.  "Migrant workers often go to Qatar in the hope of giving their families a better life - instead many people return home penniless after spending months chasing their wages, with too little help from the systems that are supposed to protect them."  The report, All work, no pay: The struggle of Qatar's migrant workers for justice, cites the example of "several hundred" contractors who were forced to "return home penniless" after the companies employing them first stopped paying them then ceased to operate.  Amnesty's research focused on firms not directly related to the World Cup.  Qatari authorities passed new laws to improve workers' rights after signing an agreement with the United Nations' International Labour Organisation in November 2017.  Those changes included ending the labour sponsorship system that forced foreign workers to seek their employer's permission to change jobs or leave the country.  New legislation also introduced a temporary minimum wage, created a workers' insurance fund and set up committees to address disputes.  However, Amnesty's latest report states that several hundred migrant workers employed by three construction and cleaning companies were forced to return home without being paid.  The BBC has contacted the Qatari government for a response but following a similar report into workers' rights in February, it said it "welcomes" the "continued interest and scrutiny" of its systems from Amnesty and claimed it penalised or banned 11,994 companies in 2018 for violating labour laws.


breitbart--2019-10-18--Right to Work Legal: Chicago Teachers Have 'Right to Rebuff' Union Demands

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation (NRTW) has issued a special legal notice to the more than 20,000 teachers affected by the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) strike order.  The notice informs Chicago teachers they have a right to refuse to leave their students and to continue to provide for their families during the planned strike. Additionally, the notice offers teachers links to resources to help them exercise their rights without fear of retaliation from union leaders.  “This strike raises serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike,” the notice reads. “Employees have the legal right to rebuff union officials’ strike demands, but it is important for them to be fully informed before they do so.”  NRTW says recent cases their staff attorneys have brought show union bosses often deceive workers about their rights during a union-ordered strike.  The NRTW legal notice informs Chicago teachers they should be aware they have the following rights:  A union has no disciplinary power over nonmembers and cannot discipline them for crossing a picket line and working during a strike. If you are currently a union member, you have the right to resign your union membership. Union officials can (and often do) levy large fines against union members who work during a strike. If you are now a union member and want to work during a strike, you should seriously consider resigning your union membership at least one day BEFORE you return to work. That is the only way to avoid possible ruinous union fines and other discipline. To have the best legal defense possible against fines the union may try to impose, you should give the union notice of your resignation BEFORE you cross the picket line so that when you return to work you are not a union member. If you encounter any difficulties in exercising your right to work during a strike, you can contact the Foundation to request free legal aid at www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid.  NRTW reminds Chicago teachers the Supreme Court ruled last year in Janus v. AFSCME that nonmembers of a public sector union have a First Amendment right not to pay any union fees or dues — unless they have waived that right.  The Foundation warns of the need for workers to fully understand the waiver process:  A union has the burden of proving employees waived their First Amendment rights by “clear and compelling” evidence. Some unions claim that employees who authorized their employer to deduct union dues and fees in the past have waived their First Amendment rights. Whether a dues deduction authorization is an effective waiver depends on when it was signed and how it was worded.  Chicago teachers who encounter difficulties in ending the collection of union fees or dues from their paychecks are invited to contact NRTW.  “CTU bosses appear intent on attempting to shut down Chicago schools with a strike in order to flex their political muscle, even if leaving children out in the cold achieves nothing for the rank-and-file teachers,” said NRTW President Mark Mix. “Chicago teachers must decide for themselves whether abandoning their students at the behest of CTU officials is really what is best for them, and Foundation staff attorneys stand by to assist those teachers want to [sic] continue teaching their students and provide for their families.”  Teachers can obtain more information by visiting the NRTW website.


buzzfeed--2019-07-23--Opinion Working People Need A New Bill Of Rights As President Ill Make One

Opinion: Working People Need A New Bill Of Rights. As President, I'll Make One.

Let’s cut to the chase: Working people are having their fundamental rights stripped away, and we’re running out of time to get them back.  For decades now, big corporations and the wealthiest Americans have counted on both parties to ram through an agenda that prevents the middle class from sharing in the fruits of their work. They’ve benefited from Reaganomics and the Trump Tax Giveaway, the bailout for the big banks, and Wall Street “reform” that let too many off easily.  While the 1 percent thrive, working people are going backward. A single full-time job used to be enough to support a family; now two parents both working multiple part-time jobs can struggle to put food on the table. They can lose their job if they get ill or their car needs repairs, trapping them permanently in the cycle of poverty.  These people power the economy, but the rewards have gone to those who often don’t know the meaning of hard work. After all, there’s plenty of money in this country – it’s just in the wrong hands.  We’ll need bold reforms to change that: a 21st Century Working People’s Bill of Rights. That’s what I’m introducing today, a comprehensive set of pro-worker policies that will ensure we restore the rights of working Americans. You can look at the full set of proposals on my website, but I wanted to share several with you today.    We’re beginning with the Right to Due Process at Work, which will end at-will employment, and guarantee that no employee can be fired without just cause. It’s shameful that employees can be fired at any time and for almost any reason — even if their boss is just in bad mood. With this new right, employees couldn’t be fired unless they’ve failed to do their job, and they’d have due process protections afterward to ensure that’s the case.  Every working American will also have the Right to Paid Time Off, thanks to the farthest-reaching paid leave policy of any 2020 candidate. It mandates paid family and medical leave, as well as paid sick days for all. It’s also the only proposal in the field to mandate two weeks of paid vacation time for every worker, a fundamental right enjoyed by every other developed country on earth. Americans work hard; they deserve to take a break.  One more right I’m particularly proud of: the Right to a Fair Job in the Gig Economy. Too often, companies like Uber care more about their profits than the people who do the work. It’s time to ensure the people who create the wealth for these apps share in it, by providing minimum pay and benefits standards for freelance workers. These companies need to treat their workers like employees when they are — not independent contractors for whom they can cut corners on pay and benefits. We’re also creating universal, transferable benefits systems for gig workers. They should be able to earn health and retirement benefits like anyone else, and they shouldn’t have to be tied to a single app to do so.  These are just some of the steps I’ll take as president to put power back in the hands of those who deserve it. Every Democratic candidate claims they’re for working people. But too few have spelled out concrete steps they’d take to help them, and fewer still have shown the leadership and know-how to make it happen.  As the mayor of our nation’s largest city, I've established many of these rights already, and they’re making a difference in the lives of 8.6 million Americans. We’ve led the way in the fight for a $15 minimum wage and enacted paid sick leave so that New Yorkers don’t have to worry about losing their livelihoods if they go to the hospital. We’ve already had fair scheduling on the books for two years.  Ensuring these rights for workers has helped make New York City the fairest big city in America. We’re putting money back in the right hands.  It’s time for our country — and our party — to do the same.


chicagosuntimes--2019-04-04--Illinois House advances bill to bar local right-to-work laws

Illinois House advances bill to bar local ‘right-to-work’ laws

SPRINGFIELD – A bill that would bar municipalities in Illinois from enacting local “right-to-work” laws like one the village of Lincolnshire enacted in 2015 is one step closer to going to Gov. J.B. Pritzker.  Those are laws that prohibit employers from requiring a worker to join a labor union as a condition of employment.  The Illinois House on Wednesday gave final passage to a bill that has already cleared the Senate that would clarify that state government has exclusive authority to enact laws governing what are known as union security agreements — agreements between employers and unions that spell out the extent to which workers can be compelled to belong to a union, as well as whether the employer will collect dues and fees on behalf of the union.  Rep. Lance Yednock, an Ottawa Democrat and chief sponsor of the House version of the bill, said it would only reiterate what Congress intended when it passed the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, which gave states authority to enact right-to-work laws.  “In doing so, Congress decided to avoid the confusion that having 7,000 units of local government in Illinois with thousands of different laws would create,” Yednock said in arguing for the bill.  In recent years, however, federal courts have interpreted the law in different ways.  In Illinois, the issue came to a head in 2015 when the village of Lincolnshire passed an ordinance that prohibited the use of union-security agreements.  It also prohibited the use of “hiring halls,” which are union-based organizations that supply new recruits to employers with collective bargaining agreements. And it prohibited the use of dues “checkoff” arrangements in which employers collect union dues through payroll deductions on behalf of unions.  The International Union of Operating Engineers Local 399 challenged that law in federal court, arguing that the Taft-Hartley Act gives only states the authority to enact such laws. Lincolnshire, however, argued that as a political subdivision of the state, it had the right to exercise the state’s authority.  In January 2017, a federal district court struck down the ordinance, and in September 2018, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision. However, the appellate court also noted that other courts of appeals have ruled differently – specifically the 6th Circuit, which in 2016 upheld a similar law enacted by Hardin County, Kentucky.  The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the Kentucky case. But now that the 7th Circuit has reached a different conclusion in the Lincolnshire case, some lawmakers said they believe the nation’s high court will be forced to weigh in.  “My impression is that if (some) other district goes up to the Supreme Court and they somehow rule that something similar to Lincolnshire is allowed, this ban would be stricken, and I think it would no longer be constitutional and enforceable on the books of Illinois,” House Republican Leader Jim Durkin, of Western Springs, said during debate.  The bill, Senate Bill 1474, passed by a 101-8 vote. It previously passed the Senate, 42-12, on March 7. But the House deleted a provision in the original Senate bill that would have made it a misdemeanor for any local government official to violate the act. That means the bill now must return to the Senate to either agree or disagree with the House change.

Peter Hancock | Capitol News Illinois | phancock@capitolnewsillinois.com


cnbc--2019-10-07--LGBT workers head to Supreme Court for blockbuster rights cases: 'I'll be that person to stand up'

Gerald Bostock was devastated when he learned he had been fired from his job overseeing child welfare services for the Clayton County, Georgia juvenile court system. The role, he says now, was his dream job. He believed working with children was his calling, and that he was good at it. In 2010, his county became the first in Atlanta to supply a volunteer to every neglected or abused child in the system. Bostock believes he was fired for being gay. His termination came in 2013, months after he joined a gay softball league, after a history positive performance reviews. When he lost his job, he also lost friends, his home and his health insurance, he said. Now Bostock's firing is at the center of a blockbuster set of Supreme Court cases that will determine whether LGBT workers may be fired on the basis of their identities. Arguments are set for Tuesday morning. "Somebody needed to stand up," Bostock said in a recent interview. "I'll be that person to stand up so that nobody has to go to work fearful of losing their job." The Supreme Court cases are the first to squarely address the question of whether federal anti-discrimination law protects lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workers. While the court has expanded the rights of LGBT individuals in recent years, holding that same-sex marriage is protected by the Constitution, for instance, it has yet to apply protections to the workplace. In about half the country, states and localities have passed laws forbidding such discrimination. In the other half, including Clayton County, workers are without protection. "In an era where people want to believe that gay marriage solved everything, this shows that it clearly didn't. There are many battles left," said Brian Riedel, a professor at Rice University who studies LGBT social movements. The justices will hear the cases of three LGBT workers who were fired, including Bostock. The other two individuals are Donald Zarda, a gay man who was fired from his job as a skydiving instructor after remarking on his sexual orientation to a female client, and Aimee Stephens, a transgender woman fired from her job as a funeral director after she announced her intention to present as a woman. Ahead of arguments, it is not clear how the justices may come down on the issue. The case is the first major LGBT case to come before the justices since the departure of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had long been a champion for gay rights from the court. In focus will be Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Kennedy's replacement, who is believed to be more conservative. "I think that it is actually a case that is pretty hard to predict," said David Cole, the national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing Zarda and Stephens. Asked which justices he is hoping to corral into a majority, Cole said: "I'll take any five." The decisions in the cases are expected by the end of June, in the middle of the 2020 presidential election.  The legal question comes down to the language of Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination because of "sex" but does not specifically mention sexual orientation or gender identity. Both the workers and the employers agree that the lawmakers who passed the law did not envision that it would protect gay or transgender workers. But in legal briefs, the workers have noted that the Supreme Court has applied the Civil Rights Act to unforeseen territory before. In the 1989 case Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, the court ruled that the law also barred discrimination against workers on the basis that they do not conform to gender stereotypes. Years later, the court ruled in the 1998 case Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services that the law protected workers against discrimination by members of the same sex. Federal appeals courts have split on the issue. The Eleventh Circuit, which reviewed Bostock's case, dismissed his complaint. Under the court's precedent, "discharge for homosexuality is not prohibited by Title VII," a three-judge panel said in an unsigned opinion. The appeals courts which reviewed Zarda and Stephens's cases came down differently. The Second Circuit, which heard Zarda's case, also had precedents on the books which held that Title 7 did not apply to LGBT workers. But after the full court heard the case, it reversed those precedents. "Looking first to the text of Title VII, the most natural reading of the statute's prohibition on discrimination 'because of . . . sex' is that it extends to sexual orientation discrimination because sex is necessarily a factor in sexual orientation," Chief Judge Robert Katzmann wrote. He added that "sexual orientation discrimination is predicated on assumptions about how persons of a certain sex can or should be, which is an impermissible basis for adverse employment actions." Likewise, in Stephens's case, the Sixth Circuit held that firing someone based on their transitioning status is by definition discrimination based on sex stereotypes. "There is no way to disaggregate discrimination on the basis of transgender status from discrimination on the basis of gender non-conformity, and we see no reason to try," Circuit Judge Karen Moore wrote. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a federal agency, has also said that Title 7 forbids gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination, though the Trump administration, via the Department of Justice, has taken the opposite view. "Even if sexual orientation were a 'function' of sex, that would be insufficient, standing alone, to violate Title VII; otherwise, all sex-specific practices, including bathrooms, dress codes, and physical fitness standards, would be unlawful," Solicitor General Noel Francisco wrote in a brief with the top court. Francisco argued that the top court's prohibition on discriminating based on sex stereotypes likewise does not forbid discriminating based on gender identity or sexual orientation. While Title 7 protects men from being fired for being effeminate, that protection applies equally to straight and gay employees, he wrote. Sunu Chandy, the legal director for the National Women's Law Center, which filed a brief in support of the employees, said she will be looking at whether the justices ask questions about the practicality of such distinctions during arguments. Adopting such a standard, she said, would "throw into havoc civil rights protections that have been precedent for decades." "What I'm really interested in is how you could practically exclude LGBT workers from these civil rights protections that we all enjoy?" she said. "If there is someone who does not comply with sex stereotypes, the employer could then say, '[you were fired] because I thought you were gay,' and get a free pass."  The cases have attracted a flurry of legal arguments from both sides of the debate. Somewhat unusually, many major businesses have come out in favor of the workers, effectively asking the court for more stringent regulations. In one particularly strong show of force, more than 200 businesses, including Apple, Google and CNBC parent NBCUniversal signed onto a brief supporting the workers in the case. "The failure to recognize that Title VII protects LGBT workers would hinder the ability of businesses to compete in all corners of the nation, and would harm the U.S. economy as a whole," the firms wrote. Bostock's attorney, Brian Sutherland, made a similar argument in a recent interview, noting that discrimination can have adverse consequences for those who are not directly discriminated against. "Discrimination against LGBTQ folks does not only hurt them. It hurts the people that they serve," he said. That point weighed on Bostock, too. "I'm very proud of who I am. And I'm proud of the man who I've become," he said. "And I am very proud of the hard work and success that I had in Clayton County, especially because it impacted the lives of so many children who suffered from abuse and neglect." Bostock said that the last six years for him have been draining, both financially and personally. But he said that he's been energized by the prospect of changing the way the law is applied to millions of people "who are fearful of losing their job because of who they are, who they love, and how they identify." "I absolutely would not change a single thing," he said. The cases are Gerald Lynn Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia; Altitude Express v. Melissa Zarda; and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.


cnn--2019-07-26--Buttigieg calls out tech companies for failing to recognize worker rights in new economic proposal

The mayor of South Bend, Indiana, titled his plan "The New Rising Tide: Empowering Workers in a Changing Economy," a reference to the economic saying "a rising tide lifts all boats."  "We got the rising tide -- GDP went up, productivity went up -- but our paychecks didn't show it," Buttigieg writes in the proposal.  The plan calls out companies like Google, Lyft and Uber for outsourcing their employees and labeling them contractors, limiting benefits workers can receive from the companies. In an exclusive interview with CNN, Buttigieg said he is willing to go up against big tech.  "I think they need to recognize the consequences if we continue moving into an economic reality where workers are eviscerated," Buttigieg told CNN. "I have nothing against these companies succeeding when workers are doing well, but they can't have it both ways."  In details of the plan, Buttigieg would guarantee the right to join a union for all American workers including gig economy workers -- like Uber and Lyft drivers who are considered independent contractors and not employees of the companies. Buttigieg would support codifying the "ABC test," a more strict definition of independent contractor that would label many more workers as employees. His plan also calls for a strong "joint employer standard," which would allow workers to collectively bargain with the companies that control their hours and working conditions rather than the company that contracts them out. "Companies like Google should not be able to hire contractors -- from janitors and food service workers to managers and software engineers -- that look like employees, but who cannot bargain with Google because they technically work for a staffing firm or other intermediaries," the plan states. Labor unions are front and center in the plan which would "introduce multimillion dollar penalties for employer interference in union elections and workers' rights" and "gives working people the right to demand access to multi-employer bargaining." For example, workers at three unionized retail stores could decide collectively to bring their three employers to one bargaining table and negotiate one pay package for all three retail stores. This model still exists in America's construction trades, but has waned in recent decades, and remains much more common in Europe. President Donald Trump has garnered support from labor unions -- especially in Midwestern states where steel and coal unions still have power, many of which helped him get elected. Buttigieg said this part of his economic plan is aimed at bringing back union support to the Democratic Party and to his campaign. "It's part of it," he told CNN. "I want workers to understand how their lives are better, how they will be better off with me or compared to this President, or our competitors and folks need to hear how this is going to impact their lives." The plan also calls for legislation that would immediately make public pay gaps at every large company -- citing that women make 80% of what men get paid. Buttigieg would also set up a national paid sick leave system for workers who do not get at least seven paid sick days. "Employers would be required to pay in the equivalent of one hour of pay for every 30 hours they work, up to a total of 56 hours, into a state fund that these workers could draw from," the plan states. While this plan is one of the most comprehensive labor policies released by one of the current Democratic candidates to date, much of it is embodied in bills that progressive Democratic lawmakers have been introducing in Congress. With no congressional record, Buttigieg is able to voice his support for these policies while other candidates like Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker have been advocating for similar platforms for years. Buttigieg renewed his call for a federal minimum wage in the plan of $15 an hour, taking it a step further by indexing "the federal minimum wage to median wage growth so that moving forward, both workers and employers know with certainty what it will be in the years to come." A similar minimum wage bill, the Raise Wage Act, passed in the House of Representatives last week.


cnn--2019-08-22--Beto ORourke rolls out new plan to protect workers rights

Beto O'Rourke rolls out new plan to protect workers' rights

"We need to be there for workers across this country who have always been the engine of our economy," the 2020 Democratic presidential candidate said, a day after speaking at the Iowa AFL-CIO Convention. "We need to keep up the fight for $15 an hour to ensure that one job is enough -- and no one needs to work a second or third job to support themselves and their families. Only then can we build an economy that finally works for everyone in this country."  Under O'Rourke's "21st Century Labor Contract," workers will be able to join a union if they so wish, get paid a living wage no matter the industry, will not need to work a second or third job to provide for a family, will not be face discrimination in the job search process, will have access to job training and will have access to a fair labor market.  In a Medium post from O'Rourke's campaign , this plan is highlighted as "a new contract between workers, employers, and the federal government," ensuring that any worker who wants can form a union and those who are not members will experience many of the same protections a union provides such as overtime and paid sick days.  O'Rourke has made raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour a staple of his stump speech on the trail throughout the duration of his campaign and he includes this policy proposal in this plan, as well as signing the Paycheck Fairness Act, which passed the House of Representatives this year.  He also issuing his plan to call for free community college so students, including undocumented immigrants who were brought to the US as children, can receive occupation training to enter the workforce. Additionally, the plan laid out by O'Rourke calls for protecting LGBTQ workers from discrimination, protecting workers lacking immigration status from retaliation and threats by employers, ensuring seven days of sick leave per year, banning non-compete agreements and using federal health care spending as a lever to raise wages for health and long-term care workers. O'Rourke's trip to Iowa this week was his first since rebooting his campaign after the mass shooting on August 3 in his hometown of El Paso, Texas, where a gunman who police say posted a screed online that warned of a "Hispanic invasion" killed 22 people at a Walmart. Since the shooting, O'Rourke has rolled out a new plan to combat gun violence and white nationalism in America, and has visited towns in southern states affected by the Trump administration's policies, including two stops in Mississippi to offer support to immigrant families affected by ICE raids at several processing plants in the state.


cnsnews--2019-07-26--Hector Barreto Slams NYC Mayor Bill de Blasios Workers Bill of Rights As Small Business Killer

Hector Barreto Slams NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio's 'Worker's Bill of Rights' As Small Business 'Killer'

July 26, 2019 | 11:28 AM EDT  #### Sponsored Links


eveningstandard--2019-01-30--Snow and work rights Are you legally entitled to time off Whataposs the snow day policy for empl

Snow and work rights: Are you legally entitled to time off? What's the snow day policy for employees in the UK?

Brits have been warned to expect "very significant snowfall" this week with yellow weather warnings covering the majority of the UK.  Temperatures are expected to plunge to minus 10 degrees in parts as a bitterly cold snap grips vast swathes of the country, the Met Office has warned.  And a weather system forecast to arrive on Thursday could break this winter's current record low, meaning you could struggle to get into work.  The freezing weather could also even force your place of work to close, while schools up and down the country have had to shut due to the harsh conditions.  So what are your rights as an employee if you find yourself unable to get into work this week? The Standard takes a look.  According to Gov.co.uk: “If the workplace is closed because of disruption and the employee doesn’t usually work from home, employers can’t usually deduct pay.”  However your company could ask you to work from another work place, or ask you to work from home instead.  You must also check to see if your contract has a provision for unpaid lay-off while if you are on a zero hours contract your employee may not have to pay you.  If your office is open but your child’s school is closed, or your childcare arrangement are otherwise disrupted due to snow, then you are legally entitled to take time off.  This is because is is considered an official emergency by the government, although it will be up to your employer as to whether you get paid or not.  The website states that an employee "could have the right for time off" to look after their child but this needs to be agreed with their employer.  Because it's your responsibility to get into work, employees are not automatically entitled to pay if they’re unable to get to work because of bad weather.  This means your employer has the right to view this as an unauthorised absence, ask you to work from home or even take it as annual leave.  Acas says that all employers will be different and offer alternative suggestions such as swapping shifts, flexible working hours or allowing employees to come in a bit later.  So who knows, a snow day could be right around the corner... if this weather continues, of course.


eveningstandard--2019-09-10--Jeremy Corbyn promises aposbiggest workersapos rights extension in the UK everapos

Jeremy Corbyn promises 'biggest workers' rights extension in the UK ever'

Jeremy Corbyn today alarmed business leaders by promising the biggest boost to trade union powers since the Seventies.  Addressing the Trades Union Congress in Brighton, Labour’s leader announced plans to scrap anti-strike laws, hand unions more say over pay and conditions, plus set up a new agency to inspect and prosecute firms accused of undermining workplace standards.  “The next Labour government will bring about the biggest extension of rights for workers that our country has ever seen,” he declared.  In language redolent of class warfare, Mr Corbyn promised to lead a “real battle against the born-to-rule establishment that [Boris] Johnson represents”.  The union wishlist comes as Labour is forced to rely more heavily on trade union donations to raise money to fight the looming general election, such as £488,000 from the Unite union in the second quarter of 2019.  Mr Corbyn also confirmed plans to ban unpaid internships, raise agency staff pay to the same as full-timers, extend rights to people currently counted as self-employed and bring in a £10-an-hour living wage.


fortune--2019-07-19--A New Bill of Rights for Domestic Workers Will Let Them Finally Bargain Collectively

A New ‘Bill of Rights’ for Domestic Workers Will Let Them Finally Bargain Collectively

Domestic workers—including house cleaners, nannies, and homecare workers—are among the lowest paid in the country. Most earn median wages of around $10 per hour, and only 12% receive health benefits. They also commonly navigate employment with unstable schedules, variable hours, and little job security. Not only is this a problem for the domestic workers themselves, who are overwhelmingly women of color, but also for those in need of their services—such difficult working conditions will only contribute to the significant workforce shortage as the country ages. A recently introduced bill, however, would take major steps to improve conditions for domestic workers and address these shortcomings.  The National Domestic Workers Bill of Rights, introduced by Sen. Kamala Harris and Rep. Pramila Jayapal, is noteworthy for a number of reasons. First, it would end the unfair—not to mention historically racist—exclusion of domestic workers from federal laws, ensuring these workers are protected from discrimination and have a safe workplace. Second, and as importantly, the legislation takes an innovative approach to raising standards that is well-suited to domestic work and may also provide a model for other types of jobs that increasingly resemble domestic work. The bill includes more modern workplace protections, such as requiring fair scheduling practices that ensure workers don’t lose pay due to last minute cancellations, and critically, creates a wage and standards board where workers, employers, and the public come together to discuss wages, benefits, and working conditions.  In an industry like domestic work, workers have a hard time engaging in traditional collective bargaining—a task made even more difficult because their work is often solitary. This is further complicated because rather than a traditional worksite, the primary place of work is a home, with each worker laboring for a different employer at a different worksite, and often for multiple employers throughout the week. This also means that the employers are fundamentally different from traditional employers: they are households that employ someone not as part of a typical business but rather in addition to their regular jobs and are not accustomed to evaluating labor market conditions and bargaining with a group of workers.  What’s more, domestic workers are often quite vulnerable, with few other options in the labor market, and thus particularly fear retaliation if they try to organize or bargain for better working conditions. And because most domestic workers have long been excluded from the National Labor Relations Act, the keystone of modern labor law that legally protects workers’ right to form a union, they don’t have much of a history of collective bargaining upon which to build. Taken together, this means that a different type of structure for bargaining is needed.  That’s why the wage and standards board introduced by the bill would be a major advancement. Such a board would create a forum to recommend standards for the industry—which can help improve job quality and help ensure that consumers are able to receive the kind of stable, quality care that they need by ensuring that enough workers want to work in the industry.  The wage and standards board will help lift domestic work above the bare minimum and make it a career that workers want because it provides a centralized location to discuss recommendations for higher standards, thus promoting the health, safety, financial security, and well-being of domestic workers. Without the board, these negotiations would not happen. The board would also be able to tailor its recommendations to the specific and sometimes changing needs of employers and workers in the industry—and thus can produce better solutions than a pure mandate would.  Such a board can also provide a model for other industries where traditional collective bargaining is particularly difficult, especially with the rise of the gig economy. Indeed, domestic work can be considered the “original” gig work as workers often need to piece together full-time employment from multiple poorly-paid jobs to make ends meet, each with minimal benefits or job security. As the U.S. continues down a path of rapidly rising income inequality in the labor market, the trend of insecure employment for domestic workers may just be a prologue for what awaits many more workers in other industries.  That’s why the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights is an essential step forward. It presents a historic opportunity to improve the working conditions for millions of workers in an industry that may be a bellwether for millions more in the casualized labor market.  David Madland is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. Adam Stromme is an assistant at the Center.  —Bernie Sanders: America is drowning in student debt. Here’s my plan to end it  —Ex-Apple CEO John Sculley: Why sensors are the future of health care tech  Listen to our new audio briefing, Fortune 500 Daily


fusion--2019-01-30--Interview Emmanuel Leal discusses immigrant low wage workers rights in New Mexico

Interview: Emmanuel Leal discusses immigrant low wage workers rights in New Mexico

Emmanuel Leal, Communications Coordinator of “Somos un Pueblo Unido” discusses low wage immigrant worries, such as ICE informants, access to State IDs, and raising the state’s minimum wage.


globalresearch--2019-09-03--Workers Need More Rights and Economic Democracy

It is good to see labor rising with teacher and other strikes increasing across the country and with the US public showing its highest support for unions in decades. The next president should harness the energy of working people and build political power for a transformation agenda for working people who have not gotten a real raise in decades, while executives and investors have been getting rich off of higher rates of exploitation with increased productivity and globalized markets and corporate-managed trade deals that enable global corporations to pit the working classes of different countries against each other in a race to the bottom.  The centerpiece of my campaign for president is an ecosocialist Green New Deal. Responding to the climate crisis is going to require changes to many sectors of the economy. We need to create a new democratic and ecological economy. We must define this economy with the rights of workers in mind, not only their right to collective bargaining but the need to make workers into owners to end the capitalist crisis highlighted by the reality that three people have wealth equal to 50 percent of the population.  We need social and cooperative ownership where workers receive the full value of their labor. Now we are exploited. We get a fixed wage and all the surplus value we create with our work in taken by capitalists as profits simply because they own the company, not because they did any work.  The Green New Deal requires the United States to reconstruct all economic sectors for ecological sustainability, from agriculture and manufacturing to housing and transportation. This means millions of new jobs in a democratized economy where some sectors are nationalized, others are controlled by state and municipal government and more are re-made into cooperatives that are worker-owned.  A Green New Deal must include a Just Transition, which means income to compensate all workers whose jobs are eliminated by steps taken to protect the environment. Displaced workers should be guaranteed up to five years of their previous income and benefits as they make the transition to alternative work.  As part of the Green New Deal, I am calling for an Economic Bill of Rights, which includes a job guarantee and a guaranteed minimum income above poverty for all. The housing crisis will be alleviated with the institution of universal rent control and expansion of public housing in walkable communities with access to regional mass transit. Air and water pollution will be relieved by putting in place a 100% electrified transportation system emphasizing freight rails, high-speed inter-city rails, and urban light-rail mass transit, with electric powered cars and trucks where they are still needed.  A crash program of federal government investment and public enterprises to rebuild our economy for zero greenhouse gas emissions and 100% clean energy by 2030 will create will create full employment and shared prosperity. But not everyone is able to work. And some things should by human rights, not commodities you can only get if you have enough money. That’s why we need a social safety net of social services funded publicly, not privately out of pocket. That means a national health service for universal health care, lifelong free public education, student debt relief, and a secure retirement by doubling Social Security benefits. The ecosocialist Green New Deal is a plan to remake the economy so that it serves the people and protects the ecology and the climate. Those objectives require a socialist economic democracy so that we the people–not big business interests–have the power to choose economic justice and ecological sanity.  In addition to changes coming as a result of putting in place an ecosocialist Green New Deal, we need are immediate labor law reforms.  Repeal Repressive Labor Laws: Repeal the sections of the Taft-Hartley Act, the Landrum-Griffin Act, the Hatch Act, and state “Right-To-Work” laws that have crippled labor’s ability to organize by outlawing or severely restricting labor’s basic organizing tools: strikes, boycotts, pickets, and political action. This should include putting in place Card Check which extends union bargaining status to majority sign-up or card-check recognition.  A Workers’ Bill of Rights: Enact a set of legally enforceable civil rights, independent of collective bargaining. This should include:  (1) Extending the Bill of Rights protections of free speech, association, and assembly into all workplaces. (2) Establishes workers’ rights to living wages, portable pensions, information about chemicals used, report labor and environmental violations, refuse unsafe work, and participate in enterprise governance. OSHA must be funded adequately to protest workers and communities and workers empowered to enforce safety and health regulations. Retirement should include a mandatory system of Guaranteed Retirement Accounts that provide a return of at least 3 percent above inflation guaranteed by the federal government. (3) Establishes workers’ rights to freedom from discharge at will, employer search and seizure in the workplace, sexual harassment, and unequal pay for work of comparable worth. These rights should ensure that workers can take legal action to stop wage theft. In addition to a living wage, workers should have subsidized, high quality child care and elder care. Workers should receive six week of paid vacation annually in addition to federal holidays. For every seven years worked, they should receive one year of paid educational leave and one year of parental leave for each child with no loss of seniority.  Employer Accountability: There must be strong and speedy penalties for employers who break labor laws. In addition, federal law needs to ban striker replacements provide, triple back pay for illegally locked-out workers, and there must be unemployment compensation for striking and locked-out workers.  Labor Law Protections for Farmworkers: Extend to farmworkers the same rights under labor law as other workers, including A Day of Rest, Overtime Pay, Collective Bargaining Protections, Disability Insurance, Unemployment Insurance, Child Labor Protections, and Occupational Safety and Health Standards.  Labor Law Protections for Prisoners: Enact legislation to end the super-exploitation of prison labor at pennies per hour, which undercuts the wages of workers outside the prison system. The prison labor system as it exists now is akin to slavery and the prison labor camps in other authoritarian countries. Work done by prisoners can be part of rehabilitation and enable prisoners to acquire job skills, support their families, and have savings upon release. Work done by prisoners for private contractors and for public works and services should be paid prevailing wages. Prison workers should have all the protections of labor law, including the right to organize unions.  Fair Trade. Trade deals should be rewritten to uplift labor and environmental standards across borders. Fair trade pacts should eliminate secretive trade tribunals to which only governments and corporations have access. Trade disputes should be adjudicated in public courts to which workers, unions, and public have access.  It is time to correct the decades of diminishing worker rights and shrinking unions as well as low-pay. The United States is about to begin a transformation to a clean, sustainable energy future. The new economy we create must prioritize the rights of workers to create an economy that works for the 99 percent, not just the 1 percent.  Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.


hitandrun--2019-04-29--Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being Reason Ro

Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws, Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being: Reason Roundup

Kamala Harris wants to make absolutely sure that we know she's an authoritarian. Fresh off announcing that as president she would override Congress to get her way on gun policy, the Democratic senator from California and 2020 presidential hopeful said she would use executive power to push for bans on state laws she opposes, too.  Speaking to a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) gathering on Saturday, Harris spoke of the need for "banning right-to-work laws" that nearly half of states have enacted and how, as president, she would use both her "bully pulpit" and "executive authority" to accomplish that.  Right-to-work laws are often framed by Democrats as an anti-worker policy. In fact, all they say is that employees can't be told to join a union or pay union fees as a condition of employment. They're still welcome to do so; they just have to make that choice for themselves.  In the topsy-turvy world of Harris and other Democrats, however, giving workers options is no good. If elite forces in Washington think workers would be better off joining unions, then they're just going to override the will of individual employees and state governments across the country. Do as they say! Or else! For your own good.  Sure, some low-income workers might think their hard-earned dollars are better spent on securing immediate material well-being for them and their families. But Harris thinks their dollars would be better off with a massive and bloated international organization that can help her presidential campaign. I mean, have you seen SEIU's massive mansion across the street from the White House? How could any group so swampy be wrong?  Right to work is a bugbear to union leaders because it crimps their finances for political spending, and Ms. Harris is eager to get the endorsement of the SEIU and other major unions. Her first big policy proposal, unveiled in March, would have the feds give teachers across the country an average pay raise of $13,500 a year. That payoff to the teachers unions would cost federal taxpayers some $315 billion over 10 years, not including what states would have to contribute to qualify for these Harris Grants. The big story of the 2020 campaign so far is the Democratic Party's lurch to the left, and Ms. Harris's pitch against right to work is evidence that her goal is entrenching union power rather than assisting workers.  Several years ago, Reason ran a series of articles on whether libertarians should support right-to-work laws. Here's Shikha Dalmia making that case that yes, "right to work laws are indeed libertarian." Meanwhile, contributors Sheldon Richman and J.D. Tuccille make a libertarian case against right-to-work laws, arguing that they interfere with freedom of contract, here and here.  The state's presence was minimal, and villagers sustained themselves through farming and remittances from relatives working in the Persian Gulf. Even in retrospect, nothing in those days indicated that my home province would become the main transit hub for jihadists moving from Syria into Iraq after the 2003 invasion, or the site of the Islamic State's final battle as a caliphate.  Now Hassan struggles "to connect images from my past with the reality of today," he writes in The Atlantic. Read the whole thing here.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown (elizabeth.brown@reason.com)


hitandrun--2019-05-21--The First Amendment Protects the Right to Work as a Tour Guide Says Federal Judge

The First Amendment Protects the Right to Work as a Tour Guide, Says Federal Judge

Telling stories for money should not require a government test and license in a country with a First Amendment, a federal judge in Georgia has ruled. The decision came as a result of a lawsuit challenging Savannah, Georgia's past attempts to force tour guides to pay fees, pass tests, and get licenses before taking people around the city and saying things to them.  Judge William T. Moore, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, in his decision in Freenor v. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah, issued yesterday, concluded that the city had offered no reasonable justifications for its tour guide licensing scheme.    Savannah actually repealed the challenged law back in 2015, after the Institute for Justice (I.J.) filed this suit in 2014, but the case was not mooted by the law's repeal since the suing tour guides and would-be tour guides also sought compensatory damages for harms that the law caused when it still existed.  A press release from I.J. spells out the pointlessness of the unconstitutional requirements which Savannah first put in place in 1978: "Tour guides who wanted this storytelling license had to pass a hundred-question multiple choice exam on Savannah history—even if they had no interest in discussing history on their tours. For instance, some tour guides focus on art and architecture or tell ghost stories." Along with the written test, licensed tour guides also needed to pass a criminal background check and to provide notes from licensed physicians certifying their fitness to work as tour guides.  I.J. celebrates that this week's Georgia decision continues a national trend toward squashing these sorts of unconstitutional occupational licensing laws:  Judge Moore found that the city's claims of any threat to the safety or enjoyment of tourists from improperly tested tour guides were not proven, nor were any provable harms prevented by a criminal background check that was also part of the tour guide licensing scheme. "Ultimately, a handful of anecdotes is not sufficient to sustain the city's burden to demonstrate that the tour guide licensing scheme actually serves its interests," Moore wrote.


hotair--2019-07-24--De Blasio unveils workers bill of rights and its really something

De Blasio unveils workers’ bill of rights and it’s really… something

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio may be ringing up literally zero in any number of primary polls and he’s facing calls to be removed from his office back home, but you have to give the guy credit for staying in the box and swinging for the fences. He held several campaign events in Washington yesterday and during one appearance with labor union officials, he unveiled his latest policy proposal. It’s a “workers’ bill of rights” and you can tell precisely which members of the choir he’s singing to. It’s packed full of goodies that labor unions will love, plenty of free stuff for all his friends and unfunded debt as far as the eye can see. (Politico)  New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio unveiled the first major policy proposal of his struggling presidential campaign Tuesday, heading to the nation’s capital to lay out a “workers’ bill of rights” at a union headquarters. The proposal, which he unveiled in a BuzzFeed op-ed earlier in the day, includes two weeks of paid time off for all workers, a national $15 minimum wage and stronger protections from terminations. “If you care about beating Donald Trump, working people are not going to come out and vote unless they believe it’ll actually change their lives,” de Blasio told a small crowd gathered for his event at the Communications Workers of America’s office in Washington, D.C.  This proposal is a transparent sop to the labor unions and it’s the same thing that nearly every Democrat in the race is doing. The unions largely fund their campaigns, so that makes sense, but Hizzoner is going way over the top in a (likely fruitless) attempt to win some union endorsements. But since some of his more viable opponents will probably adopt some of the same positions, it’s worth taking a look.  The fact that he wants a federal minimum wage of fifteen dollars per hour is the same as everyone else on the debate stage, so we can set that one aside. More interesting is the idea of scrapping “at will” employment and replacing it with “just cause.” That means that employers will have to be able to justify a decision to terminate employees in every instance. Having this sort of granular intrusion into employment decisions leads to two unavoidable results. Employers will be more cautious and slow in hiring because they’ll fear getting stuck with a dud of an employee. They will also be open to endless litigation whenever a disgruntled worker decides to go to court after losing their job. In the real world, hiring and termination decisions are hard enough without Big Brother holding a gun to your head.  He’s also calling for retirement benefits for all workers, including those in minimum wage jobs, freelancers and gig economy workers like Uber drivers. Can you imagine forcing McDonald’s franchises to set up pension funds for the kids operating the fry machine? A Big Mac would cost about twenty bucks. It would also exacerbate the unfunded pension crisis already plaguing many sectors around the nation.  There’s plenty more in there you can read for yourself, but it’s all basically one big gift wrapped up with a bow, being delivered in an effort to get some of the unions to endorse his candidacy. Unfortunately for the Mayor, the unions have two dozen other candidates to pick from, some with far better prospects of success, and they’re all willing to heap treasures upon them in exchange for their support.


abcnews--2019-12-30--Uber, Postmates sue to challenge California's new labor law

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Ride-share company Uber and on-demand meal delivery service Postmates sued Monday to block a broad new California law aimed at giving wage and benefit protections to people who work as independent contractors.  The lawsuit filed in U.S. court in Los Angeles argues that the law set to take effect Wednesday violates federal and state constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process.  Uber said it will try to link the lawsuit to another legal challenge filed in mid-December by associations representing freelance writers and photographers.  The California Trucking Association filed the first challenge to the law in November on behalf of independent truckers.  The law creates the nation's strictest test by which workers must be considered employees and it could set a precedent for other states.  The latest challenge includes two independent workers who wrote about their concerns with the new law.  “This has thrown my life and the lives of more than a hundred=thousand drivers into uncertainty,” ride-share driver Lydia Olson's wrote in a Facebook post cited by Uber.  Postmates driver Miguel Perez called on-demand work “a blessing” in a letter distributed by Uber. He said he used to drive a truck for 14 hours at a time, often overnight.  “Sometimes, when I was behind the wheel, with an endless shift stretching out ahead of me like the open road, I daydreamed about a different kind of job -- a job where I could choose when, where and how much I worked and still make enough money to feed my family," he wrote.  The lawsuit contends that the law exempts some industries but includes ride-share and delivery companies without a rational basis for distinguishing between them. It alleges that the law also infringes on workers' rights to choose how they make a living and could void their existing contracts.  Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego countered that she wrote the law to extend employee rights to more than a million California workers who lack benefits, including a minimum wage, mileage reimbursements, paid sick leave, medical coverage and disability pay for on-the-job injuries.  She noted that Uber had previously sought an exemption when lawmakers were crafting the law, then said it would defend its existing labor model from legal challenges. It joined Lyft and DoorDash in a vow to each spend $30 million to overturn the law at the ballot box in 2020 if they don’t win concessions from lawmakers next year.  “The one clear thing we know about Uber is they will do anything to try to exempt themselves from state regulations that make us all safer and their driver employees self-sufficient,” Gonzalez said in a statement. "In the meantime, Uber chief executives will continue to become billionaires while too many of their drivers are forced to sleep in their cars.”  The new law was a response to a legal ruling last year by the California Supreme Court regarding workers at the delivery company Dynamex.


cbsnews--2019-09-02--Labor Day celebrates workers but not everyones winning

Labor Day celebrates workers, but not everyone's winning

Labor Day was created by the labor movement over a century ago to mark the contributions of the American worker. And by a number of measures, the nation's 160 million workers have much to celebrate, with unemployment at a half-century low and jobs in ample supply.  But the benefits aren't being enjoyed by everyone. Indeed, a decade after the Great Recession, the labor market has become a story about the haves and the have-nots. Workers at the top of the pile — from corporate executives to engineers and other high-paid specialists, often with tech or business skills — are reaping outsized benefits, such as juicy pay hikes and high incomes.  The situation is considerably less rosy for workers without college degrees, who can likely find a job but who may struggle to find full-time work that assures them a middle-class lifestyle. In recent years, wage gains also have been disappointing for the typical worker, falling far short of what economists believe should be the norm given the historically low unemployment rate.  "The labor market hasn't reached full employment yet, and there are still workers re-entering the workforce without being coaxed in by large wage increases," said Daniel Zhao, senior economist at employment website Glassdoor.  He added, "Despite low unemployment, there's a wide range of structural factors that may be holding down wage growth, like increasing corporate consolidation and the diminishing power of unions."  In other words, workers have less bargaining power than they held in previous decades. Partly, that's due to a decades-long slump in union membership, which hit a record low last year. In 2018, participation in a union fell to 10.5% of workers, compared with a peak of almost 40% in the late 1950s.  Americans with college degrees. Highly educated workers have fared best, according to a July analysis of wages by the Congressional Budget Office. Workers with a college degree have enjoyed a 9.3% increase in inflation-adjusted wages from 1979 to 2018, compared with a 24.4% inflation-adjusted plunge for those with only a high school degree.  Workers with STEM jobs. Jobs for workers with skills in science, technology, engineering and math have grown much faster than non-STEM jobs over the past decade, at 24% compared with 4%, a U.S. Department of Commerce report found in 2017. Wages in the science and tech fields are also accelerating, with STEM workers earning 29% more than non-STEM workers. In 2010, that gap stood at 26%.  Women workers. Median wages for women grew almost 26% from 1979 to 2018 (adjusted for inflation), the CBO found. By comparison, median wages for male workers declined 5.1%. A big caveat: Although women are earning more and closing the gender wage gap, they still earn less than their male counterparts. Women earned about 85 cents for every $1 earned by men in 2018, Pew Research noted.  Workers with only high school degrees. As noted above, workers with only a high school degree have seen their inflation-adjusted wages fall more than 20% since 1979. That's making it harder for blue-collar workers to maintain their foothold in the middle class.  Middle-skill workers in manufacturing and clerical jobs. These workers are among the high-school-educated employees who have seen labor market losses due to outsourcing and automation. Clerical workers and manufacturing workers are among those who have been hard-hit by the phenomenon. "This has limited the opportunities for workers without a college degree to move up the economic ladder," Zhao said.  Black workers. Even though the unemployment rate for black Americans has declined since the end of the recession, African-Americans are twice as likely to be unemployed than white workers, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Black workers are also more likely to be underemployed —meaning they are working in jobs that don't take advantage of their skills — than white workers, EPI said.  Despite the uneven labor market, most workers are happier with their jobs and pay than in previous years, according to a recent survey from the Conference Board. Fifty-four percent of workers said they're satisfied with their jobs, an increase of 3 percentage points from a year earlier and the second-biggest increase in the survey's 32-year history.  And even if wage growth isn't what it should be, it's still a good time for workers to look for new opportunities.  "Right now it's a job-seeker's market, and workers have more agency over where they work and when they seek out opportunities, which gives them more confidence to take risks, find new jobs better aligned with their preferences, and negotiate for better pay and benefits," Zhao said. "When the economy and job market do eventually slow down, workers can't be as choosy."