DEC 02, 2019
For the first time in decades,
the House of Representatives has a rare chance to rewrite American labor laws,
in ways that would actually help workers. Among other benefits, a new bill
would abolish right-to-work laws that cripple union organizing, create penalties
for employers that punish workers for organizing, and set out rules to
eliminate delays in negotiating union contracts.
The bill, the Protecting the
Right to Organize Act (PRO), was introduced by Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., and has
215 co-sponsors. It passed the House Committee on Education and Labor in late
September. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., told the Intercept that “it is taking
longer than it should” to pass PRO, “given the number of co-sponsors that we
have. Many other bills have come to the floor with fewer co-sponsors than this
one.”
So why hasn’t Nancy Pelosi
brought it to the floor for a vote? And why is she instead focusing on a trade
bill that’s a high priority for Donald Trump?
The U.S.-Mexico-Canada
Agreement (USMCA) is a replacement for the North American Free Trade Agreement,
which removed tariffs and other restrictions on trade among the three
countries, but also caused significant job losses and led companies to move
their operations overseas.
Pelosi, Cohen suggests, may be
focusing on USMCA instead of PRO because she’s following the demands of
centrist Democrats eager to prove that they can work with the president. Those
moderates believe that passing USMCA would help protect House Democrats who
flipped Republican seats in 2018. It’s an argument also advanced by Cheri
Bustos, D-Ill., chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Last week, The Washington Post
reported that Jesús
Seade, Mexico’s undersecretary for North America, said the agreement had a
good chance of being finalized this week. That’s also what Pelosi wants,
although Democrats, the Post reports, want “changes that would ensure
enforcement of the agreement in a way that would help American workers and
prevent further outsourcing of U.S. jobs overseas.”
It’s unclear whether any of
those changes would satisfy unions, whose support Democrats still depend on.
Richard Trumka, the head of the AFL-CIO, has pushed the Democrats to hold out
for more labor protections. According to the Post, “his endorsement would be
likely to sway dozens of House Democrats to support the new deal.”
According to an earlier
Intercept article by Ryan Grim, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., chair of the Ways
and Means Committee, agrees with Bustos, but goes a step further, advocating
what Grim calls “a divide and conquer strategy,” adding pension reform to the
USMCA deal, a decision that could split union support, and, as Grim puts it,
“allow House leaders to say that labor is divided on the question, so the party
might as well vote yes [on USMCA].”
Cohen’s own reporting suggests
that union support for the NAFTA replacement is far from guaranteed. She
writes: “Unions have made clear … that from their perspective, USMCA lacks real
labor enforcement mechanisms, which could undermine the whole deal, further
drag down wages, and eliminate more jobs.”
Dan Mauer, director of
government affairs for the Communications Workers of America, which supports
PRO, told the Intercept that “We get it’s hard, there’s a lot of stuff on
people’s plates, and at the same time, this bill already has a lot of
demonstrated support.” CWA members, Maurer said, would be “very unhappy” if the
House failed to make progress on the bill.
Aside from the ample number of
co-sponsors, the bill has growing public support for unions. Organizations
like nonprofits and digital
media companies are beginning to form unions. According to a Gallup
poll released just before Labor Day, 64% of Americans support
organized labor, a near fifty year high.
Pelosi’s office did not return
The Intercept’s request for comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment