LEGISLATION

Vol. 8, No. 2
April, 1999



	LEGISLATION Bigger Fines Asked for Labor Law Violators The Labor Department has proposed to add 10 percent to the maximum fine for violations of the minimum wage, overtime and child labor provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Employers found guilty of repeated or willful violations in the payment of minimum wages or overtime would have to pay a penalty of up to $1,100 per employee. Violators of the child labor provisions of the law would be punished to a maximum of $11,000 per employee. The Labor Department collected a total of $6.17 million over a three-year period (1995-97) in 1,157 cases involving minimum wage or overtime violations. Over the same period, the government agency collected $12.5 million for 3,722 violations of the child labor provisions of the law. GOP Senator Seeks 'Right to Work' Law Legislation that would repeal union security clauses permitted in collective bargaining contracts under the National Labor Relations Act and the Railway Labor Act has been introduced by Sen. Paul D. Coverdell (Rep.-Ga.). His bill, titled "National Right to Work Act of 1999 (S.424)," masks its anti-union purposes in seemingly innocuous language: "(t)o preserve and protect the free choice of individuals and employees to form, join or assist labor organizations or to refrain from such activities." The Coverdell bill would extend the anti-union provisions of "right-to-work" laws, currently in effect in 21 states, to all states. Its co-sponsors include some notorious union-haters: Republican Senators Strom Thurmond (S.C.), Robert Smith (N.H.), Charles Grassley (Iowa) and Jesse Helms (N.C.). The mushrooming of state "right to work" laws began after Congress adopted the Taft-Hartley amendments to the National Labor Relations Act in 1947. Taft-Hartley gave employers the right of "free speech," which they can use to intimidate workers and scare them away from a union, and it also imposed restrictions on unions that made it more difficult to organize. One of the Taft-Hartley amendments, Section 14(b), permitted states to pass "right to work" laws under which workers could enjoy the benefits of union representation without the obligation to become union members or pay dues. By outlawing the union shop and legalizing the freeloading of union benefits, Section 14(b) undermines a union's financial and institutional stability, thereby sapping its strength at the bargaining table and in the political arena. In addition, it provides employers with a way to harass unions through burdensome regulation of union activities. While unions have beaten back efforts to extend "right to work" legislation to other states, they have not been successful in reducing the number of states with union-restrictive laws. Unions will be watching to see what support the Covendell bill attracts, but they are not mounting a major counterattack against it. Even if the bill should gain wide support in Congress, it probably could not survive a Senate filibuster or, if it became necessary, a veto by President Clinton. Bipartisan Education Bill Approved Republicans and Democrats in Congress responded to the public's concern about education by approving a spending bill that would give states and schools more flexibility in how they spend the $11 billion in the measure. The favorable vote was bipartisan: in the House, it was 330 to 90, with fewer than half the Democrats in opposition. In the Senate, it was 88 to 1, with Sen. Paul Wellstone (Dem.-Minn.) casting the dissenting vote. However, President Clinton's plan to finance the hiring of 100,000 new teachers was rejected by a party-line vote, even though $1.2 billion had been allocated for the measure in the 105th Congress. Democrats vowed to bring the measure up again later in the session. While both Republicans and Democrats want to be recognized as the party of education, there are important differences between them, not only on how federal money should be spent but what should be required of states and school districts that receive the funds. President Clinton wants the federal government to scrutinize how school districts meet specific educational standards, rewarding those that perform well and penalizing those that do poorly. Most Republicans favor letting local school authorities decide how best to spend the money they receive from the federal government. For the Republicans, this was their first legislative victory and evidence that they were working hard, if unevenly, to produce bipartisan legislation, AFL-CIO Supports Using 77% of Surplus To Save Social Security and Medicare As Congress gets closer to a vote on competing proposals to finance Social Security, the AFL-CIO announced its support for a plan that would preserve both Social Security and Medicare, two of the most vital programs for working families. The AFL-CIO proposal, similar to the one put forward by President Clinton in his State of the Union address, would use 77 percent of the projected surplus for the next 15 years (savings from the Social Security Trust Fund itself and federal tax revenues), allocating 62 percent to Social Security and 15 percent to Medicare. The labor federation also stated that it favored raising the $72,000 cap on the present payroll tax, so that individuals who earn more than that will have to pay an additional amount in taxes. If the top 6 or 7 percent of the highest salaried people were to pay the official tax rate, and if dividends and interest were also taxed, the additional revenue would take care of about two-thirds of the projected Social Security shortfall, the AFL-CIO said. Union leaders are overwhelmingly opposed to a 10 percent, across-the-board tax cut that Republicans have been promoting. They say there are far better ways to use the budget surplus than a tax cut that would give the wealthy a lion's share of the benefits. AFL-CIO leaders continue to oppose privatization of Social Security in any form. They have taken no position on President Clinton's controversial plan to invest a portion of Social Security funds in the stock market. The White House is proposing to set up "Universal Savings Accounts" to provide a tax-sheltered fund that would encourage individuals in lower income brackets to save.

LEGISLATION

Bigger Fines Asked for Labor Law Violators

The Labor Department has proposed to add 10 percent to the maximum fine for violations of the minimum wage, overtime and child labor provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Employers found guilty of repeated or willful violations in the payment of minimum wages or overtime would have to pay a penalty of up to $1,100 per employee. Violators of the child labor provisions of the law would be punished to a maximum of $11,000 per employee.

The Labor Department collected a total of $6.17 million over a three-year period (1995-97) in 1,157 cases involving minimum wage or overtime violations. Over the same period, the government agency collected $12.5 million for 3,722 violations of the child labor provisions of the law.

GOP Senator Seeks 'Right to Work' Law

Legislation that would repeal union security clauses permitted in collective bargaining contracts under the National Labor Relations Act and the Railway Labor Act has been introduced by Sen. Paul D. Coverdell (Rep.-Ga.). His bill, titled "National Right to Work Act of 1999 (S.424)," masks its anti-union purposes in seemingly innocuous language: "(t)o preserve and protect the free choice of individuals and employees to form, join or assist labor organizations or to refrain from such activities."

The Coverdell bill would extend the anti-union provisions of "right-to-work" laws, currently in effect in 21 states, to all states. Its co-sponsors include some notorious union-haters: Republican Senators Strom Thurmond (S.C.), Robert Smith (N.H.), Charles Grassley (Iowa) and Jesse Helms (N.C.).

The mushrooming of state "right to work" laws began after Congress adopted the Taft-Hartley amendments to the National Labor Relations Act in 1947. Taft-Hartley gave employers the right of "free speech," which they can use to intimidate workers and scare them away from a union, and it also imposed restrictions on unions that made it more difficult to organize.

One of the Taft-Hartley amendments, Section 14(b), permitted states to pass "right to work" laws under which workers could enjoy the benefits of union representation without the obligation to become union members or pay dues. By outlawing the union shop and legalizing the freeloading of union benefits, Section 14(b) undermines a union's financial and institutional stability, thereby sapping its strength at the bargaining table and in the political arena. In addition, it provides employers with a way to harass unions through burdensome regulation of union activities.

While unions have beaten back efforts to extend "right to work" legislation to other states, they have not been successful in reducing the number of states with union-restrictive laws.

Unions will be watching to see what support the Covendell bill attracts, but they are not mounting a major counterattack against it. Even if the bill should gain wide support in Congress, it probably could not survive a Senate filibuster or, if it became necessary, a veto by President Clinton.

Bipartisan Education Bill Approved

Republicans and Democrats in Congress responded to the public's concern about education by approving a spending bill that would give states and schools more flexibility in how they spend the $11 billion in the measure. The favorable vote was bipartisan: in the House, it was 330 to 90, with fewer than half the Democrats in opposition. In the Senate, it was 88 to 1, with Sen. Paul Wellstone (Dem.-Minn.) casting the dissenting vote.

However, President Clinton's plan to finance the hiring of 100,000 new teachers was rejected by a party-line vote, even though $1.2 billion had been allocated for the measure in the 105th Congress. Democrats vowed to bring the measure up again later in the session.

While both Republicans and Democrats want to be recognized as the party of education, there are important differences between them, not only on how federal money should be spent but what should be required of states and school districts that receive the funds. President Clinton wants the federal government to scrutinize how school districts meet specific educational standards, rewarding those that perform well and penalizing those that do poorly. Most Republicans favor letting local school authorities decide how best to spend the money they receive from the federal government.

For the Republicans, this was their first legislative victory and evidence that they were working hard, if unevenly, to produce bipartisan legislation,

AFL-CIO Supports Using 77% of Surplus
To Save Social Security and Medicare

As Congress gets closer to a vote on competing proposals to finance Social Security, the AFL-CIO announced its support for a plan that would preserve both Social Security and Medicare, two of the most vital programs for working families.

The AFL-CIO proposal, similar to the one put forward by President Clinton in his State of the Union address, would use 77 percent of the projected surplus for the next 15 years (savings from the Social Security Trust Fund itself and federal tax revenues), allocating 62 percent to Social Security and 15 percent to Medicare.

The labor federation also stated that it favored raising the $72,000 cap on the present payroll tax, so that individuals who earn more than that will have to pay an additional amount in taxes. If the top 6 or 7 percent of the highest salaried people were to pay the official tax rate, and if dividends and interest were also taxed, the additional revenue would take care of about two-thirds of the projected Social Security shortfall, the AFL-CIO said.

Union leaders are overwhelmingly opposed to a 10 percent, across-the-board tax cut that Republicans have been promoting. They say there are far better ways to use the budget surplus than a tax cut that would give the wealthy a lion's share of the benefits.

AFL-CIO leaders continue to oppose privatization of Social Security in any form. They have taken no position on President Clinton's controversial plan to invest a portion of Social Security funds in the stock market. The White House is proposing to set up "Universal Savings Accounts" to provide a tax-sheltered fund that would encourage individuals in lower income brackets to save.

Return to Newsmagazine Cover Page