unnamed

Opinion: Union membership fixes wage disparity

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

Ron Bieber
Published 11:00 p.m. ET
April 9, 2019

The disparity in the wage gap between CEOs and working people continues to grow to obscene levels in our country. It wasn’t always this way. In 1965, the gap between CEO and workers’ pay was 20 to 1. However, this ratio exploded in the decades that followed, climbing to a 343-to-1 ratio by the year 2000. It has remained above the 300-to-1 level since then.

If you happen to be a working woman, the wage disparity is even worse.

Last week marked Equal Pay Day. This annual observance was started to raise public awareness of the pay gap between men and women. It is commemorated on the date that symbolizes how far into the current year a woman has to work in order to earn what a man earned in the previous year.

All working people in this country deserve a raise, but if you are a working woman, the need is that much greater. The best answer to address this inequality is to have strong, vibrant unions to allow workers the freedom to collectively bargain for better working conditions.

Inequality in any manner is wrong, but to address women’s workplace inequality, Susan B. Anthony said it best over 100 years ago when she said “Join the union, girls, and together say Equal Pay for Equal Work.”

The labor movement built America’s middle class. When working men and women exercised their freedom to join in union, they demanded a fair return for their work and better working conditions. It’s no coincidence that as unions have been under attack in recent years by elected officials and corporate special interests, the middle class has been shrinking, and wages for working people have been stagnant.

This erosion of worker’s collective voice has been used to manipulate the economic rules to benefit the wealthiest 1% and CEOs, hence the growing disparity between CEO and workers’ pay.

Union workers also benefit from the nondiscrimination policies unions fight for in our collective bargaining contracts to protect all working people.

(Read More)

unnamed

Opinion: Criminalizing wage theft is only one step in the right direction (CO)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

APR 29, 2019 4:05AM MDT
Rebecca Galemba

A day worked is a day paid,” a day laborer in Lakewood, Colorado stated. But according to the Colorado Fiscal Institute (CFI), this is not the case for many Colorado workers. Each year, half a million Coloradans suffer from wage theft, amounting to $750 million a year, in addition to the associated $25 million to $47 million in lost state tax revenue and potential public services.

Wage theft refers to the denial of earned wages and benefits protected under state and federal labor laws. The CFI numbers are likely vast under-estimates due to underreporting and pervasive worker misclassification.

New legislation, like Colorado House Bill 1267, would recognize wage theft for the insidious, and often intentional, crime it is. This legislation would treat wage theft as “theft” so that the intentional withholding of wages over $2,000 would be considered a felony.

When employers get away with cheating their workers, it not only harms Colorado’s most vulnerable people, but also undermines wages and working conditions for all workers and creates unfair business advantages for unscrupulous employers. When penalties are low or not applied, committing wage theft is relatively low-risk, profitable, and normal.

Recognizing the crime of wage theft is a step forward in mitigating this unfair business practice. House Bill 1267 can pave the way for more proactive policies to target routine violators, ramp up public enforcement, enhance retaliation protections, monitor industries with pervasive violations and create partnerships to assist workers who may lack the ability to come forward in a claims-driven enforcement environment.

In Colorado, the construction sector accounts for the largest share of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act; it is estimated that a third of workers in construction may be misclassified, leading employers to avoid obligations to their workers as well as payroll taxes. In my research survey of over 400 day laborers, we found that 62% of workers surveyed had experienced wage theft, but that only half ever pursued their unpaid wages.

Fewer than 40% asked for assistance even though an amendment to the Colorado Wage Claims Act, which went into effect in 2015, authorized the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment’s Division of Labor Standards and Statistics to adjudicate wage claims and levy fines and penalties to deter bad behavior regardless of a worker’s legal status.

(Read More)

State labor official criticizes U.S. Supreme Court decision

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on
Avakian says workers and businesses will be hurt by the use of arbitration clauses in employment contracts to bar workers from joining class-action lawsuits over workplace issues. High court voted 5-4 to side with the prohibition.

Peter Wong, Tuesday, May 22, 2018

State Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian says a U.S. Supreme Court decision will prove troublesome to businesses, not just workers.

“That was an absurd decision,” Avakian said Monday, May 21.

Avakian’s reference was to a 5-4 decision, which the Supreme Court issued Monday in three consolidated cases, that allow businesses to use arbitration clauses in employment contracts to bar workers from joining class-action lawsuits over workplace issues.

Under arbitration, a third party settles the dispute – and there is usually no alternative resolution.

The decision affects an estimated 25 million employment contracts.

“Arbitration agreements limit people’s ability to go to court if they want a jury trial,” Avakian said. “That was a strike against workers.”

The court ruled in a 2011 case that businesses can invoke arbitration clauses to bar consumers from filing class-action suits.

But in two of the three cases brought to the high court – all of them arguing that workers were underpaid – federal appeals courts ruled in favor of allowing class-action suits on wages and working conditions. One appeals court, however, did not – and the conflicting rulings prompted the high court to act.

Now individual workers will have to file separate lawsuits.

“For employees, class-action suits do not put all the burden of financing or supporting a case on one individual who might be going after a giant corporation,” Avakian said. “It balances the power by letting employees join together and carry the burden.”

(Read More)