Skip to main content

U.S. House Passes PRO Act


Last Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to approve the Protecting the Right to Organize Act (the “PRO Act”), an ambitious piece of pro-union legislation that Democrats are seeking to move through Congress.

One of the key parts of the PRO Act is it would scrap right to work laws in the approximately 27 states that have these laws in place.  (For those needing a refresher, right to work laws stipulate that workers cannot be forced to join a union as a condition of employment; however unions are still required to represent all employees during the collective bargaining process...including representation those employees that are not union members and do not pay union dues.)  Unions strongly oppose right to work laws and with Democrats now having majority control of the House, the expected vote on this legislation is not necessarily a surprise.

However, for those hoping the PRO Act makes it across the finish line, two things to consider:  1) the legislation will likely falter in the Senate where Republicans hold majority control and 2) there is no indication that President Donald Trump would sign the legislation, even if the Senate somehow managed to pass it.  With that being said, several Democratic Senators running for President, including Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren have voiced their support for the legislation.  Following the caucus last Monday in Iowa, might one of these candidates use their support of the PRO Act (especially now that it has moved over to the Senate for debate and a possible vote) to help boost their appeal to Democratic voters?


For additional information:  https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.natlawreview.com/article/congress-passes-labor-friendly-pro-act%3famp

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more