Skip to main content

What I’ve Been Reading This Week


One of the more closely watched labor law topics since President Joe Biden came into office has been the Protect the Right to Organize Act (also known as the PRO Act).  For those unaware, the PRO Act amounts to a compilation of wish list items that labor advocates have long sought, including expanding joint employer classifications, overriding state right to work laws, overturning prohibitions on secondary boycotts, and prohibiting employers from replacing economic strikers or locking out employees, among other far reaching ideas.  A majority, if not all, portions of the PRO Act are strongly opposed by Republicans and employers.  However, with Democrats having majority control of the House and Senate, and President Biden indicating his support for the legislation, should the PRO Act actually become law, it would drastically rewrite labor laws across the country in an extremely unfavorable way for employers.  Given the potential ramifications of that legislation, I have two articles I want to highlight on the matter this week.

As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week.


Working Remotely & Able to Move? West Virginia Will Pay You $12,000 to Move There

Say no more, the title of this article says it all.  As NPR reports, for workers that are working remotely and that will agree to live in West Virginia for at least two years, the state will pay them $12,000 to move there and work remotely.  The program, dubbed Ascend WV, seeks to bring in workers that are no longer tied down to a physical workplace because of the coronavirus.  With reports of large cities such as New York City and San Francisco seeing a notable number of people leaving the high cost of living for a more affordable option, perhaps the Ascend WV program might just catch on.


West Virginia Senator Gives Needed Boost to PRO Act

Earlier this week, Democratic West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin indicated he would co-sponsor the Senate version of the PRO Act.  The Los Angeles Times notes that while Senator Manchin’s support for the legislation was no sure thing, his willingness to support the legislation is a big step in moving its passage closer to reality.  Granted, there is still a possibility (if not likelihood) of a filibuster stalling the legislation.  However, with the House of Representatives having already approved the PRO Act, I would suspect things will start to ramp up in the Senate now that Senator Manchin is on board.


State Attorneys General Voice Opposition to PRO Act

As noted above, while the PRO Act will soon start working its way through the Senate, that has not stopped opposition at the local level.  Earlier this month, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson sent a letter to the Senate to voice opposition to the PRO Act.  The South Carolina Attorney General, joined by Attorneys General from 13 other states, has sought to make it clear that passage of the PRO Act goes against the will of a majority of states that have passed right to work laws...something that the PRO Act would outlaw.  Whether this opposition will move the needle remains to be seen, but it is likely that pressure will mount against the PRO Act as it moves through the Senate.

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,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more