Unions mark gains under Obama

[Omaha Steve]

http://transitional.pww.org/article/view/16874/

Author: John Wojcik
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 08/31/09 15:30

Union leaders and members are saying that eight months into the Obama administration it is clear that labor’s unprecedented investment in the effort to support the election of the president and a 60 vote Democratic majority in the Senate is paying off.

From executive orders that help construction workers to a new law that restores the right to sue employers for pay discrimination based on sex, race, religion or other factors, they are happy about a long list of what they see as first steps that help working men and women.

Having said that they are ready now for what they see as some bigger tasks and challenges.

Unions are pleased with the president’s strong verbal support for their top cause, the Employee Free Choice Act but they want to see that translate into active lobbying by the administration for labor law reform.

Labor is also pushing now for a second massive economic stimulus bill, something the administration is not yet ready to support. The first stimulus bill was too small, according to AFL-CIO Secretary Treasurer Richard Trumka.

In the area of health care labor and the administration are in agreement, provided the reform undertaken includes a strong government-run public health plan option.

FULL story at link.

[Lorax7844]

1. k and r for good news

[Maximus0501]

2. Labor In My State and - I can't post tis as a topic.

I was formerly Help_I_Live_ In_Idaho but I changed E mail addresses and I can't get anyone at the underground to help me get back under the same name or keep my status. So this is my start over.

Worker: Slave to State
I have been working as a clinical social worker treating clients in poverty for 17 years. Little did they know I was in poverty as well and even for a time went to my clinical family psychotherapist job from a tent in the woods.

I am one of many in poverty in the social work profession since Idaho privatized social services and set up private employers and agencies that pay us as contractors for limited functions such as writing and face to face contacts while keeping us on site at their disposal as slaves, answering phones, providing supervision, going to meetings, furnishing offices at our expense. If our work is late due to personal crises or illness we have to do it for free.

I have worked many 40 hour weeks and been paid for as little as 10 hours of work.

Recently, I went to an online Attorney site while researching the billable hour verses employee issue. I paid for a lawyer to chat with me and she said that under federal law, Idaho can't require an individual to be both an employee and a contract employee at the same time.

Consequent to this, Idaho is in violation of federal law by putting contract employees in the position of staying on site waiting for the next client when clients don't show up.

Since the EEOC requires a contract employee, whose employer is receiving state or federal money, to be paid for at least 4 hours if forced by any circumstance to be on site to see another contracted client later. That means employers are subject to paying the contract employee for at least 4 hours if he came in for one hour alone.

The attorney could not believe that Idaho pulled this off and told me that I, and all others in the same situation, should sue every employer for which they have worked under this system for back wages.

She said it appears that the state of Idaho made up its own policy and law in conflict with established federal employment and contract law. She said it is a fraud and it is illegal, because all federal and all EEOC law trumps all state employment law.

I have for 16 years been trying to get this issue on the table, but the state of Idaho has given me the finger. And the Idaho Department of Employment has refused to help me (and many others with the same problem) by saying "it is a civil matter." The attorney says, it is not, and never will be, a civil matter, but it is fraud by the state of Idaho. (The word racketeering comes to mind - 17 years of it)

By refusing to address it, they are negligent and can be sued. But, the big issue is that they are subject to human rights violations that would be pursued by the United States Department of Employment and the Equal Opportunities Employment Commission (EEOC).

I have been given similar and slightly differing accounts for years by attorneys and advocates. But, it always came down to them saying "this is really bad, but we don't have the resources or money to confront the whole state of Idaho." And they complain that they would be attacked without cease by business interest groups in the State and in the right wing of the congress.

Bottom line, it has always been swept under the rug, because it would open up such a quagmire and result in endless infighting.

Now the quagmire is disintegrating. Now the tables of the political climate are turning, and the wheels are already rolling. It is just a matter of time before contract contracted employees of all stripes who have been subject to this tyranny begin suing for back wages and complaining to the US Department of Employment to demand, under laws that already are in place, that all workers on contract be booked back-to-back and paid for missed appointments. It is very serendipitous for my employers that I am into social justice and not lawsuits - but one can get quite inflamed by worker injustice.