Aug. 24, 2003 - 17:34 MDT

THE WONDERING JEW

Losing Ground

I wonder if the working people in or country realize how much has been lost to the changes pushed by the business and business oriented government ?

In the Sunday August 24, 2003 Business section of the Denver Post there is a long article by Anne C. Mulkern of the Denver Post Washington Bureau. Headed: "Unions say workers under seige subheaded: Bush administration defends labor policies as lifting onerous regulatory burdens."

There is a side bar listing:

Significant changes in labor law made by President Bush:

• Eliminated Labor Department rule requiring employers to take certain steps to prevent repetitive stress-type injuries in the workplace.
• Jettisoned development of a rule requiring employers to track the incidence of repetitive stress injuries separately from other injuires.
• Stopped action on 29 worker-safety regulations.
• Rewrote a rule that prohibits government contracts with any company that had broken laws, especially labor and evironmental laws. The rule now requires companies behave responsibly with a record of "integrity and business ethics."
• Eliminated a Labor Department rule that would have allowed states to use unemployment funds for workers caring for a new baby.
• Stopped action on a Labor Department rule that would have established procedures to prevent and limit the spread of airborne diseases, such as tuberculosis, in the workplace.
• Abolished the Bureau of Labor Statistics' monthly reports documenting plant closings and layoffs of more than 50 workers at any workplace.
• Required federal contractors to post signs telling workers that they do not have to join unions. Signs do not tell workers they can join unions if they desire.
• Prohibited federally funded construction projects from requiring "project labor agreements" which require union labor in exchange for a no-strike promise.
• Removed a rule that required new building service contractors in federal buildings to hire workers used by the previous contractor.
• Eliminated collective bargaining rights for certain federal employees, including those who work for the CIA, Secret Service and Department of Justice.

PENDING CHANGES:

1. - Revise overtime rules to reclassify certain workers as not eligible for overtime.

2. - Require unions to file detailed reports with the governent on how they spend their time and money.

Repetitive stress inuries are something that have plagued workers in most areas of manufacturing and some other jobs in the private sector. Up until recent years repetitive stress injury and the treatment of same was on the employee's shoulders and if he or she couldn't do the work that caused the repetitive stress injury -- guess who was out of a job. That is one of the reasons for such a rule.

The rule that employers keep separate track of repetitive stress injuries. Well, of course, if the employers had to keep separate track of same it might highlight the continuation of such work that causes those injuries.

"Stopped action on 29 worker safety regulations." If there was action on those 29 safety regulations, obviously there was a need for them. Might have caused business to revise some routines that were harmful to employees - or shifted the burden onto the employees back if he got hurt on the job.

"Rewrote a rule prohibiting government contracts with any company that had broken laws, etc." Hell yes, of course that is necessary ! Heh. Is there today a business that hasn't broken laws ? Especially labor and enviornmental laws ? Fox in the hen house again.

Care for a new baby covered by unemployment funds for workers caring for a new baby ? That one ties into too many other things to be discussed here. I can see points in favor of each way. Outcome would depend on too many other actions by government and businesses.

"Stopped action on procedures to prevent and limit the spread of airborne diseases in the workplace." Mentioned tuberculosis in the article, but I can see the great need in restaurants and hospitals to go to those procedures to prevent such things as hepatitis, and other food related diseases, staph infections caused by virus or organism, all of which can be airborne.

"Plant closings and layoffs of more than 50 workers at any workplace." Of course the Bureau of Labor Statistics doesn't want to publish statistics like that, really -- especially now.

"Required federal contractors to post signs telling workers that they do not have to join unions." Along with the signs that employers post, especially with orders from above to post with the wording supplied by the administration there is the added pressure from employers by word of mouth and the duress that workers are often under to NOT join a union. Some workers could interpret a sign like as an order or a threat.

"Prohibiting federally funded construction projects from requiring "project labor agreements," which require union labor in exchange for a no-strike promise." In other words union folks had to permit a no-strike clause in their contract. When I worked in a power plant we had a no-strike provision, but did have the prerogative of striking after all other means failed and no agreement reached. It was a hairy thing and took many, many steps, but it had never come to something like that. There are certain jobs wherein our country and our country's security would be greatly harmed and a strike would be disastrous. But, regular government work ? A worker gives up his ability to bargain if he is on a no-strike contract, that in itself is bad enough.

"A rule that required new building service contractors in federal buildings to hire workers used by the previous contractor." Yeah right, the government will have the right to contract with a new business for the services in a government building and all of a sudden those who worked those jobs can be out of a job -- and by the way it is wrote now, that can happen.

Eliminated collective bargaining rights for certain federal employees, including those who work for the CIA, Secret Service and Department of Justice." I cannot for the life of me see any reason for those employees who do not handle secret things to be unable to bargain collectively. I also remember an employer or two who precluded union membership for quite a few of us, they classified us as being administrative types, Yeah, administrate this ! No overtime, as many hours as the employer said was required. The employer did allow us to have the same vacation rights as the union members, but we had no say in anything else.

PENDING CHANGES

"Revise overtime rules to reclassify certain workers as not elegible for overtime." There as been much written pro and con. The thing that I have noticed is that neither side has listed those who will not be eligible for overtime pay. Pros say six hundred thousand people will fall into that category. The antis mention a figure into the millions. Myself I am against cutting anyone off overtime pay. My feeling is that employers will use any tactic to get as much work out of as few employees as they can. If supervision is on the ball, every employee is doing a fair days work. One of the reasons that a forty hour week and time and a half pay for anything over that or any hours worked over an eight hour day was fought for was to prevent abuse of the employee by the employer. It took many years and deaths to gain that status and now the government is nibbiling at those who have no defense against such tactics. Except in a grave emergency I see absolutely no reason for overtime work. If company administration and those planners who work for same would do adequate work there would be no reason to work people overtime. A worker is entitled to either his time off to be with his family or to engage in private pursuits -- or money to pay for his employers use of it, and about the only way is to make him pay time and a half for anything over eight hours in a day or forty hours in a week. I have been there and had that done to me. Comp time is another crock of doo doo.

"Require unions to file detailed reports with the government on how they spend their time and money.Now isn't that a crock of isht ? Punitive measures against unions. Union members and their leaders have to account for the time spent on how to cope with willful employers ? ? ? ? ? and take the time and paper to submit to the government reports on their actions, both time spent and money spent, laying themselves open to action by the governent against them. Our government has gone overboard since 9-11 trying to be secretive as all get out, trying to make all of us into total paranoids and giving up rights. But they want the right to scan every moment of our private lives ?? Union business is by golly PRIVATE to my way of thinking.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The article goes into great detail and seems to me to be quite accurate and also gives more information on the time line. One paragraph I will quote: "Bush's approach to labor became apparent in his first few months in office. Within two months, working with Congress, he repealed a Labor Deartment regulation requiring business to take specific steps to prevent repetitive stress injuries." Now get this, "A subsequent ergonomics standard released by the Bush administration relies on voluntary compliance by employers." Voluntary my donkey, employers didn't do a damn thing about repetitive stress injuries from day one.

One more thing -- now a business that has broken laws especially pertaining to labor and environment just has to say something to the order of, "We promise to be good guys, obey the law and have "integrity." Ha, if they had any integrity they wouldn't have broken any laws in the first place. So now our government wants to be "equal opportunity" employers and do business with crooks. My opinions and I have a right to express them.

It appears to me that the working Joe -- whether white collar or blue collar is rapidly Losing Ground . . . . . . . . . .

Blog