Posted on May 27th, 2009 by Tim Eavenson | No Comments »
Filed under: ., Labor Law | 
by reiner.kraft (flickr)
A Quick test: When you think of unions and New York City, what comes to mind? I’m guessing it’s not slim cardigans, GQ-worthy suits and adult-sized under-oos.
Well, shows what you know. As the New York Times reported, over 1,000 NYC employees of the international, high-fashion-low-cost retailer H&M are going to work today under a union contract that will raise their hourly pay and place restrictions on the company’s ability to change schedules at the last minute.
The H&M workers actually voted for representation by the Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union back in November of 2007; their first contract was ratified on May 20th of this year. According to the RWDSU’s press release, the new 3-year contract promises a 3% wage increase this year, with reopeners on wages for years 2 and 3, and allows for annual, merit-based increases.
The contract also guarantees that employees will know their schedules at least a week in advance – a provision that should make anyone who’s grunted through a mall job jealous. Frank Bail, the President of RWDSU local 1102 pointed out that over-flexibility in weekly schedules can be difficult for some employees with young children.
It’s unlikely that the H&M contract is a sign of big changes in the labor movement. I can’t see midwestern malls being taken over by organizing campaigns in the near future. But in urban areas like New York, Chicago and L.A., the workers at these places are probably more insulated and the turnover rates are lower (well, maybe not in L.A.). Plus, the close proximity of multiple storefronts could create a large enough worker base for organizing to be worthwhile. It’s something retail employers in major metropolitan areas should at least consider.
For now, it seems like NYC union workers are going to have to think a little harder about what they wear to the hall. Skinny up those jeans, and swap that hard hat for a trilby. And remember, it’s summer, so no felt - straw is much more breathable for your scalp.
Posted on April 7th, 2009 by Randy Enochs | 1 Comment »
Filed under: ., Labor Law, Politics |
In yet another blow signaling a need for a compromise of the Employee Free Choice Act, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) announced this past Monday that she will not support the union-backed legislation–at least not in its current form.
Meanwhile, Senator Mark Warner (D-Vir.) seems to be wavering. Warner announced that he backs a vote for cloture, but he said he will evaluate his stance on the measure after EFCA has reached the floor.
Workplace Prof Blog recently reported on a story floating around about the compromise operations that have already begun in an effort to get EFCA passed through Congress.
Posted on March 10th, 2009 by Tim Eavenson | No Comments »
Filed under: Labor Law, Politics |
After months (years, really) of prep and wrangling, The Employee Free Choice Act finally took center stage today.
EFCA was introduced mid-day by Representative George Miller (House Education and Labor Committee Chairman) and Senator Tom Harkin (see picture).
The two hit on the EFCA support bullet points, tying the bill to the economic crisis (even though it’s been around for over a year) and major labor improvements of the 20th century. From a press release:
“Americans’ wages have been stagnating or falling for the past decade. For far too long, we have seen corporate CEOs take care of themselves and shareholders at the expense of workers,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “If we want a fair and sustainable recovery from this economic crisis, we must give workers the ability to stand up for themselves and once again share in the prosperity they help to create.”
“Just as the National Labor Relations Act, the 40 hour week and the minimum wage helped to pull us out of the Great Depression and into a period of unprecedented prosperity, so too will the Employee Free Choice Act help reinvigorate our economy,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. “Today is one of those defining moments in history as we introduce legislation that puts power back into the hands of the people who are truly the backbone of this economy.”
I don’t have to tell you this is going to be bloody. The Chamber of Commerce responded to EFCA’s introduction by descending on Washington D.C. like a swarm of flying monkeys. Though, they described themselves differently. From the Washinton Post:
The Chamber of Commerce brought nearly 200 Chamber members from around the country to Washington today to lobby the senators who will decide the bill’s fate for a campaign they’re billing a “Workforce Freedom Airlift.”
They gathered this morning in the grand Hall of Flags in the Chamber’s headquarters across from the White House, where national leaders of the chamber praised them as the “first Marines hitting the beach” to defeat a “job killer” of a bill that would violate American democracy and bring further ruin on a beleaguered econonomy.
The Chamber of Commerce invoking Normandy? There’s a joke about VFW halls in there somewhere.
Both sides have made it clear that EFCA only has to jump one hurdle, but it’s a big one – like 60 votes big. Republicans have been threatening (some would argue saving) the fillibuster against EFCA since it first knocked its way around the House in ’07. And while some Democrats seem willing to compromise (see Claire McCaskill on last Sunday’s This Week, or this alternative bill introduced by Rep. Sestak), if the Chamber’s lobbying is to be given any weight, their efforts are likely in vain. Again, from WaPo:
“The only thing that stands between this Draconian, game-changing legislation and your workplace is the filibuster,” said Steven Law, the chamber’s general counsel. “It is critically important to be very clear: There is no compromise.”
