New OT bill allows employers to offer time off instead of cash
USA Today/Roger Yu
Worker advocates criticized the bill and say it’s a move by businesses to avoid paying overtime pay. “This is a lousy bargain for the employees,” wrote Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank, in a blog.
Eisenbrey says the bill empowers employers to dictate when employees can take time off. “There’s no guarantee that (employees) will get to take the leave when they need it,” he wrote. “If the employer thinks the requested time off would be unduly disruptive to its operations it can refuse the request.” “Simply put, HR 1180 is a scam. It pretends to offer a benefit to employees, but in reality it’s a benefit to employers who get to schedule overtime work but delay paying for it for up to 13 months,” he said. Getting time off under the bill would also amount to the employee making a zero-interest loan of overtime pay to the employer, Eisenbrey said. “Employees who have no paid vacation or paid sick leave will feel pressured into giving up their right to receive overtime pay in order to have some hope of getting time off in the future.”
USA Today | May 4, 2017
Celine speaks at 1:00 mark.
Marketplace | May 4, 2017
Labor Board Rule to Speed Up Union Elections Shows Mixed Results
Bloomberg BNA/Hassan Kanu
Celine McNicholas, labor counsel at the Economic Policy Institute, disagreed with the management-side lawyers’ interpretation of the data on win rates. She also had a different take on the purpose of the rule. The rule was designed as “a modest update of the procedures” to accommodate modern technology like online petition filing and providing emails instead of just mailing addresses, she said. McNicholas said she looked at the NLRB’s own data. “I would point out that the union win rate looks like 65 percent in the year after the rule, and 66 percent in the year before, so that’s not exactly in line with what’s being said” by Fisher Phillips, McNicholas told Bloomberg BNA. (Celine quoted throughout)
Bloomberg BNA | May 4, 2017
Why a $15 Minimum Wage Is Good Economics
The American Prospect/Jared Bernstein and Ben Speiberg
The questions we should be asking are about workers’ experiences: First, how many workers would benefit from this policy, who are they, and how badly do they need the money? Research by David Cooper at the Economic Policy Institute finds that the Raise the Wage Act of 2017 would give 41 million workers a raise. It would disproportionately benefit women and people of color and would provide additional income to the families of nearly one-quarter of the nation’s children. Fifty-five percent of the workers who would benefit come from families with incomes currently lower than $50,000 a year, and these are families that generally rely on those workers for the bulk of that money. Second, among the much smaller number of workers who could potentially experience some form of displacement, what might the impact on their living standards be? How likely would they be to get another job at the new, higher wage? Forthcoming research by Cooper, Larry Mishel, and Ben Zipperer shows that turnover in the low-wage labor market is already quite common. More than one-fifth of the lowest-wage workers can be expected to transition either into or out of a job during any three-month period. As Mishel notes, “We don’t live in a binary world where people either work or get excluded from employment forever. A reduction in total work hours can be absorbed over the course of a year in many ways—reduced weekly hours, fewer weeks worked, fewer multiple jobs.” In other words, the increase could lead to some low-wage workers ending up with higher annual earnings while working fewer hours over the course of a year
The American Prospect | May 4, 2017
By comparison, the CPC is much better politically situated to actually enact their proposals, should Democrats win power. Perhaps most importantly, they are not lying about what’s in them. It’s all laid out, clearly and honestly, with realistic assumptions and funding mechanisms. As laid out by the Economic Policy Institute, it would run a large short-term fiscal stimulus to reach true full employment. Additionally, it would boost food stamps, unemployment spending, and the Earned Income Tax Credit. It would also spend $2 trillion on infrastructure over 10 years.
The Week | May 4, 2017
The People’s Budget provides a basic road map for where we have to go. It outlines what we are for, not simply what we are against. Prepared in conjunction with the Economic Policy Institute, it is bolstered by supporting charts and documents, as well as the EPI’s detailed economic analysis—which by comparison makes a mockery of the shoddy “skinny budget” and one-page tax “plan” that the Trump administration released.
The Nation | May 4, 2017
“In 2013, nearly nine in 10 families in the top income fifth had retirement account savings, compared with fewer than one in 10 families in the bottom income fifth,” a report from the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute found.
Buzzfeed | May 3, 2017
As the Urban League focuses on protecting advancements, Valerie Rawlston Wilson, director of the Economic Policy Institute’s Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy, said the 2017 Equality Index provides a “line in the sand” to measure what happens from now on.
NPR | May 3, 2017
Infosys (INFY) is an Indian information technology company that is one of the biggest users of the H-1B visa program, which has come under fire from President Donald Trump and others who claim the system allows businesses to hire cheaper foreign workers rather than Americans. That criticism is heard on both sides of the political aisle, with the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute charging that Infosys and its competitors use the visa program to cut labor costs. … While Infosys vowed to hire in specific tech-related fields, it didn’t specify how many of the jobs would consist of support staff versus higher-paid tech workers. Hiring American programmers and analysts is considerably costlier than outsourcing tech staff from India, according to a 2015 study from EP
CBS Moneywatch | May 3, 2017
Celine McNicholas, a labor lawyer with the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, said the proposed reforms ignore the power balance inside a real-world workplace. “It sets up a dynamic, for the first time since [the law] was created, that employees are going to have to ask to be paid overtime that they’ve earned,” McNicholas said. “Sitting down with employers and electing to choose comp time or [to be] paid the overtime they’ve earned … we know in reality what those situations can look like in terms of pressure.” (Celine quoted throughout)
The Huffington Post | May 3, 2017
“Given what we’ve seen so far in terms of the kinds of policies that are being set forth by this administration, I don’t sense that there will be great gains on narrowing these gaps, and in some cases, they could widen,” said Valerie Rawlston Wilson, director of the Economic Policy Institute’s Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy and one of the report’s authors. She said in an interview that the annual reports provide a consistent barometer of how black and Hispanic Americans are faring “beyond the political talking points.”
The Washington Post | May 2, 2017
During the campaign President Trump cast himself as a champion of working-class Americans. But critics point out that in his first 100 days in office, Trump has rolled back worker protections and outlined a budget that would starve the agencies in charge of looking out for laborers. The Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank based in Washington, D.C., last week released a report detailing Trump’s record on workers’ rights so far. Here & Now‘s Jeremy Hobson talks with Celine McNicholas (@CmMcNich), the institute’s labor counsel, about the report.
Here & Now | May 2, 2017
“I think at this point it would be premature to say anything about a Trump policy effect, at least, since we haven’t passed any policies yet,” said Josh Bivens, research director at the Economic Policy Institute. Burtless added that Trump benefited from taking office during a period when economic signs were trending up. “The U.S. economy has been achieving pretty steady job gains for the past four or five years, and it’s hard to see that job creation is any faster since President Trump took office or won the election,” he said. “That trend was underway well before the election.”
NBC News | May 2, 2017
“It’s a complete and total fraud,” said Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the left-of-center Economic Policy Institute. Nothing under current law prevents companies from just offering paid sick days or family leave to their workers, opponents of the proposal say — or short of that, from granting requests for unpaid leave. Because workers right now could take paid overtime and then use the money to make up for unpaid leave taken later, they argue, there’s no benefit to them in letting them instead work unpaid overtime and then make up for it by taking paid leave. “It forces the employee to give the employer a loan — unsecured, interest-free — of the overtime pay, in order to have the hope — not a guarantee, but the hope — of having some time off later on,” said Eisenbrey. Either way, he said, employers still get to decide whether to actually grant their workers’ requests for time off.
Bloomberg | May 2, 2017
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a liberal think tank, estimated in 2013 that NAFTA caused the direct loss of about 700,000 jobs because of manufacturers moving to Mexico, where wages are 30% of that of an American factory worker on average. “There were some job gains along the border in service and retail sectors resulting from increased trucking activity, but these gains are small in relation to the losses, and are in lower paying occupations,” it said.
USA Today | May 2, 2017
During the campaign President Trump cast himself as a champion of working-class Americans. But critics point out that in his first 100 days in office, Trump has rolled back worker protections and outlined a budget that would starve the agencies in charge of looking out for laborers. The Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank based in Washington, D.C., last week released a report detailing Trump’s record on workers’ rights so far. Here & Now‘s Jeremy Hobson talks with Celine McNicholas (@CmMcNich), the institute’s labor counsel, about the report.
Here & Now | May 2, 2017
100 Days of Trump Impact on Workers – EPI Report
WORT-FM
Kayla Blado, Media Relations Specialist with the Economic Policy Institute. reviews the impact of actions by the Trump Administration in its first 100 days. The story was originally aired on WORT-FM’s Labor Radio, on Friday, April 28, 2017.
WORT-FM | May 1, 2017
Watchdogs: Trump’s Disastrous 100 Days Fueling “Golden Era of Activism”
Common Dreams/Nadia Prupis
Celine McNicholas for the Economic Policy Institute: “In his first 100 days in office, President Trump has continued to talk about creating ‘jobs where Americans prosper and grow.’ However, his actions during that time tell a different story.”
“Working Americans deserve more than talk,” McNicholas said Thursday. “If the president were serious about improving the lives of working men and women, he could strengthen overtime rules, work to increase the minimum wage, and support workers’ rights to bargain collectively. Instead he has steadily undermined the laws and institutions that protect working people and advance their interests.
Common Dreams | May 1, 2017
EPISODE 27: 100 DAYS OF CRAZINESS, BIGOTRY AND BAD STUFF
Working Life/Jonathan Tasini
I dig into the Top 10 really bad things that have happened so far in Donald Trump’s reign, focusing on workers, and the issues we care about in the political revolution. It’s all an easy-to-understand conversation with my expert guest, Heidi Shierholz, Senior Economist and Director of Policy at the Economic Policy Institute.
Working Life | April 27, 2017
By the time it would take full effect in 2024, the minimum wage proposal would raise the pay of 41.5 million workers, according to an analysis released by the progressive Economic Policy Institute timed to coincide with the Capitol Hill rally. The bill would ensure that in 2019 the minimum wage would exceed the inflation-adjusted peak it reached in 1968, EPI estimates. EPI is an influential think tank in Democratic circles. It did not endorse previous $15 minimum wage proposals in Congress, but it does back this one ― another sign that the more gradual escalation of the wage floor in this plan has broadened the tent of supporters on the left.
The Huffington Post | April 27, 2017
Think tank Economic Policy Institute offered its breakdown of the benefits of Sanders and Murray’s bill. The EPI dubs itself nonpartisan, but it is affiliated with (and has received funding from) the labor movement. According to an EPI fact sheet, the bill is a response to ground-up advocacy taken on by cities and states in the wake of the fast-food workers strike in 2012. So far, California, New York and D.C. have approved raising their minimum wages to $15 an hour and Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Arizona and Maine have approved minimums in the range of $12 to $14.75. Some of the cities on the front line of the fight (even before 2012) have included Seattle, Phoenix, Los Angeles and San Diego. The EPI sees the bill as all sweetness and light, stating that it would “lift pay for 41 million workers — nearly 30 percent of the U.S. workforce,” “begin to reverse decades of growing pay inequality between the lowest-paid workers and the middle class,” and “generate $144 billion in higher wages for workers and would also benefit their communities.” It would also be a boon for women and people of color, in the EPI’s eyes.
Next City | April 27, 2017
A minimum wage increase this high could help undo that trend. By 2019, according to a new analysis from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), the legislation would bring the value of the minimum wage above where it was in 1968 for the first time in more than a half century. It would finally be enough, if someone were working full-time and supporting a family of four, to lift her out of poverty. “The lowest-paid workers in the U.S. economy earn less than what their counterparts did 50 years ago, which is just absolutely crazy and socially irresponsible,” said Ben Zipperer, an economist at EPI. “We’re really digging ourselves out of a hole.” It would also directly and indirectly lead to raises for millions of Americans. According to EPI’s analysis, 22.5 million people would get higher pay thanks to their employers being required to increase their wages within seven years, earning an average of $5,100 more a year for full-time work. Another 19 million people, meanwhile, would see their pay rise as employers hiked compensation for people making more than $15 an hour so as to retain and attract them. That amounts to a raise for more than a quarter of the entire wage-earning workforce.
Think Progress | April 27, 2017
While the progressive Economic Policy Institute estimates the resulting U.S. trade deficit with Mexico had displaced more than 680,000 U.S. jobs by 2010 and has contributed to lower incomes among U.S. manufacturing workers, other economists counter it lowered the prices of goods and created jobs in different sectors.
Mic | April 27, 2017
Researchers have found mixed effects on the US labour force. Some industries have shrunk, while others have grown. The Economic Policy Institute said in 2013 that some 700,000 jobs had been lost as production moved to Mexico – with California, Texas, and Michigan among the worst hit states.
Al Jazeera America | April 27, 2017
Sanders and 21 Democrats introduce bill to raise minimum wage to $15 an hour
The Washington Post/David Weigel
Since then, Sanders has used his increased prominence on the left and around the Democratic Party to push for the higher wage. Wednesday’s legislation relies in part on the analysis of the progressive Economic Policy Institute, whose president, Larry Mishel, said in an interview that critics who warned that a higher wage would kill jobs were relying on outdated nostroms. “They don’t know that, and if they insist on it, this will be the first time those people ever care about low-wage workers,” said Mishel. “It’s always odd to find the employers of low-wage workers claim to be the heroes of young black teenagers, who on any other day of the week they do everything they can to ignore them.”
The Washington Post | April 26, 2017
The plans have split experts. Hunter Blair, budget analyst at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, said the proposals were “basically a huge tax cut for the rich”. “According to the treasury, 43% of corporate tax is paid for by the top 1%. We have tried this supply side economics before; trickle down just doesn’t work,” he said.
The Guardian | April 26, 2017
President Trump is expected to unveil his tax plan tomorrow. It would reportedly lower the corporate tax rate to 15 percent. Budget analysts predict that would cost the federal government more than $2 trillion in revenue over a decade. But the administration says the tax cuts will boost the economy so much that they’ll pay for themselves because of increased economic activity. Is that realistic? (Hunter speaks at 1:53-2:05)
Marketplace | April 26, 2017
Do tariffs necessarily mean more jobs for steelworkers? A typical U.S. steel plant uses far fewer workers today than in the past, thanks to automation. And lower demand for domestic steel affects U.S. jobs, though an infrastructure program would provide a boost. But it’s axiomatic that lowering costs for American steel relative to Chinese rivals would help the industry (and half a million jobs, according to a 2014 Economic Policy Institute report). Plus, I don’t recall the proviso in trade enforcement that violations aren’t important unless they definitively bring the affected industry back to 1960s levels of employment. Anyway, there are lots of other reasons to prevent China’s predatory pricing.
The Fiscal Times | April 25, 2017
Interview with Daniel Costa about the problems with the H-1B program and what to make of Trump’s new executive order.
The American Prospect | April 25, 2017
We go to Washington hoping to make a difference. But in many cases, low starting salaries and unpaid internships are barriers to entry. It’s a phenomenon Carlos Vera described last year for NBC Latino, writing, “Interning in Congress is a rite of passage for any college student who wants a career in politics, but they don’t come cheap. Congressional internships are generally unpaid, and in D.C. will cost you a pretty penny.” As Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute, told the New York Times last year, “It restricts access to jobs in government to a narrower group of people.” The median white family has 13 times the net wealth of the median black family and 10 times the wealth of the median Latino family, narrowing the access of people of color to congressional internships that translate to entry-level jobs, which translates to fewer minorities advancing to senior staff positions: In 2015, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies found that of 336 chief of staff, legislative director, communications director and committee staff director positions, people of color held only 24.
The Washington Post | April 25, 2017