Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

DIscuss all labor issues here.

Moderators: plunderer, Bernie the union guy

Post Reply
User avatar
gounion
Board Emeritus
Posts: 37746
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm

Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by gounion »

How hilarious can you get? So, no shit, this was an op/ed in The Hill:

Joe Biden campaigns as a moderate, yet his labor policy is anything but. He supports the most radical rewrite of federal labor laws in U.S. history, and American workers should be afraid.

Biden’s plan is sweeping. He would strip states of their ability to regulate their own affairs, end workers’ freedom to choose whether to join a union, and destroy independent contracting and the “gig” economy. If elected, Biden will push an agenda that would eviscerate the rights of tens of millions of workers, put labor unions in control of the economy, and impose a one-size-fits-all labor system on the entire country.


To me, if you have to completely lie about what the agenda is, then you can't make the case. Yep, the agenda is sweeping. It does right a bunch of past wrongs. So why is this doofus from a corporate-funded think tank lying? Because if he told the truth, he knows that workers LIKE the agenda, and it's popular. So, I invite the RLF member to read the op/ed, and Joe Biden's website.

Here's the problem: we all know the balance of power between corporations and workers is way off balance. It need to be fixed.

And the lies? The biggest are easy. The op/ed says "Forced national public-sector bargaining". Simply isn't true. What the agenda WOULD do is, first, give public (and private, for that matter) workers the RIGHT to form a union. Then, the employer is required by law to bargain in good faith with the union.

Problem is, right now, in many states and communities, either the workers are banned by law from forming unions, and in some, the local government can decide whether or not to allow them to have a union, even before the idea of bargaining.

Second, "destruction of the gig economy" is laughable. It says he's already destroyed it. Thing is, the law hasn't been enacted in California yet, so that remains to be seen. Just more doomsaying of the calamity that will happen if workers are paid a living wage.

Third, "Prevailing Wage". Look, we've built the middle class on good, union jobs. Construction workers are highly-skilled craftsmen that deserve a good wage for the skills they bring to the table. What the right wants, is if a union firm bids on a job with well-paid union labor, they want fly-by-night companies using unskilled and often illegal labor to be able to undercut them on job bids, thus driving the unionized companies out of business.

Railroad tycoon Jay Gould in the 1800's said "I can hire half the working class to kill the other half" and that's what this is.

Just more right-wing bullshit trying to destroy the middle class altogether and turn us into a nation of serfs.

Motor City
Board Emeritus
Posts: 5336
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by Motor City »

wish Biden had an extremist Labor agenda, I'd be preaching Biden and going to his rallies, but we all know thats not the case its more like his indifferent favors corporate business extremists labor plan.

User avatar
gounion
Board Emeritus
Posts: 37746
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by gounion »

Motor City wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:32 pm
wish Biden had an extremist Labor agenda, I'd be preaching Biden and going to his rallies, but we all know thats not the case its more like his indifferent favors corporate business extremists labor plan.
I'm impressed with his labor plan. Far better than any recent Dem nominee. I certainly think if we can get it passed, then the unions will be on a far more level playing field than they have in a half a century.

User avatar
ZoWie
Board Emeritus
Posts: 21235
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Location: The blue parts of the map

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by ZoWie »

The Hill sure isn't what it used to be. I generally ignore it.

User avatar
gounion
Board Emeritus
Posts: 37746
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by gounion »

ZoWie wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:53 pm
The Hill sure isn't what it used to be. I generally ignore it.
Well, to be fair, it's an op/ed. But you usually can't get a rebuttal in. They should have contacted the AFL to give them a say.

bradman
Policy Wonk
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by bradman »

gounion wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:06 pm
I'm impressed with his labor plan. Far better than any recent Dem nominee. I certainly think if we can get it passed, then the unions will be on a far more level playing field than they have in a half a century.
Empower the National Labor Relations Board to fulfill its intended purpose of protecting workers. Congress created the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to encourage union organizing, support collective bargaining, and protect workers’ rights. The Obama-Biden Administration appointed officials to the NLRB who supported workers’ right to organize and collective bargain, and made critically important decisions such as ensuring that workers could organize in micro-units. Trump has undermined this progress and the intent of the NLRB by appointing board members with long histories of anti-union activities. As president, Biden will appoint members to the NLRB who will protect, rather than sabotage, worker organizing, collective bargaining, and workers’ rights to engage in concerted activity whether or not they belong to a union.
[bold] That's interesting.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. - Will Rogers

User avatar
gounion
Board Emeritus
Posts: 37746
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by gounion »

bradman wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:25 pm
[bold] That's interesting.
Useful in the Fight for 15 campaign, and in the Our Walmart campaign. Also the Uber drivers in New York.

Even workers without a union need protections for concerted action.

User avatar
Clara Listensprechen
Member
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:42 am
Location: At large
Contact:

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by Clara Listensprechen »

The formal title for what we all call "labor law" is Master Servant Law and that alone should tell people just how far overdue it is to overhaul that puppy from stem to stern.
I shall continue to be an impossible person so long as those who are now possible remain possible.

User avatar
gounion
Board Emeritus
Posts: 37746
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by gounion »

Clara Listensprechen wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:30 pm
The formal title for what we all call "labor law" is Master Servant Law and that alone should tell people just how far overdue it is to overhaul that puppy from stem to stern.
Congratulations. You were able to throw something at me I hadn't heard before. Via uslegal.com:

Master and servant is a term used to describe the legal relationship between an employer (master) and employee (servant) for purposes of determining an employer's liability for acts of an employee. A master and servant relationship is determined based upon the amount of control the employer exercises over the service provide by the employee. A master will be liable for acts of an employee committed while within the scope of employment. Such liability attaching to an employer due to acts of an employee is called vicarious liability.

This is distinguished from a relationship between an employer and independent contractor. An employer is generally not vicariously liable for acts of an independent contractor, whether or not they were done within the scope of employment.


I'm sure business doesn't like this, as they never want to be liable for anything. And some historical background, via Wiki - Master and Servant Act:

Master and Servant Acts or Masters and Servants Acts were laws designed to regulate relations between employers and employees during the 18th and 19th centuries. An 1823 United Kingdom Act described its purpose as "the better regulations of servants, labourers and work people". This particular Act greatly influenced industrial relations and employment law in the United States, Australia (an 1845 Act), Canada (1847), New Zealand (1856) and South Africa (1856). These Acts are generally regarded as heavily biased towards employers, designed to discipline employees and repress the "combination" of workers in trade unions.

The law required the obedience and loyalty from servants to their contracted employer, with infringements of the contract punishable before a court of law, often with a jail sentence of hard labour. It was used against workers organising for better conditions from its inception until well after the first United Kingdom Trade Union Act 1871 was implemented, which secured the legal status of trade unions. Until then, a trade union could be regarded as illegal because of being "in restraint of trade".

A 2013 study found evidence suggesting that "Master and Servant law allowed workers to insure themselves against labor market risk by allowing them to credibly commit to stay with an employer despite a higher outside wage; when employees did breach their contracts in hope of higher wages, employers used prosecution to retain labor. The elimination of penal sanctions for breach of contract in 1875 was associated with shorter contracts and higher, but more volatile, wages."


Certainly I agree that labor law could use a really big overhaul, but I'm enough of a realist to know it's not in the cards at this time.

However, with a Biden win and winning control of the Senate, we can realistically implement Biden's proposals, which would go a long ways toward leveling the playing field between workers and employers.

And certainly the reason corporations are shutting down American factories to move overseas is because they CAN have a TRUE master-servant relationship.

If the right were to once again make chattel slavery legal, the corporations would do it. If we protested that it was immoral to own slaves, they'd simply say "We follow all Federal and State laws and regulations!"

User avatar
Sam Lefthand
Board Emeritus
Posts: 14766
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by Sam Lefthand »

It is bidness.

User avatar
Clara Listensprechen
Member
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:42 am
Location: At large
Contact:

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by Clara Listensprechen »

"Master Servant" is still the formal title of all our labor laws and it's the concept relied on in Right to Work states as well as Employment At Will Doctrine, which is how labor law is treated in those states and other states as well.
I shall continue to be an impossible person so long as those who are now possible remain possible.

User avatar
gounion
Board Emeritus
Posts: 37746
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by gounion »

Clara Listensprechen wrote:
Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:17 am
"Master Servant" is still the formal title of all our labor laws and it's the concept relied on in Right to Work states as well as Employment At Will Doctrine, which is how labor law is treated in those states and other states as well.
Yeah, the corporations HATE the Employment at Will doctrine, because they don't like idea that people can just quit at a moment's notice. That's why they fight the rights of workers to strike, which is basically everyone quitting at once. It's why the try to demand workers give a two-week notice, so you can't leave them in the lurch.

Of course, when they fire YOU, they never want to give notice, not caring if they leave YOU in the lurch.

They never want any laws or regulations that give workers any rights on the job at all.

But be clear - what they DO like, and never tell workers, that in the Employment at Will Doctrine is that they can fire you at any time and for any reason, or no reason at all. That's the rights you have without a Union Contract.

The only exceptions are non-discrimination laws for race, gender and age. That's why, if you're in a protected class, they always tell you it's for another reason.

User avatar
Clara Listensprechen
Member
Posts: 487
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:42 am
Location: At large
Contact:

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by Clara Listensprechen »

Well, there are other disincentives to an employee quitting, whether for reason or no reason, and that's unemployment benefits. If you quit you ain't getting money for that.
I shall continue to be an impossible person so long as those who are now possible remain possible.

User avatar
carmenjonze
Board Emeritus
Posts: 25975
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm

Re: Joe Biden's Extremist Labor Agenda

Post by carmenjonze »

Clara Listensprechen wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:30 pm
The formal title for what we all call "labor law" is Master Servant Law and that alone should tell people just how far overdue it is to overhaul that puppy from stem to stern.


Stop calling the cops on us.

Post Reply