The Supreme Court Struck a Blow Against Workers’ Rights / by Alex N. Press

_{^{The US Supreme Court building is seen on April 23, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)}}

On Thursday, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in a case involving Starbucks and its union, seeing all justices side with the company against workers. The decision will make it easier for employers to get away with firing workers for unionizing

_{Reposted from Jacobin}

It just got easier for employers to get away with firing workers for organizing a union.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court sided with Starbucks in a decision against Starbucks Workers United (SBWU), the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) affiliate that continues to organize Starbucks locations across the country. The union has organized more than 440 stores representing some ten thousand workers since the campaign began in December 2021.

The case, Starbucks Corporation v. McKinney, concerns the “Memphis Seven,” whom Starbucks fired during their store’s organizing drive in 2022. The workers claim that they were fired in retaliation for their organizing activities, alleging that the policy the company cited as the cause of their termination — the workers reopened the store after closing time, inviting nonemployees, including a television crew, inside — are not usually enforced.

SBWU filed an unfair labor practice (ULP) charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) over their termination, arguing that it constituted a violation of the workers’ legally protected right to engage in concerted activity. In response, the board issued a complaint against Starbucks, writing that the reason it fired the Memphis Seven was because they had “joined or assisted the union and engaged in concerted activities, and to discourage employees from engaging in these activities.” The NLRB then asked a federal judge in Tennessee for an injunction reinstating the seven; in August 2022, six months after they were fired, the judge issued that order.

Even as Starbucks finally agreed to get serious at the bargaining table with SBWU, stating that it hopes to reach a first contract by the end of the year, the coffee giant did not drop its objections to the injunction, which it appealed to the Supreme Court. But the NLRB’s actions were an attempt to remedy the chilling effect of the company’s actions: if other workers see that Starbucks can fire seven workers for engaging in protected activity and those workers have to wait years for justice to prevail in the legal realm, it will make them think twice about organizing.

“Starbucks has committed more than 400 violations of federal labor law, including firing 59 union leaders and supporters, according to decisions of administrative law judges,” wrote twelve former Starbucks workers who have been disciplined or fired in response to organizing in a friend-of-the-court brief. “More than 60 additional complaints against Starbucks are awaiting decisions.”

An employer’s ability to stall worker organizing by forcing workers to wait as legal matters wend their way through the courts is particularly damaging for SBWU, for whom momentum has been a key tool to spreading the organizing victories. That dynamic is why NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo called the federal judge’s granting of an injunction “a crucial step in ensuring that these workers, and all Starbucks workers, can freely exercise their right to join together to improve their working conditions and form a union.”

The Supreme Court judges disagree. Starbucks’s argument was that federal judges have different standards for granting injunctions to reinstate workers: some courts only require the NLRB to show that there is “reasonable cause” to believe an employer has violated labor law, while others make the board prove that not reinstating workers would cause “irreparable harm,” and that the board will likely prevail in its legal case. The NLRB called the difference semantic, arguing that there is no discrepancy in need of intervention by the Supreme Court.

Eight of the court’s nine judges agreed with Starbucks’s argument, ruling in favor of the stricter standard. As Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority opinion, “But, the reasonable-cause standard goes far beyond simply fine tuning the traditional criteria . . . it substantively lowers the bar for securing a preliminary injunction.” Justice Thomas noted that the stricter standard is usually applied in cases where other laws allow a judge to issue a preliminary injunction.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a separate opinion that concurred with the overall judgment but stated that it’s easy to show irreparable harm to workers who have been terminated and will have to wait years for reinstatement as a case makes its way through the legal process. Thomas’s opinion, wrote Justice Jackson, ignores Congress’s “clear and comprehensive” directives in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) as to how courts should exercise discretion when it comes to the Board’s authority over labor disputes.

“Unfortunately, today’s decision appears to be another installment in a series of labor cases in which this Court has failed ‘to heed Congress’s intent,’” she wrote. “I am loath to bless this aggrandizement of judicial power where Congress has so plainly limited the discretion of the courts, and where it so clearly intends for the expert agency it has created to make the primary determinations.”

“Working people have so few tools to protect and defend themselves when their employers break the law,” Workers United president Lynne Fox said in a statement. “That makes today’s ruling by the Supreme Court particularly egregious.”

The case is but the first of many in the works from employers seeking to diminish the NLRB’s capacity. Amazon, SpaceX, and Trader Joe’s have all made arguments challenging the constitutionality of the board. These companies are taking advantage of the court’s rightward swing: the court is currently poised to remove power from federal agencies broadly by overturning a legal doctrine known as the Chevron deference, which establishes that judges must defer to federal agencies when interpreting ambiguous laws. Overturning that principle will be a major blow to the government’s regulatory power and as such is a priority for the Right.

Employers seeking to undermine the NLRB are but one prong of that broad attack. They’re chipping away at an agency that has been a thorn in their side in recent years, consistently objecting to union-busting campaigns across the country. With last week’s Supreme Court ruling, they’ve scored a victory in that project.

_{Alex N. Press is a staff writer at Jacobin who covers labor organizing.}

Twin Cities workers headed for massive coordinated strikes / by Press Associates

_{^{SEIU Local 26 President Greg Nammacher speaks at a press conference about potential simultaneous strikes by thousands of workers in front of St. Paul City Hall on Feb. 22, 2024. | Max Nesterak/Minnesota Reformer}}

_{Reposted from the People’s World}

MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL, Minn.—More than 13,000 workers around the Twin Cities—Teachers, Laborers, Service Employees and United Food and Commercial Workers, transit workers—are headed for coordinated strikes in mid-March unless their bosses, including Minneapolis city officials, reach new pacts with their union locals.

The potential strikes by the “What Could We Win Together?” coalition could see 8,000 janitors and security guards, members of SEIU Local 26, take a hike. Joining them would be 3,700 teachers and staffers from the St. Paul Federation of Teachers/AFT, 1,000 workers at 12 nursing homes represented by Local 26 and by UFCW Local 663 and 400 Minneapolis city workers, members of Laborers Local 363. Also in the coalition: 2,000 Metro Transit workers in Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1005.

All but ATU already overwhelmingly authorized strikes. The nursing home workers plan to walk on March 5 and March 7, not just over pay—they want $25/hour, double what many earn now—but over bosses’ labor law-breaking, formally unfair labor practices. ATU is in mediation with Metro Transit.

The other unionists plan to take a hike on March 13, unless bosses come to their senses and provide fair contracts. Local 1005 “is demanding COLA+1 (cost of living adjustment plus 1%) for our members in this next contract. Inflation has been a huge burden on our members and working people. We need wage increases that make up for what we lost to inflation.”

“To stand in solidarity” is “why we are coming together,” their joint platform, posted by Local 26, declares. Solidarity will “make our voices louder, but mostly we are coming together to win. Winning for ourselves, our families, each other, our communities, and those in our society who need it most.”

Local 26 President Greg Nammacher, who started working on the joint contract expirations and walkouts long ago, told a February 26 press conference the planned mass walkouts will draw more public attention and, the unions hope, support.

“When unions are isolated from their communities, it is very hard for them to make the kind of advances that working people deserve,” Nammacher told the Minnesota Reformer in a later interview. “If we’re going to have big demands, we do need to be in alignment with our community.”

While all the workers plan to walk, their priorities vary.

Laborers Local 363 told its members that “after over six months since your negotiating team began bargaining, City of Minneapolis negotiators still refuse to engage in meaningful discussions about worker health and safety protections, sustainable staffing levels and work schedules, and increasing wages to rates competitive with surrounding metro area cities. They continue to stall, deny information requests, and demand concessions.”

Local 363 members chimed in, too, via X/Twitter.

“If it takes a strike to fight for a fair wage and contract, for each and every one of us, let us vote ‘Yes!’” tweeted Traffic Maintenance and Repair Division worker Kristine Haney. Sewer and Water Division’s Scott Yahr added improved worker safety to the list.

“We are being paid over six dollars less per hour compared to market rates. Shockingly, the city is paying temporary workers more than us for the same work,” tweeted Solid Waste and Recycling Division worker Robert Messinger Jr.

SEIU Local 26’s own priorities include raises to cover the 20% inflation since 2019, pensions workers can live on after retirement, “affordable and equitable health care,” and safer and healthier working conditions, including freedom from racial, gender and other discrimination on the job.

Campaign-wide priorities also include higher pay for teachers and staff—the issue that is driving the St. Paul teachers to join the strike authorization votes and Minneapolis’s teachers to support the cause. The teachers’ unions also demand “full-service community schools,” similar to the “wraparound schools,” providing social services, too, which the Teachers (AFT) advocate nationally.

Other priorities include measures to close the Twin Cities’ racial wealth and income gap, which the coalition says is the widest in the U.S., providing affordable housing and rent stabilization. They’re rapidly rising, as developers convert buildings to luxury housing.

“We can’t rely on developers to provide affordable housing,” Local 26 says.

“A lack of publicly owned housing doesn’t just hurt renters, who due to a lack of other options are at the mercy of these corporate developers and property managers, but through tax cuts taxpayers end up subsidizing them.”

Demands to end wage theft on the job, a particular cause of construction unions, are in the platform. The Twin Cities building trades have been especially active, along with the Centro de Trabajadores Unidos en Lucha (CTUL) workers center, in exposing wage theft. That center, as well as the state AFL-CIO and the Minneapolis Regional Labor Federation, all support the general strike plans.

“The issues…sometimes feel astronomical,” the joint platform says. “In Minnesota we know too well the racism, prejudice and indignities that BIPOC people face in their jobs, communities, by police and other institutions.

“These divisions are used against us. And workers were harmed by the coronavirus pandemic, “inflation that is pushing people out of our homes and out of our communities, women seeing their rights being stripped away (and) LGBTQ folks are having to flee some states enacting policies meant to harm them.

“Schools are facing huge challenges, all while our planet is burning. The structures that exist in our society are used by the corporate elite to continue exploiting our labor. Turning us against our neighbors and our coworkers, and leading us to believe that people different than you deserve less. That’s why we’re coming together.”

_{We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!}

_{Press Associates Inc. (PAI), is a union news service in Washington D.C. Mark Gruenberg is the editor.}

Teamsters lobby for consumer boycott of food chain / Mark Gruenberg and the Southern California Teamster

_{^{Demonstration at company headquarters | Teamsters Joint Council 42}}

_{Reposted from the People’s World}

LOS ANGELES —Los Angeles-based Teamsters Local 630 is lobbying for consumers to boycott the Smart & Final food chain, after its Mexican-based owner, a $13 billion company, decided to close two warehouses in Southern California, open a third in Rancho Cucamonga, and make all 600 workers involved re-apply for their jobs.

The close-move-and-reapply threat forced the workers, who just voted for Local 630 to represent them, to strike for three weeks last November over company unfair labor practices, Local Secretary-Treasurer Lou Villalvazo said. Seeking and getting community support, including support for the boycott, is a follow-up step.

And on January 12, they staged a mass rally at the firm’s L.A. corporate offices to highlight the lawbreaking refusal to bargain a first contract, or over the move or anything else.

Teamsters Warehouse Division Director Tom Erickson added then: “Chedraui must honor their sacrifices by ensuring their jobs are protected and union rights are upheld. Just because you move workers to a new warehouse doesn’t mean you can rewrite the rules.

“We continue to boycott and expose Smart & Final/Chedraui as the greedy corporate bully it is!” Villalvazo wrote in the Southern California Teamster. “On December 19 we conducted another leafleting action, with the help of our sister locals in Joint Council 42, along with our stewards and the dedicated Teamsters@S&F.”

The leafletting drew public support. The local believes the boycott will, too. It even posted a QR code in the paper and on its website for its readers to join in. The council has 160,000 members in dozens of unions over several West Coast states, and Villalvazo wants them to rise up in solidarity.

“The boycott will be ongoing until we achieve justice and a fair contract that protects these workers’ right to their work. As Teamsters we must be militant and ready to engage this company at a moment’s notice!

“If you think this does not affect you because you’re in a different industry, you’re wrong. We are all connected by the food chain.”

The union explained Grupo Commercial Chedraui, a $13 billion Mexican company that owns the grocery chain, plans to fire all the workers at the two existing warehouses, in Commerce and Riverside, Calif., “and force workers to reapply for their jobs at a new distribution warehouse for lower wages and weaker benefits.”

It’s also threatened workers, withheld and delayed benefits “and taken other actions that interfere and retaliate against employees for exercising their rights to form and join a union, Villalvazo said. And it still won’t guarantee the present workers their jobs “and their union representation” even when the move to Rancho Cucamonga occurs, he added.

“That’s why we need your help to boycott Smart & Final,” Villalvazo urged consumers. “Do not give your hard-earned money to a company that refuses to treat workers with dignity and respect. Stand in solidarity with the Teamsters” through the boycott, the QR code and signing a protest petition to Chedraui CEO Carlos Smith “to respect these workers that built” the company.

“For too long this company has jerked us around with its bad faith negotiations,” Villalvazo said at the January rally. “We are out here today to protect American jobs. We are calling for a fair first contract that will provide our members with the wages and respect they deserve. Chedraui needs to wise up to the fact that these workers will not back down until the company listens to their demands.”

_{Mark Gruenberg is head of the Washington, D.C., bureau of People’s World. He is also the editor of the union news service Press Associates Inc. (PAI). Known for his reporting skills, sharp wit, and voluminous knowledge of history, Mark is a compassionate interviewer but tough when going after big corporations and their billionaire owners.}

_{Paul Mihalow is the editor of the Southern California Teamster.}

Opinion: Worker wins and setbacks in the 2023 legislative session / by James Myall

_{^{A banner at a protest for a nurses’ union at Maine Medical Center | Beacon}}

_{Posted in the Maine Beacon on August 4, 2023}

_{This piece first appeared on the Maine Center for Economic Policy blog.}

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been steady gains in the overall output of Maine’s economy and workforce, employment levels, and wages for people with the lowest incomes. Yet the pandemic also highlighted underlying issues in our economy that remain unresolved, especially an inability for many Mainers to participate fully in the workforce, and the continued precariousness of certain kinds of work.

Public policy and legislative action are the main ways we can address these shortcomings and build on a robust recovery. The Maine legislature began some of this work in this year’s recently concluded legislative session. They considered a number of important bills to improve conditions for Maine workers, and while there was significant progress on several fronts, some important bills were defeated and a significant amount of work remains for the legislature’s “short session” beginning in January 2024.

Expanding access to care

The supplemental budget contained two significant provisions to help working Mainers who also have to care for a child or a loved one. The passage of a Paid Family and Medical Leave program (originally LD 1964) will allow tens of thousands of Mainers each year to take time away from work to recover from an illness, care for a loved one, or welcome a new child. The program will begin collecting premiums from employers and employees on January 1, 2025, and Mainers will be able to begin claiming leave benefits in May 2026.

The budget also included a significant investment in child care (originally LD 1726) that will raise wages for more than 7,000 child care workers and support more parents to balance work and home life affordably by expanding access to child care subsidies.

Strengthening protections against discrimination and retaliation

Two bills that effectively strengthen existing laws will also benefit Maine workers. The first bill (LD 1703) will explicitly ban pay discrimination based on race for the first time in Manie law. While this practice is illegal under federal law, the creation of a new state law gives the state’s Department of Labor more ability to enforce the prohibition.

The Department also supported a new provision in state law (LD 767) that creates a wide-ranging prohibition against retaliation for employees who use their existing workplace rights. There are several rights covered by the new law, from accommodations for breastfeeding mothers to the right to use the relatively new earned paid leave law. For earned paid leave in particular, fear of employer retaliation is a common reason that workers do not use the leave they are entitled to.

Protecting employee free speech

Workers gained a new protection from employer intimidation this year. A new law (LD 1756) will make it illegal for employers to hold mandatory workplace meetings, sometimes known as “captive audience” meetings. In the past, employers have used these gatherings to thwart collective bargaining efforts by forcing employees to listen to anti-union messaging. The new law will make it clear employers cannot mandate attendance at these meetings.

A symbolic win for immigrants

Unfortunately, the legislature missed some key opportunities to help New Mainers this session. An effort to expand eligibility to MaineCare for immigrants (LD 199) passed the House but failed in the Senate, even after an amendment was offered to narrow the bill’s scope.

Another bill (LD 1138) would have allowed all immigrants to apply for a driver’s license regardless of their immigration status. The ability to obtain a license is important to help New Mainers live and work in Maine. The bill was withdrawn by the sponsor before receiving a public hearing.

One largely symbolic resolution (LD 1050) was passed with strong bipartisan support. It directs the Maine Department of Labor to ask the federal government for a waiver from federal immigration law to allow people seeking asylum to work in Maine as soon as they have applied for asylum. Currently asylum seekers must wait six months before applying for work authorization, making it extremely difficult for them to support themselves in the interim. However, there is currently no provision for such a waiver in federal law, so it appears unlikely it would be granted. Ongoing efforts at federal legislation, led by Representative Chellie Pingree and Senator Susan Collins, may have more success.

Farmworkers rights vetoed

Governor Janet Mills vetoed legislation (LD 398) which would have guaranteed farmworkers in Maine the state’s minimum wage (they are currently only covered under the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour) and included them in some basic workplace protections, such as limits on mandatory overtime and the offer of a rest break after six hours of work. As MECEP previously noted, the current system means farmworkers — who are disproportionately Black, Latino, and Indigenous — are many times more likely to live in poverty than other Maine workers. The governor has promised to reconvene a stakeholder group and to introduce new legislation in 2024 to address the issue.

The legislature carried over two other bills relating to farmworker rights. One (LD 525) would allow farmworkers the right to unionize, a proposal the legislature passed but Governor Mills vetoed in 2022, and another (LD 1483) would guarantee service providers such as health care workers and lawyers have access to farmworkers’ accommodations, which are often owned and controlled by employers.

Bills to raise wages, improve scheduling, and increase access to education all carried over

A large number of worker bills are scheduled to be carried over to the next legislative session. Many passed both houses of the legislature and are awaiting funding, while others are still in committee.

A bill that would have increased Maine’s minimum wage to $15 per hour in 2024 was passed by both houses, but failed to secure the funding necessary for the state to increase the wages it pays to direct care workers via the MaineCare program. The Appropriations Committee also failed to fund a bill that would require employers to include a wage or salary estimate in job listings (LD 936), while bills to ban noncompete agreements (LD 1496) and to make more salaried Mainers eligible for overtime pay (LD 513) were both carried over in committee.

Efforts to address the harms caused by irregular scheduling arrangements were also put off until 2024. One (LD 827) would have guaranteed workers the right to ask for a flexible schedule from their employer, and another (LD 1190) which would have discouraged employers from calling in workers to shifts and sending them home soon after. A bill to address staffing and scheduling practices for nurses (LD 1639) received a favorable vote in committee but was carried over until next year.

Some bills related to worker training will also be carried over until 2024. These include tuition-free access to the University of Maine System, on par with the Community College program (LD 512), a prohibition on employers requiring repayment agreements for job-specific training (LD 741), and a bill to reimburse the costs of tuition for direct care workers (LD 1718).

Despite significant wins, much work remains in 2024

While there were meaningful wins in 2023 — especially the creation of a transformational Paid Family and Medical Leave program — too many good bills to protect and expand worker power were either defeated or set aside. With so many pieces of legislation to take up in 2024, it’s especially important for lawmakers to remember the interests of working Mainers.

_{James Myall is a policy analyst for the Maine Center for Economic Policy. He holds a master’s degree in ancient history and archaeology from the University of St. Andrews in Scotland and is a candidate for a master’s degree in public policy and management from the University of Southern Maine (USM). He has previously served as coordinator of the Franco-American Collection and an adjunct professor of American history and government at USM, Lewiston-Auburn College.}

Mills signs bill to spur offshore wind in Maine, ensure high labor standards within industry / by Evan Popp

_{^{Gov. Janet Mills at a press conference in January 2023 | Beacon}}

_{Originally published in the Maine Beacon on July 27, 2023}

Environmental and labor groups praised Gov. Janet Mills on Thursday after she signed into law a bill that adds strong labor standards to a sweeping measure that will shape the buildout of Maine’s budding offshore wind industry.

As Beacon previously reported, LD 1895, sponsored by Sen. Mark Lawrence (D-York), is an omnibus bill that lays out a framework for state procurement of three gigawatts of offshore wind power in the Gulf of Maine by 2040 — enough to power 900,000 homes with clean power, according to the Maine AFL-CIO — and construction of a deepwater port for the manufacture of floating wind turbines, as well as protections for wildlife and fishing grounds.

The measure was amended near the end of the legislative session to include higher wage standards for construction jobs created by the port and procurement portions of the legislation. Under the agreement, in order to win bids, construction firms must agree to what is called a community workforce enhancement agreement, wherein they must give the wage and benefits package that has been collectively bargained by local trade unions.

The bill as amended was approved Tuesday by the Senate on a 19-8 party line vote, with Democrats supporting the legislation. It then went to the House, where it was passed by a 59-40 vote. The measure then received final approval from each chamber early Wednesday morning in one of the final actions taken by lawmakers this legislative session.

“I thank the legislators and stakeholders who, through collaboration and compromise, have positioned Maine to pursue offshore wind in a manner that puts all Maine workers and businesses on a level playing field, invites investments in critical port infrastructure, and importantly, respects those who rely on the ocean for their livelihoods,” Mills said in a statement Thursday. “I am pleased with of the outcome of this legislation and proud to sign it into law.”

Labor advocates were thrilled as well, calling the measure a huge win for the state.

“This bill is a homerun for Maine workers and our clean energy future,” Matt Schlobohm, executive director of the Maine AFL-CIO, said. “It ensures that we will create thousands of good union jobs with great benefits and apprenticeship training opportunities. It protects our fisheries and puts Maine on a path to clean energy independence.”

Environmental advocates also praised the signing of the measure.

“Offshore wind is the single biggest lever we can pull to address the climate crisis, meet Maine’s energy needs, and grow our economy simultaneously,” said Kathleen Meil of Maine Conservation Voters.

“When this bill is implemented, Maine will set a national example for how to responsibly develop a new, affordable energy source, grow good-paying jobs for our workers, and do so without compromising Maine values,” she added. “We’re ready to get to work and launch this new industry.”

The signing of LD 1895 comes after Mills vetoed a separate wind energy bill late last month that included provisions to create good-paying union jobs that could have helped Maine unlock federal money. That veto followed a decision by lawmakers to amend the bill to include project labor agreements, or PLAs, which are meant to prevent low-ball bids from construction firms on taxpayer-funded construction projects by setting wage rates to the prevailing standard.

Mills echoed business lobbyists and the construction industry in her veto letter, claiming PLAs would raise construction costs and produce a “chilling effect” on the wind industry. Labor leaders objected, warning that the governor’s opposition to higher labor standards could instead raise costs by making Maine less competitive for federal dollars set aside by Congress.

However, Mills, labor unions and other advocates continued to negotiate on the issue, coming to the deal reflected in the provisions of LD 1895.

“We applaud legislators and Governor Mills for working collaboratively with our coalition to negotiate a comprehensive framework that will jumpstart this new industry with strong labor, climate and equity standards,” Schlobohm said.

_{Evan Popp studied journalism at Ithaca College and interned at the Progressive magazine, ThinkProgress and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. He then worked for the Santa Fe New Mexican newspaper before joining Beacon. Evan can be reached at evan@mainebeacon.com.}

Legislature approves wind power procurement and labor standards bill, sending it to Mills / by Evan Popp

_{^{Offshore floating wind turbine in Maine. | Photo credit: Maine Aqua Ventus}}

_{Originally published in the Maine Beacon on July 20, 2023}

Just before the legislative session wrapped up, the House and Senate gave final approval Wednesday morning to a bill that adds strong labor standards to a sweeping measure that will shape the buildout of Maine’s budding offshore wind industry, sending it to Gov. Janet Mills’ desk.

Advocates say the bill would be a massive win for the state and believe that Mills will sign it.

As Beacon previously reported, LD 1895, sponsored by Sen. Mark Lawrence (D-York), is an omnibus bill that lays out a framework for state procurement of three gigawatts of offshore wind power in the Gulf of Maine by 2040 and construction of a deepwater port for the manufacture of floating wind turbines, as well as protections for wildlife and fishing grounds.

Those changes came after Mills vetoed a separate wind energy bill late last month that included provisions to create good-paying union jobs that could have helped Maine unlock federal money. That veto followed a decision by lawmakers to amend the bill to include project labor agreements, or PLAs, which are meant to prevent low-ball bids from construction firms on taxpayer-funded construction projects by setting wage rates to the prevailing standard.

However, Mills, labor unions and other advocates continued to negotiate on the issue, coming to the deal reflected in the provisions of LD 1895.

The bill as amended was approved Tuesday by the Senate on a 19-8 vote party line vote. It then went to the House, where it was passed by a 59-40 vote. The measure then received final approval from each chamber early Wednesday morning.

Both labor and climate leaders are hailing the bill as potentially transformative for Maine, noting that the measure will help build out a crucial clean energy source while also providing high-quality jobs for people in the state.

“This new law will be a model for the rest of the nation for how people can come together across differences with common purpose to build a just clean energy economy that works for everyone,” Natural Resources Council of Maine CEO Rebeccah Sanders said.

“Maine has set the stage for a competitive new clean energy industry that will bring thousands of family-supporting jobs, protect the rich array of wildlife in the Gulf of Maine, ensure fishing communities have a voice in the process, and keep us on our trajectory to meet a goal of 100% renewable energy by 2040,” Saunders continued.

Labor leaders are also pleased with the legislation.

“This is a really strong compromise framework that will ensure that we are creating very high quality jobs for Maine workers,” Maine AFL-CIO executive director Matt Schlobohm told Beacon earlier this month. “People will be getting paid good wages, getting good benefits, and have really strong training programs and retirement security.”

‘Embarrassing and shameful’: Advocates blast Mills’ veto of farmworker rights bill / by Evan Popp

_{^{Gov. Janet Mills outside the Maine Democrats’ convention earlier in May | Photo via Maine Democrats on Twitter}}

_{Originally published in the Maine Beacon on July 20, 2023}

Gov. Janet Mills vetoed a bill Wednesday that would have allowed farmworkers in Maine to gain protections under some of the state’s wage and overtime laws — a decision that a prominent labor leader called “embarrassing and shameful.”

The bill, LD 398, sponsored by House Speaker Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Portland), would have made farm laborers in the state — many of whom are migrant workers — eligible to be covered under Maine’s minimum wage laws. In addition, the bill would have stipulated that farmworkers be protected from working more than 80 hours of overtime in any consecutive two-week period and allowed such workers to take a 30-minute unpaid break after six hours. The measure was amended multiple times to reduce the scope of the bill, likely with the goal of winning Mills support — an ultimately unsuccessful effort.

Wednesday’s veto marks the second time in the last year and a half that Mills has vetoed legislation to provide farmworkers with the same rights that other workers enjoy. In January of 2022, the Democratic governor made national headlines when she rejected a measure to allow farmworkers to unionize. (A bill introduced earlier this year to grant farmworkers full collective bargaining rights was carried over to the 2024 legislative session).

Advocates on Wednesday decried Mills’ latest decision to block labor rights for farmworkers.

“The governor’s veto sends a clear message to farmworkers that they are second class citizens, not worthy of the same rights and protections other workers enjoy,” said Cynthia Phinney, president of the Maine AFL-CIO. “This veto carries on the historical stain and stench of exploitation and racial exclusion. It’s embarrassing and shameful. Farmworkers are some of the hardest working people in our nation and they deserve fair and equal treatment.”

As Beacon previously reported, LD 398 sought to address a longstanding practice of farmworkers being left out of worker protections, as both the Fair Labor Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act, which passed in the 1930s as part of the New Deal, excluded farmworkers and domestic workers. The carveout was intentional, as Congress moved to specifically exempt groups of workers who were predominantly people of color from labor standards to keep them in an economically subservient position.

A growing number of states are moving to change that practice. Currently, 12 states guarantee collective bargaining rights to farmworkers. And in 2021, state legislatures with Democratic majorities in Washington and New York passed overtime rights for farmworkers. Colorado has gone the furthest, granting state minimum wage, overtime and organizing rights to agricultural laborers.

In her veto message of LD 398, Mills wrote that she was reluctantly rejecting the bill despite supporting a minimum wage for farmworkers in part because the changes made to it throughout the legislative process “led to a series of questions from members of the agricultural community about the true scope of the language,” with Mills claiming the measure could potentially create unintended consequences related to other parts of state and federal labor laws.

Mills also stated that she would have liked to have the legislature recall the bill from her desk to work on those issues but said that wasn’t possible because lawmakers weren’t in session this week and the measure had to be acted on by Wednesday. Mills added that in the coming weeks, she will issue an executive order to reestablish a stakeholder group to undergo an analysis of the bill’s provisions and implications. She said she believes a deal on including farmworkers in the state’s minimum wage laws can ultimately be reached and pledged to introduce such a bill during next year’s session if an agreement is struck.

However, Mills’ explanation didn’t add up for some, such as the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA).

“It is impossible to accept this explanation of her action,” said Heather Spalding, MOFGA’s deputy director. “Governor Mills’ own staff from the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry participated in multiple stakeholder meetings where participants discussed the bill language and amendments at length and made concession after concession, mainly at the request of the governor herself. It is disingenuous for her to say that she supports minimum wage for farmworkers when she won’t even allow a stripped-down bill with many exemptions for agricultural employers to pass into law.”

In addition, as the Maine AFL-CIO pointed out in a press release on Wednesday, Mills’ veto means many farmworkers in Maine will continue to face some of the most dire economic conditions of any segment of the population. Farmworkers are among the lowest paid and most exploited workers in the state, with a 2020 study finding that U.S. farm employers stole $76 million in wages from 154,000 agriculture employees over two decades.

Along with that, despite many workers being paid extremely low wages, farm labor is among the most dangerous jobs in the country. Those who work in the industry are also at risk of sexual abuse and face danger related to extreme heat waves and toxic pesticides, the Maine AFL-CIO added.

Given those factors, other advocates also expressed frustration with Mills’ veto of LD 398.

“Continuing the current system of sub-minimum wages for farmworkers means that about one quarter of Maine’s agricultural workers will continue to live in poverty,” said Arthur Phillips, a policy analyst with the Maine Center for Economic Policy. “We know that Maine’s economy is strongest when everyone has the means to thrive. The people who produce our food deserve a job that pays them adequately and treats them with dignity.”

“As in the rest of the country, these workers in Maine are disproportionately Black, Latino, and Indigenous, and they are more than four times as likely to live in poverty as other workers,” Phillips added. “This veto means their second-class status will persist in Maine.”

LD 398 will now return to the House for a vote to see if the legislature can override the governor’s veto. But given the tight margin of the initial House vote and widespread opposition from Republicans, it appears unlikely that the override attempt will be successful.

Workers made big gains this session, but some important policies were deferred / by Dan Neumann

_{^{A recent rally in support of Chipotle workers in Augusta | Maine Service Employees Association, SEIU Local 1989 via Facebook}}

_{Originally published in the Maine Beacon on July 20, 2023}

Topping the list of policies passed this session that will benefit working Mainers are a paid family and medical leave program, increased funding for child care and a tentative last-minute deal creating good-paying jobs in Maine’s budding offshore wind industry.

But labor leaders and economists say other much-needed policies were also left on the table this year, including measures to finally raise the state minimum wage to $15 and repair the hole in the state pension system created over a decade ago.

“I think paid family leave is definitely one of the biggest wins for workers and it will make a huge difference for many people,” said James Myall, a policy analyst for the Maine Center for Economic Policy.

Policies that will lift up working families

_{^{Supporters hold a press conference before the May 25 public hearing on a proposal to create a paid family medical leave policy. | Beacon}}

Gov. Janet Mills approved a statewide paid family and medical leave program when she signed a two-year budget earlier this month. The budget included start-up funding for the program which will allow most workers to take up to 12 weeks of medical leave and family leave in a year while receiving a wage supplement to keep them financially afloat.

The new paid leave law combined with the $60 million set aside in the budget for improving access to child care for low-income families and improving wages for child care providers will be transformative for many working families with young children, said Jeff McCabe of the Maine Service Employees Association.

“It’s going to be life changing for many folks,” he said.

The significant funding comes after early childhood educators testified before lawmakers earlier this year, sounding the alarm that low pay is driving people out of a field that the economy depends on to allow parents to work.

Another farmworkers veto

Another priority this session was a bill to classify farmworkers as employees under some of the state’s wage and worker protection laws. But Mills on Wednesday vetoed the legislation that would have made farmworkers eligible to earn the state minimum wage. It is the second time the governor has vetoed protections for farmworkers. In 2022, she vetoed another bill that would have expanded collective bargaining rights to agricultural workers.

“This veto carries on the historical stain and stench of exploitation and racial exclusion,” the Maine AFL-CIO tweeted after the veto.

The stain is that farmworkers and domestic workers — predominantly people of color — were deliberately cut out of the labor laws passed in the 1930s as part of the New Deal.

A Green New Deal

While Mills thwarted the attempt to rectify the racial exclusions of the New Deal, workers in Maine did move closer to accomplishing some of the goals of the proposed Green New Deal, a massive mobilization plan that would put millions of Americans to work in good-paying, union jobs in the green energy sector.

Last week, days before the session officially concludes, Mills and labor unions struck a tentative deal to add strong labor and equity standards to a sweeping bill that will shape the buildout of Maine’s budding offshore wind industry. The deal came after Mills vetoed a similar wind energy bill in June that included provisions to create good-paying construction jobs in the industry.

“The resulting compromise is great news for working people in Maine, and for our collective fight against the climate crisis,” said Mike Williams, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress focusing on climate, energy and labor policy.

“It’s a good compromise and it would not have happened were it not for the dogged efforts by Maine’s labor and environmental movements, along with the Governor and legislative champions to negotiate in earnest,” he added. “The national movement to deploy massive amounts of gigawatts of offshore wind power is stronger because of the work of all the folks involved.”

Worker rights tabled or left unfunded

_{^{Workers with the national Fight for $15 movement. | Scott Olson, Getty}}

While the higher labor standards were cause to celebrate, worker rights advocates also feel there were many missed opportunities this year.

Several policies were tabled until next year, including a bill backed by the state’s largest nurses’ union that would address unsafe staffing levels at Maine hospitals, as well as a bill that would make thousands of more workers eligible for overtime pay when they work over 40 hours.

Since the 1970s, the number of salaried workers who automatically qualify for overtime pay has steadily fallen, plummeting from 66% of workers then to just 13% in Maine currently.

Multiple attempts to expand overtime protections have failed in recent years. Myall believes this is because state lawmakers anticipate that the Biden administration will change the overtime rules at the federal level, but he warns that the same was expected under former President Barack Obama, whose proposed changes were halted by the Trump administration.

“It means another year where these priorities will be put off and delayed,” Myall said. “I do think we need to see the state take action on this, regardless of what might happen at the federal level.”

On top of the priority bills that didn’t get a vote this year, there were also many workforce policies that did pass, but didn’t get funded by the legislature’s budget-making committee and therefore won’t go into effect.

Many of them were given relatively small fiscal-impact assessments for the administrative costs their implementation would require. Still, they were not selected by lawmakers for funding off of the legislature’s special appropriations table.

Among those left unfunded is a bill that would increase the state’s minimum wage to $15 an hour next year, a bill requiring a worker be paid if they report for a shift that is canceled, a bill preventing workers from having to pay for some job training, a bill protecting workers from employer surveillance, a bill allowing employees to request flexible work schedules, and a bill requiring employers to disclose pay ranges and maintain records of employees’ pay history.

All the bills will need to be funded in next year’s supplemental budget or they will die.

“I think, on one level, it was heartening to see the legislature very supportive of these additional rights and protections for workers. It’s more momentum than was seen in previous years,” Myall said. “But, obviously, we’re still falling short in terms of getting some of these things prioritized enough that they are being funded.”

One-time boost for retirees

Several bills that proposed long-term fixes to Maine’s retirement system for state workers and teachers were also not funded off the special appropriations table. However, the budget did include $19.8 million for a one-time 3% cost-of-living adjustment for state retirees.

In 2011, former Gov. Paul LePage and the Republican majority made significant cuts to the public employee pensions to pay for income-tax breaks mostly benefiting the wealthy and corporations. Today, the cuts are still pushing more retirees closer to poverty as Maine’s retirement system is failing to keep up with the cost of inflation.

While the one-time COLA adjustment was welcome, it still doesn’t completely repair the damage that was done, McCabe said.

McCabe and Myall both said that Mills and Democrats’ refusal to reverse LePage’s legacy by taxing the wealthy will continue to lead to a situation where many bills that pass the legislature will not get funded, as they are forced to compete with other priorities.

“We are still continuing to try to claw our way back from the pension cuts of 2011,” McCabe said. “We haven’t seen an overall repeal [of the LePage cuts]. There have only been some small steps.”

_{Dan Neumann studied journalism at Colorado State University before beginning his career as a community newspaper reporter in Denver. He reported on the Global North’s interventions in Africa, including documentaries on climate change, international asylum policy and U.S. militarization on the continent before returning to his home state of Illinois to teach community journalism on Chicago’s West Side. He now lives in Portland. Dan can be reached at dan@mainebeacon.com.}