SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
labor law
Justice Jackson Voices Lone Dissent Against Supreme Court Attack on Right to Strike
The Biden appointee accused the Court of overstepping its bounds in a ruling denounced by one labor leader as "shameful."
Jun 01, 2023
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 8-1 in favor of a concrete company and against its striking workers, in a decision progressive advocates called "de-facto union busting."
The lone dissenting voice, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued that her colleagues overstepped their authority in siding with the company instead of deferring to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
"Today, the Court falters," she wrote in her dissent.
\u201cBREAKING: The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a concrete company that wanted to sue a union because a strike cost them money.\n\nThe 8-1 decision means the company, Glacier Northwest Inc., can sue the union over a strike where truck drivers left wet concrete in their trucks.\u201d— More Perfect Union (@More Perfect Union) 1685632085
The case dates back to 2017, when Seattle-area truck drivers belonging to Teamsters Local 174 engaged in a week-long strike against company Glacier Northwest, as The Seattle Timesexplained. At the time of the strike, the workers had wet concrete in their mixer trucks, but abandoning the trucks during the stoppage meant the cement could no longer be used and could have damaged the trucks, the company claimed.
"What Glacier seeks to do here is to shift the duty of protecting an employer's property from damage or loss incident to a strike onto the striking workers."
Glacier Northwest sued the Teamsters for damages in Washington state court, but the union argued that the suit conflicted with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which protects collective bargaining rights. The Washington State Supreme Court agreed with the workers, but the Supreme Court reversed this decision, meaning the lawsuit can proceed. Labor advocates worry that this decision could embolden other companies to file similar lawsuits against striking workers.
"The Supreme Court decision in Glacier, Inc. vs. Teamsters is the latest in a long line of examples that the conscience of this court is clearly up for sale to the highest bidder. The institution that was at one point the last line of defense for working people against oppression and corporate greed is now a bludgeon wielded against those very people by the wealthy and well-connected," Working Families Party National Director Maurice Mitchell said in a statement.
Thursday's ruling, added Mitchell, "is nothing more than a de-facto union-busting, strike-breaking tactic. It clears the way for deep-pocketed corporations to sue workers for withholding their labor in the face of exploitation and deplorable job conditions."
In her majority opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett argued that the NLRA did not protect the workers because "Glacier alleges that the Union took affirmative steps to endanger Glacier's property rather than reasonable precautions to mitigate that risk."
However, Jackson said the Court had historically deferred its judgment on labor cases involving a complaint pending with the NLRB, as in this case.
"[W]e have no business delving into this particular labor dispute at this time. But instead of modestly standing down, the majority eagerly inserts itself into this conflict, proceeding to opine on the propriety of the union's strike activity based on the facts alleged in the employer's state-court complaint," she wrote.
Further, Jackson expressed concern that the Court's ruling would interfere with the NLRB's development of labor law and "erode the right to strike."
Moreover, she pointed out that, in siding with Glacier, the Court was infringing on how the workers chose to carry out their right to strike.
"What Glacier seeks to do here is to shift the duty of protecting an employer's property from damage or loss incident to a strike onto the striking workers, beyond what the Board has already permitted via the reasonable-precautions principle. In my view, doing that places a significant burden on the employees' exercise of their statutory right to strike, unjustifiably undermining Congress's intent," she wrote.
\u201cShe also argues that the court is putting the onus on workers and their union here, when it is actually incumbent on Glacier, the company, to take steps to negotiate with the union and mitigate their losses. /3\u201d— More Perfect Union (@More Perfect Union) 1685632085
Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh, signed on to Barrett's majority opinion, while Justice Clarence Thomas authored a concurring opinion joined by Neil Gorsuch and Justice Samuel Alito filed another concurring opinion joined by Thomas and Gorsuch.
Progressive advocates and lawmakers called out the majority for its ruling. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) tweeted it was "another dangerous decision," while the Center for Popular Democracy Action said the current Court, with a right-wing majority, is one where "labor rights go to die" and argued in favor of legislation that would expand the Court to 13 justices.
"This morning, our highest court issued a ruling that makes it easier for companies to sue unions for striking," the group said in a statement.
"This is yet another example of this extremist court siding with the rich and powerful over workers—the everyday people who deserve the hard-fought right to have a union that fights for them against corporate abuses," the group continued. "More and more, we see how disconnected the Supreme Court is from the realities of communities that need and deserve good-paying union jobs to thrive. If we don't take immediate steps to expand the court by passing the Judiciary Act, we can expect these egregious decisions to continue."
Teamsters General President Sean M. O'Brien decried the Court's decision, but vowed to keep fighting.
\u201c\u203c\ufe0fStatement from #Teamsters General President Sean M. O\u2019Brien on the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling today in #Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No. 174, which opens the door for corporations to sue their own workers. \n\n#1u @TeamsterSOB 1/9\ud83e\uddf5...\u201d— Teamsters (@Teamsters) 1685632539
"The Teamsters will strike any employer, when necessary, no matter their size or the depth of their pockets. Unions will never be broken by this Court or any other," O'Brien said.
"Today's shameful ruling," he continued, "is simply one more reminder that the American people cannot rely on their government or their courts to protect them. They cannot rely on their employers. We must rely on each other. We must engage in organized, collective action. We can only rely on the protections inherent in the power of our unions."
Fellow union president Manny Pastreich of 32BJ SEIU also said working people would not back down in the wake of the ruling.
While Pastreich said the majority decision was in keeping with "the current court’s hostility towards organized labor and tendency to side with multi-billion dollar corporations over the interests of working people," it was not a "'deathblow'" to the right to strike and could have been much harsher to the union.
"In fact, given the opportunity to side with the bosses and heavily curtail the right to strike and undercut the National Labor Relations Act, one of the most right-wing Supreme Courts in recent history did neither," Pastreich argued. "While this Supreme Court continues to eat away at worker rights and protections, we move forward to fight and strike whenever necessary, another day."
Keep ReadingShow Less
The GOP's Abhorrent Attack on Child Labor Laws
Documented and preventable tragedies mean nothing to Republican legislators bent on helping employers pad their bottom lines at kids' expense.
Mar 09, 2023
Brad Greve has been a Scout leader for more than 20 years. The Davenport, Iowa retiree leads 50-mile canoe trips on Minnesota’s Boundary Waters that test teens’ mettle while teaching them essential skills.
Greve told a story recently where two boys, despite being warned repeatedly, let their canoe drift perilously close to a section of stream that swept over rapids into a lake below. They just barely recovered and made it to streambank.
That near-accident a few years ago, Greve said, underscores the vulnerability of young teens. And it fuels Greve’s anger at Republicans across the country who want to gut child labor laws and fill dangerous jobs with still-maturing high schoolers.
A GOP bill in Iowa, for example, would allow 14-year-olds to work in industrial freezers, meatpacking plants, and industrial laundry operations. The legislation would also put 15-year-olds to work on certain kinds of assembly lines, allow them to hoist up to 50 pounds, and allow employers to force kids into significantly longer work days.
In some cases, it would even permit young teens to work mining and construction jobs and use power-driven meat slicers and food choppers.
Make no mistake, this is dangerous work. Just three years ago, a 16-year-old in Tennessee fell more than 11 stories to his death while working construction on a hotel roof. Another 16-year-old lost an arm that same year while cleaning a meat grinder at a Tennessee supermarket.
But these preventable tragedies mean nothing to legislators bent on helping employers pad their bottom lines at kids’ expense. “It’s about businesses wanting cheap labor or more labor than they can currently get because they don’t want to pay reasonable wages or give any benefits,” Greve said.
COVID-19 prompted millions of Americans to ditch jobs lacking decent working conditions, sick leave, and affordable health care. The meatpacking industry, among many others, hemorrhaged workers after deliberately putting them at risk to protect profits during the pandemic.
Now, rather than provide the quality jobs needed to attract adults, Greve observed, companies want their cronies to “throw them a bone” and widen access to child labor.
Minnesota Republicans want to let 16- and 17-year-olds work construction. GOP legislators in Ohio are pushing legislation to expand teens’ work hours. In 2022, labor unions and Democratic officials in Wisconsin beat back a Republican proposal to lengthen work days for teens there.
The Iowa legislation is particularly dangerous because it would exempt employers from civil liability in the event of a youth’s injury or death on the job — even in cases of employer negligence — if the teen was participating in a school-approved “work-based learning program.”
Employers already flout child labor laws at record rates, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.
After the 16-year-old fell off the hotel roof, for example, Tennessee officials determined that the company not only illegally put the teen in harm’s way but also worked him more hours than allowed and cheated dozens of other workers out of overtime pay. Adding insult to injury, the company vowed to appeal the $122,000 fine it received for the teen’s death.
The poor, migrants, victims of trafficking, and other at-risk youths will be especially impacted. Last year, the news agency Reuters found migrant youths and other children as young as 12 working at Alabama companies supplying the auto industry.
The New York Times reported more recently that the illegal employment of minors from poor and migrant families had reached epidemic proportions, reflecting a “new economy of exploitation.” The paper found employers subjecting thousands of kids to some of the deadliest jobs in the country, including work in slaughterhouses and sawmills.
“Why would you want to weaken the law when you can see companies already taking advantage?” asked Greve. “The law should be strengthened.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Fantastic News for the Country!' Biden Nominates Julie Su for Labor Secretary
"She's really been a champion her entire career for all workers, regardless of immigration status, regardless of economic status," said one advocate.
Feb 28, 2023
Progressives on Tuesday applauded as U.S. President Joe Biden nominated Julie Su to succeed outgoing Labor Secretary Marty Walsh—a choice the nation's largest federation of unions said will "continue the Department of Labor's historic legacy of pro-union leadership."
"Julie Su is a leader who stands up for dignity, safety, and fair pay for all working families including immigrant and marginalized communities," continued the AFL-CIO, calling on the U.S. Senate to promptly confirm Su, who is currently Biden's deputy labor secretary.
The president noted that before working in the Biden administration, Su "led the largest state labor department in the nation" as California's labor commissioner from 2011-18.
In that role, Su oversaw "a renaissance in enforcement activity" against employers who violated labor laws, according to the U.S. Labor Department. She launched a historic, multilingual "Wage Theft Is a Crime" campaign, using multimedia to reach low-wage workers, inform them about their rights, and encourage them to feel safe speaking out against abuses of labor law.
"Julie Su is the real deal and she will do everything in her power to put working people central to the agenda."
Years before leading California's Labor Department, in the mid-1990s as a recent law school graduate, Su helped defend more than 70 Thai undocumented immigrants who had been enslaved in a garment sweatshop in El Monte, California. The case is widely studied in law school classes and by advocates and rights organizers, NBC News reported in 2021 when Su was nominated to serve as deputy labor secretary.
"What an inspiring pick," Helen Brosnan of the advocacy group Fight Corporate Monopolies tweeted, noting Su's anti-slavery case.
Biden said Su has proven herself to be "a champion for workers" as she has "cracked down on wage theft, fought to protect trafficked workers, increased the minimum wage, created good-paying, high-quality jobs, and established and enforced workplace safety standards."
The president selected Su after reportedly being urged by House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to nominate former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chair Sean Patrick Maloney, who was a member of the corporate-friendly New Democrat Coalition before losing his reelection campaign last year and who has been blamed for allowing the Democrats to lose control of the U.S. House.
"Great to hear that we won't see Sean Patrick Maloney return to power anytime soon," said organizer Joshua Sauberman.
A number of progressives strongly urged Biden to nominate Sara Nelson, international president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, to succeed Walsh, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) telling the president in a letter that Nelson "has been a leading voice for worker rights and is a very strong communicator of progressive values."
Nelson has been a vocal critic of a widening gap between CEO and worker pay and was a key negotiator of provisions in the pandemic-era CARES Act, which temporarily banned airline stock buybacks and capped executive compensation.
Despite his support for Nelson, Sanders was one of the first lawmakers to respond to the news of Su's nomination, expressing confidence that she "will be an excellent secretary of labor."
\u201cI\u2019m confident Julie Su will be an excellent Secretary of Labor. I look forward to working with her to protect workers\u2019 rights and build the trade union movement in this country.\u201d— Bernie Sanders (@Bernie Sanders) 1677608523
Nelson also expressed strong support for Biden's choice, saying the nomination is "fantastic news for the country!"
\u201cFantastic news for the country! Julie Su is the real deal and she will do everything in her power to put working people central to the agenda! I am so proud of her work, her sisterhood and solidarity, her commitment to promote a labor movement for all working people! TY, @POTUS!\u201d— Sara Nelson (@Sara Nelson) 1677610265
Other labor advocates shared their hope that as secretary of labor, Su will push forward efforts to strengthen workers' rights in the fast-growing renewable energy sector.
"Renewables workers—and our planet—need someone like Su at the helm of the Department of Labor to push for and deliver on much-needed change. Right now, renewable energy jobs are scaling up across the country to meet the demand of the Inflation Reduction Act's unprecedented investment in clean energy," said Matthew Mayers, executive director of the Green Workers Alliance. "But the industry still relies on low-road subcontractors and temp agencies, who frequently short-change workers and promise jobs that never materialize."
"This industry—and many more across America—will need to fundamentally change," Mayers added. "Julie Su knows this from first-hand experience. She has been a fighter to win these changes, and we look forward to working with her as we demand more and better green jobs."
Immigrant rights groups have also pushed Biden to nominate Su, with the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) saying earlier this month that her "track record shows her commitment to protecting everyone's fundamental rights at work."
"She's really been a champion her entire career for all workers," Raha Wala of the NILC toldBloomberg Law Tuesday, "regardless of immigration status, regardless of economic status."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular