Protecting the Right to Organize
Congressman Bobby Scott (D-VA-03) and Doris Crouse-Mays, President of the Virginia AFL-CIO brief the transition team on the congressman's PRO Act to protect the right to organize. All of Virginia's Democratic house members and Sen. Tim Kaine are co-sponsors of the bill, which would weaken state Right-to-Work laws at the national level and enforce penalties for worker misclassification.
Michael Pope
Welcome to Transition Virginia, the podcast that documents the ongoing transition of power in Virginia. I'm Michael Pope.
Thomas Bowman
And I'm Thomas Bowman. Today on the podcast, protecting the right to organize. Earlier this month, the House of Representatives passed the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, a bill that would provide protections for workers trying to organize. It could be the most dramatic labor law in 80 years, if it were able to get out of the Senate.
Michael Pope
Getting a major piece of legislation like this, on labor rights, out of the Senate, will probably require some heavy lifting. Senator Tim Kaine is a supporter, he's on board, but Senator Mark Warner has no position on the issue. And even if Democrats were to persuade Warner and Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia to vote for it, passing the bill out of the Senate would probably require ditching the filibuster, at least the filibuster as it works now.
Thomas Bowman
So what is the Protecting the Right to Organize Bill and how does it work? Joining us to walk through this bill, is the senior member of the Virginia Congressional Delegation. He's the Chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, and he introduced the Protecting the Right to Organize Bill. It's an honor to welcome to the podcast, Congressman Bobby Scott, thanks for joining us.
Rep. Bobby Scott
Thank you. It's good to be here.
Michael Pope
We're also joined by one of the most prominent labor leaders in Virginia, the President of the Virginia AFL-CIO, Doris Crouse-Mays. Thanks for joining us.
Doris Crouse-Mays
Oh, thank you for having me. It's a pleasure.
Michael Pope
Well, let's start by talking about the name of this bill. Now, everybody knows that Virginia is a Right to Work state because it has a Right to Work law. But your bill, Congressman, is called the Right to Organize. Is the Right to Organize intended as a solution or reaction to the problems created by the Right to Work?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Well, it's designed to protect the right to organize. In all states, there are problems in forming a union, employees have a right to join a union. Surveys show that a significant number, about half the workers, would like to join a union if they could, but only about 10% actually belong to a union now. And that's because when they try to join a union, there's so many barriers and obstacles, that it's extremely, extremely difficult. We've seen more interest in joining unions since the pandemic, because people have noticed that many of their work sites are not safe, and they'd like to discuss with their employers safe workplace and have noticed that if they had a union, they would have an effective way to negotiate changes in working conditions. It's well known that if you have a union, you have better wages, better benefits, and better working conditions. And they were finding that it was very difficult to form a union to be able to discuss, effectively discuss, working conditions. So it's not only in Right to Work states, it's in all of the states. There's so many barriers to forming a union, that Protecting the Right to Organize Act has been introduced to eliminate many of those unreasonable barriers.
Doris Crouse-Mays
I would just add also, in terms of organizing, it is really, really hard for workers to organize, you know, the companies have the workers comp, to captive audience speeches, and the pressure that it's put on workers. You know, the playing field has just not been level. And then also, you know, there's retaliation on workers who want to be in the Union. So I really thank the Congressman for, you know, sponsoring this legislation, and he totally understands what workers go through. And we're hoping this bill is about building an economy that works for all working families.
Thomas Bowman
Republicans in Congress don't seem to like this very much. Many Republicans didn't even try to hide their hostility to labor unions. Here's Congress Bob Good, the newest member of Virginia's Congressional Delegation.
Rep. Bob Good
I actually worked in a unionized auto factory during college. And I saw the problems with unions firsthand. Unions protect the unproductive worker, the diminished the incentive to stand out and be exceptional. They treat everyone the same based on seniority. They encourage an entitlement mentality, and they foster an attitude of resentment toward management.
Thomas Bowman
So what do we make of this anachronistic view of unions? Do unions protect unproductive workers or foster resentment toward management?
Doris Crouse-Mays
So no, I mean, that is totally untrue. I mean, in terms of disciplinary action, having a union means that there is a progressive disciplinary action, a process that goes through. And also I would just say that when you, the workers have a union, they have a labor management, to where workers and the management work together.
Michael Pope
Congressman Scott, what do you make of Congressman's Good's view of unions there? Obviously, he has a very dim view of unions. What did you make of that perspective?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Well, a lot of people have dim views of unions, they have dim views of minimum wage. In fact, in the past congresses, the U.S. Senator, who had Chair of the Committee of Jurisdiction of the minimum wage, did not believe in the minimum wage. I didn't say he did not believe in an increase, he did not believe in a minimum wage. If you're willing to work for $2 an hour, you got to just you get to be that paid $2 an hour. So there are different views on labor management. We read, we view that people have the right to organize this, it's in the law, and they ought to have that or be able to have they have that right. And it ought to be an effective, right. And right now, the employers have the ability to fire workers with virtually no sanction. The sanction now is if you fire a worker illegally, that you have to, in the fullness of time, pay back pay, minus whatever they made in the interim. And if they leave your non-union business, and go and get a good union job, they'll probably make more, which means you can fire the person without any sanction at all. Well, that's an interesting message to everybody else, who might not be as confident that they can find another job, they get fired for union organizing. So that's what we're dealing with. And that's why the proact is so important.
Michael Pope
So there's this tension here between the Right to Organize and the Right to Work. Advocates of this bill want to protect the right to organize, but many Republicans want to stand by what they call the Right to Work. Here's Congressman Scott Fitzgerald of Wisconsin.
Scott Fitzgerald
Striking down state Right to Work laws would force millions of workers to pay dues to labor unions without any say about how their money was spent.
Michael Pope
Now, Virginia has a Right to Work Law that allows people who are not members of unions, people who don't pay union dues, they benefit from being represented without paying their fair share. Now this bill attempts to solve the freeloader problem by creating a new fair share fee. How does that work?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Once you formed a union, all of the members will pay a fair share of their portion of the expenses of representation required by law. All of the members of the bargaining union get the increased wages that are negotiated after the union negotiates higher wages. That costs money, you gotta hire lawyers, you gotta hire accountants, and they negotiate higher wages, better benefits, and safer workplaces. All that negotiation costs money. Also, the union is required by law to provide individualized representation. If a non-union member messes up, and is in a grievance procedure, and the Union would provide a lawyer to a union member, they have to provide a lawyer to the non-union member, it just seems reasonable that non-union members would pay a fair share of their costs of the expenses for the benefits that they are enjoying. Now, there's an old saying that when you're used to privilege, equality seems like oppression. Well, if you're used to getting things for free, if you're used to freeloading, paying a fair share seems unreasonable. And so they make all kinds of complaints. We have to be precise, the fair share is only your fair share of the cost of providing representation required by law. So you get the benefit of the higher increase in wages, benefits, safe working conditions, you do not have to pay your fair share of the annual contribution of the Union to the food bank, if you don't want to participate in that. You don't have to pay your fair share of the holiday parties. And certainly you don't pay anything for political activities, but you should pay your fair share of the benefits that you are accruing. And that just seems reasonable that you'd pay your fair share and not get them for free and paid for by other people's dues.
Doris Crouse-Mays
And I would also add, like, there's like a component here, that is missed a lot. And that is the fact that it allows the employer and the unions to enter into this agreement. So that still is part of the negotiations as well. And you know, having a union also is democracy. So if you have a problem with leadership or anything, we have elections. You know, workers, if they have issues with the company, or the CEO, there was no process for the workers to question any of that, and have a say. And then I will also point to the Governor of West Virginia, Governor Justice, the state of West Virginia, as you all know, went to a Right to Work state and they also eliminated the prevailing wages. And they thought, they too, were told it was like, gonna be a field of dreams, that if they eliminated this, buisnesses was definitely going to come into West Virginia. And as the Governor of West Virginia said, he's been looking out the window, and they're not coming. So there we have a Republican governor, who here recently has seen firsthand that this is not true to say that we wouldn't be competitive or anything like that. So I would just keep that in mind as well.
Thomas Bowman
As expected, some business groups don't like this bill. Here's the ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee, Republican Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, of North Carolina.
Rep. Virginia Foxx
I rise today in opposition to the radical partisan and utterly shameful proact. This unnecessary bill is an assault on American workers, employers, and the economy.
Thomas Bowman
Opponents of this bill like to say, "This is an assault on workers." Does the proact create new penalties for wrongdoing?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Yes, employers right now, have the almost unfettered right to fire people for trying to organize the union. That's a violation of the of the law, but the sanction is virtually meaningless. I mean, if you have to pay back pay minus what they made on the side, it's not much of a sanction at all, particularly if somebody has to pay a mortgage, they're gonna go get another job, and the sanction may be little or nothing. That sends a devastating message to everybody else when they see what happened. And so it's a reasonable penalty that would deter illegal activities. Like I said, when you're used to privilege, equality seems like oppression. When you're used to firing people without any sanctions, a meaningful sanction for violating the law seems unreasonable. This is just making sure that the law can be complied with, the people have the right to organize, and if the employer is violating that right, illegally, there should be some meaningful sanction.
Michael Pope
Now, one member of the House Democrats who has clearly had it with Republican opposition to unions, is Congressman Tim Ryan of Ohio. This is what he had to say about Republicans who are in opposition to the Right to Organize.
Tim Ryan
Heaven forbid we pass something that's going to help the damn workers in the United States of America. Heaven forbid, we tilt the balance that has been going in the wrong direction for 50 years. We talk about pensions, you complain, we talk about the minimum wage increase, you complain, we talk about giving them the right to organize, you complain, but if we're passing a tax cut here, you'd be all getting in line, to vote yes for it. Now stop talking about Dr. Seuss, and start working with us on behalf of the American workers.
Michael Pope
And the Daytime Emmy goes to Congressman Tim Ryan. I'm just kidding. Now one of the reasons, you can hear in his voice there, that Congressman Ryan is so worked up is because of all these recent economic changes here that have exacerbated problems with worker misclassification. How does this bill attempt to solve this problem of worker misclassification?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Well, the misclassification is a is a scheme that employers can commit and save- and actually save a lot of money, because if someone's an employee, you have to pay the Social Security benefits for the...Social Security. You have to pay, they're entitled to unemployment compensation, if they get hurt on the job, they're entitled to workers compensation. There are a lot of things that accrue, if they employee they get the benefit package like health care. There are a lot of things that accrue by virtue of being an employee and the purposes of the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, the right to organize, independent contractors do not have the right to organize. And so if you just called your employees, just misclassify them as independent contractors, you can save a lot of money, and you can deny that group the right to organize into a union. What the bill does is outline what factors have to be considered, in terms of whether or not you're really independent, whether you're running a separate business, whether you are working only for this business or actually available for other businesses. Whether or not you're truly independent, who controls your activities, whether or not you're truly independent, it's the same, what they call the ABC test that most of the states have adopted. But it's a it's a clear objective standard, when you're an employee, and when you're an independent contractor. But many employers have abused the classification called people independent contractors, when in fact, they are not, and and avoided a lot of expenses and denied the employees the right to organize, this fixes that problem.
Doris Crouse-Mays
Yeah, and I'll just also add, you know, in addition to doing a clear test to determine the employee status on all of this, the state of Virginia, J Lark did a study about misclassification, and even the state, in terms of income, taxes and stuff, loses money. So this also is an issue that pertains to resources and income that states could use and need. And it also helps in terms of employers that do the right thing, and don't misclassify workers, and they're not being undercut. So it levels that playing field, because we cannot continue to reward bad businesses and bad practice in this because it hurts the good ones, and it hurts the state, and it hurts the workers. So this one is an issue that crosses over in many different silos.
Rep. Bobby Scott
And there's another thing the employers benefit from by misclassifying, the employee would not be entitled to minimum wage, nor overtime, so the employer really gets away with a lot when they misclassified employee as an independent contractor.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, let's take a break. When we come back, we'll talk about some of the specific criticisms of the bill. We're joined by Congressman Bobby Scott and the President of the Virginia AFL-CIO, Doris Crouse-Mays.
Michael Pope
And we're back on Transition Virginia, we're talking about the Right to Organize, which received very few Republican votes in the House of Representatives. I think there were like five Republican votes in favor of this. Now, one of the complaints you're heard from Republicans was that money would be given to liberal groups. Here's Congressman Rick Allen of Georgia.
Rick Allen
From 2010 to 2018, Union's spent more than $1.6 billion in member dues to hundreds of left wing groups like Planned Parenthood, the Clinton Foundation and the Progressive Democrats of America. Instead of spending that money on worker representation. That's right. Union leaders are lining their pockets and their friends pockets with the dues workers were forced to pay.
Michael Pope
Now we heard this criticism so many times from Republicans during the debate, that I think Planned Parenthood, the Clinton Foundation, and the Progressive Democrats of America probably got some kind of royalty for being mentioned so many times on the House floor. Will money from workers really be going to these groups?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Well, first of all, they have the right to give the money to whoever they want to. But the employees that do not want to participate in whatever the union is doing, they don't they don't have to. They can elect to do a fair share, and only pay for those services that the union is compelled to provide. That means they don't have- if they don't want to make contributions to the local hospital for healthcare, to the food bank, to certainly they don't have to make political contributions, or the holiday party, only for those services like negotiating for higher wages, better benefits and safer working conditions, or representation on grievance procedures that the union is obligated to provide, that's all they have to contribute to. And they didn't know when they're talking about contributing to progressive groups, they didn't say anything about corporate contributions to right wing groups. There are a lot of people who don't like that idea that money that could ordinarily otherwise be used for dividends, get diverted into contributions that many stockholders don't think much of.
Doris Crouse-Mays
And in addition to that, you know, the workers have no way of knowing either about like the money and stuff that corporations give the lawyers for union busting and all of that. So there you go.
Thomas Bowman
Privacy concerns are another criticism we're hearing from Republicans. Here's Congressman Gregory Murphy of North Carolina.
Rep. Gregory Murphy
This legislation would require employers to hand over workers private, personal information to union organizers. Home addresses, cell phone numbers, email addresses, without their employees consent. These are private violations not to be tolerated in this country.
Thomas Bowman
So does this bill allow for privacy violations?
Rep. Bobby Scott
You would think listening to the outrage that he was expressing, you'd think you, they're handing over health care information. No, it provides an opportunity for the union to contact the people who would potentially be in the Union so they can be contacted. The employer has all this information and it just provides the union an opportunity to communicate with people. The law has always been that the union was entitled to home addresses. This just updates it to the other ways that people now communicate with each other, not by just mail, but by email, and cell phone texts. That was the law for several years, just very recently. And there were no complaints about privacy violations. This is just a part of the Union management balance. And some people want to balance it all in favor of management. So that management, has all this information and can communicate with people who are considering joining the union, but they don't want the union to be able to communicate, but when when it was in effect, there were no complaints.
Doris Crouse-Mays
I just want to add, too, that during an organizing campaign, the employer, of course, has access to the workers, you know, for eight hours or 12 hours a day, however many that they're working, and they make workers attend to captive audience speech. So you know, if this is a problem with the companies then and saying all of this, well, then why don't they allow the union to come in when they're having those meetings, to make that balance? But this is where, it's the only way that the union has access to the workers is after hours.
Michael Pope
Now, the timing of union elections is another criticism that we're hearing from Republicans. Here's Congressman Glenn Grothman of Wisconsin.
Rep. Glenn Grothman
Under this bill, you can have a vote on unionization within under 15, I'm told even 11 days, of finding out the vote is coming. You look at our elections, you get over two and a half months between filing and knowing you're going to have an election, and actually the election. It's hard to believe anybody who really cares about the work would do that.
Michael Pope
Doris, what do we make of this criticism here? Are these union elections going to be held on a short notice?
Doris Crouse-Mays
Well, they need to be held on the short notice, because of the time that the employers have to really scare workers in these tactics. So he's comparing this to election day, you know, that said all the time so there's no debate about that. So but yes, workers need to know and things need to be timely in order for workers to have a free and fair election.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, let's take another quick break. When we come back, we're going to hear from the Congressman about how his perspective on this issue has changed over time.
Michael Pope
And we're back on Transition Virginia. We're going to go back in time, all the way back to the late 1970s when there was a young guy by the name of Bobby Scott, who was first elected to the House of Delegates. Now this was a time when leaders at the AFL-CIO were trying to expand their influence into Southern states. And they were able to win a major victory here in Virginia in February 1978. That's when 16,000 workers at the Newport News Shipbuilding voted to oust the company based union, in favor of the United Steel Workers of America. But Newport News Shipbuilding refused to come to the bargaining table and they challenged the union election in court. Workers at the shipyard organized a strike and Republican Governor John Dalton responded by invoking the Right to Work Law to deploy 90 state troopers, along with nightsticks and police dogs and armored cars and helicopters. Uh, Congressman Scott, you were in the House of Delegates at the time, a freshman member, this must have been a really tense moment for the for the region in general. But then you also as a freshman House member, what are your memories of this era?
Rep. Bobby Scott
Well, it was very tense. There were a lot of people that wanted a much stronger union than the Press the Shipbuilders Association. And they have that right....the steel workers had the majority, it went back and forth after the steel workers won the election, the shipyard and and the Governor's office just didn't give up. And it resulted in a strike. It was apparent that the steel workers had the support and the election should be recognized. It's it was very tense because obviously the the Newport News Shipyard was really the economic engine for the peninsula. So everyone on the peninsula has a stake in the viability of the shipyard. So everybody, everyone was obviously concerned. But we'd worked out the steel workers were ultimately recognized and they've been doing a good job representing the workers in the shipyard ever since. And it just gives an example of why you need elections that can be done quickly. We talked in the previous segment about timeliness of elections, if you do allow them to be spread out, all you do is allow the employer more time to commit unfair labor practices and in companies with more than 60 employees, during an election, they find unfair labor practices being committed about 50 over 50% of the time. Obviously, they're doing it with with very little sanction. So we need meaningful sanctions. And the situation with the shipyard, it took a lot longer than it should have. But it it ultimately worked out.
Thomas Bowman
The head of the AFL-CIO at the time, was a guy named Julian Carper. He said the presence of state troopers at the shipyard was inflammatory, and he asked the Governor to remove them. Doris, is this the kind of behavior from Governor Dalton, or any governor, intended to inflame tensions? Does action like this indicate bias on the part of the Governor?
Doris Crouse-Mays
Definitely does. I mean it, it just also goes to show how politics, as well, can play into things in terms of who you vote for, as your Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General and even you know, Congress and Senate. Luckily, I think things have gotten a lot better here in Virginia, you know, with that, but my predecessor was absolutely right in saying that, and the reaction to all of that was just as we would say, that was just a little bit over the top and it definitely escalated. But yeah, that was definitely over the topic and Julian was correct in saying that.
Michael Pope
Now after the strike was over, Governor Dalton went into high gear to undermine the labor movement before it was able to get much of a foothold in Virginia. He launched an ad campaign that declared Virginia is not only a Right to Work state, it's a want to work state. Now, this state funded campaign cost Virginia taxpayers $450,000 a year in 1980. So that's like more than a million dollars in today's dollars. Now, the idea was to boast that Virginia's weak unions were not good for business. Governor Dalton called the Right to Work law, "The single most beneficial statute in bringing new industry to the state." Was the Governor right about that? Had this law actually been effective in bringing new business to Virginia?
Doris Crouse-Mays
I would just say that when you look at businesses that come to Virginia, companies look at some other things, not whether or not you know, you're a Right to Work state. They look in, do you have a skilled workforce? Do you have good infrastructure and transportation? Do you provide a good education? These are the things that brings businesses to the state. Because even if you look at some of the contracts now and the businesses that's come to Virginia, and they'll always say, "Oh, we beat out North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia," well, all of those states are Right to Work states, as well. So this whole theory, and what you're saying, is totally untrue. And if it was true, then what are we doing? Is it a race to the bottom? What they really need to say is, "You're an at will employee, which means we can fire you or disciplinary action against you for no reason at all, because you're at will." And when you want to talk about the money, the taxpayers money, used for stuff like that, well, then we should be complaining about that. But instead, they want to complain about money, that laborer's spending.
Rep. Bobby Scott
It's also if you're attracting businesses because they will be able to under pay their workers, it's all it's known that when you have unions, you have better wages, better benefits, better working conditions. Studies have been shown that the benefits are so strong, that the children of union members do better in life than children of non-union members. Jobs, like auto workers that paid good middle class wages didn't pay those wages by accident, they pay those wages because unions negotiated for them. If the company wants to go to an area where people will not do as well, they do that at their peril, because the workers are going to be better workers, they're going to drift towards areas where the conditions are better. They're things like the income gap in a union contract. Blacks and Women get paid the same for the same job, equal pay for equal work, than others. There's the wealth gap for union members do much better in terms of household wealth. You've seen the studies with significant wealth gaps between different demographic groups. Well, it's much less if the person is a member of the Union, there are many benefits that accrue to union members. And if the company wants to go to an area where people do not thrive, that's a decision the company would have to make. But I think the vast majority of people would think that a company would want to go to an area, as Doris just mentioned, where you have good education and good opportunities, and you'll bring the best workers to places where they can do the best for themselves.
Thomas Bowman
When the governor's ad campaign was grabbing headlines, Larry Sabato was quoted saying, "Right to Work has become one of the most overreaching symbols of Virginia's conservatism. And while most people don't understand the issues involved, through the generations, they have been told, by their leaders, that Right to Work is one of the pillars of Virginia society, and they accept it." It's worth noting that this Larry Sabato quote, from 1980, could very easily be from today. Has anything changed in the last 40 years?
Rep. Bobby Scott
I think things have changed. These right in 1980, it was fairly accepted within the political circles that it was just the law of Virginia, and it was gonna stay that way, but I think things have significantly changed. The conservatives tried to stick the Right to Work Law into the Virginia Constitution and could not get a majority, even a majority of the voters to support it. That is in stark difference to how things were in, in the General Assembly in 1980. The vote on the putting the Right to Work Law to the referendum, the vote in the General Assembly was a very close vote. In 1980, it would not have been close.
Doris Crouse-Mays
Yeah, and I would just add too, I mean, the Congressman mentioned 2016, when we had the vote on the constitutional amendment, labor done an education on that. And Labor has done a really good job, in working with allies, community groups, and others, to really educate on what Right to Work really means. Also, in addition to that, workers and young people entering the workforce, you know, they're seeing that they don't have a voice. So they want to unionize, and have a union, and have a voice, and have a good job, and be able to have a say in their future. And this is changing everything. So the tide is turning in Virginia.
Thomas Bowman
That's all for right now. Thank you for listening to Transition Virginia. I'm Thomas Bowman. And my co host is Michael Pope. If you have comments or questions about what you just heard, or maybe you only want to tell us what you think about the show, write an email and send it to us at TransitionVApodcast@gmail.com so we can read it on the air. Subscribe to Transition Virginia anywhere pods are cast, follow the Transition Team on Twitter @TransitionVA and find us on the web at transitionvirginia.com. Don't forget to like and subscribe so you can enjoy our next episode of Transition Virginia.
