Senator Hawley is Wrong: The PRO Act Isn't a "Pretty Good Piece of Legislation"
Here's the latest dispatch.
With Republicans like Senator Josh Hawley, who needs pro-Big Labor Democrats?
A Bloomberg labor reporter claimed Senator Hawley now believes the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act is “pretty good piece of legislation.” The Missouri senator won’t be co-sponsoring the bill just yet, but hopes a hypothetical alternative GOP labor bill from him could get support from former President Trump should he win re-election.
From Bloomberg Law:
Diego Areas Munhoz: A prominent Republican is breaking ranks and saying that Democrats’ marquee labor bill is a “good” idea.
Sen. Josh Hawley (Mo.) told Bloomberg Law he thinks the PRO Act is a ”pretty good piece of legislation.” The bill has been a priority for unions and Democrats to overhaul US labor laws and make it easier for workers to unionize.
Hawley noted that it’s unlikely that the bill could become law given almost unanimous Republican opposition. He said he’s instead working on a different “labor law reform” bill that could get 60 votes in the Senate, and hopes former President Donald Trump would back the legislation if he’s elected in November.
“It’s a priority of mine,” Hawley said. “I would hope that he would consider supporting some labor legislation, and I’d like to write it and I’d like to get the support for him and see if we can actually get the ball moving and get something done.”
Hawley is one of the leaders of the populist wing of the Republican party, and has taken pro-labor stances that are often at odds with the rest of the party. He’s introduced a $15 minimum wage bill, voted for sick time off for railroad workers, sponsored legislation to crack down on child labor violations, and endorsed striking United Auto Workers last year.
Those positions have drawn praise from Teamsters President Sean O’Brien, who name-checked Hawley during his speech at the Republican National Convention last month.
But the PRO Act is far from garnering a consensus on Capitol Hill.
This comes after Teamsters President Sean O’Brien, a big PRO Act backer, delivered a communist-esque speech at last month’s RNC Convention in Milwaukee, WI. And what did Republicans, including President Trump, get in return for platforming him? A non-endorsement.
I’m curious: What provisions of the PRO Act does Hawley like? Overall, it’s a rotten piece of legislation that’ll upend Main Street—especially small businesses, self-employed people, and gig workers. I’ve been covering it extensively for several years. I understand the majority of Democrats backing it, but so-called conservative Republicans? They should know better.
Does Hawley like the provision to abolish 27 right-to-work statutes? Because if his recent comments - his now-opposition to RTW - provide any insight here, he probably tolerates this section. Ugh.
The latest 2023 version of the PRO Act states employers and unions would negotiate “fair share agreements” to mandate employees (a.k.a. workers) pay union fees to keep their jobs. This is code for abolishing RTW. As one legal analysis observed (bolded for emphasis):
The PRO Act states contract provisions requiring that “all employees in a bargaining unit shall contribute fees to a labor organization for the cost of representation, collective bargaining, contract enforcement, and related expenditures as a condition of employment shall be valid and enforceable notwithstanding any State or Territorial law.” By compelling all employees in a bargaining unit to contribute fees to the union as a condition of keeping their jobs, the PRO Act would provide a financial benefit to unions at the expense of each covered employee.
Not convinced? Here’s the provision straight from the bill:
SEC. 111. FAIR SHARE AGREEMENTS PERMITTED.
Section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 164(b)) is amended by striking the period at the end and inserting the following: “: Provided, That collective bargaining agreements providing that all employees in a bargaining unit shall contribute fees to a labor organization for the cost of representation, collective bargaining, contract enforcement, and related expenditures as a condition of employment shall be valid and enforceable notwithstanding any State or Territorial law.”.
Does Hawley like the provision about mandating an ABC test on all workers to default them to employee (W2) status over independent contractor (1099) status? Because I’d love to know if he loves that too. Again, from the bill:
TITLE I—AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACTSEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.
(b) Employee.—Section 2(3) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following:“An individual performing any service shall be considered an employee (except as provided in the previous sentence) and not an independent contractor, unless—
“(A) the individual is free from control and direction in connection with the performance of the service, both under the contract for the performance of service and in fact;
“(B) the service is performed outside the usual course of the business of the employer; and
“(C) the individual is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession, or business of the same nature as that involved in the service performed.”.
California AB5 has been a disaster for the Golden State’s self-employed and gig economy workers. Numerous carve outs and exemptions were added to the bill that barely stopped the bleeding. 58% of California voters rebuked Newsom and the legislature in fall 2020 by voting for Proposition 22 to protect ride-share drivers as independent contractors—a law that was recently upheld by the lefty California Supreme Court. The decision read like this:
Under section 7451, a driver for an app-based transportation or delivery company, such as Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber), Lyft, Inc. (Lyft), or DoorDash, Inc., is an independent contractor and not an employee of the company as long as several conditions are met.
For a lawmaker that claims to be anti-woke, supporting woke California’s AB5 on steroids is ironic. Unless he doesn’t love this portion? He, again, wasn’t clear about what he loves or doesn’t love about the PRO Act.
The American Action Forum warned “the bill [PRO Act] could increase employment costs by anywhere from $18 – $61 billion and put up to $2.3 trillion of gross domestic product at risk.”
Instead of kowtowing to progressive Big Labor interests as Hawley has, do as Carol Roth suggests: make the GOP the party of Main Street. You can appeal to both non-unionized and unionized workers without displacing one for another.
64 million freelancers (and counting) - or 38% of the U.S. workforce - are an emerging yet powerful demographic. Don’t underestimate them.
Thank you for reading! Let me know your thoughts and encourage your friends to subscribe to the newsletter too.
—Gabriella