NYC isn’t the only coastal city looking at a $30 minimum wage:
Big Labor is lobbying local lawmakers in California to raise Alameda County’s minimum wage far beyond the current $16.90 per hour. Their goal is to push up to $30 by 2030, which makes the SEIU’s decade-old “Fight For $15” campaign pale in comparison.
UAW Region 6 leaders are among the most vocal of the coalition pushing for this initiative to land on November ballots. If the issue passes with voters, then the 2030 deadline would apply to businesses with 100+ employees and who surpass annual revenue of $1 billion, and smaller companies would have an extended deadline to reach that level.
This follows word earlier that the NYC Council introduced a bill to increase the Big Apple’s minimum wage to $30 by 2030, much to the trepidation of a restaurant owner who predicted that this would make entrepreneurship unsustainable in that sector. The Teamsters and Amazon Labor Union are behind that effort, akin to SEIU-lobbied legislation that increased California’s fast-food minimum wage to $20 only a few short years ago.
The DOL’s measured reaction to the Cesar Chavez allegations:
The aftermath won’t be over anytime soon after last week’s New York Times investigative report detailing an alleged “pattern of sexual misconduct” against United Farm Workers co-founder Cesar Chavez. This week at the Department of Labor headquarters, a portrait of Chavez was removed from prominent display, and an engraving has been covered.
California lawmakers also took swift action this week by voting to rename Cesar Chavez Day (Mar. 31) as Farmworkers Day. This mirrors action at libraries and parks across the U.S. based upon that investigative report, which included rape accusations from Chavez’s fellow UFW co-founder, Dolores Huerta.
Altogether, the effects of the Chavez revelations won’t become clear for some time, but it’s worth noting that the UFW’s membership rolls have fallen drastically over decades, down to less than 5,000 members, which is far fewer than 60,000 or so members from the union’s 1970s heyday.
A long Kaiser Permanente strike didn’t bring meaningful results for union members:
Around 31,000 Kaiser nurses and other healthcare workers ended an open-ended UNAC/UHCP strike and ratified a new contract. The union has predictably lauded the deal as “historic” with 21.5% raises over four years.
Kaiser repeatedly offered 21.5% raises, which include 16% in the first two years of the contract, both in late January and last fall, and the union kept nurses on strike for months before accepting that same offer.
Progressive site WSWS is now calling out the union for “a calculated betrayal of tens of thousands of healthcare workers" in accepting 21.5% as opposed to the union’s original 38% demand. Another long healthcare strike ended without meaningful results for union members.
The NLRB’s Ex-Cell-O avalanche has begun:
A few weeks ago, the NLRB reaffirmed its 1970 Ex-Cell-O standard. That decision still protects the employer’s NLRA-articulated right to refuse to bargain while challenging a union certification in court. This Board decision follows former General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo’s aggressive quest to punish employers with “make-whole” remedies for exercising their legal right, but the Biden-era Board never finished that job.
After the current Board declined to overrule Ex-Cell-O, GC Crystal Carey further confirmed that the standard will not be up for review again under her watch. And if you were wondering how many NLRB cases would soon reflect that stance, the answer, naturally, is “plenty.”
At least seven Ex-Cell-O cases have been disposed of by the Board in recent days, as tracked via Matt Bruenig’s NLRB Edge newsletter. Of course, employers can still face other remedies for unlawful conduct while seeking judicial review of union certification, but the Board is wasting no time in clearing out a stack of cases that don’t merit further attention.
Meanwhile, the Cemex drama continues:
The Abruzzo NLRB’s most aggressive move, however, is still in process of cleanup by the current Board.
As we previously discussed, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to enforce a Cemex bargaining order, thereby sticking a fork in the Board's 2023 decision that favored such an order for a single ULP. But it ain’t over yet. The Ninth and D.C. Circuits still have pending Cemex cases, and the Board has yet to issue a decision after the Sixth Circuit’s remand.
This week, however, the NLRB reversed a regional director’s dismissal of an employer’s RM petition against CWA. In doing so, the Board rejected the argument that “promptly” under Cemex meant a two-week deadline. That standard required an employer to either recognize a union after card check or file an RM petition for an election within two weeks. According to the current Board, no deadline exists for an RM filing under Cemex.
At some point, the Board is widely expected to overturn Cemex and restore the Gissel standard of only issuing bargaining orders for extreme employer conduct. This overturning might not happen until a third GOP member is confirmed, and we also await the pending appeals court decisions.
