So, if you go look at the Breitbart website right now, you’ll see an anti-Trump headline that accuses him of nominating a Labor Secretary that prefers foreign labor to American workers. And if you actually go ahead and read the article, you’ll see that it lashes out at Andy Puzder for standing “diametrically opposed to Trump’s signature issues on trade and immigration.”
As an example, they cite his decision to “join forces with Michael Bloomberg, Bob Iger, and Rupert Murdoch’s open borders lobbying firm, the Partnership for a New American Economy, to call for ‘free-market solutions’ to our immigration system.” They also question Puzder’s support for “amnesty” and overall view him as a poster-boy for what they oppose, which is bringing in low-wage immigrants that take jobs from white Americans and suppress their wages.
Now, the Breitbart website is as closely associated with Trump’s consigliere Steve Bannon as Trump Tower is with Trump. I don’t think they would run a hit piece on Andy Puzder if they thought it would displease Bannon. The question is whether or not they wrote this article as his direction and with his guidance.
Bannon and Reince Priebus are having a little bureaucratic hand-to-hand combat about how to fill out Trump’s cabinet, and perhaps Bannon lost the battle over the Labor Department. Maybe this is the way he strikes back and demonstrates his power.
For Democrats, this is interesting speculation, kind of like trying to figure out how the car wound up upside down, on fire, and on top of the garage.
But it also makes it more likely that there will be some Republican senators who will consider voting against Puzder’s confirmation. If the left is united against him and Bannon’s hordes are against them, it’s at least possible that he won’t be confirmed.
Guess Trump didn’t get the memo on the GOP great divide on immigration. One public (immigrants are stealing your jobs) and one private (cheap labor capitalists). Doesn’t seem to matter how often the private GOP position is revealed for the rubes to stop buying the public one.
Will Puzder even make it to Senate confirmation hearings and if he does, will he make it out of the hearing alive? (Detail on the Senate HELP committee in my comment on the previous thread.)
You know, that is a group of our “better” progressives, no? What legislation have they been pushing this last 4 yrs to improve the power of labor? Serious question, here.
In fairness, they have been constrained by the DP PTB and it’s agenda: “protect Obama” bc he’s the first AA President and therefore, must not fail and “elect Clinton” bc the DP is, after all, the Clinton Party and Obama was the accidental interference but only as the Party leader bc on policy he’s in line with the Party.
The question today is if they remain under the yoke of the neoliberal DP. If they “keep their powder dry” over this nomination, the answer would be a clear yes. Unfortunately, if they mount an attack sufficient to defeat him, the answer will remain undefined as such an effort may be nothing more than seizing a political opportunity to stick a dart in Trump.
Card check (the Employee Free Choice Act) which President Obama strongly supported was pushed for in the first term and lost. President Obama also appointed progressive members to the NLRB during a pro-forma Senate session and that was reversed unanimously by the Supreme Court.
Do. Not. Contradict. The. Narrative.
I don’t want to have to tell you this twice/
Like wind through the corn field, the facts pass through and leave no trace.
The comment you responded to said “in the last four years.” Dragging out something that was supported in the first term and then dropped after if failed is exactly the measure ordinary people use to evaluated their elected reps. By your standard — proposed, failed, and then dropped during the remained of a politicians term(s) in office — Senator Clinton was a legislative powerhouse.
They have no idea of the answer and so they jape.
I thought we had some labor organizers on this blog that might have some input. I was curious if any European methods had been considered…
They gave you some answers and you sarcastically dismiss them. I’m not sure why.
Here’s some actions by Obama and his Administration; more are easily found on the Internet tubes for your review:
https:/www.employmentlawspotlight.com/category/nlrb
http://www.mcneeslaw.com/national-labor-relations-board-2015-year-review-overview-major-developments
-labor-law/
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/cappelli-mcdonalds/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2016/08/17/employers-beware-nlrb-likely-to-drop-more-pro-un
ion-rulings-by-end-of-august/
https:/www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/nlrb-issues-numerous-decisions-against-employe
rs-hirozawas-term
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-nlrb-labor-union-20141212-story.html
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-nlrb-gives-labor-a-rock-solid-win-20150827-column.h
tml
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=dbf6a128-6377-4252-9d72-ecf774b08c4c
http://www.ferrarafirm.com/articles_clips/email_organizing.aspx
http://democracyjournal.org/arguments/the-perils-of-a-partisan-nlrb/
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18224/independent-contractor-laws-department-of-labor
The Adminstration’s independent pro-worker actions have been so substantial that the Judiciary has sometimes blocked them. Here’s one example:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/overtime-rule-231778
Have these been enough? No, they haven’t. We need better Labor laws, not just better regulation of the existing laws. While the 111th Congress passed a number of important laws such as the Lilly Ledbetter Act, that Congress could have been better in this area. In particular, failure to pass the Employee Free Choice Act has bitten the Democratic Party in the ass. Republican intransigence and the failure to get 60 Senators on the Bill during the window of time we had a filibuster-proof majority killed EFCA.
Here’s the big problem for those who pooh-poohed the importance of the Supreme Court as an issue in this year’s POTUS election. The most profound anti-Labor actions taking place in recent years have not been Legislative or Executive actions; they’ve been Judicial actions by the Supreme Court and other Circuit Courts.
Take a look at the morally and intellectually bankrupt Harris v. Quinn decision for a prime example:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harris-v-quinn/
https:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/11-681_j426.pdf
Unions representing home care workers lost hundreds of thousands of dues-paying members in the stroke of a pen. As damaging as the actions have been by anti-worker Governors and Legislators, there are no Executive and Legislative actions which can damage more workers more quickly than sweeping Judicial actions.
And now the four conservatives, in their Friedrichs opinion this year, have essentially said that they are ready to tear down the stare decisis of Abood. they only need a fifth anti-worker Justice to devastate worker power in the public sector, which holds the majority of Union memberships in the U.S.:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/friedrichs-v-california-teachers-association/
https:
/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abood_v._Detroit_Board_of_Education
What we’re heading to in these and other Court decisions is an effective national right-to-work law created ad hoc by a 5-4 decision, with the five Justices nominated by Presidents from the Republican Party taking direct action to steal valuable resources from worker Unions, defeating the four Justices nominated by Presidents from the Democratic Party.
Even this rotten Congress will not pass a national right-to-work law; there are no Senators in the Democratic Caucus who would vote for it. But the conservative movement may essentially accomplish it this decade anyway.
The Parties are not the same.
I keep reading that our traditional labor laws are totally inadequate to address the needs of “gig economy” workers. Who are well on the way to becoming the majority employment category. What NEW approaches are being discussed among organizers.
That is why I asked about Congressional ruminations in the last four years…
Republicans have controlled Congress in the last four years, so there are no pro-Labor ruminations which have a chance of getting out of Congress. Ideas which Congressional Democrats have proposed can’t even get a vote, or a serious discussion.
Every single link I provided to an Obama Adminstration action has taken place in the last four years.
Here’s a link to examples of Laws which are being passed in States under full Democratic Party control:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/2014/11/17/the-most-frustrating-labor-rules-for-california-businesses
/
Keep in mind that Governor Brown has vetoed a number of pro-worker, pro-organizing Bills passed by the State Legislature. (To be fair, he’s signed most of these good Bills.) The quoted representatives of the poor, downtrodden business community would have much more to complain about if the Senate and Assembly had their way more often.
Believe me, there are plenty of different organizing strategies being discussed within the Labor movement. Some of these strategies have seen recent success, such as more than a half-dozen Statewide minimum wage ballot measure campaigns. These campaigns have won every time they’ve gone to the voters this decade, even with electorates which have chosen Republicans to govern.
Additionally, other Governors and Legislatures, most prominently New York and California, have been leveraged by the success of the ballot measure campaigns in their States to take action and pass minimum wage laws which came close to meeting the standards their ballot measures had sought.
There are other strategies being executed, and more are in the planning stages. But if you think I’m going to trust you or this community with a discussion about new Labor strategies, you are sorely mistaken.
Depends on what Jeff Sessions has to say. Also Grassley. Also Sherrod Brown and Dick Durbin and Bernie Sanders.
Before Bernie was muzzled by the open-borders folks, he was and remains a “enforce the law and protect the borders” fella.
Other than Sanders, your list doesn’t include any members of the 114th Senate HELP committee. Sessions will be busy prepping for his own confirmation hearing (and wasn’t on this committee anyway). Durbin as minority leader may have some say, but Grassley and Brown are functionally irrelevant to this nomination.
What immigration policy and regulations does the Department of Labor have the power to enforce?
Pudzer’s plusses for the Trump team is striking down the Fair Employment Standards Act provisions (and possibly child labor provisions as well).
The Homeland Security pick will have the major influence over immigration policy and regulations.
But if Bannon can play “fraternity railroad” with Priebus over Pudzer and shoot him down, who would Trump replace him with? Someone who shuts down immigration and guts the Fair Employment Standards Act. (Minimum wage, overtimes, etc.)
It is 10 days until the Electoral College meets. They need not vote for Donald Trump, but probably will.
The small business owners, who are Trump’s real white base, will love his pick for labor no matter who he is.
Either Bannon or Priebus will be out within two years. Likely Priebus will figure it’s his turn for elective office–like Rahm Emanuel did. Dare we predict Governor of Wisconsin? What is Bannon’s backup?
E-verify?
DOL also enforces, or fails to enforce, laws and policies related to work visas and other visas.
Financial and physical abuse of immigrant labor is distressingly common, but the current DOL has enforced laws meant to prevent these abuses. It is likely to certain that the Federal government will turn its back on these workers much more substantially.
Eschaton I Found A Study Which Proves My Point
READ IT! Duncan is absolutely correct.
Would add and “gotta know HOW we got” here because it’s often not at all obvious from simply knowing the “before” and “now.”
an article, a piece of fake news, etc. and pull out a bit of it to declare, “see, I’m right.” Anybody can Google, but that doesn’t exhibit all the knowledge and understanding one needs to make such declarative statements of “being right.”
The Intercept – He Waged Intimidation Campaigns Against Climate Scientists; Now He’s Helping Trump Remake the EPA
For reference, remember Reagan’s Secretary of Interior, James G. Watt
Watt may get off that ten worst list by virtue of Trump scraping further down on the bottom of the barrel. (Not that GWB’s “clear skies” and “clean water” guys were much different Watt with the exception that they were better propagandists.)
Henry Giroux: Trump’s Second Gilded Age: Overcoming the Rule of Billionaire and Militarists. (Not the most descriptive title for the article which is better than the title.)
I thought Bush II was most excellent at doing that. Exceeded even Reagan.
The Intercept – Trump Transition Team Announces a Hire and Then Denies That It Ever Happened
Okay — since The Intercept has a screengrab of Birkenstock inclusion in the original TrumpInc release, can we label TrumpInc’s denial as “Fake News?” When does just good old-fashioned lying that gets disseminated without comment by media organization qualify as “FakeNews.” Seems to me that lies are born fake but it takes media operations to turn them into “FakeNews.” Most of what was distributed in the 2016 election.
CNN – Trump: No Cabinet post for Rudy Giuliani Rejected by Trump has got to sting.
SA had to be reigned in, neh?
Also, the strike against Social Security has begun.