They also create a level playing field for businesses who want to treat their employees fairly and decently. Without government establishing and enforcing basic standards, employers would find themselves at a competitive disadvantage relative to those who seek to profit by endangering and cheating workers. We would have a race to the bottom.
The Majority has called this hearing to discuss federal regulations involving workers and employment, and their effects on the economy. It is important to remember that the regulations being considered today involve longstanding, fundamental rights and principles, some of which have been established in U.S. law for more than 70 years, For example:
The principle that we do not use child labor in this country, except with appropriate limits and safeguards;
The principle of the 40-hour work week, with premium pay for overtime above that norm;
The right of workers to organize and join unions, without fear of being fired or retaliated against;
The right to equal pay for equal work, regardless of race or gender;
And the right to a workplace free of major preventable hazards to life and health.
Rules like these do more than just protect workers. They also create a level playing field for businesses who want to treat their employees fairly and decently. Without government establishing and enforcing basic standards, employers would find themselves at a competitive disadvantage relative to those who seek to profit by endangering and cheating workers. We would have a race to the bottom.
From some, we hear complaints about the costs of regulation. But what costs are they referring to? The cost of maintaining a safe workplace, so that workers are not disabled or killed by their jobs? The cost of payroll taxes that support basic protections like unemployment insurance and workers compensation? The cost of paying the same wages to women and minorities that are paid to white men?
I would not call those "costs of regulation" but rather part of doing business in a country that cares about its people.
There seems to be a notion among many in the Majority that the Labor Department damages the economy by enforcing labor standards required by law. That is simply not plausible.
For one, according to an Economic Policy Institute analysis of government data, the share of corporate profits in our gross domestic product increased to 25.6 percent in 2012, the highest in any year since 1950-1951. Meanwhile wages have fallen to a record low of 43.5% of GDP. In fact, average real weekly earnings have increased by just 2% over the past ten years.
Meanwhile, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 103,318 layoffs in the fourth quarter of 2012 were attributed to poor business demand, while only 965 were attributed to government regulation.
And according to a survey of small business owners conducted last year by the American Sustainable Business Alliance, Main Street Alliance and the Small Business Majority, the most important problem for businesses right now is weak customer demand. Only 14 percent mentioned government regulations.
Yet, over the last two years, the House Majority has made it a priority to bring bills to the floor seeking to overturn regulations or block them before they are even finalized. These include bills to prevent the EPA from moving forward with regulations that have been mandated by the courts or rules we will hear about today like those governing NLRB elections or addressing legally-required disclosure of arrangements between employers and labor-management consultants.
This week, we are continuing down the same path considering a bill on the floor to stop the NLRB from enforcing labor law.
If anything, current rules and enforcement may not be strong enough. For example, Labor's Wage and Hour Division does the best job they can, but they have less than 1,800 staff to cover the whole country, and there are reports of widespread violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act - violations that tend to cheat the most vulnerable workers.
I was glad to see the administration take action to battle pay discrimination by rescinding the voluntary guidelines and compensation standards that hamstrung the Department of Labor's attempts to ensure equal pay in the Bush years. But we are still waiting for a coal dust standard to be finalized, and for a new standard addressing the serious health hazards of silica to even be formally proposed. We are also still waiting for final action on modernization of fair labor standards rules for home health workers.
There are many more examples I could cite, but the belief that this administration has unleashed an unprecedented wave of new regulations is simply not substantiated by the facts.
In any case, I expect an interesting discussion today, and I look forward to our witnesses' testimony.
Source: U.S. Department of HCA
