Note who introduced it...
The bill, introduced by Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, and co-sponsored by Reps. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., and Michelle Steel, R-Calif.
Cuellar is the anti-abortion candidate that Pelosi, Jim Clyburn, etc supported. And now he's in congress. Great job democrats!
And now he’s in congress.
He's been in Congress for a while. The district leans Dem so they needed a placeholder to be "the best we can do" and sandbag out more representative voices.
Lmao. I love that they're trying to make it sound like Biden is pro labor and would totally shoot this bill down
Who was the guy funding Prop 22 in California again? :curious-marx:
Oh, right -- Kamalas husband
The “Worker Flexibility and Choice Act,” or HR 8442, would change the Fair Labor Standards Act so that “employee” does not include a person who has entered into a worker-flexibility agreement, such as workers for gig companies like Uber Technologies Inc., DoorDash Inc., Lyft Inc., and others. The bill would amend Internal Revenue Code to say that an individual who enters into any such agreement would not be treated as an employee, and the company for which that person performs a service would not be treated as an employer.
The bill, introduced by Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, and co-sponsored by Reps. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., and Michelle Steel, R-Calif., calls for workers subject to worker-flexibility agreements to have some rights guaranteed to employees, such as those related to privacy, nondiscrimination, nonharassment, nonretaliation and safety, plus time off under the Family and Medical Leave Act. It does not call for wage and hour protections to which employees are entitled — including rules on minimum wage and overtime — and would supersede all federal, state and local laws on wages for workers in a worker-flexibility agreement.
Oh joy, it offers minor protections while cutting off the possibility of proper labor classification. Any resistance to this will have the same tired response of, 'Telephone servants should have a nondiscriminatory environment! Why do you hate the working class?!'
also, the amount of stretching most will have to do to manage that fucking.
at least prop 22 had a chance to fail because it was a referendum, gee i wonder if the servants of the bourgeoisie will pass this one
They way overreached with the "7/8 majority to overturn" language in that one, and iirc that's the only reason it was shot down as unconstitutional. But yeah, good thing it doesn't matter bc it was all staging ground for federal bills :porky-happy: learned his lesson and won't be repeating that shit
Also cant get over the idea that "flexibility of schedule" will be what allows like a third of all US workers to be stripped of federal protections. Literally not even a thing
being correct and articulate about it is worth precisely nothing in the 21st century. except stress heartache and dread. you get plenty of stress heartache and dread.
if/when this passes every one of us will be reclassified into gig workers
Hardly. The professional tier will remain salary because paying $X/year on someone working 80 hour weeks is way cheaper than paying hourly.
If they pass this it will only make the labor movment even stronger.
Either they pass the law or SCOTUS guts existing labor rights.
Either way, calling employees "private contractors" has been an end run around labor law for decades. This is explicitly about protecting a handful of new wave tech firms. It might as well be called the "Uber Amnesty Act"
I don't disagree with you at all, was thinkin that these company's like lift uber and such are gonna evaporate into the air with increased intreat hikes as they haven't made money pretty much ever.
A ton of the expense side of Uber's balance sheet has simply been recruitment.
That's why the end game for these firms has to be some kind of oligopoly to function.
Cuellar brought this bill with two Republican co-sponsors so that makes me assume it does not have broad support among Dems
If the bill doesn't pass, the Chudpreme Court will probably have a go at it next. DAE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE UNCONSTITUTIONAL? :doomer:
