Search News
For the Media
For media inquiries, call CWA Communications at 202-434-1168 or email comms@cwa-union.org. To read about CWA Members, Leadership or Industries, visit our About page.
Worker-Friendly Legislators Try to Derail Bush Attack on Overtime
Democrats and some Republicans are continuing to do battle with the Department of Labor over proposals that would strip millions of workers of overtime rights, changes the agency wants to formalize by the end of March.
Lawmakers and labor unions are looking at legislative and legal options to stop the DOL's attack on the 40-hour workweek. At a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing Jan. 20 on the overtime issue, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) was among those with sharp questions for Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, who gave only vague answers.
"Without any hearings, the Secretary of Labor with just a few strokes of her pen is about to adversely affect the quality of life for millions of hard working families," Murray said in an opening statement. "Here we are with so many Americans out of work, many people struggling to keep their jobs, millions have lost their pension benefits and their health care benefits and now this administration is going to force a pay cut on those who work overtime for their employers."
GOP leadership and the Bush administration twisted enough arms late last year to keep an amendment protecting overtime rights out of an omnibus spending bill. Despite Bush's threats to veto the bill if the language was included, worker-friendly lawmakers - lobbied for months by CWA's legislative office - fought hard to restore it but were ultimately outnumbered.
The media showed renewed interest in the overtime issue after the Associated Press report in early January based on an issue raised exclusively by CWA: The agency's tips hidden in the regulations showing employers how to avoid paying overtime - or any additional wages - of 1.3 million low-income workers who Chao insists will be helped by the new rules. Presently, the involved workers' supervisory duties make them exempt from overtime, in spite of their low pay.
The regulations tell employers that they can cut these workers' base wages so that once overtime hours are figured in, their pay won't change. The DOL even provides a mathematical example based on a $400-a-week employee, showing how to drop the wage from $10 an hour to $8.42 an hour to compensate for overtime costs.
"The workers don't get an extra dime under this abhorrent scheme," CWA President Morton Bahr said. "The Labor Department and this administration have said over and over that their plan will raise the salaries of 'vulnerable' workers when the truth, once again, is that corporate profits are their only real concern."
The story was published in scores of major daily newspapers and reported on by radio and TV stations nationwide, drawing harsh comments from many of the Democratic candidates for president. CWA has tried to raise this issue with the media through press releases and a news conference, but reporters paid no attention until the AP story ran.
The Labor Department responded with several letters to the editor in papers that published that story, claiming that the tips for employers were nothing more than language required under an analysis of the plan's economic impact.
The Denver Post published one of the letters, as well as a response from CWA District 7 Vice President John Thompson. "The regulations make the department's agenda clear," he wrote. "Sadly, a once-proud agency that was created to look out for workers in a corporate-dominated world is now little more than a second U.S. Department of Commerce."
Lawmakers and labor unions are looking at legislative and legal options to stop the DOL's attack on the 40-hour workweek. At a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing Jan. 20 on the overtime issue, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) was among those with sharp questions for Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, who gave only vague answers.
"Without any hearings, the Secretary of Labor with just a few strokes of her pen is about to adversely affect the quality of life for millions of hard working families," Murray said in an opening statement. "Here we are with so many Americans out of work, many people struggling to keep their jobs, millions have lost their pension benefits and their health care benefits and now this administration is going to force a pay cut on those who work overtime for their employers."
GOP leadership and the Bush administration twisted enough arms late last year to keep an amendment protecting overtime rights out of an omnibus spending bill. Despite Bush's threats to veto the bill if the language was included, worker-friendly lawmakers - lobbied for months by CWA's legislative office - fought hard to restore it but were ultimately outnumbered.
The media showed renewed interest in the overtime issue after the Associated Press report in early January based on an issue raised exclusively by CWA: The agency's tips hidden in the regulations showing employers how to avoid paying overtime - or any additional wages - of 1.3 million low-income workers who Chao insists will be helped by the new rules. Presently, the involved workers' supervisory duties make them exempt from overtime, in spite of their low pay.
The regulations tell employers that they can cut these workers' base wages so that once overtime hours are figured in, their pay won't change. The DOL even provides a mathematical example based on a $400-a-week employee, showing how to drop the wage from $10 an hour to $8.42 an hour to compensate for overtime costs.
"The workers don't get an extra dime under this abhorrent scheme," CWA President Morton Bahr said. "The Labor Department and this administration have said over and over that their plan will raise the salaries of 'vulnerable' workers when the truth, once again, is that corporate profits are their only real concern."
The story was published in scores of major daily newspapers and reported on by radio and TV stations nationwide, drawing harsh comments from many of the Democratic candidates for president. CWA has tried to raise this issue with the media through press releases and a news conference, but reporters paid no attention until the AP story ran.
The Labor Department responded with several letters to the editor in papers that published that story, claiming that the tips for employers were nothing more than language required under an analysis of the plan's economic impact.
The Denver Post published one of the letters, as well as a response from CWA District 7 Vice President John Thompson. "The regulations make the department's agenda clear," he wrote. "Sadly, a once-proud agency that was created to look out for workers in a corporate-dominated world is now little more than a second U.S. Department of Commerce."