The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) lists as one of its purposes the creation of a uniform national labor policy. That might have been the thought nearly 80 years ago when the NLRA was enacted, but it is the furthest thing from the truth today — as state-to-state conflicts in employment philosophy have become more and more pronounced.
I write these words from San Francisco, which has the highest minimum wage in the nation: $10.24 per hour. Students in a San Jose State University social action class recently filed paperwork with the city of San Jose seeking the city attorney’s authorization to collect signatures to put a $10 minimum wage proposal on the San Jose city ballot in November. If it passes legal review, the students, who have already collected and spent $6,000 on professional pollsters and campaign help, will then have 180 days to collect 19,161 valid signatures to place the proposition on the ballot.
50 Employment Laws in 50 States
While this proposal is brewing in northern California, the opposite wave is heading to South Carolina. Last year, that state reduced unemployment benefits from 26 to 20 weeks. The backers of that successful effort are now proposing three new obligations for workers collecting unemployment. First, to prove they are ready and able to work, random drug testing of unemployment recipients is being proposed. Second, once recipients have been out of work for six months, they would have to take any job they are physically able to perform. And finally, again after receiving unemployment for six months, recipients must volunteer at least 16 hours per week. While those conditions likely violate federal law today, the House of Representatives recently passed legislation allowing the states to impose greater restrictions on unemployment recipients.
This labor law dichotomy between the West Coast and the Southeast is already being litigated in other forums. Recently, Boeing Aircraft moved the manufacture of its Dreamliner 787 from union-friendly Washington to a union-free facility in South Carolina. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has lodged unfair labor practice charges as a result of that move, while Boeing has challenged the charge, saying it has a constitutional right to move production of the plane under the Commerce Clause. Expect that conflict to eventually make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Another philosophical gorge exists in the area of employer-provided health care. There, too, the city of San Francisco has made some form of health care coverage mandatory for employers in the city, while employer medical plans remain the linchpin of federal health policy. At the same time, the number of Americans covered by employer health plans has gone down over the past three years from 48 percent to 46 percent to 45 percent ― with more employers today saying they may drop employee health coverage in 2012. For example, Wal-Mart, America’s biggest private employer, said it will drop health care coverage for employees working less than 24 hours a week and increase employee contributions and reduce benefits for everyone else.
Which America are we?
The toughest cases are always those in which everyone has some degree of right on their side. When the San Jose State students say that a family can’t easily live on $16,000 a year, they are right. When the San Jose Chamber of Commerce says that a $10 minimum wage will drive some businesses out of San Jose, it is right.
When minimum wage earners say they can’t afford to double their copays and insurance contributions, they are right. When employers say they can’t absorb a 30 percent increase in medical insurance between 2011 and 2012, they are right, too.
Our nation’s response has been to become polarized, with blue states favoring one result, red states favoring another, and each blaming the other for stymieing America’s economic recovery. Once both sides recognize and respect the truth in the other’s perspective of this problem and stop playing political football with the most basic of human and business relationships, we can begin to develop a unified national employment policy after all!