News for
Nov. 15-19, 1999
Links to commercial press stories are functional at the date of posting.
In some cases, these links may "expire" after a week or two, when the
newspaper would like to begin charging you to access their archives (all the old news
that's fit to... sell).
THURSDAY, November 18 -- Change in pension law nixed from budget package
In today's (Tacoma) News-Tribune -- Transit union plans
suit against I-695
In today's Roll Call -- Gephardt
wary of WTO issue
WEDNESDAY, November 17 -- Welcome to the margin of the trade debate, all 93% of you
In today's New York Times -- Union leaders
will try to block China WTO agreement
TUESDAY, November 16 -- L&I
proposes new ergonomics standards
-- Labor applauds new standards for job injuries
In today's Seattle Times -- Engineers rally
to denouce Boeing's "best" contract offer
MONDAY, November 15 -- Sweeney
calls WTO-China deal "a grave mistake"
-- Locked-out Kaiser workers rally outside BPA in Portland
In today's Washington Post -- China, U.S. sign WTO
deal
In today's (Tacoma) News-Tribune -- Western State: Can it ever be
made a safer place to work?
News from previous weeks: Last week -- Nov. 1-5 -- Oct. 25-29
![[Dividing Line Image]](../images/div.gif){kind=small}
A change in a relatively obscure pension law known as "Section 415'' sought by organized labor was removed Wednesday from a bill extending the life of various tax measures as Congress scrambled to adjourn for the year. Although it would have benefitted all union pensioners, critics said the change would enable highly paid union officials to sharply increase their pensions.
The measure would have benefited all union pensioners by eliminating a requirement that benefits be based the three highest consecutive years of earnings. If pension trustees chose to base benefits on the highest two years, for example, it would amount to a small benefit increase for some and a significant increase for others.
But another part of the proposal would have eliminated an annual pension cap of about $60,000 for those who retire before age 65, enabling them to get yearly pensions of well over $100,000. Most members of organized labor in that income category are senior union officials.
"There are not a lot of people earning that much money,'' said Peter Orszag, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley. "It could easily be interpreted as mainly helping them.''
Among the 22 co-sponsors of an earlier House version of the measure was Washington state's own Rep. Jack Metcalf (R-2nd).
The following story by Ethan Wallison appeared in today's Roll Call, a fine publication that former U.S. House Speaker Tip O'Neill once referred to as "our hometown newspaper," which posts timely and informative inside-the-beltway news online (for which the links expire after just one day and are not archived):
Gephardt Wary of WTO Issue; China Entry Splits House Democrats
House Minority Whip David Bonior (D-Mich.) was in midair, returning from a visit to Guam, when his office got the hurried phone call from an aide to Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.).
The message: Don't let David say anything about the Clinton administration's trade deal with China until Dick has had a chance to sit down with him and talk it through.
The urgency was a sign of how delicate an issue trade with China will be for Gephardt and the House Democrats. Gephardt has pursued the House majority through an emphasis on party unity and through the delicate appeasement of both organized labor and big business. Now the White House had forced his hand; and in doing so, it set up the strongest test yet to Gephardt's leadership this Congress.
"It's a bad predicament for him," one party strategist said. "He's courting business, and his best friend is labor. Whichever way he goes, he's for one and against the other. He's got to make a call here."
One Democratic Member, who requested anonymity, cited Gephardt's predicament within the Caucus. "If he comes out in favor of the deal, he really risks building opposition to himself in the [party's] center-left coalition. If he comes out against it, he risks building opposition from the [centrist] New Democrats and the free-traders.
"He's in the classic position of walking the high wire here," the Member said.
In a way, it's already looking like an uphill climb toward consensus. Bonior, a leader of pro-labor forces on Capitol Hill, had essentially laid out his opposition to a deal in a letter to President Clinton he signed the previous week, before the agreement was reached. At press time, 65 Democrats had signed the letter.
Gephardt and other top Democrats have already filled the coffers at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee with millions of dollars from business that has not been there for Democrats in previous cycles.
Business interests have given about $10 million to the DCCC so far this year, compared with $18.9 million in the entire 1998 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
But the party's coziness with business always has to be weighed against the interests of the labor community, which traditionally has provided the foot soldiers that deliver victory at the polls -- or defeat when they won't show.
Already the lines are being drawn, particularly by labor, which is warning ominously of a repeat of 1994, when labor stayed home and the Democrats got trounced at the polls.
"Look what happened in 1994 -- that's what we will say" to Democrats, said Alan Reuther, the top lobbyist for the United Auto Workers, which is fighting the trade pact.
The level of anxiety surrounding the China trade issue was crystallized at a meeting called Nov. 2 by Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.), who has been acting as a go-between for the White House and pro-labor Democrats on the issue.
One Member at the meeting, which included representatives from the White House and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said the room erupted in loud scorn when one participant suggested an agreement with China was in the party's best interests in 2000.
"It was immediately clear that that dog wouldn't hunt," the Member said, adding that much of the scorn was directed at the representatives from the administration.
Many Democratic Members, who have come to associate their prospects for 2000 with Gephardt's stability as a leader, are practically rooting for him to stay out of this one, leaving the fight to allies, such as Bonior or Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who can act with the tacit assent of the Minority Leader.
Bonior will be among a group of Democrats who will rally labor against the World Trade Organization at the group's ministerial meeting in Seattle next month.
But while Democrats on either side of the issue predict Gephardt will make every effort to avoid the fray, they acknowledge he probably won't have that luxury if labor, as expected, comes to rely on the leader to turn back the tide on the White House. "If it gets to that," one Democrat said, "it could be a crisis for the leadership."
Even as he begins to plot strategy on China, Gephardt's breathing room is rapidly being constricted.
"As leader of the Democrats, Gephardt can't be on the sidelines," said Reuther. "We are expecting him to be leading the opposition."
For now, Gephardt aides are talking only in the broadest terms about the China matter. They say the leader is focused entirely on the budget endgame, and that it would be "premature" for him to talk about the trade deal at this time.
But a top Gephardt aide promised Gephardt will not remain on the sidelines for the duration. "At the end of the day, he's going to have to stick his card in the machine and vote," the aide said.
The trade pact reached by the Clinton administration paves the way for China's entry into the World Trade Organization. In order for the deal to be completed, Congress would have to grant permanent normal trade relations status to the Chinese.
Such approval would eliminate the annual debate on renewal of NTR status that is used by China critics to register their displeasure with the communist regime.
At a meeting Tuesday with representatives from the White House, there were already signs of reticence among several pro-business Democrats who reported they had heard the message from the UAW back in their districts, participants said.
Business, meanwhile, is planning to turn up the heat. Lonnie Taylor, the top lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the group will not make any threats, but will stress to Democrats that trade with China is a "key issue" for the group.
He added: "I'm sure they'll recognize the importance of the matter as they move into the election cycle."
Major corporations such as Goldman, Sachs &Co., Mirage Resorts and AT&T have already made large, early contributions to the DCCC this cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. All three had shown little or no support for the Democrats at the same stage of the 1998 cycle.
Centrist Democrats who favor the pact are trying to embolden their troops to stand up to labor's threats. At the same time, they are urging business groups to make appointments to meet with Members back in their districts over the coming recess.
"What we're saying to [the business community] is, 'The sooner the better,'" a top aide to one prominent Caucus centrist said.
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER
16The following OpEd by Washington State Labor Council President Rick Bender, has been submitted to a number of newspapers in the Puget Sound area:
"Countries that are a part of international trade agreements should be required to maintain minimum standards for working conditions."
What percentage of Americans agree with that statement? According to a poll by the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes, the answer is 93 percent.
Ninety-three percent! Try to get 93 percent of Americans to agree on anything, including whether the world is round, and you’ve got a challenge on your hands. But when it comes to support for minimum labor standards in trade agreements, there is near unanimity of opinion.
Despite this, our government has yet to sign a trade agreement that seriously addresses the issue of minimum labor standards. Until the embarrassing revocation of his Fast Track negotiating authority, President Clinton refused to publicly acknowledge that labor issues should even be on the agenda at international trade negotiations.
The problem is that the 7 percent who disagree with the statement above happen to be the ones with the power. They are your government’s trade representatives. They are the corporate executives whose interests they truly represent. And they are the "free trade" cheerleaders in the commercial media who are granted an audience with the powerful from time to time.
The U.S. government and the Clinton administration have yet to pay anything but lip service to demands that basic labor and human rights be a part of trade agreements. Our government signs cosmetic unenforceable "labor side agreements" (see NAFTA) and promises "environmental reviews" (see Clinton’s announcement the same day the above-mentioned poll was released.)
Meanwhile, U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky is in China toasting an agreement that gives up America’s ability to punish the world’s biggest human-rights violator unilaterally through trade sanctions, and hands it over to the World Trade Organization.
That’s the same WTO that so far has adamantly opposed even discussing the inclusion of labor or human rights in its rules. Good luck getting that on the agenda once the giant, union-organizer-executing nation of China is at the table.
But it’s not enough that our trade representatives say one thing and do another.
The labor movement has been vilified and marginalized by these so-called "trade experts" for advocating what 13 of every 14 Americans support. Our position on the issue has been grossly misrepresented and dismissed by the "experts" as simplistic anti-trade protectionism based on labor’s self-interest in saving the few manufacturing jobs left in this country.
Let me let you in on a little secret, labor supports trade. We’d even like more of it.
As President of the AFL-CIO state federation in the Most Trade-Dependent State in the Country®, I have managed to figure out that 40 percent of the rank-and-file union members I represent have jobs dependent on trade. Fortunately for my job security, they have a little clearer understanding of what labor is fighting for here.
We are saying it is unacceptable that our government and its trading partners ignore the human and environmental costs of production as they seek to remove barriers to trade. We are saying child labor sweatshops are due as much (or more) consideration as intellectual property rights. We are saying workers worldwide should have the freedom to associate to improve their standards of living just as corporations have the freedom to associate to improve their bottom lines.
And we are saying that until we see substantive progress on these issues and some assessment of the damage already done by our trade policies, the United States should not continue to rush into bed with countries that openly destroy the environment and intentionally suppress their citizens in the name of "free trade."
On Tuesday, Nov. 30, the first day of the WTO Ministerials in Seattle, tens of thousands of people will be saying this as they rally and march peacefully downtown. Represented in the rain will be labor unions, religious groups, environmentalists, community organizations, students, fair trade activists, human rights groups and lots of other folks who share the opinions of 93 percent of Americans.
You are invited. We’ll meet you at the Seattle Center’s Memorial Stadium at 10 a.m.
Rick S. Bender is President of the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO, representing some 400,000 rank-and-file union members in the state.
The Department of Labor and Industries Monday proposed a new regulation to help employers reduce ergonomic hazards that cripple and injure more than 50,000 Washington workers every year.
The proposed rule will protect workers from the primary cause of injury and illness at Washington workplaces, according to L&I Director Gary Moore, who unveiled the ergonomics proposal at a news conference in Seattle today. The rule is aimed at preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders ("ergonomic injuries"), such as back strains, tendinitis and carpal tunnel syndrome. The afflictions cost Washington businesses millions of dollars a year.
"Ergonomics is about working smarter and safer," Moore said. "It’s about protecting a worker’s body from unnecessary wear and tear on the job. It’s about reducing pain and increasing productivity. That’s good for workers and good for employers.
"We have the ability and the tools to stop this needless pain and suffering," Moore said. "This is the right thing to do, and now is the time to do it. Workers are entitled to protection from preventable injury. Your job shouldn’t rob you of your health."
The proposed rule will be presented for testimony at 14 public hearings in January. Moore said he wants the hearings to produce a full and open discussion of the proposal.
"While the $340 million annual price tag that goes with these injuries is enormous, we are talking about more than dollars and cents," Moore said. "These are real people – workers who are in pain, people unable to work, people with personal lives damaged by the physical demands of their jobs."
Michael Silverstein, M.D., L&I’s assistant director for workplace safety and health, said the rule resulted from discussions with business, labor, the medical community and others who care about the health of working people and the concerns of business. Public meetings held last year and comments from advisory committees helped shape the proposal.
"We drafted an ergonomics proposal that protects workers," Silverstein said. "The proposal also gives employers the support they need to successfully implement these new safety rules."
Ergonomics is the science of designing jobs, selecting tools and modifying work methods to better fit workers’ capabilities and prevent injury.
Initially, the rule would focus on larger employers (50 or more employees) in the industries that have the highest risk of ergonomic injury. They include general contractors in residential construction, roofers, nursing homes and sawmills.
Employers subject to the rule would evaluate jobs that typically involve exposure to the physical risk factors described in the rule and make changes if the exposure to any of them reaches a hazardous level. For example, repeatedly lifting heavy boxes from a conveyor onto a pallet, then reaching across the pallet to stack them poses a hazard, and the employer would have to reduce it.
Under the proposed rule, employers could quickly determine whether the rule applied to their business, and there would be flexibility for companies with ergonomics programs under way. Employees in ergonomically risky jobs would receive information on prevention. They would have opportunities to help their employers design solutions.
Moore said some employers have willingly embraced ergonomics to protect their employees from unnecessary injury. "But as we have seen with other workplace hazards, some employers will not voluntarily act to reduce them. That is why we need an ergonomics rule," he said. "The proof is in the number of workers’ compensation claims paid by L&I. Tens of thousands of injuries continue each year. That’s wrong and we have to do something about it."
The dates and locations of the hearings follow. Hearing times are 1 p.m. and 6 p.m.
Jan. 5 -- Washington State Convention Center, Room 618-620, 8th & Pike Seattle
Jan. 6 -- Howard Johnson Plaza Hotel, Orcas Room, 3105 Pine St. Everett
Jan. 10 -- Tacoma Public Library, Olympic Room, 1102 Tacoma Ave. S. Tacoma
Jan. 11 -- Red Lion Hotel at the Quay, Centennial Center, 100 Columbia St. Vancouver
Jan. 12 -- Cavanaugh’s Inn at the Park, Skyline Room, 303 W. North River Dr. Spokane
Jan. 13 -- Cavanaugh’s at Yakima Center, Ball Room, 607 E. Yakima Ave. Yakima
Jan. 14 -- L&I Building, Room S117-S118, 7273 Linderson Way S.W. Tumwater
L&I will accept oral and written comments at the public hearings. Written comments may be mailed, faxed or e-mailed until 5 p.m., Feb. 14, 2000. The fax number is 360-902-5529. (Faxed comments must be 10 or fewer pages.) The e-mail address is: ergorule@lni.wa.gov.
To mail comments, address correspondence to:
Department of Labor and Industries
WISHA Services Division, Standards Section
P.O. Box 4462
Olympia, WA 98504-4620
More information about the rule proposal and about general ergonomics can be found on L&I's Ergonomics web page.
The president of the Washington State Labor Council, the largest labor organization in the state,
Monday applauded the new "Ergonomics Rule" promulgated by the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. "For too long, the pain and suffering of unnecessary injury has been borne by workers. It’s past time for this positive step to improve the health, safety and work lives of all workers," said Council President Rick Bender.Ergonomic-related injuries are the fastest growing type of workplace injury. They include carpal tunnel syndrome, tendinitis and back sprains and involve injury to nerves, soft tissue, ligaments, joints, tendons and spinal discs. Many injured workers suffer from constant pain. Ergonomic-related injuries are caused by poorly designed workplaces or work processes. Improving the design to prevent injury is called ergonomics.
The new proposed rule has been issued by L&I after months and years of study. Labor and business representatives worked on the Department’s Ergonomics Advisory Committee which held seven meetings over several months earlier this year. The Committee proposed a series of suggestions to make the new ergonomics rule effective, including involving front-line employees in workplace design changes. The proposed rule includes a provision for employee involvement.
The state has worked with the business community for the past 10 years to win voluntary compliance with ergonomic standards. Unfortunately, a recent survey found that 60 percent of employers have failed to make any improvement to include ergonomic design in their workplaces. However, those businesses that have made changes have been rewarded with lower rates of injury.
The Washington State Labor Council does have some concern with the lengthy timetable of implementation for the proposed rule. The proposed six-year, gradual schedule is too long, and labor would like to see all workplaces covered sooner rather than later. The cost for not doing so is too high: Both in the pain and suffering of injured workers, and in the lost productivity and workers’ compensation system burden.
Bender added, "Nevertheless, we are pleased with this first positive step towards a real effort to reach the mandate of WISHA, the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act. Under WISHA the safety and health of working people should be given first priority in decisions of the state, and with this new ergonomics rule, that’s exactly what the state is doing. It’s the right thing to do."
In the coming weeks, the Council will be publicizing the hearing dates on the ergonomics standard and encouraging its affiliates to represent the interests of working families at those hearings.
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15The fevered rush to admit China to the World Trade Organization is a grave mistake. It is disgustingly hypocritical of the Clinton Administration to pledge to "put a human face on the global economy" while prostrating itself in pursuit of a trade deal with a rogue nation that decorates itself with human rights abuses as if they were medals of honor.
At a time when WTO rules protecting workers' and human rights and the environment are yet unwritten, this agreement undermines that possibility and squanders a chance for the WTO to achieve the legitimacy it and other international institutions lack among people around the world.
By continuing to persecute dissenters, to imprison labor leaders and worker activists and to export goods produced by slave labor, China shows it had no interest in playing by even the most basic rules of the world community.
The agreement reached this weekend deals away our democratic principles and most cherished values and we will fight it.
Thousands of residents across the Pacific Northwest, and recently Governor Gary Locke, have all signed a petition in support of the GCCC. A strong and binding Good Corporate Citizenship Clause would require DSIs to demonstrate a responsible record in their labor, environmental, community relations and safety performance in order to receive cost-based (i.e. reduced rate) electric power from the BPA.
Under a GCCC, corporations such as Kaiser Aluminum, which has locked out its workers, been fined for extraordinary pollution violations in Washington state and watched its rate of workplace accidents skyrocket with the use of inexperienced replacement workers, would not be eligible for BPA's cost-based electric power rates until the corporations are able to demonstrate good corporate citizenship.
Today marks the beginning of hearings at which those parties who have intervened in the rate case will supplement and clarify written presentations they have already filed. In recent months, members of the United Steelworkers of America have already participated in nine public hearings in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana at which BPA has taken testimony and comment from citizens who are not parties in the rate case.
For more information, contact the USWA's John Goodman at 360-604-8530 x7398 or Jon Youngdahl at 253-351-0511.
If you have a news item regarding unions in Washington state that you would like to have posted on WSLC OnLine, please e-mail or fax a news release to (206) 285-5805.
