America's workplace laws are failing to protect our country's workers. In industries ranging from construction and food manufacturing to restaurants, janitorial services and home health care, workers are enduring minimum wage and overtime violations, hazardous working conditions, discrimination, and retaliation for speaking up or trying to organize. They have little recourse because of their need for work, especially during the recession.
Broken Laws, Unprotected Workers is a study of its kind, exposing systematic and routine violations of employment and labor laws in core sectors of the economy. In 2008, it conducted a survey of 4,387 workers in low-wage industries in the three largest U.S. cities-Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City.
The study found that:
Workplace violations are severe and widespread in the low-wage labor market. In our sample, 26% of low-wage workers were paid less than the minimum wage in the week prior to the survey, and 76% of those who worked more than 40 hours were not paid the legally required overtime rate.
Job and employer characteristics are key to understanding workplace violations. For example, the industry and occupation of a worker's job was one of the strongest predictors of violations.
All workers - regardless of legal status, race, gender and nativity - are at risk of workplace violations, though some groups are more vulnerable than others.
More than two-thirds of our sample experienced at least one pay-related violation in the previous work week. Assuming a full-time, full-year work schedule, we estimate that workers lose an average of $2,634 annually due to workplace violations, out of total earnings of $17,616.
Fully 26 percent of workers in our sample were paid less than the legally required minimum wage in the previous work week. These minimum wage violations were not trivial in magnitude: 60 percent of workers were underpaid by more than $1 per hour.
Over a quarter of our respondents worked more than 40 hours during the previous week. Of
those, 76 percent were not paid the legally required overtime rate by their employers. Like minimum wage violations, overtime violations were of substantial magnitude. The average
worker with a violation had put in 11 hours of overtime—hours that were either underpaid or not
paid at all.
Nearly a quarter of the workers in our sample came in early and/or stayed late after their shift
during the previous work week. Of these workers, 70 percent did not receive any pay at all for the work they performed outside of their regular shift.
The large majority of our respondents (86 percent) worked enough consecutive hours to be
legally entitled to at least one meal break during the previous week. Of these workers, more than
two-thirds (69 percent) received no break at all, had their break shortened, were interrupted by
their employer, or worked during the break—all of which constitute a violation of meal break law.
In California, Illinois and New York, workers are required to receive documentation of their
earnings and deductions, regardless of whether they are paid in cash or by check. However, 57
percent of workers in our sample did not receive this mandatory documentation in the previous
work week.
ƒ Employers are generally not permitted to take deductions from a worker’s pay for damage or
loss, work-related tools or materials or transportation. But 41 percent of respondents who
reported deductions from their pay in the previous work week were subjected to these types of
illegal deductions.
Of the tipped workers in our sample, 30 percent were not paid the tipped worker minimum wage
(which in Illinois and New York is lower than the regular state minimum wage). In addition, 12 percent of tipped workers experienced tip stealing by their employer or supervisor, which is illegal.
When workers complained about their working conditions or tried to organize a union,
employers often responded by retaliating against them. Just as important, many workers never made complaints in the first place, often because they feared retaliation by their employer.
ƒ One in five workers in our sample reported that they had made a complaint to their employer or
attempted to form a union in the last year. Of those, 43 percent experienced one or more forms
of illegal retaliation from their employer or supervisor. For example, employers fired or suspended workers, threatened to call immigration authorities, or threatened to cut workers’ hours or pay.
ƒ Another 20 percent of workers reported that they did not make a complaint to their employer
during the past 12 months, even though they had experienced a serious problem such as
dangerous working conditions or not being paid the minimum wage. Half were afraid of losing
their job, 10 percent were afraid they would have their hours or wages cut, and 36 percent
thought it would not make a difference.
We found that the workers’ compensation system is not functioning for workers in the low-wage
labor market.
ƒ Of the workers in our sample who experienced a serious injury on the job, only 8 percent filed a
workers’ compensation claim. When workers told their employer about the injury, 50 percent experienced an illegal employer reaction—including firing the worker, calling immigration authorities, or instructing the worker not to file for workers’ compensation. About half of workers injured on the job had to pay their bills out-of-pocket (33 percent) or use their health insurance to cover the expenses (22 percent). Workers’ compensation insurance paid
medical expenses for only 6 percent of the injured workers in our sample.
The best inoculation against workplace violations is workers who know their rights, have full
status under the law to assert them, have access to sufficient legal resources, and do not fear
exposure or retaliation when bringing claims against their employers. Achieving this is always
a substantial challenge—but for unauthorized immigrant workers, it can be a near impossibility.
While in theory, unauthorized workers are covered by most employment and labor laws, in
practice, they are effectively disenfranchised in the workplace, by the lack of legal status, fear
of deportation, and the willingness of all too many employers to exploit their vulnerability. The
result is the high prevalence of workplace violations among unauthorized immigrants that we
document in this report. Any policy initiative to reduce workplace violations must therefore act
on two fronts:
ƒ Prioritize equal protection and equal status in national immigration reform:
Comprehensive immigration reform without close attention to labor market impacts and
workers’ rights will push more workers into the informal economy, leading to greater
insecurity for immigrant families and less economic integration. A guiding principle for
reform must be that immigrant workers receive equal protection and equal status in the
workplace.54 This means guaranteeing all immigrants the full protection and remedies under
U.S. employment and labor law. Any immigration reform that creates a second class of
workers will only worsen the problems exposed in this report, ultimately hurting all
U.S. workers.
Ensure status-blind enforcement of employment and labor laws by maintaining a
strong firewall between workplace and immigration inspections: Agencies enforcing
minimum wage, prevailing wage, overtime, and other workplace laws can and should create
a firewall between themselves and immigration authorities, so that workers do not fear
deportation when bringing a wage claim or workplace grievance. Without this protection,
unauthorized workers will be driven further underground, too fearful to claim their right to
workplace protections.
Full report here
Hat-tip Paul Bennett
Broken Laws, Unprotected Workers is a study of its kind, exposing systematic and routine violations of employment and labor laws in core sectors of the economy. In 2008, it conducted a survey of 4,387 workers in low-wage industries in the three largest U.S. cities-Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City.
The study found that:
Workplace violations are severe and widespread in the low-wage labor market. In our sample, 26% of low-wage workers were paid less than the minimum wage in the week prior to the survey, and 76% of those who worked more than 40 hours were not paid the legally required overtime rate.
Job and employer characteristics are key to understanding workplace violations. For example, the industry and occupation of a worker's job was one of the strongest predictors of violations.
All workers - regardless of legal status, race, gender and nativity - are at risk of workplace violations, though some groups are more vulnerable than others.
More than two-thirds of our sample experienced at least one pay-related violation in the previous work week. Assuming a full-time, full-year work schedule, we estimate that workers lose an average of $2,634 annually due to workplace violations, out of total earnings of $17,616.
Fully 26 percent of workers in our sample were paid less than the legally required minimum wage in the previous work week. These minimum wage violations were not trivial in magnitude: 60 percent of workers were underpaid by more than $1 per hour.
Over a quarter of our respondents worked more than 40 hours during the previous week. Of
those, 76 percent were not paid the legally required overtime rate by their employers. Like minimum wage violations, overtime violations were of substantial magnitude. The average
worker with a violation had put in 11 hours of overtime—hours that were either underpaid or not
paid at all.
Nearly a quarter of the workers in our sample came in early and/or stayed late after their shift
during the previous work week. Of these workers, 70 percent did not receive any pay at all for the work they performed outside of their regular shift.
The large majority of our respondents (86 percent) worked enough consecutive hours to be
legally entitled to at least one meal break during the previous week. Of these workers, more than
two-thirds (69 percent) received no break at all, had their break shortened, were interrupted by
their employer, or worked during the break—all of which constitute a violation of meal break law.
In California, Illinois and New York, workers are required to receive documentation of their
earnings and deductions, regardless of whether they are paid in cash or by check. However, 57
percent of workers in our sample did not receive this mandatory documentation in the previous
work week.
ƒ Employers are generally not permitted to take deductions from a worker’s pay for damage or
loss, work-related tools or materials or transportation. But 41 percent of respondents who
reported deductions from their pay in the previous work week were subjected to these types of
illegal deductions.
Of the tipped workers in our sample, 30 percent were not paid the tipped worker minimum wage
(which in Illinois and New York is lower than the regular state minimum wage). In addition, 12 percent of tipped workers experienced tip stealing by their employer or supervisor, which is illegal.
When workers complained about their working conditions or tried to organize a union,
employers often responded by retaliating against them. Just as important, many workers never made complaints in the first place, often because they feared retaliation by their employer.
ƒ One in five workers in our sample reported that they had made a complaint to their employer or
attempted to form a union in the last year. Of those, 43 percent experienced one or more forms
of illegal retaliation from their employer or supervisor. For example, employers fired or suspended workers, threatened to call immigration authorities, or threatened to cut workers’ hours or pay.
ƒ Another 20 percent of workers reported that they did not make a complaint to their employer
during the past 12 months, even though they had experienced a serious problem such as
dangerous working conditions or not being paid the minimum wage. Half were afraid of losing
their job, 10 percent were afraid they would have their hours or wages cut, and 36 percent
thought it would not make a difference.
We found that the workers’ compensation system is not functioning for workers in the low-wage
labor market.
ƒ Of the workers in our sample who experienced a serious injury on the job, only 8 percent filed a
workers’ compensation claim. When workers told their employer about the injury, 50 percent experienced an illegal employer reaction—including firing the worker, calling immigration authorities, or instructing the worker not to file for workers’ compensation. About half of workers injured on the job had to pay their bills out-of-pocket (33 percent) or use their health insurance to cover the expenses (22 percent). Workers’ compensation insurance paid
medical expenses for only 6 percent of the injured workers in our sample.
The best inoculation against workplace violations is workers who know their rights, have full
status under the law to assert them, have access to sufficient legal resources, and do not fear
exposure or retaliation when bringing claims against their employers. Achieving this is always
a substantial challenge—but for unauthorized immigrant workers, it can be a near impossibility.
While in theory, unauthorized workers are covered by most employment and labor laws, in
practice, they are effectively disenfranchised in the workplace, by the lack of legal status, fear
of deportation, and the willingness of all too many employers to exploit their vulnerability. The
result is the high prevalence of workplace violations among unauthorized immigrants that we
document in this report. Any policy initiative to reduce workplace violations must therefore act
on two fronts:
ƒ Prioritize equal protection and equal status in national immigration reform:
Comprehensive immigration reform without close attention to labor market impacts and
workers’ rights will push more workers into the informal economy, leading to greater
insecurity for immigrant families and less economic integration. A guiding principle for
reform must be that immigrant workers receive equal protection and equal status in the
workplace.54 This means guaranteeing all immigrants the full protection and remedies under
U.S. employment and labor law. Any immigration reform that creates a second class of
workers will only worsen the problems exposed in this report, ultimately hurting all
U.S. workers.
Ensure status-blind enforcement of employment and labor laws by maintaining a
strong firewall between workplace and immigration inspections: Agencies enforcing
minimum wage, prevailing wage, overtime, and other workplace laws can and should create
a firewall between themselves and immigration authorities, so that workers do not fear
deportation when bringing a wage claim or workplace grievance. Without this protection,
unauthorized workers will be driven further underground, too fearful to claim their right to
workplace protections.
Full report here
Hat-tip Paul Bennett
No comments:
Post a Comment