Author: paul

SMART with the help of Jobs to Move America (JMA), signed a landmark community benefits agreement with BYD Motors that will create pathways into the manufacturing industry for underrepresented and underserved populations in Los Angeles County.
Community Benefits Agreements are commonly associated with real estate projects, but through JMA’s work, are becoming a gold standard for communities seeking returns on their investment in new infrastructure projects. The CBA between JMA and BYD is a legally enforceable agreement that will support the creation of a robust U.S. jobs program through deep investments in pre-apprenticeship and training programs. BYD has committed to a goal of recruiting and hiring 40 percent of its workers from populations facing significant barriers to employment, such as veterans and returning citizens. In addition, populations that have historically been excluded from the manufacturing industry, such as women and African Americans will be also be recruited and placed.
The agreement comes weeks after a successful “card-check” vote at the BYD factory in Lancaster, California, at which the employees voted to recognize SMART Sheet Metal Local 105 (Los Angeles Metro Area) as their official bargaining unit. “BYD is the only electric bus manufacturer with a workforce represented by a union, meaning workers will have a seat at the negotiating table around their wages, benefits, and working conditions. Now, as the only electric bus manufacturer with a bona fide Community Benefits Agreement, community will also have a seat at the table to make sure the county’s most struggling populations have a pathway into the middle class,” said Luther Medina, President/Business Manager of SMART Local 105.
BYD, the JMA coalition, SMART International, and SMART Local 105 will jointly create training and apprenticeship programs for workers in the electric bus manufacturing and assembly industry.  Technical training will consist of classroom and hands-on training in basic skills, precision metal work, electrical wiring and assembly of complex mechanical and electrical systems, among other skills.  BYD, the JMA coalition and SMART Local 105 will collaborate to develop a customized, pre-apprenticeship program that will help ensure the success of all workers, particularly disadvantaged workers, gearing them towards preparation of employment at BYD. The training will include life skills, language and mathematical literacy, and soft skills.
BYD will collaborate with the JMA coalition and SMART Local 105 to recruit and place workers that have historically not had access to the manufacturing industry, including women, African Americans, returning citizens, and veterans. BYD has committed to a goal of at least 40 percent of the eventual workforce being composed of workers in one or more of these groups.  BYD will also collaborate with the JMA coalition and SMART Local 105 to identify and overcome barriers for workers to site access, such as providing shuttles, ride-sharing programs, or other services to overcome gaps in public transportation.
 

Mechanical and building codes are the Bible that sheet metal workers live by — they protect occupants and property in the buildings they help design, construct and maintain. At the 2017 ICB (International Certification Board) Conference, held May 1-5 in Saint Charles, Missouri, involvement by union sheet metal professionals in code interpretation, proposals, revisions and adoption was the theme of the week.
“Who wrote this?” and “This doesn’t make any sense” have been often muttered by those interpreting codes for projects across the country, and many trades men and women don’t know what they can do to lend their expertise to change it.
“Codes help anything you can drive on a job site,” said Gary Andis, ICB director of certification. “Codes have a minimum requirement, but you can raise the bar with a code change.”
Misty Guard, vice president of PMG Programs at the International Code Council; Chad Beebe, deputy executive director at the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE); Brian Rogers, regional manager, International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), also known as the Uniform Mechanical Code Officials; and Henry Green, president/CEO of the National Institute of Building Sciences, spoke during lunch-and-learn sessions aimed at educating attendees and getting them involved.
“Codes and standards are your friends,” Green said. “They facilitate the construction process, level the playing field and lead to predictable, quantifiable, focused outcomes. Don’t think of them as a barrier to getting your project built; they help you achieve it in terms of safety, performance and design intent.”
All voices and opinions can be heard, from apprentices, to experienced 20-year journey persons, to those who work in the field every day, to instructors in the training classroom.
“It’s your voice, your vote, your code,” Rogers said. “It is extremely important to the industry. Anybody who has to deal with providing safe installs— they become involved to make sure the highest level of standards are maintained.”
As professionals dealing with codes created by organizations and government entities every day, sheet metal workers are the eyes, ears, hands and minds behind the life of a code. Does it work? Does it make sense? Is it interpreted correctly? Are the codes updated to stay abreast of the rapidly changing sheet metal industry?
“Codes affect their daily jobs,” Guard said. “At the end of the day, that code will affect how they design systems, test systems, maintain systems.”
The birth and maintenance of a code depends on whether it’s a local code, investigated and updated by a local organization, or an international/national code that is updated on an often three-year cycle through a national organization. The advent and use of technology has made participating on the global stage more possible than ever, but sheet metal workers can also make a large impact in local codes.
“That’s where they’re most affected, and it’s the best way to get introduced to the process that impacts their work,” Rogers said.
It can even start smaller, Beebe added.
“I think the first thing to do is to talk about it with others,” he said. “The main goal is to collaborate. We all have different needs, but we’re all after the same goal. It’s just finding out how all that aligns together.”

With the confirmation vote looming, the AFL-CIO formally opposed GOP President Donald Trump’s two nominees to the National Labor Relations Board, management-side lawyers Marvin Kaplan of the D.C. area and William Emanuel of Los Angeles.  It says the two appear not to even believe in the board’s mission.
But the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee was expected to brush the fed’s objections aside and approve the two by party-line votes on July 19.
If confirmed by the full Senate – and its Democrats can’t filibuster their nominations any more – Kaplan, a former right-wing GOP congressional aide, and Emanuel, whose current firm engages in union-busting, would give the board a 3-2 Republican majority. That would set up potential reversals of many pro-worker Obama era NLRB rulings.
“Without a private right of action, working people must depend on the NLRB to enforce their rights. The NLRB’s decisions and actions have a significant impact on the lives of working Americans,” AFL-CIO Legislative Director Bill Samuel told senators.
“By tradition, presidents appoint a majority of members to the NLRB from their own political party, and in keeping with that tradition, President Trump” appointed Kaplan and Emanuel. “Unfortunately, after reviewing their records and statements at their confirmation hearing, the AFL-CIO concluded we must oppose these nominees and urge the Senate to reject these nominations.
“Notwithstanding the clear purpose and mission of the agency to which they have been nominated – to protect and encourage the practice of collective bargaining — nothing in the background or statements of either nominee provides any assurance that either Kaplan or Emanuel would be guided and motivated by this basic mission,” Samuel explained.
He cited Emanuel’s statement at the panel’s July 12 confirmation hearing that he’s never represented a worker or a union. And “Kaplan has never practiced labor law,” Samuel said. “His sole experience with labor law is on a policy level, drafting legislation to weaken worker protections under the National Labor Relations Act and holding hearings to criticize the NLRB during the Obama administration.
“Neither man said anything at the confirmation hearing to give working people any confidence that they would vigorously enforce the NLRA consistent with the law’s purpose of protecting workers’ right to organize and promoting collective bargaining,” Samuel said.
Both men have participated in “relentless attacks” by lawmakers and business on the agency and battled to overturn its key rules, and didn’t disavow those attacks at the hearing, Samuel noted. And nothing they said “suggests they would bring a less hostile, and more pro-NLRA view to their work, should they be confirmed.”  Both nominees also refused to abstain on cases – such those pitting arbitration against labor law – where their writings and views showed they prejudged the issues involved, he added.

An attack on the Davis Bacon Act Act, which sets prevailing wages that protect wage standard for SMART sheet metal workers across the United States, died in the House last week.

Every member deserves recognition for your calls and emails in ensuring this victory. With that in mind, me must double on our efforts in support of protecting prevailing wages by thanking those who stood with us and reminding those who voted against us that we will take notice of their efforts to undermine American workers.

Find out how your congressperson voted and send them a message at the link below: https://actionnetwork.org/letters/gosar-amendment

Story via Mark Gruenberg, Press Associates Inc.
In a multi-hour exhibition of evasion, Republican President Donald Trump’s two nominees to vacant National Labor Relations Board seats spent several hours before the Senate Labor Committee ducking, bobbing and weaving and generally avoiding answering tough labor law questions from the committee’s Democrats.
But despite that performance at their July 13 confirmation hearing, the GOP-majority panel and the GOP-run Senate will likely approve veteran management-side labor law attorney William Emanuel of Los Angeles and Marvin Kaplan, a former top GOP congressional staffer on labor issues, by party-line votes. The committee will vote on them on July 19.
Trump nominated the two to fill vacant seats on the 5-person board, which oversees and judges labor-management cases in most of the private sector and some public sector firms and enterprises. Their confirmation would give the board a 3-2 GOP majority, a prospect that the radical right and their business allies anticipate with glee – and that workers do not.
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the “track records” of Kaplan and Emanuel “raise serious concerns about their commitment to the rights and protections guaranteed by our labor laws and enforced by the NLRB.
“Kaplan has never practiced labor law, and his experience comes from crafting legislation for politicians to rig the rules against working people. Emanuel has a long record of practicing labor law on behalf of employers, most recently at one of the most infamous union-busting law firms in the country. On their face, the résumés of both appear to be in direct conflict with the mission of the NLRB.
“A fair and functioning NLRB can protect the freedom of working people to negotiate a fair return on our work so we can provide for our families. A partisan, ideologically driven NLRB can further empower corporations and CEOs to take away our freedoms at work,” he warned.
Democratic senators also were leery of the two. “There are a lot of folks who think that when you two are put on the board, the fix is in,” Sen. Christopher Murphy, D-Conn., told them.
“I haven’t found one instance where you supported the NLRB” or workers in arguing cases, in academic writing or in bargaining, top committee Democrat Patty Murray, D-Wash., told Emanuel. “In labor law, you just don’t do both” labor and management work, he replied.
Emanuel and Kaplan gave frequent answers of “I would make decisions case by case,” or “I would consult with fellow board members” or “it depends on the facts,” or all of the above to pointed questions from committee Democrats. Both pledged to enforce U.S. labor law, but went no further than that – and sometimes even backtracked.
A skeptical Murray said both men flunk. “As I look at your records, I see anti-union, anti-worker and even anti-NLRB stands,” she told them. “Do you believe the National Labor Relations Act is meant to encourage collective bargaining?” she later asked Emanuel.
He replied that encouraging collective bargaining is the goal of “the first section” of the original 1935 law, “but the 1947 statute” – the pro-business GOP-passed Taft-Hartley Act – “protects the rights of employers, protects the rights of individual employees against unions and also protects the rights of the public in disputes” between workers and bosses. “I haven’t worked to discourage the practice of collective bargaining,” Emanuel contended.
That didn’t satisfy Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. She called his big firm, Littler Mendelson of Los Angeles, “a noted union-buster.” She added that “Your entire career has been to discourage union membership. How can people trust you?” Emanuel replied he “practices traditional labor law” there.
Emanuel did pledge to Warren, however, that he would not vote on cases involving his firm – though not on other cases involving issues, such as legalizing so-called micro-unions, where he’s opposed the board academically. “You’ve prejudged those areas,” Warren replied.
Emanuel also denied the existence of one labor law issue highly visible in his hometown. Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., asked him “What would you do” on the NLRB “to cure this epidemic?” of employer misclassification of workers as independent contractors.
Independent contractors, unlike “employees” under labor law, lack worker rights – including the right to organize — and their employers can get away with not paying for their Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, unemployment insurance and workers comp.
“I’m not sure it’s an epidemic. It’s a very fact-intensive issue,” Emanuel said. One of the highest-profile instances of misclassification of workers as independent contractors involves port truckers in Los Angeles-Long Beach, whom the Teamsters are trying to organize. Califor-nia judges have repeatedly ruled that trucking firms misclassify port drivers as independents.
Kaplan was another matter. As a top GOP staffer for the Republican majorities of the House Governmental Affairs and Education and the Workforce Committees, he helped author legislation that tried to overturn NLRB rulings. Kaplan also worked on the controversial multi-employer pension law the GOP pushed through several years ago. That issue didn’t come up.
When Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., asked the two a “yes or no,” question, “Do you believe in the NLRA?” Emanuel answered “yes,” while Kaplan said “we’re bound by it.” He didn’t back it.
On the labor law issues, Kaplan claimed he ”was doing what they” – his congressional GOP bosses – “asked.” Those issues included GOP attempts to overturn NLRB rulings (a)  which removed employer-erected roadblocks to recognition elections (b) allow unions to organize parts of one enterprise and not the whole, and (c) hold both corporate headquarters and individual franchise owners are joint employers responsible for obeying or breaking labor law. In another duck, Kaplan did not say how he would rule on those issues at the NLRB.