North Carolina -- which
historically has run one of the nation's most
progressive unemployment insurance programs --
apparently will not be among states participating
in a new federal program that allows states to
use unemployment insurance money to provide
workers with up to 12 weeks paid leave after a
birth or adoption in their families.
The new program, proposed by President Clinton
earlier this year, was finalized in U.S.
Department of Labor regulations published in the
June 13 Federal Register. Click
here to read a text of the DOL regulation. The
National Association of Manufacturers and the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce are promising an all-out
court battle to block the new regulation, which
is a major expansion of the 1993 Family and
Medical Leave Act. FMLA already provides workers
with 12 weeks of unpaid leave from the jobs after
a birth or adoption in the family.
The U.S. Chamber said it's one of the most
ludicrous proposals to emerge in years to
use unemployment insurance money to pay workers
to stay home after a birth or adoption. "If
there ever was a case of robbing Peter to pay
Paul, this is it, said Patrick Cleary, NAM
vice president for human resources policy.
Under the guise of helping working
families, the Clinton Administration is raiding
the unemployment trust fund that serves as a
safety net for unemployed workers so he can score
political points during a booming economy,"
Cleary added.
NCCBI is the state affiliate of both the NAM and
the U.S. Chamber.
Business groups estimate extending paid leave for
births and adoptions would drain as much as $14
billion a year out of state unemployment
insurance trusts funds if all 50 states
participated. The U.S. Labor Department estimates
it would cost just $196 million if only the 15
states that so far have expressed interest
participate.
The 15 states that have indicated they will
participate in the program are California,
Florida and those in the industrial Northeast.
David Clegg, deputy commissioner of the N.C.
Employment Security Commission, said he had
talked informally with the seven ESC
commissioners and heard little interest from them
in participating in what's called the BAA-UI
program (for Births And Adoptions, Unemployment
Insurance). He said it was possible that a formal
vote by the full commission on the issue could
come during the commission's scheduled June 29
meeting. I haven't perceived any sentiment
that they (ESC commissioners) want to get
involved, Clegg said.
Clegg also pointed out that, even if the ESC
commission voted to participate in BAA-UI, it
would require approval from the General Assembly
before the ESC could proceed.
North Carolina has historically been at the
forefront of unemployment insurance social
issues, Clegg said. He noted that the
state, which provides the highest unemployment
insurance weekly benefit in the Southeast, has a
provision which allows workers to receive
unemployment benefits if they miss work as the
result of domestic violence. North Carolina also
has a provision which allows for the payment of
benefits if a worker has to change the shifts he
or she works and the change causes problems with
child care.
We feel that we have taken the lead
nationally and have addressed issues such as
this, Clegg said. This has not been
one of them.
Clegg said there is a concern that BAA-UI would
imperil the solvency of North Carolina's
unemployment insurance trust fund, which now
stands at $1.2 billion. That sounds like an
incredible amount of money, but with the growth
of North Carolina's labor market, if we were to
experience a recession like we had in the late
`80s and early `90s, that $1.2 billion would last
us about 18 months.
The NAM's Cleary said the idea is a radical
change in the whole concept of unemployment
insurance. "Unemployment insurance isn't for
people who have jobs; it should be reserved for
the unemployed, particularly in light of the
Department of Labor's disclosure that, even
today, some 25 states currently have insufficient
unemployment insurance reserves, he said.
"While it is our view that the Clinton
Administration's so-called `Baby UI' proposal
violates both the Federal Unemployment Tax Act
and the Family and Medical Leave Act, at the very
least it is back-door rulemaking at its
worst, Cleary concluded.
Pay Gap Narrows Between Men
and Women
Women still aren't paid as much as men who
work in the same job, but the gap is narrowing,
the U.S. Department of Labor said in a report.
Women's earnings as a percent of men's earnings
have risen from 62.5 percent in 1979 to 76.5
percent in 1999, the report said. The pay gap is
worse for black and Hispanic women whose earnings
have grown very little.
More women are working in occupations that pay
well, but even within those occupations they
still make less than men. In each of the top 10
occupations with the highest earnings for women
(chart, right), there is at least a 9.5 percent
pay gap.
However, the overall condition of the American
worker continues improving. Unemployment is less
than half of the rate in Europe. Among those with
a college degree, that rate is an astonishing
2.1%. Other statistics:
* Since 1991, the U.S. economy
has created 15.6 million new jobs. Of these, 12
million have been in such high-skilled,
higher-knowledge occupations as systems analysts,
accountants and computer engineers.
* Total compensation (salary
plus benefits) is at an all-time high. In 1997,
the average total compensation was over $40,000
per year $48,000 per year in
manufacturing.
* Over 99 percent of
manufacturers provide health care benefits to
their employees; 78 percent contribute to 401 (k)
and pension plans; 54 percent have bonus plans
and 35 percent have pay-for-performance
incentives.
* Todays workers are also
becoming todays owners. In 1975, only .28
percent (one-quarter of one percent) of those
employed nationwide were involved in some form of
employee ownership. Today, 16 million workers --
12.4 percent of civilian employment in the
U.S. are offered employee ownership plans.
* Unfortunately, the burden of
higher taxes on the average worker has created a
very real sensation of "working more for
less" in spite of their relative prosperity.
Since 1949, the FICA tax rate alone has increased
520 percent.
Four N.C.
Cities Win Grants for Airports
Federal
Department of Transportation grants totaling $7.7
million are being handed out to four North
Carolina communities to upgrade and maintain
safety at their airports, said U.S. Sen. John
Edwards (D-N.C.). Moore County will receive
$2,611,111 to improve runway safety areas, expand
the terminal building, install new lighting and
rehabilitate runways. Charlotte will receive
$2,533,425 to repair lighting and expand ramps to
handle growth in commuter traffic at
Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. the
Greensboro-High Point Airport Authority will get
$1,345,000 to relocate a road to accommodate
construction of a runway safety area at Piedmont
Triad International Airport. Onslow County will
get $1,242,439 to rehabilitate a runway at Albert
J. Ellis Airport.
Death Tax
When you get two-thirds of the House to vote for
a bill to repeal the death tax, you've done a
good job telling your side of the story. That's
what happened in June, as a bill to eliminate the
death tax roared out of the chamber. H.R. 8
passed 279-136. A whopping 65 Democrats supported
it. The bill would phase out the death tax,
reducing the rates down to zero over 10 years.
The Administration opposes the bill, arguing the
tax adds progressivity to the tax code and
doesn't affect more than a few families. But
small manufacturers and family farmers carried
the day. During debate on the bill, the
Administration, which has actually proposed
raising estate taxes, threw its support behind a
legislative fig leaf offered by Rep. Charles
Rangel (D-NY). That measure failed 222-196. With
polls showing that nearly 80 percent of Americans
support repeal, you'd think the bill would be a
slam-dunk in the Senate. Senate Democrats may try
to bottle it up to avoid an embarrassing veto.
Stay tuned.
Ergonomics
If the House has its way, OSHA won't be able to
spend a nickel to implement its proposed
ergonomics rule. The ban cleared the House
220-203 and is now part of the Labor Department
spending bill for FY 2001, which begins 10/1. The
President is threatening to veto it. And if he
gets his way, OSHA will have a green light to
issue the most expansive workplace rule ever. It
would trigger an OSHA-scripted ergonomics program
at your plant if just one employee reports a
repetitive-motion injury caused by or aggravated
by work. Injured employees would immediately
qualify for extended time off at 90 percent
disability pay. The agency wants to publish the
final rule this year -- no matter what. This
means, absent a legislative ban, the courts may
be our last resort. OSHA says it expects lawsuits
from industry -- and from organized labor, which,
believe it or not, thinks OSHA's proposal isn't
tough enough! With sound science on our side, we
expect to prevail, if not in Congress, then in
court. In the House vote, North Carolina's seven
GOP members of Congress voted to sustain the
ergonomic ban and were supported by one Democrat,
Mike McIntyre. The Senate followed through and
upheld the House position, with Sen. Jesse Helsm
(R-N.C.) supporting the NCCBI position and Sen.
John Edwards (R-N.C.) opposed.
Health Care
True to form, Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) tried to
pull a fast one in June. Not satisfied with the
progress of a House-Senate conference committee
working on a final managed health care bill, he
surprised many by springing a House-passed bill
that would expose manufacturers to employee
lawsuits. The bill, which was offered as an
amendment to unrelated legislation, was voted
down 51-48. In the end, all but four Republicans
voted to stop Kennedy. No Democrats crossed party
lines. The House-passed "patients bill of
rights" is loaded with coverage mandates and
an explicit, broad employee right to sue. Managed
care providers and employers would immediately be
vulnerable to malpractice and other health-care
suits. Though Kennedy's amendment failed, other
attempts to force a vote in the Senate could
emerge.
Foreign Sales Corporation
(FSCs)
"Thanks, but that's not good enough."
That's what the European Union (EU) is telling
U.S. trade negotiators after an offer was made to
replace a U.S. tax provision that helps American
firms of all sizes ship goods abroad. The issue
at hand is foreign sales corporations (FSCs),
which the WTO says are an illegal export subsidy.
The U.S. must now rewrite the FSC tax rules or
face retaliatory trade sanctions. Billions of
dollars are at stake. FSCs allow up to a 15
percent tax reduction on gross export income.
Smaller manufacturers stand to lose, as many
participate in what's called a "shared
FSC." The replacement regime offered by the
U.S. to the EU seeks to maintain the tax benefits
of FSCs and stay within the guidelines of WTO
trade rules. Even though the EU rejected the U.S.
proposal to replace FSCs, the U.S. apparently
will stick with it and work to see it enacted
into law before Congress adjourns. The EU would
then be forced to rechallenge the tax regime
under WTO dispute rules.
OSHA Schedules Hearing on Ergonomics
Rules
OSHA
will hold a public hearing in Atlanta on July 7
to receive comments on the economic impact of its
proposed ergonomics standard on railroads, state
and local governments and the U. S. Postal
Service. The hearing will begin at 9:00 a.m. in
Conference Rooms B&C of the Sam Nunn Atlanta
Federal Center at 61 Forsyth St., S.W., Atlanta,
Ga. 30303.
Return to main page
|