The Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers - The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)

 

I am not a member of the Catholic Church, but I respect the people who are, and who claim that their religious beliefs prohibit them from getting vaccinated against COVID-19. The Catholic Church abhors abortion, and any vaccine that uses cells from a fetus. However, the conclusion the Church has reached is that the urgency of the pandemic takes precedence over any moral question, and therefore all Catholics should take the vaccine.

I believe that everyone must make an individual choice, one that they can live with. It seems to me that efforts to create or continue the remote work of someone who cannot be vaccinated because of their sincere religious beliefs, are not that difficult to plan and implement, in many cases.

The City of New York should make accommodations for anyone with a request for a religious exemption from getting the vaccine, and stop the nonsense of how these individuals are creating an "undue hardship" for asking for telework. 

Prove it, Mayor Adams.

Betsy Combier

betsy.combier@gmail.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ Blog

Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

The Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)

The economy must serve people, not the other way around. Work is more than a way to make a living; it is a form of continuing participation in God’s creation. If the dignity of work is to be protected, then the basic rights of workers must be respected--the right to productive work, to decent and fair wages, to the organization and joining of unions, to private property, and to economic initiative.

Scripture

Genesis 2:1-3
God rests on the seventh day.

Genesis 2:15
God settles man in the garden of Eden to cultivate and care for it.

Deuteronomy 5:13-15
The Sabbath is for everyone—all are allowed to rest from their work.

Deuteronomy 14:28-29
The Lord blesses our work so that we may share its fruits with others.

Deuteronomy 24:14-15
Do not withhold wages from your workers, for their livelihood depends on them.

Sirach 34:26-27
To deprive an employee of wages is to commit murder.

Isaiah 58:3-7
To observe religious practices, but oppress your workers is false worship.

Jeremiah 22:13
Woe to him who treats his workers unjustly.

Matthew 20:1-16
All workers should be paid a just and living wage.

Mark 2:27
The Sabbath was made for people, not people for the Sabbath.

Luke 3:10-14
Practice integrity in your work.

Luke 12:13-21
One’s worth is not determined by an abundance of possessions.

James 5:1-6
Those who become rich by abusing their workers have sinned against God.
Tradition

Work should be the setting for this rich personal growth, where many aspects of life enter into play: creativity, planning for the future, developing our talents, living out our values, relating to others, giving glory to God. It follows that, in the reality of today's global society, it is essential that "we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for everyone," no matter the limited interests of business and dubious economic reasoning. We were created with a vocation to work. The goal should not be that technological progress increasingly replace human work, for this would be detrimental to humanity. Work is a necessity, part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human development and personal fulfillment. Helping the poor financially must always be a provisional solution in the face of pressing needs. The broader objective should always be to allow them a dignified life through work. (Pope Francis, On Care for Our Common Home [Laudato Si'], nos. 127-28)

Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programs, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality. I am far from proposing an irresponsible populism, but the economy can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby adding to the ranks of the excluded." (Pope Francis, The Joy of the Gospel [Evangelii Gaudium], no. 204)

I would like to remind everyone, especially governments engaged in boosting the world's economic and social assets, that the primary capital to be safeguarded and valued is man, the human person in his or her integrity: "Man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and social life." (Pope Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth [Caritas in Veritate], no. 25, quoting Second Vatican Council, The Church in the Modern World [Gaudium et Spes], no. 63)

The economic sphere is neither ethically neutral, or inherently inhuman or opposed to society. It is part and parcel of human activity and precisely because it is human, it must be structured and governed in an ethical manner. (Pope Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth [Caritas in Veritate], no. 36)

In many cases, poverty results from a violation of the dignity of human work, either because work opportunities are limited (through unemployment or underemployment), or "because a low value is put on work and the rights that flow from it, especially the right to a just wage and to the personal security of the worker and his or her family." (Pope Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth [Caritas in Veritate], no. 63)

The obligation to earn one's bread by the sweat of one's brow also presumes the right to do so. A society in which this right is systematically denied, in which economic policies do not allow workers to reach satisfactory levels of employment, cannot be justified from an ethical point of view, nor can that society attain social peace. (St. John Paul II, The Hundredth Year [Centesimus Annus], no. 43)

All people have the right to economic initiative, to productive work, to just wages and benefits, to decent working conditions, as well as to organize and join unions or other associations. (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, A Catholic Framework for Economic Life, no. 5)

Work is, as has been said, an obligation, that is to say, a duty, on the part of man. . . Man must work, both because the Creator has commanded it and because of his own humanity, which requires work in order to be maintained and developed. Man must work out of regard for others, especially his own family, but also for the society he belongs to, the country of which he is a child, and the whole human family of which he is a member, since he is the heir to the work of generations and at the same time a sharer in building the future of those who will come after him in the succession of history. (St. John Paul II, On Human Work [Laborem Exercens], no. 16)

Work is a good thing for man-a good thing for his humanity-because through work man not only transforms nature, adapting it to his own needs, but he also achieves fulfillment as a human being and indeed, in a sense, becomes "more a human being.” (St. John Paul II, On Human Work [Laborem Exercens], no. 9)

All these rights, together with the need for the workers themselves to secure them, give rise to yet another right: the right of association, that is to form associations for the purpose of defending the vital interests of those employed in the various professions. These associations are called labor or trade unions. (St. John Paul II, On Human Work [Laborem Exercens], no. 20)

As the Church solemnly reaffirmed in the recent Council, "the beginning, the subject and the goal of all social institutions is and must be the human person." All people have the right to work, to a chance to develop their qualities and their personalities in the exercise of their professions, to equitable remuneration which will enable them and their families "to lead a worthy life on the material, social, cultural and spiritual level" and to assistance in case of need arising from sickness or age. (Blessed Paul VI, A Call to Action [Octogesima Adveniens], no. 14)

Federal Appeals Court Temporarily Blocks NYC Teacher Vaccine Mandate Pending a Review By Three-Member Panel

 

The mandate represents “a rational policy decision” on how to best protect kids from the
virus, said judge.

THIS JUST IN:

Judge blocks Biden’s vaccine requirement for health workers in 10 states

Associated Press, November 30, 2021

UPDATE: Early Friday evening, a federal appeals court granted a temporary injunction staying the enforcement of the mandate requiring all city public-school employees to be vaccinated against the coronavirus (COVID-19) by Monday.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the injunction is in place only until a three-member panel of the court can review an appeal of a Brooklyn federal court judge’s ruling on Thursday, which upheld the mandate.

A group of teachers had filed a suit two weeks ago seeking to block the vaccine requirement. The teachers are appealing the ruling by Judge Brian M. Cogan.

The review, which is on an expedited basis, could possibly occur over the weekend.

“We’re confident our vaccine mandate will continue to be upheld once all the facts have been presented because that is the level of protection our students and staff deserve,” said a Department of Education (DOE) spokeswoman. “Our current vax-or-test mandate remains in effect and we’re seeking speedy resolution by the Circuit Court next week. Over 82 percent of DOE employees have been vaccinated and we continue to urge all employees to get their shot by September 27.”

In twist, fed appeals court grants temporary block on NYC teacher vaccine mandate pending review

Updated: Sep. 25, 2021, 8:43 a.m. | Published: Sep. 24, 2021, 2:24 p.m.STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. — 

By Frank Donnelly | fdonnelly@siadvance.com

A federal judge has rejected a bid by hundreds of teachers to halt enforcement of the city’s controversial mandate which requires all public-school employees to be vaccinated against the coronavirus (COVID-19) by Monday or face losing their job.

Brooklyn federal court Judge Brian M. Cogan shot down the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction.

The judge said he wasn’t unsympathetic to the plaintiffs’ predicament, but the mandate is reasonable.

“In denying plaintiffs’ motion, this court is not impugning either the integrity or validity of the plaintiffs’ concerns,” wrote Cogan in a decision handed down Thursday. “No one will get the last laugh if it turns out that 10 or 20 years from now, plaintiffs’ fear of long-term deleterious effects from the vaccination proves to be well-founded. … However, the court cannot reasonably conclude that the (city’s) arguments in favor of vaccination were not made in good faith, or that they are irrational.

“Substantive due process, therefore, requires the court to afford deference to (the city’s) weighing of the competing concerns.”

The plaintiffs are challenging the ruling.

“My partner, Louis Gelormino, and myself respect the court’s decision but obviously disagree with it,” said Mark J. Fonte, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. “With the deadline looming, we are moving expeditiously to appeal this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals and plan to file with the court today. We are cognizant of the anxiety of our clients and are hoping to prevail on appeal.”

Two weeks ago, the plaintiffs had filed the suit against the city, Department of Education (DOE), and officials seeking class-action status, along with injunctive relief and compensatory damages.

The vaccine mandate, they contend, is arbitrary and capricious and interferes with their right to pursue their chosen profession.

The suit also cited concerns about the potential long-term effects of a newly-developed vaccine for which long-term data is not available.

In addition, the plaintiffs maintain the mandate violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Other municipal union employees may opt-out of the vaccine through weekly testing; however, public-school employees don’t have that recourse.

They can, however, apply for a religious or medical exemption.

The mandate requires every city DOE employee — including teachers, principals, custodians and central office staff — to receive at least one dose of the vaccine by Monday.

SEPARATE STATE COURT LAWSUIT



On Wednesday, a Manhattan state Supreme Court justice, responding to a separate lawsuit, lifted a temporary injunction which had blocked the enforcement of the mandate.



Cogan, likewise, denied a temporary injunction, although his ruling does not nullify the federal suit.



The decision allows the enforcement of the mandate, for now, until the suit itself is decided.



“Yet again, another court has cleared the way for a vaccine mandate at the DOE which is in the best interest of children and department employees,” said Nick Paolucci, director of public affairs and press secretary for the city Law Department. “The court has again recognized the authority of the Health Department to implement a mandate that is firmly grounded in science and the expertise of public health officials from across the nation.”



In his ruling, Cogan acknowledged the mandate may ultimately disqualify the plaintiffs from their jobs in city public schools.



However, it wouldn’t preclude them from working elsewhere, such as in private schools in the city or public schools outside the five boroughs.



“Plaintiffs are not being denied their fundamental right to pursue their profession,” he wrote.



Requiring workers to be inoculated by a vaccine approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration does not impinge on their rights, said the judge.

The mandate represents “a rational policy decision” on how to best protect kids during a global pandemic, Cogan said.



“Although plaintiffs argue that there are other proven means of preventing the spread of COVID-19 in schools, among them frequent testing and mask-wearing, it is not shocking for the city to conclude that vaccination is the best way to do so, particularly at a time when viral transmission rates are high,” wrote the judge.



In support, the city had cited the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendation that teachers and staff be vaccinated “as soon as possible,” Cogan said.



RATIONAL BASIS



The judge also said there was a rational basis for the difference between the mandate requirements for public school employees and other city workers.



While allowing opt-out testing for other workers might be appropriate, the stiffer vaccine mandate for teachers and school employees is “not unreasonable,” said the judge.



School workers are in close contact indoors for “long hours” each day with children under age 12 who are not eligible to be vaccinated, he said.



Social distancing, mask-wearing and testing may be sufficient to protect other municipal workers, particularly since a number of them would be inoculated, said the judge.

Schools, however, are another story.

“It is not irrational to conclude that such measures would not adequately protect unvaccinated children in a school setting, especially as some of these children will have preexisting conditions that make them especially vulnerable,” wrote Cogan.



In addition, if the vaccine reduces the risk of infection, as the city contends, the mandate would minimize teacher and student absences due to contraction of the virus or quarantine, the judge said.

Judicial Watch Files a Lawsuit To Protect The Right of Teacher Jeanne Hedgepeth To Speak Out on Facebook Criticizing Chicago Riots

Palatine High School | Township High School District 211

This case will provide guidelines for teachers on speaking out as private citizens on matters of public concern. Kudos to Judicial Watch! 

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, Advocatz.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Judicial Watch Files Civil Rights Lawsuit for High School Teacher Fired for Facebook Posts Criticizing Chicago Riots, Looting, and Violence in the Aftermath of George Floyd Killing

Press Release

Judicial Watch announced today that it has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Palatine, Illinois tenured high school teacher Jeanne Hedgepeth, who was fired by the suburban-Chicago school district where she had worked for 20 years after posting comments on Facebook criticizing the riots, violence, and shootings in Chicago in the aftermath of the May 25, 2020, killing of George Floyd. Hedgepeth made the posts on her personal Facebook page while vacationing after the end of the school year, just as some of the most severe violence was occurring. In her posts, Hedgepeth recommended studying Thomas Sowell, whom she described as a “treasure” and a “truth seeker,” and praised political commentator and activist Candice Owens and talk show host Larry Elder. She alleges that the firing violated her First Amendment rights.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seeks damages from the school district, Township High School District 211, and district board members and officials who participated directly in the firing (Hedgepeth v. Britton et al. (Case No. 1:21-cv-03890)).

The lawsuit explains:

In late May and early June 2020, Hedgepeth was vacationing in Florida after the end of the 2019-20 school year when violent street protests, rioting, looting, and shootings erupted in Chicago and many other U.S. cities in the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd on May 25, 2020 by Minneapolis police officers. In Chicago alone, 82 persons were shot, 19 fatally, over the May 30-31, 2020 weekend. On May 31, 2020, which the Chicago SunTimes described as the most violent day Chicago had seen in 60 years, Mayor Lori Lightfoot asked Governor J.B. Pritzker to deploy the Illinois National Guard in the city.

That same day, May 31, 2020, Hedgepeth posted the following photos of herself on the beach in Florida along with the comment, “I don’t want to go home tomorrow. Now that the civil war has begun I want to move.”

An individual responded, “Follow your gut! Move!!!!!!!!!” Hedgepeth answered, “I need a gun and training.” The individual replied, “me too!”

Another individual posted a meme that same day suggesting that the riots could be stopped with a septic tank truck and a pressure cannon. Hedgepeth reposted the meme, obviously in jest, adding, “You think this would work?”

On or about June 1, 2020, Hedgepeth posted the following comment on Facebook in the course of an exchange of posts begun the previous day with a third individual:

I am about facts, truth seeking and love. I will speak on any topic I choose because I live in a free country. I find the term “white privilege” as racist as the “N” word. You have not walked in my shoes either so do not make assumptions about me and my so called privilege. You think America is racist? Then you have been hoodwinked by the white liberal establishment and race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Travel the world and go see that every nation has racism and some more than others but few make efforts such as we do to mitigate or eliminate it. I have lived and seen. The people I am informed by about the black experience in America are actually some of the smartest people in America. And it so happens they are black. I highly recommend studying Thomas Sowell, who is now retired and in his 80’s. A treasure. A truth seeker. [D]oes REAL research and analysis. Candice Owens is one of the smartest and most courageous women in America and Larry Elders speaks the truth with a great sense of humor and FACTS not feelings. They are who I listen to when it comes to facts about the black experience in America. Don’t you think there is a deeper problem than racism when 50% of murders in America are committed by 13% of the population? Do you think there might be a subtle genocide of black babies when most planned parenthoods are put in poor neighborhoods and that 30% of abortions are black babies. [B]lack women only make up 7% of the U.S. population. The greatest power you have is what you believe about yourself. [W]hat have Democrats, mainstream media and intellectuals in ivory towers been telling the black community to believe about themselves for forty years? Wake up and stop believing them, then things will change.

All of Hedgepeth’s posts were on her personal Facebook page. None of Hedgepeth’s posts identified her as a teacher or a District 211 employee, nor did Hedgepeth post them in her capacity as a teacher or a District 211 employee. None of the persons with whom Hedgepeth exchanged Facebook posts were current District 211 or Palatine High School teachers, staff, or students.

Upon returning from her vacation in early June 2020, Hedgepeth learned that the school district was investigating her for her Facebook posts. She was fired by the school board six weeks later, on July 16, 2020, by a vote of 5-2. In her defense, Hedgepeth noted that the posts were on her personal Facebook page and were made “out of school.” She also expressly invoked her First Amendment rights.

“The school district took what could have been a teachable moment about respecting diversity of viewpoints and turned it into a clear civil rights violation,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Jeanne Hedgepeth had every right to express herself freely and openly on her personal Facebook page, outside of school, about matters of undeniable public concern. Firing her for opposing lawlessness, speaking out about gun rights, praising black conservatives, and criticizing Democrats and tenets of Critical Racial Theory violated the First Amendment, and the school district and district officials who did so will be held accountable.”

Judicial Watch is being assisted by attorney Christine Svenson of Palatine, Illinois.

See also:

Former Palatine High School Teacher Files Federal Lawsuit

Ex-Palatine H.S. teacher fired for anti-riot, anti-BLM Facebook posts files First Amendment suit vs District 211, school board members

By Jonathan Bilyk, July 21, 2021

A former Palatine High School teacher who was fired in the summer of 2020 over her Facebook posts critical of riots and looting that erupted in Chicago amid protests led by the Black Lives Matter movement, has sued the Palatine school district that formerly employed her, saying the district trampled on her First Amendment speech rights.

Named defendants include Township High School District 211, and individual defendants including those sitting on the District 211 school board in July 2020 and the district’s superintendent and human resources director.

The suit comes as Hedgepeth also continues to pursue a separate defamation lawsuit in Cook County court against current District 211 board member and Black Lives Matter activist Tim McGowan.

Both cases center around Hedgepeth’s termination in July 2020 from the teaching job she had held at Palatine High School for 20 years.

According to the new federal complaint, Hedgepeth was vacationing in Florida in late May 2020 when rioters and looters inflicted hundreds of millions of dollars in damage on Chicago’s central business district and other major corridors in the city. The riots broke out amid widespread protests against racism, triggered by the death of George Floyd at the hands of police in Minneapolis earlier that month.

According to the complaint, Hedgepeth then posted photos, memes and other comments critical of the looting and rioting.

For instance, she posted photos of herself on a beach in Florida, captioned: “I don’t want to go home tomorrow. Now that the civil war has begun I want to move.”

She also reposted a meme, created by someone else, saying authorities seeking to stop rioters should “mobilize the septic trucks, put a pressure cannon on em… hose em down… the end.” Hedgepeth added the comment: “You think this would work?”

In June, Hedgepeth added more in-depth comments on Facebook, as part of a discussion.

Those said, in part:

“I find the term ‘white privilege’ as racist as the ‘N’ word. You have not walked in my shoes either so do not make assumptions about me and my so-called privilege. You think America is racist? Then you have been hoodwinked by the white liberal establishment and race-baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Travel the world and go see that every nation has racism and some more than others but few make efforts such as we do to mitigate or eliminate it.”

She added: “Don’t you think there is a deeper problem than racism when 50% of murders in America are committed by 13% of the population? Do you think there might be a subtle genocide of black babies when most planned parenthoods are put in poor neighborhoods and that 30% of abortions are black babies. [B]lack women only make up 7% of the U.S. population. The greatest power you have is what you believe about yourself. [W]hat have Democrats, mainstream media and intellectuals in ivory towers been telling the black community to believe about themselves for forty years? Wake up and stop believing them, then things will change.”

The complaint noted all of Hedgepeth’s comments were on her personal Facebook page, and she did not identify herself as a teacher or employee of Palatine High School District 211. Further, none of the people she engaged with in those posts were District 211 students or employees.

However, the complaint said Hedgepeth was immediately placed under investigation by the school district, and was fired by the school board about one month later, with the school board citing her Facebook posts as justification.

In her defamation lawsuit against McGowan, Hedgepeth accused McGowan of falsely smearing her as a racist, and then orchestrating a campaign against her that resulted in her termination. McGowan had organized “anti-racism” protests in Palatine in the summer of 2020 under the banner of BLM.

He posted a video to Facebook in which he laid out accusations of racism against Hedgepeth.

McGowan was elected to the District 211 school board in November 2020, thanks to support from the District 211 teachers union.

A Cook County judge refused McGowan’s attempt to dismiss Hedgepeth’s lawsuit, and the case remains pending.

In her federal lawsuit against the District 211 board, Hedgepeth asserts the board’s decision to fire her over personal Facebook posts amounts to a violation of her First Amendment free speech rights.

Hedgepeth’s “protected speech was a substantial or motivating factor in (District 211’s) decision to terminate Plaintiff’s employment, and, but for Plaintiff’s protected speech, Defendants would not have terminated Plaintiff’s employment,” Hedgepeth’s lawsuit asserts.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified compensatory damages from District 2011 and punitive damages against District 211 human resources director James A. Britton; District 211 school board members Kimberly Cavill, Anna Klimkowicz, Robert J. Lefevre Jr., Edward M. Yung and Steven Rosenblum; and District 211 Superintendent Lisa A. Small.

Hedgepeth is represented in the federal action by attorneys Paul J. Orfanedes, of Judicial Watch, of Washington, D.C., and Christine Svenson, of Svenson Law Offices, of Palatine.

She is represented in the Cook County defamation case by attorney Joel F. Handler, of the Handler Law Group, of Chicago.

Whistleblowers Need To Be Protected

If you are an employee in NYC I think you may have heard about a co-worker who sees another employee do something abusive, harassing, or wholly improper and the observer reports what happened, only to be discontinued or fired for making that report?

Whistleblowers need to have a say and be heard in the workplace.

Note: While I have posted the Outten and Golden LLP blog post below, I do not work for the lawfirm.

Betsy Combier
Editor, ADVOCATZ.com
Editor, ADVOCATZ blog
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Congress Proposes Vital Protections for Whistleblowers as Workplaces Reopen

by Tammy Marzigliano and Brittany Arnold, Employment Law Blog of Outten and Golden, Apr 7, 2021 | Retaliation & Whistleblowing |

COVID-19 has devastated countless individuals and businesses, both economically and personally. Local, state, and federal agencies have hastily authorized economic relief programs to help ease the impact on families, communities, and the national economy. To address community needs, many agencies quickly distributed funds with minimal oversight.

Although this helped expedite relief payments, it also opened the door for improper distribution of these funds. To prevent fraud and misuse of federal benefits, members of Congress have introduced proposed legislation called the Coronavirus Oversight and Recovery Ethics (CORE) Act, which also includes critical whistleblower protection provisions.

Implementing Federal Oversight and Expanding Whistleblower Protection

Many small businesses need federal grants and loans to continue operations and reopen workplaces successfully. Some will use Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act programs, like the $500 billion corporate bailout fund and the Paycheck Protection Program. As the pandemic continues, Congress may pass additional legislation enabling other loan and grant programs to help avoid economic disaster for businesses and individuals.

To reduce profiteering and ensure that CARES Act benefits and other federal aid funds are fairly and lawfully distributed, the CORE Act proposes a multi-faceted approach, tackling potential fraud from many angles, that:

• Empowers and funds the Office of Government Ethics to take steps to reduce conflicts of interest in the selection or hiring of contractors or advisors and the distribution of relief grants and loans, including prohibiting receipt of bailout funds by companies closely connected to government officials.
• Protects Inspectors General from retaliation by requiring them to be removed only for cause, requiring Congress to be notified of their removal, and providing Inspector Generals a means to bring suit to challenge the firing.
• Strengthens the authority of the Congressional Oversight Commission by expanding their jurisdiction to all COVID-19 relief funding and providing them with subpoena authority, as well as the oversight entities and Executive Branch accountability requirements of the CARES Act, including requiring a weekly reporting of instances in which they were unreasonably denied information from the executive branch.
• Restricts lobbying and political spending by bailout recipient companies by requiring monthly reporting to prevent “quid pro quo” handouts.
• Improves transparency about the disbursal of bailout funding by requiring public reporting detailing the use of the funds, the recipients, employee compensation data – including bonuses, and whether the company has been charged with violations of federal law.
• Establishes strong whistleblower protections for government employees, government contractors, and private-sector workers who witness and report waste, fraud, or abuse or are victims of misconduct.
• Creates individual causes of action for individuals harmed by the prohibited misconduct, allowing private lawsuits, and establishes personal responsibility for senior executives for their corporate wrongdoing.

Fleshing Out Employee Whistleblower Protections

Several laws are already in effect to protect employees who blow the whistle on misuse or theft of federal funds during the coronavirus pandemic. The federal False Claims Act (FCA), for example, protects and even provides incentives for workers who report employers misusing, misappropriating, or improperly obtaining government funds. Properly making a claim under the FCA, however, can be complicated, and the law contains numerous restrictions and exclusions limiting who can file a suit.

The CORE Act would protect most workers who reasonably believe their employer is misusing economic aid related to COVID-19, allowing them to report alleged improprieties without fear of reprisal or retaliation. It would also protect workers from retaliation after reporting conduct they “reasonably believe[] would require the employee to violate th[e] Act . . . with respect to any Coronavirus pandemic-related program, project, or activity.” The proposed Act leaves it to the Secretary of Labor to establish the rules and procedures for administrative investigation and hearings, appeals, and relief, indicating that – as much as possible, it should mirror the Taxpayer First Act.  As more organizations apply for and receive these vital federal benefits and use them to reopen, returning workers will play a critical role in preventing employers’ unscrupulous behavior.

Employees who know of or suspect their employers of fraud or who have concerns about the safety of their workplace should consult an attorney immediately. Numerous state and federal statutes protect whistleblowers, but every situation is unique. An experienced attorney – like the lawyers in Outten & Golden’s Whistleblower-Retaliation Practice Group – can help you chart the best course of action for your situation.

Section 740 - Retaliatory personnel action by employers; prohibition

Whistleblower Claims on the Horizon Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

1. Proskauer Rose LLPSteven J. PearlmanApril 20, 2020

   The NLRB held that such a policy restricted the employee’s right to publicly complain about workplace issues of common concern to all employees, and therefore, the employee was “discharged for engaging in protected concerted union activity in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3).”New York Whistleblower StatutesNew York has two whistleblower statutes—New York Labor Law § 740 and New York Labor Law § 741—that may be relevant to claims arising from COVID-19, but differ from one another in significant respects, as discussed below. As we have previously reported, the New York whistleblower statute, New York Labor Law § 740, protects employees from retaliation for reporting a violation of the law that “creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety.”

2. Can I be Fired for Refusing to Report to Work During the Coronavirus Pandemic?

   Sanford Heisler Kimpel LLPAndrew MelzerMarch 28, 2020

   For example, New York State law protects employees who “object to, or refuse to participate in any activity, policy, or practice” “that is in violation of law, rule, or regulation which violation creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety.” NY Labor Law § 740(2). This would seem to include refusals to violate official stay-at-home or social distancing orders.

3. Port Authority Not Subject to Worker-Friendly New Jersey Whistleblower Law, State Court Rules

   Jackson Lewis P.C.Richard CinoMarch 29, 2017

   Sullivan maintained he was pushed out because, in 2011, he reported to his superior, the Chief and Director of Public Safety, that he confronted an officer who had obtained photographed copies of an examination to become a sergeant in the Port Authority’s police department. In August 2012, Sullivan served a notice of claim on the Port Authority, alleging violations of the New York Whistleblower Law (NYWL), N.Y. Lab. Law § 740, and the New York Civil Service Law. N.Y. Civ. Serv. Law § 75(b). On May 15, 2013, he filed a complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Hudson County, alleging retaliation and civil conspiracy in violation of CEPA, and sought reinstatement and damages.

4. Healthcare Litigation - February 2017

   Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLPBarry LandsbergFebruary 23, 2017

   Id., § 1-502, 1-505(5), (6). Other states with similar healthcare employee whistleblower statues that authorize money damages in actions brought by an employee physician against a hospital include (but are not necessarily limited to): Illinois (210 ILCS 86/35, 86/40); New York (N.Y. Labor Law §§ 740, 741); and Texas (Health & Safety Code § 161.134).

5. Health Update - February 2017

   Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLPKinda SerafiFebruary 22, 2017

   Id., § 1-502, 1-505(5), (6). Other states with similar healthcare employee whistleblower statues that authorize money damages in actions brought by an employee physician against a hospital include (but are not necessarily limited to): Illinois (210 ILCS 86/35, 86/40); New York (N.Y. Labor Law §§ 740, 741); and Texas (Health & Safety Code § 161.134).

6. Employees Need Not Identify Specific Law, Rule or Regulation Violation in Pleading Retaliation Claim Under New York’s Whistleblower Statute

   Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.David KatzMay 29, 2014

   Earlier this month, in Webb-Weber v. Community Action for Human Services, Inc., New York’s highest court overruled several appellate court cases in holding that an employee need not identify the specific law, rule or regulation allegedly violated by his or her employer in pleading a retaliation claim under New York’s whistleblower statute. Ms. Webb-Weber served as COO of Community Action, a not-for-profit organization providing social services to the mentally and physically disabled and subject to oversight by the State. Plaintiff filed suit against Community Action claiming that it terminated her in violation of New York Labor Law § 740, the “whistleblower statute,” for registering complaints with public agencies concerning certain policies and practices of Community Action. Specifically, according to her complaint, Ms. Webb-Weber alerted Community Action to issues she claimed endangered the welfare and safety of patients, including falsification of patient medication and treatment records, inadequate fire safety, mistreatment of residents and deficiencies in patient care and in the facility itself.

7. New York’s Court of Appeals Makes it Easier to Plead Whistleblower Law Claims

   Hodgson Russ LLPJoseph BrownMay 23, 2014

   The Court of Appeals’ decision in Webb-Weber v. Community Action for Human Services, Inc. likely means that more whistleblower claims will be able to survive the motion to dismiss stage and can proceed to the discovery stage, which can be expensive and time consuming. By way of background, New York Labor Law § 740, commonly referred to as the “whistleblower statute,” prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who “discloses or threatens to disclose to a supervisor or public body an activity, policy, or practice of the employer that is in violation of the law, rule or regulation” that either “creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety, or…constitutes health care fraud.” To prevail under this law — which applies to both private and public employers — a whistleblower must ultimately establish an act

Trending Now: Attempts To End Employment-at-Will

 

For many years there has been an effort to undo unionization and to give employers the right to fire employees whenever they want, for any reason.

Today, the trend is against this power imbalance between employer-employee, and give the workers powers of their own. 

We are all for this movement.

Betsy Combier
Editor, ADVOCATZ.com
Editor, ADVOCATZ blog
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

The Movement to End At-Will Employment
Is Getting Serious

Posted on April 8, 2021 by Jeff Schuhrke

On March 31, a group of worker centers, unions, community groups and policy organizations in Illinois officially formed a new coalition, Stable Jobs Now, that aims to dramatically shift the power balance between workers and bosses by eliminating ?“at-will” employment?—?the practice that allows employers to fire their employees on a whim.

In most of the rest of the world, workers are protected by the ?“just cause” principle, which says they can only be terminated for legitimate, documented reasons connected to poor job performance. But in the United States, the at-will doctrine allows bosses to arbitrarily fire employees for any reason or no reason whatsoever, with the burden of proving it was an unlawful dismissal placed on the worker. 

“It’s like we’re disposable to them,” said Estrella Hernandez, who was abruptly fired from her stitching job at a Chicago-area factory in December 2020. ?“I got to work one morning at 4am and the supervisor told me I couldn’t be there, that they had let me go the day before… I asked the reason and they said they didn’t have to tell me and told me to just go home.”

Hernandez believes she was fired as illegal retaliation for raising concerns about the inability to practice social distancing in her cramped work area, but she can’t prove it, especially since her employer never provided a reason for her dismissal. 

Predominantly Black and Latino workers in Chicago’s low-wage jobs routinely face illegal retaliation for reporting workplace injustices like unsafe conditions, wage theft, injuries, sexual harassment and discrimination. The at-will doctrine makes it practically impossible for employees to prove they were fired as retaliation for speaking up against illegal abuses.

A new study published by Raise the Floor Alliance, a group of Chicago worker centers, and the National Employment Law Project (NELP) found that 37percent of Illinois workers have been fired for an unfair reason and 42 percent have been terminated for no reason at all, with Black and Latino workers the most likely to be fired. A third of those who faced unfair discharge say it was over raising concerns about problems on the job.

“While conditions were bad for working people well before the pandemic, this past year has highlighted and exacerbated these conditions,” said Sophia Zaman, executive director of Raise the Floor Alliance.

The Stable Jobs Now coalition is pushing for passage of the Secure Jobs Act, a bill recently introduced in both chambers of the Illinois General Assembly. The legislation would make Illinois the second state to adopt a just cause system. Only Montana currently restricts at-will employment, a law dating back to 1987.

Among other measures, the Secure Jobs Act would lay out valid reasons for termination, grant workers a fair chance to improve their job performance before being fired, prohibit ?“constructive discharge” where employers pressure workers into resigning by creating a hostile work environment, outlaw ?“Do Not Hire” lists (a practice prevalent in the temp industry), and allow workers to accrue severance pay that employers would have to disburse upon termination. The law would be enforced by the Illinois Department of Employment Security, but would also permit fired workers to sue their employers under a private right of action.

“At-will employment has been a longstanding problem in the state and at-will termination has long endangered the stability of our communities,” said State Rep. Carol Ammons, the Secure Jobs Act’s chief sponsor in the Illinois House of Representatives. Ammons previously spearheaded a successful legislative effort to enshrine more rights for temp workers in Illinois. 

The new campaign in Illinois is part of a budding national movement to end the at-will employment system. In the past two years, Philadelphia and New York City have both enacted just cause bills covering parking lot attendants and fast-food workers, respectively. 

“This cries out for a signature federal bill, however long it takes to pass,” said Shaun Richman, an In These Times contributor and advocate for a national just cause rule. ?“In the absence of that, you’ve got these sort of rebel cities and blue states that are introducing their own bills as signal efforts.”

“This movement is still at an early stage, perhaps where the Fight for $15 or the paid sick days movements were a decade ago, which is why the work being done here in Illinois is so important and exciting,” explained NELP senior researcher and policy analyst Irene Tung.

Proposals to enact just cause laws are widely popular, with a recent pollfinding that 67 percent of likely voters support the idea.

“At-will isn’t a law anyone voted for, it was just made up by judges in the 19thcentury,” Richman said. ?“Let’s actually have a vote on this. Let’s put this to the people.”

Traditionally, U.S. employers only have to follow just cause rules in workplaces governed by union contracts, but only 11 percent of the national workforce is currently unionized. Several unions have joined the Stable Jobs Now coalition, including the Chicago Teachers Union, SEIU Healthcare, SEIU Local 73, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 308, Cook County College Teachers Union, and the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America.

Coalition organizers say they are also in communication with the Illinois AFL-CIO. The state labor federation supported a similar wrongful discharge bill in 2017, but so far has not endorsed the Secure Jobs Act and did not respond to In These Times’ requests for comment. 

“The American labor movement has this weird, total exception to the rule that we base this right in collective bargaining,” Richman said. ?“It’s time to get over that. This really should just be a law. It sucks up so much time in collective bargaining. Also, workers know they will be fired for organizing a union. Let’s make it a law that you can’t be fired unless it’s for a good reason, and then we’ll get more unions.”

Importantly, the Secure Jobs Act includes a provision that would restrict bosses from using data gathered through electronic monitoring to make decisions around discipline or dismissal, instead limiting such decisions only to human-based information. The new study by NELP and Raise the Floor Alliance found that 52 percent of Illinois workers are observed, recorded, or tracked at work through various forms of surveillance technology.

Delivery driver Jesus Ruelas told In These Times that he was fired by Amazon last year partly because he had a low score on Mentor, an app he said the company uses to monitor ?“how fast we’re driving, if we’re reversing, how fast we’re turning, how hard we’re braking, and whether we’re putting a seatbelt on.”

Amazon drivers nationwide complain that Mentor often provides glitchy, inaccurate, or misleading data that doesn’t take real-world conditions into account?—?leading to unfair discipline and discharge. 

“The app just records what you do, it’s not advanced enough to know if you’re doing it for a reason. If you brake on a slick road, it records that as a negative thing,” Ruelas said. ?“Amazon will let you go for anything they can think of.”

The proposed legislation is certain to face opposition from employer groups, but since 2019, the Illinois General Assembly has managed to pass a host of progressive reforms, including a $15-an-hour minimum wage, legalization of recreational marijuana and abolition of cash bail.

“At its core, this is a racial justice and economic justice issue that can no longer be ignored,” said State Sen. Celina Villanueva, the bill’s chief sponsor in the Illinois Senate. ?“We have to catch up with the rest of the world and end this perverse and broken system that seeks to subjugate workers.” 

This blog originally appeared at In These Times on April 6, 2021. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Jeff Schuhrke has been a Working In These Times contributor since 2013. He has a Ph.D. in History from the University of Illinois at Chicago and a Master’s in Labor Studies from UMass Amherst.