Tag: Labor Unions

President Biden Signs Executive Order Directing Agencies to Prioritize Pro-Union and Union Neutrality Policies

On September 6, 2024, President Biden signed an Executive Order on Investing in America and Investing in American Workers (the “Order”), that, among other things, aims to provide “incentives for federally assisted projects with high labor standards – including collective bargaining agreements, project labor agreements, and certain community benefits agreements.” Specifically, the Order directs federal agencies to prioritize projects that provide “high labor standards” for “Federal financial assistance,” which is defined as “funds obtained from or borrowed on the credit of the Federal Government pursuant to grants (whether formula or discretionary), loans, or rebates, or projects undertaken pursuant to any Federal program involving such grants, loans, or rebates.”

The Order expressly instructs agencies to prioritize projects that “provide a clear plan for efficient project delivery by promoting positive labor-management relations.” This includes project labor agreements, collective bargaining agreements, community benefits agreements, and other “agreements designed to facilitate first collective bargaining agreements, voluntary union recognition, and neutrality by the employer with respect to union organizing.”

In addition, the Order directs agencies to prioritize projects that: (i) “enhance worker productivity by promoting family-sustaining wages”; (ii) supply particular benefits, including paid leave (e.g., paid sick, family, and medical leave), healthcare benefits, retirement benefits, and child, dependent, and elder care; (iii) enact policies designed to combat discrimination that impacts workers from underserved communities; (iv) expand worker access to high-quality training and credentials that will “lead to good jobs” and strengthen workforce development; and (v) promote and protect worker health and safety. Per the Order, projects that use, among other things, union pattern wage scales, joint labor-management partnerships to invest in “union-affiliated training programs, registered apprenticeships, and pre-apprenticeship programs,” or policies that encourage worker and union participation in the design and implementation of workplace safety and health management systems, will assist in satisfying the goal of achieving “high labor standards” and should be prioritized.

To effectuate the Order’s priorities, agencies are instructed to consider including application evaluation criteria or selection factors that will prioritize those applicants for federal assistance that adopt or provide a specific plan to adopt the priorities set forth in the Order. Agencies also must consider, among other things, publishing relevant guidance, such as best practice guides, engaging more deeply with applicants prior to any award of federal assistance “to ensure that applicants understand the benefits of [the Order’s] priorities for key programs and projects,” and collecting relevant data to evaluate and monitor the progress of funding recipients in satisfying the Order’s goals.

The “implementing agencies,” or the agencies subject to the Order, are the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Labor, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Finally, the Order creates a task force, referred to as the Investing in Good Jobs Task Force, that will be co-chaired by the Secretary of Labor and the Director of the National Economic Council, or their designees, and will oversee implementation of the Order’s labor standards in funding decisions by the implementing agencies.

The White House also issued a Fact Sheet (available here) discussing the Order and President Biden’s motivation for its enactment. It remains to be seen what impact the Order will have on the implementing agencies or how those agencies may alter their funding programs to comply with the Order. We will continue to monitor these developments and will keep you informed as to any new updates.

© 2024 Proskauer Rose LLP.
For more news on the Executive Order on Investing in America and Investing in American Workers, visit the NLR Labor Employment section.

The College Athlete Right to Organize Act – Labor Unions Enter the Pay-for-Play Debate

The debate about compensating college athletes has presented itself in many forms recently, including a recent argument before the United States Supreme Court. As that notion gains momentum, U.S. legislators have stepped in by presenting legislation to ensure that labor organizations have their place at the table. On May 27, 2021, Senators Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and several members of the House of Representatives introduced legislation that would extend collective bargaining rights and the other protections of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or Act) to any athlete who receives any form of compensation from their public or private college or university and is required to participate in an intercollegiate sport. They call it the “College Athlete Right to Organize Act.”

The 2014 Union Petition by Northwestern Football Players

This legislation is not the first attempt to gain bargaining rights for college athletes. In 2014, members of Northwestern University’s football term filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (Board) asking that the University recognize the College Athletes Players Association as their exclusive representative for purposes of bargaining. While the Regional Director, Peter Sung Ohr (who is now the Board’s Acting General Counsel), agreed that players who receive scholarships are employees entitled to the rights and protections of the NLRA, the Board declined to assert jurisdiction. It did so without deciding whether the players are employees under the Act. In part, the Board declined because it does not have jurisdiction over public institutions, meaning that it maintains jurisdiction over only 17 of the 125 colleges and universities that participate in the same football division as Northwestern. The others are public institutions exempt from the Act.

The College Athlete Right to Organize Act Declares College Athletes Common Law Employees and Would Cover Both Private and Public Universities

The College Athlete Right to Organize Act addresses both of those issues. First, after denouncing the NCAA and its member institutions’ practices as “exploitive and unfair,” the College Athlete Right to Organize Act broadly declares that college athletes meet the common law definition of an “employee” because they “perform a valuable service… under a contract for hire in the form of grant-in-aid agreement.” Second, and more significant, the Act extends the NLRA to public institutions of higher education with respect to the employment of college athletes. Currently, the NLRA broadly excludes government entities.

Mandatory Multiemployer Bargaining Within an Athletic Conference

The College Athlete Right to Organize Act also introduces multiemployer bargaining as a matter of right by stating that “college athletes must be able to form collective bargaining units across institutions of higher education that compete against each other.” Thus, the College Athlete Right to Organize Act provides that the “Board shall recognize multiple institutions of higher education within an intercollegiate athletic conference as a multiemployer bargaining unit, but only if consented to by the employee representatives” of the players, meaning that multiemployer bargaining may proceed without the consent and over the objection of the colleges and universities. This change could have significant implications for colleges and universities operating within the same athletic conference, as it would require institutions with different resources, priorities and goals to approach negotiations with players in a generally uniform manner, which may not be suitable for a particular institution.

The Act’s Future

Whether the College Athlete Right to Organize Act gains any momentum remains to be seen. What’s clear is that debate around the issue of compensating college athletes is intensifying. As that debate matures, it seems that at least some legislators want to ensure that labor unions have a seat at the table.

Copyright © 2021 Robinson & Cole LLP. All rights reserved.

ARTICLE BY Natale V. Di Natale and Emily A. Zaklukiewicz of Robinson & Cole LLP
For more articles on college sports, visit the NLREntertainment, Art & Sports section.