Earlier on Tuesday as the debate on the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act got underway, Republican candidate for IL-16 Catalina Lauf issued video against the PRO Act
Back in late January, Catalina Lauf lashed out multiple times against laws like the California AB5 law, and the PRO Act, as published here on McHenry County Blog.
On Tuesday, Lauf took to Twitter again, specifically on the PRO Act:
The video speaks for itself, as did Lauf’s statements back in January against all such laws robbing American workers of freedom.
As the House debate resumed on the PRO Act around 5PM CST, the first set of amendments to the PRO Act have won approval in an en bloc grouping and vote.
The Democrat-backed amendments were approved by a 227-196 vote, with seven Republicans crossing over in support.
Here are the amendments to H.R. 842 approved in the first en bloc vote:
1. Bourdeaux (GA): Clarifies that nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect the jurisdictional standards of the NLRB with respect to small businesses, including any standards those that measure the size of a business with respect to revenues, that are used to determine whether an industry is affecting commerce for purposes of determining coverage under the National Labor Relations Act.
4. Davids (KS): Clarifies that the amendments made under this Act shall not affect the privacy of employees with respect to voter lists provided to labor organizations by employers pursuant to elections directed by the Board.
9. Jackson Lee (TX): Provides whistleblower protections to employees who report violations of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) with this amendment covering employees of employers as well as employees of labor unions.
11. Levin, Andy (MI): Directs the National Labor Relations Board to develop a system and procedures to conduct union representation elections electronically, as allowed by the underlying legislation.
12. McBath (GA), Phillips (MN), Morelle (NY), Murphy, Stephanie (FL), Schrader (OR): Clarifies that nothing in this Act shall affect the definitions of “employer” or “employee” under any state law for wage, hour, worker’s compensation or unemployment insurance.
13. Murphy, Stephanie (FL), McBath (GA), Peters (CA), Phillips (MN), Case (HI), Cuellar (TX), Schrader (OR), Rice, Kathleen (NY): Requires GAO, within one-and-a-half years from the date of enactment, to prepare a report on the impact—on workers and businesses across different sectors—of the changes made by the bill to the definition of “employee” (the “ABC” test) and the definition of “joint employer” under the National Labor Relations Act. The President is required to consider the report and, within 60 days, may recommend that Congress modify one or both of these definitions or make no recommendation. Expresses the Sense of the House that the House shall consider whether to accept, reject, or modify any recommendations received from the President.
14. Newman (IL): Specifies the National Labor Relations Board’s regulations regarding notices to inform workers of their rights must address requirements for posting notices in the languages spoken by the employees.
15. Stevens (MI): Directs the GAO to conduct a report on sectoral bargaining in other countries.
16. Tlaib (MI): Establishes a 120-day timeline for the tripartite arbitration process between the employees/labor organization and employer in order to ensure that the arbitration process is not indefinitely drawn out.
17. Torres, Ritchie (NY): Revises the Labor-Management and Disclosure Act of 1959 to require the Department of Labor to make disclosures under the persuader rule publicly available in an accessible and searchable electronic form, and through a secure software application for use on an electronic device.
From the desk of John Lopez: I highlighted Amendment 12, offered by Congresswoman Lucy McBath (D, GA-06), and cosponsors include Congresswoman Stephanie Murphy (D, FL-07) and Congressman Greg Schrader (D, OR-05), because it’s very interesting.
First, McBath, Murphy and Schrader voted against the PRO Act passed in the House last year.
Second, the question of the use of the ABC test is potentially rendered moot, because it specifies state laws defining an “employee” and an “employer” will supersede any provision of the PRO Act.
Given California and the AB5 law has been prominent, the AB5 law, and all of its exemptions including the passage of the voter-approved exemption for app-based businesses (Uber, Lyft, etc.) through Proposition 22 last fall will stand.
Some proponents of the PRO Act were hoping its passage would overturn the will of the people exercised last fall on Prop 22 in California.
UPDATE: Democrat amendments vote grid.
Lauren Underwood and Sean Casten change your vote and say NO to PRO Act.
DO IT! CHANGE YOUR VOTE! YOU SAY NO!
When your constituents hear more of the details in this bill, they don’t like it.
Wow, if Catalina Lauf is the future of our political movement, we are in EXCELLENT shape.
EVERY Republican should be doing everything they can to support her.
Yeah adore Lauf!!!!
She’s so cool.
Let’s throw $$$ at her so we can feel good about elections that are rigged and stolen.
And meaningless.
We don’t need to anoint ANYONE FOR ANYTHING!
It hasn’t even been a year since last year’s primary.
We don’t even know what these districts are going to look like.
There is no rush to coronate anyone, including Lauf.
Lauf….. I like her, but when I think about it, I don’t like her.