Scott Statement on Republican Efforts to Dismantle Critical Worker Protections
WASHINGTON – Ranking Member Bobby Scott (VA-03) spoke on the House Floor against H.J. Res. 37 – a measure that would dismantle President Obama’s Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order which ensures that taxpayer funds are not awarded to government contractors who willfully and repeatedly engage in labor law violations, such as wage theft or maintaining unsafe workplaces. H.J. Res. 37 passed by a vote of 236-187. Below are Ranking Member Scott’s remarks.
“Mr. Speaker: Before I address the Resolution of Disapproval, I want to acknowledge the important role of federal contractors in meeting the needs of the federal government. Employment and critical services in many districts, including my own, are heavily reliant upon federal contractors, including those who serve a critical role for our nation supporting the needs of the military, coast guard, and homeland security.
“That said, it is also imperative that contractors are bidding on a level playing field when they compete for contracts. Unfortunately, this Resolution would effectively reward contractors who cut corners, endanger the rights and safety of their workers, and studies show, compromise quality. Although most federal contractors obey labor laws, studies by GAO, the Senate HELP Committee and others document that federal contractors with histories of serious, willful, and repeated violations of labor, employment and non-discrimination laws continue to be rewarded with federal contracts.
“For context, it is important to know that contracting rules already require agencies to determine whether a prospective contractor is ‘responsible’ before awarding a contract. Amongst the criteria considered is whether the contractor has ‘a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics’ and ‘a satisfactory performance record.’ However, contracting officers did not have access to a list of a prospective contractor’s labor violations until this rule was issued, nor were contracting officers required to review a bidder’s labor violations history.
“The rule implementing the Executive Order on Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces does not add any extra layers of review, rather it would fill the data gap by requiring contractors to disclose whether they have violations of 14 long-standing labor laws, including the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act, and non-discrimination laws.
“It only applies to contracts over $500,000. We aren’t talking about ‘Mom and Pop’ operations. But if listing of those violations of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplace rule constitutes an administrative burden, then more of a reason to make them be listed. They ought to be disclosed. And although we have heard about allegations, and some violations may not be final, the only thing that has to be disclosed are those violations when there has been an agency merits determination. That is an allegation is made, it’s investigated by the agency and a company is found to be in violation. It may be on appeal, but there has at least been an agency determination of guilt. The rule requires contracting officers to focus on whether such violations are serious, repeated, willful or pervasive. And, the rule helps to bring those contractors with a history of violations into compliance via Labor Compliance Agreements, so that they may continue to be considered for contracting opportunities, while they improve their records.
“Some have mislabeled this rule as the black listing rule, but this suggestion and characterization ignores the rule’s meaningful compliance assistance provision. The reality is that this rule would – according to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) – encourage agency contracting officials to push bidders with serious labor law violations ‘to enter into labor compliance agreements’ rather than ‘to debar or suspend them.’
“I also want to point out that a coalition of 20,000 construction contractors submitted testimony to the Small Business Committee, where they wrote: ‘Employers –primes and subs have more rights, remedies and redress for non-responsibility determinations based on lack of integrity or business ethics under the EO than the current FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulation) procedures specifically provide.’
“This testimony suggests that these rules are far more contractor-friendly than the detractors have characterized.
“It would be premature to dismantle a rule that hasn’t even been put into effect, because it has been under a court injunction. Further, repealing this rule under the CRA would bar future consideration of a substantially similar rule, unless Congress enacted subsequent enabling legislation.
“And so the bottom line is there are winners and losers if this legislation passes. The winners would be those companies who willfully and repeatedly and pervasively violate labor laws. The winners would be the contractors who cut corners and gain an unfair competitive advantage over law-abiding contractors. The losers would be workers who are employed by federal contractors who would be more susceptible to wage theft and unfair working conditions by unscrupulous contractors. And losers would be the law abiding contractors who lose contracts because they abide by laws that protecting their workers.
“That is why the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule enjoys support from a widespread number of business, veterans, civil rights, labor organizations, from the Easter Seals and Paralyzed Veterans of America to the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
“That’s why I oppose this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.”
Press Contact
EdLaborPress@mail.house.gov
202-226-0853
Next Article Previous Article