Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Repealing the Weekend

In Wisconsin, the state whose progressive forebears championed labor rights, a move is afoot to “allow” workers to work 7 days a week.

This is being touted by the Republicans as a “win-win”: businesses don’t have to hire more workers, just add hours! And workers can make more money! What could possibly go wrong? Businesses would never coerce workers into working more hours, they lurves their workers!!!

In 1938, President Roosevelt signed into law the Fair Labor Standards Act:

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (abbreviated as FLSA; also referred to as the Wages and Hours Bill) is a federal statute of the United States. The FLSA introduced a maximum 44-hour seven-day workweek, established a national minimum wage, guaranteed “time-and-a-half” for overtime in certain jobs, and prohibited most employment of minors in “oppressive child labor”, a term that is defined in the statute. It applies to employees engaged in interstate commerce or employed by an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, unless the employer can claim an exemption from coverage.

What led to that law? A number of things, including caring about the plight of those who were forced to be wage slaves:

While President Franklin Roosevelt was in Bedford, Mass., campaigning for reelection, a young girl tried to pass him an envelope. But a policeman threw her back into the crowd. Roosevelt told an aide, “Get the note from the girl.” Her note read,

I wish you could do something to help us girls….We have been working in a sewing factory,… and up to a few months ago we were getting our minimum pay of $11 a week… Today the 200 of us girls have been cut down to $4 and $5 and $6 a week.

To a reporter’s question, the President replied, “Something has to be done about the elimination of child labor and long hours and starvation wages.”

– FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, Public Papers and Addresses, Vol. V,  New York, Random House, 1936), pp. 624-25.

It took some doing and led to some strong words lashing out at those who would exploit workers:

On May 24, 1937, President Roosevelt sent the bill to Congress with a message that America should be able to give “all our able-bodied working men and women a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work.” He continued: “A self-supporting and self-respecting democracy can plead no justification for the existence of child labor, no economic reason for chiseling worker’s wages or stretching workers’ hours.” Though States had the right to set standards within their own borders, he said, goods produced under “conditions that do not meet rudimentary standards of decency should be regarded as contraband and ought not to be allowed to pollute the channels of interstate trade.”

This bears repeating:

“… goods produced under conditions that do not meet rudimentary standards of decency should be regarded as contraband”

Businesses are certainly no more benevolent now than they were in 1938. In fact, encouraged and emboldened by the teaparty brand of Republicans, they are trotting out all their favorite worker-exploitation schemes (what’s wrong with child labor? … good for the little ankle biters to learn the value of a buck!) and working to create a libertarian paradise where they can wreak havoc on the environment to extract every bit of profit out of a state … and then when it is destroyed, simply move on.

It’s time to draw the line. And very sad that the lines drawn back in the Good Government days of FDR are being washed away by the teaparty-inspired race to the bottom.

In 2014, we can draw that line in Wisconsin by repealing the 2010 election and returning to power those who care about our state and those who live and work here.

When we vote, we win. And when we win, workers win.


24 comments

  1. Debtor’s prison?  For profit, natch, just like the Elizabethan jails where inmates had to pay for anything better than straw on a stone floor and moldy bread to eat.  Of course debtor’s prison would be only for the little people.  And hey!  They could earn a few pennies on chain gangs.

  2. HappyinVT

    Unfortunately it does not come as a surprise and surely trying to figure out how to get around child labor laws can’t be far behind.

    Companies have been finding ways to get around full-time versus part-time designations for years now and it is only getting worse.  But we’re supposed to shut up and take it and be grateful we have jobs.

  3. NLRB v Canning is a case about the president’s right to make recess appointments. It is an appeal of this case:

    A panel of Republican-appointed judges struck down President Obama’s appointment of three members to the National Labor Relations Board during the winter 2012 congressional recess in an expansive ruling that invalidates more than a century of presidential practice. The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will now likely be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but has the potential to also affect Obama’s concurrent appointment of Richard Cordray to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It could also invalidate every ruling by the NLRB during the period between January 4, 2012 and today, as well as many actions by the CFPB during that period. The opinion is the latest demonstration of the radical views of Judge David Sentelle, who authored this opinion and has previously suggested that all business, labor and Wall Street regulation is constitutionally suspect.

    Here is his, and Janice Rogers Brown’s, opinion of labor law:

    First the Supreme Court allowed state and local jurisdictions to regulate property, pursuant to their police powers, in the public interest, and to “adopt whatever economic policy may reasonably be deemed to promote public welfare.” Then the Court relegated economic liberty to a lower echelon of constitutional protection than personal or political liberty, according restrictions on property rights only minimal review. . . . Thus the Supreme Court decided economic liberty was not a fundamental constitutional right, and decreed economic legislation must be upheld against an equal protection challenge “if there is any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis” for it.

    The author of that ThinkProgress article pointed out that “Yet for all the many, many laws they would strike down, for all the anarchy they would create by sweeping away literally centuries of regulation in a single constitutional whirlwind, one thing is conspicuously absent from Sentelle and Brown’s opinion. At no point do they cite a single word of the Constitution which supports their sweeping assault on America’s power to govern itself. This is not a coincidence. Those words do not exist.”

    Antonin Scalia is signalling that he thinks that the president overreached and it is because of he is a “self-interested president”. This from the guy who was party to appointing George W. Bush to the presidency. IOKIYAR, you have found your champion.

  4. DTOzone

    who told me Upstate New York is an economic wasteland because of liberals.

    He suggested tax cuts. I pointed out that Gov. Cuomo did that. We have tax-free zones and no one seems to be taking advantage of it except casinos.  

    I then went into an explanation that the problem with Upstate New York is that anyone who wants to start a business in New York State is going to want to do it in or close to the city because in a world of globalization, your potential when in a major hub like New York is limitless, while it is certainly limited somewhere Upstate.

    Why would you want to open a business in Rochester, when you can do it closer to NYC where there is a diverse workforce of blue collar and white collar and quick access to major airports, investment, etc.

    He reiterated that it was taxes and no matter what Gov. Cuomo give them, he’s still a liberal and business think he will turn on them. Why Upstate declined economically for the 12 years we had a Republican governor he simply couldn’t answer.

    Basically his fall back argument is companies won’t come here no matter what we do because they’re worried liberals might win.

    Which is mind-numbingly stupid.  

  5. The guy who wrote a law for his wealthy donor is withdrawing the bill because all y’all noticed it was for his wealthy donor!!!

    “While I am frustrated by the amount of misinformation the bill has encountered,” Kleefisch said Tuesday, “I believe a fair and equitable child support system, one that fundamentally recognizes the value of both parents in the upbringing of a child, is an important issue and one that warrants serious conversation.”

    This was the bill, by the way, described perfection by Wonkette: Millionaire WI Repo Man Would Rather Not Pay Child Support, Can The GOP Help Him Out With That, Great Thanks

    Say you are a Wisconsin millionaire repo man who doesn’t want to pay so much gosh-darned child support, and you would like to get a law passed that says “stop class-warring job creators by making them feed their children all the time.” Wouldn’t it be great if there were someone you could call who would lend an ear, and also his bill-drafting pen? Luckily, for the low, low price of just an $11 thousand campaign donation to himself and his lieutenant governor wife, GOP Rep. Joel Kleefisch is here to help!

Comments are closed.