Liability limits could threaten everyday workers

Bill Knight column for 6-25, 26 or 27, 2020

           

Those with the misfortune of contracting COVID-19 and getting sick or worse because their employers didn’t following safety guidelines may not get their “day in court” if Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and colleague John Cornyn (R-Texas) force the deregulation of liability laws.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and conservative groups are lobbying lawmakers to give companies, hospitals, property owners and other businesses legal immunity if workers contract the coronavirus on the job or families claim their relative died after catching the virus there.

A Chamber memo this spring showed major corporations are conceding that many workers could get infected and possibly die.

“Our legislation is going to create a legal safe harbor for businesses,” McConnell said in the Senate, later adding, “My red line going forward on this [new government relief] bill is we need to provide litigation protection for those who have been on the front lines. We can't pass another bill unless we have liability protection.”

Last Friday. McConnell said, “I’m going to insist on liability protection related to the coronavirus incident. Keep your eyes out for July.”

Besides McConnell holding additional aid hostage, it’s unnecessary. Current law says businesses needn’t be worried about litigation if they take “reasonable care” to protect workers, like following industry standards and state or local guidelines. If they don’t, well …

Some may McConnell’s liability limitation would stop frivolous lawsuits, but there are other ways that’s already done, and some attorneys say that COVID-19 lawsuits are unlikely anyway since evidence would be difficult to determine.

“You have to prove that’s where you got it, like if some employer demands symptomatic workers come back to work, maybe like in meatpacking,” said Peoria attorney David Hunt, who represents people in personal-injury and workers’ compensation cases.

The choice is safely operating even though there may be some liabilities, versus reopening without protections because you won’t be sued and having workers sickened.

“You can’t have it both ways,” Hunt said. “The consumer standpoint presents a whole different set of problems because technically, if you step outside you expose yourself.”

Further, unlike personal-injury or wrongful-death cases, which can hinge on negligence, workers sickened or injured on the job usually cannot sue since workers compensation is the exclusive remedy for getting medical bills paid and maybe getting help for lost pay. Not ensuring safe working conditions, though, could make employers vulnerable to legal action.

However, Congress weakening liability responsibilities could tempt companies to not bother sanitizing work areas, providing masks or enforcing social distancing, letting them escape their obligations to provide safe working conditions.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends workers wear face coverings, have plenty of opportunities to wash their hands, and have their temperatures taken before working. But in April the CDC also said employers can compel employees to work if they’ve been exposed but aren’t showing symptoms – despite what epidemiologists call the risks of “silent carriers” of the virus.

For decades, so-called tort reform has been a goal by conservative groups such as the American Legislative Exchange Council, a Koch-supported group that drafts bills for state legislators, and in May North Carolina became the 10th state to limit liability, joining Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin.

Plus, immunity on the federal level would let lawsuits be moved to courts with Trump-appointed judges, said the National Employment Law Project, which added that the scheme could cover nearly everything, not just the COVID-19 virus.

Hunt says he thinks it’s less about conservatives’ long-running attacks on trial lawyers than about protecting business.

“They’re pandering to employers, particularly insurance companies that wouldn’t have to pay [claims],” he says. “I don’t see how they could possibly do that. That would be a horrible situation.”

Democrat Charles Booker, a Kentucky State Representative and one of the candidates vying to run against McConnell in November, said, “Folks like Mitch McConnell are still seeing this as an opportunity to bail out big businesses and not prioritize the people.”

Bailout fallout: the rich got richer

Bill Knight column for 6-22, 23 or 24, 2020      

           

Days ago, lawmakers blasted Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin after he refused to reveal which businesses received any of the $500 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans backed by public money.

Recipients that maintain payrolls will have the loans forgiven under the program, which notes in its application that borrowers’ names and loan amounts could be released if someone requests them under the Freedom of Information Act.

But for now, it’s a guessing game. However, according to “Tale of Two Crises,” a new report from Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) and the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), various assistance from the government and Federal Reserve seems to have contributed to enriching industry and the wealthiest individuals. U.S. billionaires’ fortunes increased by $434 billion during the nation’s lockdown between mid-March and June, the report shows.

“Tale of Two Crises” used Forbes magazine data on America’s 630 billionaires between March 18 and May 19 (when most states were in lockdown) and says the net worth of America’s wealthiest billionaires alone grew 15% during the two-month period, to $3.382 trillion from $2.948 trillion. Those engorging themselves the most were at the top, with the richest five billionaires – Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Bill Gates (Microsoft), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Warren Buffett (Berkshire Hathaway), and Larry Ellison (Oracle) – together enjoying gains of $76 billion.

“The surge in billionaire wealth during a global pandemic underscores the grotesque nature of unequal sacrifice,” said Chuck Collins, director of IPS’ Program on Inequality. “While millions risk their lives and livelihoods as first responders and front-line workers, these billionaires benefit from an economy and tax system that is wired to funnel wealth to the top.”

Away from company suites, the streets show another story: 42+ million people lost jobs, at least temporarily; millions lost employer-based health insurance; some 20% of Americans are unsure whether they’ll be able to pay rent or mortgages.

But this spring, government’s eyes were on Wall Street. Its paper value dropped dramatically when corporations realized the nation was caught in a pandemic unprepared. Investors fled from stocks, bonds and everything short of free bank pens. At one point this month, the S&P 500 was up more than 44% since March, effectively recovering all of its losses. So the bailout worked – for investors.

The first relief measure, the $2.3 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, turns out to have mostly protected the investor class, letting everyone else mostly scramble for “free market” crumbs after the feeding frenzy. Lawmakers from both major political parties seemingly can’t tell the difference between Wall Street and the U. S. economy.

 “One of the realities of our system is that corporate America has a large influence on how these bills play out.” said Neil Barofsky, author of “Bailout” and a former economist in both the Trump and Obama administrations.

At first, Democrats went along with the top-heavy handouts because individuals at least got something, such as the $1,200 checks President Trump insisted on signing in a shallow-but-predictable campaign gimmick.

Maybe urgency, an unforeseen panic attack or a new-found compassion for constituents contributed to the bipartisan go-along-to-get-along rubber stamp that approved it in a week, by voice vote in the House and unanimously in the Senate.

The fine print: The measure supposedly provides $560 billion for “individuals” (including $300 billion in “Trump checks”), plus $377 billion for small businesses, $339 billion for state and local governments, and $100 billion for hospitals and other health-care providers, plus some aid for students and children. But $454 billion was earmarked for discretionary big-business help.

“Essential” workers who during the virus’ spread kept working, and let the country keep going, were mostly relegated to the kids menu of peanut butter sandwiches while investors feasted on champagne and caviar. Relief didn’t include paid sick leaves, medical coverage or a jobs plan even faintly resembling FDR’s Works Progress Administration (WPA) or Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC).

 “Congress really didn’t insist on the strings attached to a lot of this money that I think we originally had been told they would,” Barofsky said. “[It] is a cause of concern.”

Some Republicans and most Democrats are concerned about Mnuchin and the “loans,” especially with no strings attached – or at least used.

Although the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) was appointed, Trump after signing the legislation declared, “I’ll be the oversight,” and since then fired Glenn Fine, acting Defense Department Inspector General (and the first PRAC chair), Michael Atkinson, Intelligence Community IG, and Steve Linick, State Department IG. So it’s anyone’s guess how much oversight there is.

But few need to guess how and why workers got the shaft and investors got the gold.

Building trades weather pandemic’s storm

Bill Knight column for Thurs., Fri. or Sat., 6-18, 19 or 20, 2020

           

As Gov. J.B. Pritzker has led Illinois through experts’ cautious recommendations on re-opening the state after weeks of a partial shutdown, construction workers have been reeling from the global pandemic that’s forced people to choose between their livelihoods and their lives, their jobs and insurance, their pensions and their future.

In downstate Illinois, the building trades generally are working, according to Clint Drury, executive director of West Central Illinois Building and Construction Trades Council.

“March and some of April was a little slow, but that is typical,” Drury said. “All in all, [we’re] holding strong in our area, considering.”

Nationally, there haven’t seemed to be enforceable standards on working during the pandemic, whether coronavirus-specific safety measures, clear definitions of “critical infrastructure” projects making construction essential, or the financial fallout from a still-volatile stock market.

States have deemed construction workers “essential employees,” so contractors could keep them building, but “social distancing” on crowded job sites can be difficult-to-impossible. Six-foot spaces are possible in work like operating engineers in enclosed cabs on heavy equipment, but it’s another story if bricklayers must help each other move 70-pound blocks or laborers together pouring concrete.

“Among [Painters] members, there is a split down the middle between those who are more concerned about health risks, and those who say ‘I need to work so that I have my health care coverage, so that I can continue my way of life’,” said Jim Williams, vice president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades.

Health-care benefits for idled construction workers can be at risk – when they or a family member may need it.

“No health insurance contributions are required to be paid to the funds on behalf of laid-off or furloughed member,” Drury said. “Unions' internationals tried to get 100% COBRA coverage in the CARES Act, but that didn't happen. But we are still pushing for it to be included in the next” aid package.  

Some workers are protected by their logged hours, Drury said.

“It depends on if the member has already reached their qualifying hours,” he said. “If they did, then they have health insurance going forward, but the length depends on the fund and also if they can ‘bank’ hours. Banked hours let workers keep union-negotiated health insurance. Employer health contributions for all hours over 120 worked in a month go into a reserve, and some members can bank up to six months of health benefits.

Meanwhile, unions are trying to do what they can on behalf of the workers they represent. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and contractors’ NECA group agreed that no action will be taken against any employee who refuses to be present at a jobsite if they believe there’s danger of contracting COVID-19. Bricklayers Local 1 Business Manager Matt Eleazer wrote members that, “If you choose not to work during this time, that’s your decision. If that’s your case, Local 1 supports you. There are many members who are willing to work through the crisis. And again, if that’s your case, Local 1 supports you.” Likewise, Painters had waived April dues.

Choices haven’t been easy. Eric Dean, president of the 130,000-member Ironworkers union, said that 30% of his work force was “idle or sitting at home.” He added that some members getting close to retirement age may take early retirement, which dilutes unions’ most skilled members and also weakens membership rolls.

In Illinois, unemployment varies, Drury said.

“Unemployment is up, but it depends on the trade and the area,” he said. “Painters are around 6% in our area. The Illinois Capital Development Board (CDB) shut down all projects early on, which affected Painters, [but] the CDB authorized work to start again. Heavy highway work has not slowed much, but that work obviously takes place outside, making social distancing easier.”

Also at risk are unions’ pension funds, whose values have plunged along with financial markets, endangering retirement benefits for thousands.

Dean says Ironworkers' pension portfolio lost about 20% of its value with Wall Street’s spring collapse, and such results aren’t unique, Drury said.

“Our investments took a similar hit,” he said. “Obviously, it depends on the portfolio allocation, but I think the level of risk across the funds is similar.”

Throughout the trades, concern is as widespread as the outbreak, and communication is more important than ever.

“Early on, I heard of a few older members that expressed concern their health was at risk,” Drury said. “Shortly after that, there were concerns due to working in close proximity and the number of workers on the job. We communicated, and continue to do so, with the owners of the projects and contractors to establish safety protocols, proper Personal Protective Equipment, additional cleaning, etc.”