'People Who Work for a Living' Rally at Labor Dept as DOGE Readies Latest Attack
"The people who keep our food and medicine safe know more about how to make government efficient than an outsider whose companies benefit from the very agencies he is infiltrating."
A person holds up a sign as they protest against U.S. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in Washington, D.C. on February 5, 2025.
(Photo: Drew Angerer/AFP via Getty Images)
Julia Conley
Feb 05, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
As billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk set his sights on the U.S. Department of Labor in his wide-scale ransacking of the federal government, the largest federation of unions in the country made clear at a rally that Musk's Department of Government Efficiency isn't waging an attack on "waste" or bureaucracy—but on working people.
The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) led labor unions and Democratic lawmakers in a gathering outside the Department of Labor (DOL), where employees were notified Tuesday that they would soon be ordered to turn over data to Musk's DOGE operatives, who will be staying at the agency for "an indeterminate period of time."
Those who don't comply, acting Labor Secretary Vince Micone said, could be fired.
At the rally, AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler announced the union's launch of the "Department of People Who Work for a Living"—a new campaign aimed at reporting on DOGE's attacks on working Americans through digital ads and public actions at the agencies Musk's advisory body is attempting to cut.
"Elon Musk and DOGE, they want us to think this is about efficiency, right?" said Shuler. "They want us to think the DOL is some bureaucracy that doesn't matter. That could not be further from the truth. This is about our health, our safety, our fair pay, our jobs, and these are the people who fight for us."
Musk was scheduled to have a "kickoff meeting" with DOL staffers on Wednesday, but Shuler noted that at the last minute, the in-person meeting was switched to a virtual one.
"And it's because you turned up the heat!" said Shuler. "You're making them feel it."
In a statement, Shuler added that "the government can work for billionaires or it can work for working people—but not both."
"We will hold DOGE and Elon Musk accountable because we are certain that the people who keep our food and medicine safe know more about how to make government efficient than an outsider whose companies benefit from the very agencies he is infiltrating," she said.
In recent days, DOGE has set up illegal servers in the Office of Personnel Management; taken control of Treasury Department payment system that contains personal data of millions of Americans who receive Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as other payments; placed nearly all U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) employees on administrative leave and attempted to dismantle the agency while attacking its aid initiatives around the globe; and begun a probe of Department of Education data as the Trump administration prepares to try to shut the agency down.
Musk's companies Tesla and SpaceX have faced multiple federal investigations, including by the DOL, into complaints of unfair labor practices, at least one workplace death, and failures to comply with protocols for protecting state secrets.
In addition to rallying at DOL, the AFL-CIO joined several national unions including the American Federation of Government Employees and Communications Workers of America in filing an injunction against Micone and DOGE, demanding a temporary restraining order to keep Musk and his employees out of the agency.
As In These Times reported, the legal filing warns that "failing to grant the injunction will result in DOGE's unqualified, unelected operatives having access to 'highly sensitive data,' including but not limited to medical and benefits information about all federal workers with worker compensation or black lung claims, the identities of vulnerable workers who have filed wage and hour or occupational safety complaints, and critical Bureau of Labor Statistics data."
At the rally, Shuler applauded workers for standing up in the face of Musk's attempted takeover of the federal government.
"No one voted for this undermining of our rights and that's why were standing up," said Shuler. "Look around. We have power and we're ready to use it!"
Fired NLRB Official Sues Trump Over 'Illegal and Unprecedented' Ouster
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent," according to the complaint.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks alongside newly confirmed Attorney General Pam Bondi during her swearing in ceremony in the Oval Office at the White House on February 05, 2025 in Washington, D.C.
(Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
Eloise Goldsmith
Feb 05, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Former Democratic National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox sued U.S. President Donald Trump in federal court Wednesday over her dismissal from the NLRB in late January.
Wilcox was first appointed to the body—which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize—in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023.
On January 28, Trump dismissed both Wilcox and NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who, alongside Wilcox, helped strengthen workers' rights to form unions and went after employers it accused of undermining those rights. Given that Biden dismissed Trump's first-term NLRB general counsel on his first day in office, Abruzzo's firing was expected.
Wilcox's "unprecedented and illegal" firing—which was less expected than Abruzzo's—constitutes a "blatant violation" of the National Labor Relations Act, according to the complaint, which names both Trump and the acting chairman of the NLRB, Marvin Kaplan, as defendants. Wilcox is seeking an injunction against Kaplan, ordering him to reinstate her as a member of the board.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, the president can only remove board members in cases of "neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause" and only upon "notice and hearing," the filing states.
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent that has ensured the independence of critical government agencies like the Federal Reserve," Wilcox's attorney wrote.
The complaint points to a 1935 Supreme Court decision which restricted the president's power to remove members who perform perform quasi-legislative and judicial functions.
The complaint also notes that Wilcox's legal challenge is aimed at pushing back on a broader pattern of action by the Trump administration. Wilcox's dismissal is one of multiple "openly illegal firings" during Trump's first days back in the White House that appear "designed to test" Congress's ability to create independent agencies such as the NLRB, the complaint alleges.
"Although Ms. Wilcox has no desire to aid the president in establishing a test case, she is also cognizant of the fact that, if no challenge is made, the president will have effectively succeeded in rendering the NLRA's protections—and, by extension, that of other independent agencies—nugatory," wrote Wilcox's legal counsel.
The same day that Trump fired Wilcox and Abruzzo, he also dismissed two of the three Democrats on another independent federal body, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Wilcox's removal has also left the NLRB without a quorum, meaning it can't issue decisions on labor relations disputes.
Matt Bruenig, a labor lawyer who is also head of the People's Policy Project think tank, wrote in a blog post that the lawsuit sets up a constitutional challenge in which Trump will advocate for the removal of the section of the NLRA that offers removal protections to NLRB board members.
"The most likely outcome of all of this will be that the Supreme Court will rule that the removal protections in Section 3(a) of the NLRA are unconstitutional," Bruenig wrote.
"I don't think this ruling will matter all that much in the long run," he added, "but it will create delays and various headaches in the short run."
Feb 05, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Former Democratic National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox sued U.S. President Donald Trump in federal court Wednesday over her dismissal from the NLRB in late January.
Wilcox was first appointed to the body—which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize—in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023.
On January 28, Trump dismissed both Wilcox and NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who, alongside Wilcox, helped strengthen workers' rights to form unions and went after employers it accused of undermining those rights. Given that Biden dismissed Trump's first-term NLRB general counsel on his first day in office, Abruzzo's firing was expected.
Wilcox's "unprecedented and illegal" firing—which was less expected than Abruzzo's—constitutes a "blatant violation" of the National Labor Relations Act, according to the complaint, which names both Trump and the acting chairman of the NLRB, Marvin Kaplan, as defendants. Wilcox is seeking an injunction against Kaplan, ordering him to reinstate her as a member of the board.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, the president can only remove board members in cases of "neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause" and only upon "notice and hearing," the filing states.
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent that has ensured the independence of critical government agencies like the Federal Reserve," Wilcox's attorney wrote.
The complaint points to a 1935 Supreme Court decision which restricted the president's power to remove members who perform perform quasi-legislative and judicial functions.
The complaint also notes that Wilcox's legal challenge is aimed at pushing back on a broader pattern of action by the Trump administration. Wilcox's dismissal is one of multiple "openly illegal firings" during Trump's first days back in the White House that appear "designed to test" Congress's ability to create independent agencies such as the NLRB, the complaint alleges.
"Although Ms. Wilcox has no desire to aid the president in establishing a test case, she is also cognizant of the fact that, if no challenge is made, the president will have effectively succeeded in rendering the NLRA's protections—and, by extension, that of other independent agencies—nugatory," wrote Wilcox's legal counsel.
The same day that Trump fired Wilcox and Abruzzo, he also dismissed two of the three Democrats on another independent federal body, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Wilcox's removal has also left the NLRB without a quorum, meaning it can't issue decisions on labor relations disputes.
Matt Bruenig, a labor lawyer who is also head of the People's Policy Project think tank, wrote in a blog post that the lawsuit sets up a constitutional challenge in which Trump will advocate for the removal of the section of the NLRA that offers removal protections to NLRB board members.
"The most likely outcome of all of this will be that the Supreme Court will rule that the removal protections in Section 3(a) of the NLRA are unconstitutional," Bruenig wrote.
"I don't think this ruling will matter all that much in the long run," he added, "but it will create delays and various headaches in the short run."
No comments:
Post a Comment