SALEM, Ore. - Some Oregon workers aren't getting paid what they are owed, and at a committee hearing in Salem this week, state lawmakers will get a first look at upcoming legislation to curb wage theft.

Just since Thanksgiving, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) has announced settlements recovering $2.7 million in unpaid wages for construction workers on state-funded projects. But Michael Dale, executive director, Northwest Workers Justice Project, says BOLI has less staff and a bigger workload than in the 1990s.

He says workers in many fields, particularly in rural Oregon, can't always get the help they need if they aren't being paid fairly – or paid at all.

"The notion that somehow now, the problem is solved – no," says Dale. "Wage theft continues to be a pervasive and broad problem that needs attention. BOLI needs resources, and private workers need to have the ability to enforce their wage claims themselves."

He says the proposal includes giving workers better access to their payroll records, without having to file a lawsuit or a wage claim with BOLI, making it a felony to not pay prevailing wages on jobs, and requiring companies that have had wage-theft problems to post bonds.

Dale says wage theft takes many forms, from refusing to pay, to classifying workers as independent contractors to keep from paying overtime, to asking people to work extra hours "off the clock." He points out that wage theft affects not just individuals, but entire communities.

"Nobody spends the money that they didn't get paid in the grocery store," says Dale. "And it's a problem for other employers, because if an employer is trying to do the right thing, they have to compete with people that may not have the same cost structure because they're not paying their workers right. And that's bad for the economy."

He adds the ideas in the draft legislation have had some backing when they've come up before in Salem in different bills, and are being combined to help get them through the short session in February.

The hearing is Wed., Jan. 13, at 2:00 p.m. in the Senate Workforce and General Government Committee, at the State Capitol.


get more stories like this via email

Labor groups representing thousands of Minnesota state workers find themselves at serious odds with Gov. Tim Walz over his move this week to reduce remote work options.

Walz announced that, starting June 1, most state-agency employees have to carry out their duties in person at least 50% of the time. That has drawn swift criticism from the unions that negotiate for nearly 40,000 state workers, including the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 5 is another, and at a Thursday news conference, its executive director, Bart Andersen, expressed frustration about having no input in the decision.

"If we are going to be considered a labor-friendly state, we need to have conversations," he said, "not dropped at the last minute and told that all these people have to go back to work in a month and a half, with no means to get there."

MAPE officials have said this also disrupts the lives of workers with children, citing day-care demands and long waiting lists for those facilities.

The governor has pointed to an exemption for people who live more than 75 miles from their primary work location. He also has said the change should help downtown businesses in the Twin Cities by spurring more foot traffic.

These debates have been happening in the private sector, too, since the constraints of the pandemic have faded. But Andersen suggested to anyone who believes remote workers are "slacking off" to think again.

"They're not in a bubble. They're not isolated," he said. "They're working with their teams and they're getting the work done."

Andersen said they know tasks such as road maintenance can't be done from home. But he highlighted the effectiveness of telework in recruiting and attracting people for the public-sector jobs that have that flexibility. The mounting tension between these labor groups and the administration comes as talks on a new contract take shape.


get more stories like this via email

Kansas City transit riders and workers are fighting proposed cuts, warning of a looming public transit crisis.

Hundreds of advocates of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority gathered on the steps of City Hall last week over threats to cut 13 bus routes, eliminate up to 175 transit jobs and shut down the Immigrant and Refugee Integration Services microtransit program.

Protesters warned the cuts could strand thousands, cost hundreds of jobs and leave misclassified IRIS drivers without unemployment benefits.

Ashley Ball, a leader with Stand Up KC and the Missouri Workers Center, relies on public transit for work.

"I was living in a hotel with my kids in North Kansas City and the buses weren't always reliable, so I got IRIS early to be able to get to my shift," Ball explained. "I work in the city now, overnights at Taco Bell. It's very beneficial to have IRIS when I get off work."

Supporters argued the cuts are needed to address KCATA's budget shortfall, as the city's $71 million allocation falls far short of the $117 million needed. Officials also cited high administrative costs and call for more efficient transit operations.

In 2024, KCATA reported 1.1 million riders, a four-year high, averaging more than 35,000 people daily. Couple that with KC Streetcars, and Kansas City's transit served more than 40,000 people per day last year.

For Ball, its significance goes beyond just transportation.

"Our public transportation is the heart of the city," Ball emphasized. "It allows us, no matter where we are from or what we look like, to move around, accomplish our goals and try to live a better dream."

The budget cuts are being discussed by the City Council Finance Committee after talks were delayed in a previous session.


get more stories like this via email

Minnesota's up-and-coming doctors say in order to better care for patients down the road, they need collective bargaining power.

A large group of them has filed to form a union, reflecting an industry shift. This week, a supermajority of nearly 1,000 University of Minnesota resident physicians and fellows submitted their union-creation plans. It follows a similar move by peers at Hennepin Health earlier this month.

Dr. Thomas Schmidt, infectious diseases fellow at the University of Minnesota, said the current work environment for providers advancing through their training in hospitals and other settings is pretty grueling, with up to 80-hour workweeks in some cases.

"It's us making sure that we're having some breaks and making sure that we're able to have some life outside of training," Schmidt explained. "To ensure that we can be good doctors when we're there with our patients."

Schmidt cited burnout, still lingering from the COVID-19 pandemic, as one factor behind doctors embracing unionization. Researchers say the number of newly union-represented doctors could soon double, compared with the past two decades.

Because of consolidation in health care, more physicians are now employees of larger systems, as opposed to independent practitioners. The university said it will be responsive to all necessary parties as the process takes shape.

Doctors still getting their training say the residency system leaves little room to advocate for changes or request a new location. And while established medical professionals might make good money, Schmidt said it is not the case for residents, who are often in the $15 to $20 per-hour range.

"That is not a substantial amount of money to be able to take care of your housing, to take care of your family," Schmidt pointed out. "I'm a parent of two young kids, so it has not been easy to be a trainee."

He added some peers are delaying starting a family because of the limited pay and long hours.

Skeptics fear the union push among doctors will reduce the earnings of specialists. Meanwhile, the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, which has members working on infectious disease control in the state health department, recognizes the need for providers to have a bigger voice. It said it is vital as public health concerns, such as the bird flu, add to the work demands for the young professionals.