A newly enacted law provides New York freelancers with labor protections.

The "Freelance Isn't Free Act" prevents companies from not paying freelancers. The law requires a contract between freelancers and clients for any work valued at $800 or more. It also requires clients to pay freelancers by the contract's due date or within 30 days of work completion if no date is specified.

Rafael Espinal, executive director of the Freelancers Union, said the law has been needed for a long time.

"We've found that freelancers, on average, lose about $6,000 a year because of nonpaying clients," Espinal reported. "We know, in a state like New York, $6,000 goes a long way in being able to keep up with the cost of living and being able to pay their bills like their rent, utilities, putting food on the table."

Freelancers have provided positive feedback on the law but it faced hurdles before passing in late 2023. Some companies expressed compliance concerns about larger businesses' interactions with freelancers. Gov. Kathy Hochul initially vetoed the bill. At first, enforcing the bill went to the Department of Labor but the passed version puts the responsibility on the Attorney General's office.

Before the bill passed, Espinal advised freelancers about how to make contracts bulletproof so they were guaranteed payment. Some steps involve stipulations ensuring payment at milestone periods of a job and net payment terms. Espinal noted the new law expands what is considered a written agreement to protect freelancers further.

"The law really captures all written agreements and considers them to be contracts," Espinal explained. "It could be anything as simple as a text message, outlining the work with the payment terms. It can be an email, it doesn't necessarily have to be a traditional contract on legal paper."

This bill was modeled after New York City's own "Freelance Isn't Free" law. Aside from New York, Kansas, Missouri and Los Angeles have similar protections for freelancers.

As the Biden-Harris Administration prepares to invest up to $175 billion in tax money into semiconductor manufacturing under the CHIPS Act, a new Institute for Policy Studies report warns guardrails are necessary to ensure that workers in Colorado and across the U.S. - who make tiny chips critical for electronic devices - are getting good jobs.

Report author Chris Rodrigo, the managing editor at the institute's Inequality.org website, said the U.S. Department of Commerce should add key worker protections - including good wages, safety from toxic chemicals, and the freedom to unionize - to all contracts before backing up the Brinks trucks.

"Commerce should require, or at least strongly encourage, companies to not try to disrupt any organizing activity going on," said Rodrigo. "Having unions at these companies is a good back stop to make sure there aren't too many violations of people's labor rights."

The report also recommends banning stock buy-backs and other executive perks - to make sure that more taxpayer dollars are invested in workers in the form of improved wages, training, and safety measures.

Despite pledges from companies in the 1990s to phase out dangerous chemicals, miscarriage and cancer rates remain high among the global semiconductor workforce.

The industry and the administration cite rapid growth as a sign of a smart economic policy. And in fact the companies claim there aren't enough qualified Americans willing to take on jobs created by the CHIPS Act.

But researchers found there was no deficit of credentialed workers. Rodrigo cited a recent survey showing that many are turning to other industries because of bad work environments.

"And over half of the workers interviewed said they were likely to leave their jobs within the next three to six months," said Rodrigo. "Companies should look inward and try to improve the quality of jobs before blaming it on external factors like workers not being available or not being interested in working in their industry."

Rodrigo said he believes setting a good precedent now by demanding high quality jobs could be transformative for future public investments across the economy.

"This is an opportunity," said Rodrigo, "for the federal government to set strong standards for what jobs look like when public money is being given to any industry."




get more stories like this via email

National proposals to end taxes on tips might have mixed effects on New Yorkers.

Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have developed variations of the policy, which would let workers keep more of their tips. But many tipped workers do not earn enough income for a living wage because they make a subminimum wage, which is $16 with tip credits in New York.

Saru Jayaraman, president of the advocacy group One Fair Wage, said both candidates would take separate approaches to implementing their policies.

"Trump's proposal also would provide that same tax exemption to hedge fund billionaires and Harris' proposal, you know, when she elevated it did call for raising the minimum wage in addition to ending taxes on tips," Jayaraman explained.

She argued the best way to implement change is by ending the subminimum wage. Several states and cities have done it, but New York's bill faces opposition from groups like the New York Restaurant Association. However, restaurants in different states are seeing dividends from paying workers a full minimum wage with tips. Several states have ballot measures this year to end the subminimum wage.

On average, tipped wage workers in New York earn almost $18 an hour with tips. But the living hourly wage for a single New Yorker is closer to $27. Beyond state-level hesitation to pass such laws, Jayaraman noted a big challenge to make sure if Congress passes a bill, it is done so equitably.

"The only way it's fair to other workers is if you're exempting taxes on tips that are above the minimum wage, not tips that bring you to the minimum wage," Jayaraman emphasized. "Because otherwise other minimum wage workers are paying tax on the minimum wage and then you'd have tipped workers not paying taxes on their minimum wage."

Advocates said it could also lead unscrupulous businesses to switch to a tipping model so they would not have to pay their workers a full minimum wage. She argued there would have to be some kind of guard enacted in the policy to prevent it from happening.

Unionized workers with the federal agency responsible for processing immigration and asylum paperwork claim they are being forced to turn their jobs over to non-union labor, in violation of federal law.

United Electrical, Radio, & Machine Workers of America members say the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Nebraska Service Center is laying off union workers in Nebraska and other states, and moving the jobs to non-union operations.

UE Local 808 President Dawn Meyer calls the center's move "union busting."

"What they are doing is, they're taking good union jobs," said Meyer. "They're outsourcing them to places that are paying less money, are less efficient, are far less vigilant in accuracy. They're risking people's ability to get immigration benefits."

Meyer said UE workers are a skilled, experienced workforce that performs clerical and pre-adjudication tasks.

They serve the immigration pipeline for asylum seekers, refugees, and victims of human trafficking and domestic violence.

The U.S. CIS did not respond to a request for comment.

Meyer said the U.S. CIS is playing a "shell game," laying off union workers and moving their jobs to the non-union Lockbox location in Dallas.

The work there principally involves the processing of fee-bearing petitions. She said the decision to relocate this work has resulted in predictable delays in processing.

"All these contracts are supposed to be open to the public because SCA is supposed to be a transparent process," said Meyer. "So it makes it very difficult for the common person to go looking for, 'Hey, what's my government doing?'"

UE locals in Lincoln, Essex, Vermont, and Laguna Niguel, California have recently held protests of the layoff policies - calling for the government to stop so-called "rolling layoffs," aimed at reducing the unionized workforce at all three locations by about two thirds between 2023 and 2025.


get more stories like this via email