Labor and Jobs

Subterms

    Latest story

    175 Shares71 Views

    Trump May Get His ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ but the G.O.P. Will Pay a Price

    by

    And so will many voters.There will be many short- and long-term consequences if Republicans succeed in passing President Trump’s signature policy bill, as they aim to do before the July 4 holiday, David Leonhardt, the director of the Times editorial board, tells the national politics writer Michelle Cottle in this episode of “The Opinions.”Trump May Get His ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ but the G.O.P. Will Pay a PriceAnd so will many voters.Below is a transcript of an episode of “The Opinions.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio App, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.Michelle Cottle: I’m Michelle Cottle and I cover national politics for Times Opinion. So with the July 4 weekend looming, I thought we’d talk about a different kind of fireworks: that is, President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” and as always, I hope the air quotes there are audible for everybody.But that bill looks like it is on track for passage. From Medicaid cuts to tax breaks for the rich, it is a lot. Thankfully with me to talk about this is David Leonhardt, the fearless director of the New York Times editorial board, who has some very pointed thoughts on the matter. So let’s just get to it. David, welcome.David Leonhardt: Thank you, Michelle. It’s great to be talking with you.Cottle: I’m so excited, but warning to all: We are recording on Monday midday and even as we speak, the Senate is brawling its way through to a final vote. So the situation is fluid and could change the details by the time you all hear this.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares84 Views

      in Elections

      Fed’s Interest-Rate Approach Keeps It on Collision Course With Trump

      by

      The central bank signals little urgency to cut interest rates despite demands from President Trump for lower borrowing costs.Just hours before the Federal Reserve was set to announce its latest decision on interest rates on Wednesday, President Trump unleashed a barrage of attacks on its chair, Jerome H. Powell.“I call him every name in the book trying to get him to do something,” Mr. Trump said at an event at the White House, where he bashed Mr. Powell for not slashing interest rates.“I’m nasty, I’m nice — nothing works,” he lamented as he called Mr. Powell a series of names, including “stupid” and “Mr. Too Late.”The central bank’s resolve in the face of what has been an unrelenting pressure campaign from the president was on full display on Wednesday. Policymakers held interest rates steady for a fourth straight meeting, and nearly half of them signaled in new projections less scope to cut interest rates this year in anticipation of resurgent inflation. The Fed’s benchmark interest rate is currently in a range of 4.25 percent to 4.5 percent.Mr. Powell was also unwavering in his message that the Fed could afford to take its time on interest rate cuts and would stick to a “wait-and-see” approach until officials had more clarity about how Mr. Trump’s policies were affecting the economy.That could take months, keeping the White House and the Fed on a collision course that economists say stems directly from Mr. Trump’s policies, including his global trade war.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares97 Views

      in Elections

      China Labor Bulletin, a Rights Group in Hong Kong, Shuts Down

      by

      The China Labor Bulletin, which tracks factory closures and worker protests in China, cited financial difficulties for its dissolution.China Labor Bulletin, a Hong Kong-based group that tracked worker unrest in China and was started by a former pro-democracy protest leader, said on Thursday that it was shutting down because of financial difficulties.The group said that because of “financial difficulties and debt issues,” it could no longer maintain operations and had “decided to dissolve.” It said that it would stop updating content on its website and social media platforms.China Labor Bulletin, a resource for journalists and academics about worker unrest in China, was founded in 1994 by Han Dongfang, who had been one of the leaders of pro-democracy protests around Tiananmen Square in 1989. Over the years, the organization has closely monitored some of China’s biggest labor disputes. It regularly updated a map of labor strikes across the country, and published reports on companies and industries with known labor concerns.But in recent years, as the space for civil society in China narrowed and labor activists were monitored and harassed, Mr. Han directed his employees to focus on cases of labor unrest that involved foreign companies subject to foreign laws.Mr. Han was one of the last remaining labor rights activists not in hiding in Chinese territory. He continued to operate his group from Hong Kong, even as other China-focused civil society groups started closing or leaving from 2020, when Beijing imposed a national security law that has dismantled civil rights protections that gave the city its semiautonomous status.Mr. Han was not available by phone on Friday morning. A guard in the lobby of the building where China Labor Bulletin had its office said the group had moved out a month ago. Outside the doors of its office on the 26th floor, the organization’s sign had been taken down.In an interview last year, he told The New York Times that he was certain his offices were being surveilled by China’s state security and local national security police. But, he added, “I prefer to be open rather than to hide.”But academics have warned that China Labor Bulletin, and Mr. Han, could become a target of Beijing’s tightening grip on Hong Kong under the guise of national security because it is funded in part by a charity registered in the United States.Hong Kong and Beijing authorities have increasingly leaned on new national security legislation to arrest and charge activists, often citing links to foreign funding and organizations overseas as grounds for the arrests.On Thursday night, Beijing national security authorities operating in Hong Kong raided the homes of six people and the office of an organization that the government said it suspected of committing “collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security.” The Hong Kong authorities, which participated in the investigation, did not name the individuals or the organization. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Justice Jackson Just Helped Reset the D.E.I. Debate

      by

      At the heart of the debate over diversity, equity and inclusion is a question: How much should the law treat a person as an individual rather than as a member of a group?For a very long time, American law and American institutions answered that question unequivocally. People were defined primarily by the group they belonged to, and if they happened to be Black or Native American or a woman, they were going to enjoy fewer rights, fewer privileges and fewer opportunities than the people who belonged to the categories white and male.That was — and remains — a grievous injustice. At a minimum, justice demands that a nation and its institutions cease and desist from malicious discrimination. But doesn’t justice demand more? Doesn’t it also require that a nation and its institutions actually try to provide assistance to targeted groups to help increase diversity in employment and education and help targeted groups overcome the systemic effects of centuries of discrimination?On Thursday, the Supreme Court unanimously decided a case that was directly relevant to the latter question, and while the outcome wasn’t surprising, the court’s unanimity — and the identity of the author of the court’s opinion — certainly was.The facts of the case, Ames v. Ohio, are simple. In 2004, the Ohio Department of Youth Services hired a heterosexual woman named Marlean Ames to work as an executive secretary. By 2019, she’d worked her way up to program administrator and set her sights higher — applying for a management position in the agency’s Office of Quality and Improvement.The department interviewed Ames for the job but decided to hire someone else, a lesbian. The department then demoted Ames and replaced her with a gay man. Believing she’d been discriminated against on the basis of her sexual orientation, she filed suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Pledge to Not Tax Overtime Could Become Federal Law

      by

      When President Trump first floated the idea of “no tax on overtime” at a campaign rally last year, he did not elaborate on how it would work. Could anyone who works more than 40 hours a week claim a tax break? Would overtime pay really be completely tax-free?The answer to both questions, as it turns out, is no.Under the sprawling domestic policy bill that Republicans pushed through the House and are preparing to steer through the Senate, the tax break would be limited. It would be available only to Americans who, under federal law, must be paid at a time-and-a-half rate for working any time exceeding 40 hours in a week. That’s a broad group that includes almost all Americans who are paid an hourly wage, but many salaried workers would not be eligible.And the tax relief would not be total. Americans would still owe payroll taxes, and potentially state income taxes, on their overtime pay. Federal income taxes would be eliminated on those wages, but only on the earnings attributable to the 50-percent bump in pay — only a third of the money made while working overtime.Even with those limitations, both critics and supporters of the idea believe the tax break could reshape the American labor market. The White House Council of Economic Advisers expects that the policy will motivate Americans to work more and help strengthen the economy.Skeptics think the change would primarily drive people to reclassify their earnings or even change jobs in order to file for overtime. They worry that if enough people sought jobs that offer overtime, wages in those positions could eventually fall.“Ultimately, it’s going to create unintended consequences that incentivize certain behaviors in the labor market and thus create winners and losers from that,” said Emmet Bowling, a labor policy analyst at the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank. “Hourly jobs might become more desirable because of this tax deduction.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What Dreams Lie Beyond the Carnival?

      by

      I grew up going to amusement parks and fairgrounds in Quebec and the United States. Back then, the only thing on my mind was worrying about having my head turned upside down on the rides. My memories are full of the bright lights, fast rides and greasy food stands of those carnivals.Years later, when I revisited this world as an adult, all I could see was what was happening behind the scenes: workers busy building a wonderful world for children who aren’t their own, and men and women trying to escape a well-ordered life to find freedom and hope in their own way.The short documentary above was born out of my encounter with Kim Lalonde, who has spent a large part of his life working in carnivals, doing his best to put a smile on strangers’ faces. He also dreams of following other passions, but leaving the close-knit carnival world and his best friend, Billy, would be like losing a family. This tension between freedom, roots, kinship and new possibilities touched me — I wanted to capture this world where people never stop dreaming of somewhere else.Isabelle Grignon-Francke is a director and producer based in Quebec.Op-Docs is a forum for short, opinionated documentaries by independent filmmakers. Learn more about Op-Docs and how to submit to the series.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      New Jersey Can Show How to Take On Public Sector Strikes

      by

      Democrats have long blanched when public-sector unions threaten to strike and hold the economy for ransom. But with New Jersey Transit train engineers walking off the job on Friday, Gov. Phil Murphy can show the nation how blue states can resist that threat. Don’t panic, just say, “Let them strike,” and demonstrate resilience.With New York’s help, New Jersey can reduce the impact of the strike.New Jersey starts with an advantage: As of 2024, nearly three-quarters of New Jersey Transit’s weekday trips were on buses and light rail, which continue to operate. Most commuters who travel into Manhattan from New Jersey arrive on a bus and New Jersey is adding bus service to mitigate the strike’s impact. A private bus company, Boxcar, is also giving customers more options.Governor Murphy should also push car-pooling, with the help of Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York, who could implement a two- or three-passenger minimum for vehicles entering Lower and Midtown Manhattan from New Jersey if traffic grows too heavy. New York’s four-and-a-half-month-old congestion-pricing program is already a good reason for workers to car pool and save money.Governor Hochul should resist calls to suspend the congestion charge during the strike.Transit worker walkouts can have devastating consequences for the area economy. In 1966, the Transport Workers Union’s 12-day strike against subways cost New York more than half a billion dollars ($5 billion in today’s dollars) in lost wages and business.The strike transformed the brand-new administration of Mayor John V. Lindsay from fresh to exhausted.The political terror of transit strikes levies long-term costs. For decades, elected officials have allowed various unions to use the threat of a strike to protect pay and work practices that perennially push up the cost of providing transit.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Bessent Pitches Skittish Investors to Bet on Trump’s Economic Plan

      by

      The Treasury secretary urged executives and entrepreneurs to look beyond the Trump administration’s trade agenda.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urged skittish global business leaders on Monday to ignore President Trump’s economic naysayers and ramp up investment in the United States, defending an economic agenda that economists warn will slow economic growth and exacerbate inflation.Speaking to executives, entrepreneurs and policymakers, Mr. Bessent argued that the Trump administration’s economic plans go beyond trade policy and will pay off in the long run. He urged them to also focus on Mr. Trump’s plans to cut taxes and regulation, which he said would spur job creation and output.“Tariffs are engineered to encourage companies like yours to invest directly in the United States,” Mr. Bessent said in remarks at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles. “You’ll be glad you did — not only because we have the most productive work force in the world. But because we will soon have the most favorable tax and regulatory environment as well.”His comments came just hours after Mr. Trump ordered up new tariffs on foreign film producers, a decision that left many in Hollywood puzzled about how such a tax would work.The Treasury Secretary has been working to ease concerns among investors that Mr. Trump’s trade plans will destabilize the global economy. Mr. Trump last month levied tariffs on countries around the world and escalated a trade fight with China, which sent financial markets plunging.Since then, Mr. Bessent has been racing to negotiate trade deals with dozens of countries. He has also signaled that the China tariffs are not sustainable, offering hope that Mr. Trump would soon begin negotiations to lower them.”Our goal with trade policy is to level the playing field for our great American workers and companies,” Mr. Bessent said.The Trump administration is working closely with congressional Republicans ]on tax legislation that would extend the 2017 tax cuts and offer new tax breaks for overtime pay, tips and Social Security benefits. Mr. Bessent made the case on Monday that investors need to consider the broader agenda when thinking about where to park their money.Describing Mr. Trump’s policies as “mutually reinforcing,” Mr. Bessent said, “acting in concert, they push toward the same goal — to solidify our position as the home of global capital.”Investors have grown increasingly wary of Mr. Trump’s policies in recent months, with stocks, bonds and the dollar all showing signs of weakness as fund managers fret over the uncertainty surrounding Mr. Trump’s policymaking approach.The International Monetary Fund projected last month that global output will slow to 2.8 percent this year from 3.3 percent in 2024 and sharply downgraded its outlook for the U.S. economy.On Monday, Mr. Bessent said that Mr. Trump would prove “critics in establishment circles” wrong.“We have the world’s reserve currency, the deepest and most liquid markets, and the strongest property rights,” Mr. Bessent said. “For these reasons, the United States is the premier destination for international capital.” More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Administration Unveils EPA Overhaul With Shift to Approving New Chemicals

      by

      The Environmental Protection Agency’s administrator, Lee Zeldin, announced the agency was “shifting its scientific expertise.”The Environmental Protection Agency said on Friday that it would disperse scientists from its independent research office to other divisions where they among other things will be tasked with approving the use of new chemicals.Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the changes to the E.P.A. in a video, saying the agency was “shifting its scientific expertise” to focus on issues he described as “mission essential.”Most of the immediate changes will affect the Office of Research and Development, the E.P.A.’s main research arm that conducts studies on things like the health and environmental risks of “forever chemicals” in drinking water and the best way to reduce fine particle pollution in the atmosphere.An internal document previously reviewed by The New York Times outlined the Trump administration’s recommendation to eliminate that office, with plans to fire as many as 1,155 chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists working on health and environmental research.That didn’t happen on Friday, but the agency’s new priorities were made clear: One hundred and thirty jobs will be moved to an office at the agency tasked with approving new chemicals for use, Mr. Zeldin said. Chemical industry groups have long complained of a backlog in approvals, which they say is stifling innovation.At an all-hands staff meeting late Friday, Nancy Beck, a former lobbyist at the American Chemistry Council who now heads the E.P.A.’s chemicals office, told stunned scientists that it was “a very exciting time.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More