Fred Wang is a student at Harvard Law School.
Employers are divided on company-level vaccination policy, according to a New York Times survey published last week. Although the vast majority of large corporations plan to require vaccinations for at least some workers, there remains meaningful variation in terms of what these vaccine requirements will look like. Some employers will allow regular testing as an alternative to vaccination. Many go “above and beyond” the federal vaccine-or-test requirements that the Supreme Court blocked last month. Some require booster doses; most do not. And some will defer to federal, state, or local mandates — and not enact their own requirements. The result is a patchwork system of vaccination requirements that can vary based on one’s occupation, employer, city, or state.
Employment-recovery prospects for leisure and hospitality workers remain dim, despite general labor market tightness, according to a recent piece in HuffPost. Job numbers in the food-service and accommodations industries are down from their pre-COVID-19 levels, leaving workers laid off at the start of the pandemic “waiting for callbacks they’re no longer sure will come.” This protracted recession is likely the result of depressed consumer demand: people are going out and traveling less because of COVID-19. But workers fear that employers may be using the pandemic as a reason to permanently slash services and labor costs.
Uber’s proposal to establish pooled-benefit programs is a “bad deal” for platform workers, Simon Archer and Josh Mandryk argue in Jacobin. In Canada, the ride-share company is encouraging the creation of pooled-benefit funds that would, in Uber’s words, “protect the flexibility of platform work, while providing additional benefits and protections to workers.” In effect, the proposal is a half-measure that Uber will likely use to stall employment law reforms classifying platform-work drivers as employees. As the authors point out, “Uber’s financial incentive in the portable benefits plan is obvious: it is less than half the cost of existing benefits to which employees are currently entitled.”
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
July 31
Legislators move to end mandatory arbitration in employment contracts; NYC tip laws result in greater pay for delivery workers; women's college basketball players seek to unionize.
July 30
Supreme Court denies Cemex's bid to pause bargaining order; employers remain exposed to Title VII suits over English-only rules; Texas judge declines to enjoin NLRB proceeding despite unconstitutional removal protections.
July 29
NYC public defender strikes spread to the Bronx; NLRB drops challenge to New York labor law after Amazon wins its case; new data shows appointments of women and minorities to S&P 500 boards at lowest level in a decade.
July 28
DOJ drops charges against SEIU California president; Massachusetts nurses file ULP against hospital; Democratic lawmakers look to remove damage caps in employment discrimination cases
July 27
NY Port Authority proceeds to trial on PUMP Act case; First Circuit denies stay in order vacating H-1B visa fee; DC Circuit panel denies First Amendment claim over disclosure of confidential emails in allegation of prison's COVID-19 mismanagement.
July 24
EEOC drops request for UPenn's Jewish staff; Starbucks defeats mail-in ballots; and Mamdani appoints Lina Khan.