![](https://onlabor.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/fwang-scaled.jpeg)
Fred Wang is a student at Harvard Law School.
In today’s news and commentary, employers react to Dobbs with criticism, internal policy change, or silence.
Employers — in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to overrule Roe v. Wade — are offering to reimburse travel expenses for employees who cross state lines to access safe, legal abortions. Companies such as Disney and Dick’s Sporting Goods have promised to cover travel expenses to obtain abortions as part of their employment health-benefits plans. The decision surely provides some relief for many, many workers whose lives are now troublingly complicated by the Court’s decision in Dobbs.
But even pro-choice advocates have raised hesitations with these initiatives. Some have voiced privacy concerns with having to let your employer know that you are even getting an abortion. Some have discussed the problem of further tying the average American’s access to basic health care to their employer. And some are worried that employers will leverage these benefits in anti-worker ways, such as to discourage union activity. For example, Starbucks — which has offered to help pay for employee abortion-travel expenses — has said that it could not “make promises of guarantees about any benefits” for unionized stores. Of course, there is no compelling reason for Starbucks to deny these benefits to workers at its unionized stores. The real motivation, some suggest, is to “sabotage the union effort.”
Most of these employers, however, have offered little in the way of actual criticism of Dobbs’s holding. Likely because abortion is such a uniquely politically charged issue, large companies have approached the merits of the decision with abundant caution. Some have not even mentioned whether the decision would trigger further changes in company policy.
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
June 30
Explaining the turnaround in Starbucks-union negotiations; overtime rule implementation against Texas enjoined; California reforms PAGA
June 28
Gig driver classification deal reached in Massachusetts; Amazon drivers in Illinois strike over ULP; CEO pay accelerates.
June 27
The economy and immigration expected to play a central role in the upcoming presidential debate and Washington gets involved in AI regulation of the entertainment industry.
June 26
California judge fines companies for child labor violations; IATSE reaches tentative deal with studios; Texas judge likely to block Biden Administration's overtime rule
June 25
Supreme Court grants petition to hear a case on the scope of ADA standing; Texas federal district court blocks DOL rule expanding wage requirements for construction contractors, and South Korean Hyundai workers authorize strike.
June 24
Workers across the country face extreme heat exposure with minimal government protections; Utility Workers Union of America Local 1-2 reaches a tentative agreement with Con Edison narrowly avoiding a strike; the Tenth Circuit grants a continuation of a freeze on a wage increase for some federal contractors