
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
August 15
Columbia University quietly replaces graduate student union labor with non-union adjunct workers; the DC Circuit Court lifts the preliminary injunction on CFPB firings; and Grubhub to pay $24.75M to settle California driver class action.
August 14
Judge Pechman denies the Trump Administration’s motion to dismiss claims brought by unions representing TSA employees; the Trump Administration continues efforts to strip federal employees of collective bargaining rights; and the National Association of Agriculture Employees seeks legal relief after the USDA stopped recognizing the union.
August 13
The United Auto Workers (UAW) seek to oust President Shawn Fain ahead of next year’s election; Columbia University files an unfair labor practice (ULP) charge against the Student Workers of Columbia-United Auto Workers for failing to bargain in “good faith”; and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) terminates its collective bargaining agreement with four unions representing its employees.
August 12
Trump nominates new BLS commissioner; municipal taxpayers' suit against teachers' union advances; antitrust suit involving sheepherders survives motion to dismiss
August 11
Updates on two-step FLSA certification, Mamdani's $30 minimum wage proposal, dangers of "bossware."
August 10
NLRB Acting GC issues new guidance on ULPs, Trump EO on alternative assets in401(k)s, and a vetoed Wisconsin bill on rideshare driver status