[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]






                              


 
                 EXAMINING THE POLICIES AND PRIORITIES
                     OF THE WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               Before The

                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS

                                 of the

                COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________



           HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FEBRUARY 14, 2024

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-36

                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce
  
  
  [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


        Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
        
        
                           ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 56-415PDF            WASHINGTON : 2024
    
        
        
        
        
        
                COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE

               VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman

JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, 
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania             Virginia,
TIM WALBERG, Michigan                  Ranking Member
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,
JIM BANKS, Indiana                     Northern Mariana Islands
JAMES COMER, Kentucky                FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania          SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  MARK TAKANO, California
BOB GOOD, Virginia                   ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
LISA McCLAIN, Michigan               MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MARY MILLER, Illinois                DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
MICHELLE STEEL, California           PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
RON ESTES, Kansas                    SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana              LUCY McBATH, Georgia
KEVIN KILEY, California              JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
AARON BEAN, Florida                  ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
ERIC BURLISON, Missouri              HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas               TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico
JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 KATHY E. MANNING, North Carolina
LORI CHAVEZ-DeREMER, Oregon          FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York           JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana
                       Cyrus Artz, Staff Director
              Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
                                 ------                                

                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS

                   KEVIN KILEY, California, Chairman

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            ALMA ADAMS, North Carolina,
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York            Ranking Member
JAMES COMER, Kentucky                ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
MARY MILLER, Illinois                HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
ERIC BURLISON, Missouri              MARK TAKANO, California
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on February 14, 2024................................     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

    Kiley, Hon. Kevin, Chairman, Subcommittee on Workforce 
      Protections................................................     1
        Prepared statement of....................................     4
    Adams, Hon. Alma, Ranking Member, Subcommittee Workforce 
      Protections................................................     6
        Prepared statement of....................................     8

                               WITNESSES

    Looman, Jessica, Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. 
      Department of Labor........................................    10
        Prepared statement of....................................    12

                         ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

    Omar, Hon. Ilhan, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of Minnesota:
        Comments from the National Electrical Contractors 
          Association and the International Brotherhood of 
          Electrical Workers.....................................    41
        Statement dated August 9, 2023, from the National 
          Electrical Contractors Association on the Davis-Bacon 
          Act....................................................    48
        Letter dated December 19, 2022, from the National 
          Electrical Contractors Association.....................    50
        Letter supporting Julie Sue's nomination dated March 7, 
          2023, from David Long..................................    52
        Testimony dated April 19, 2023, from the National 
          Electrical Contractors Association.....................    53
        National Electrical Contractors Association's nomination 
          support for Jessica Looman.............................    61
        Vote recommendations dated November 2, 2023, from the 
          National Electrical Contractors Association............    62
        Letter dated February 7, 2024, from the Sheet Metal and 
          Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association 
          supporting Final Rule Implementing Independent 
          Contractor Reforms.....................................    64
        Letter dated October 24, 2023, from the Sheet Metal and 
          Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association 
          endorsing Jessica Looman...............................    66
        Statement dated February 14, 2024, from the Sheet Metal 
          and Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association.    67
        Letter dated February 14, 2024, from the Sheet Metal and 
          Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association 
          supporting Biden's Final Rule..........................    74
        Letter dated October 25, 2023, from the Sheet Metal and 
          Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association 
          supporting the simplification of the Davis-Bacon Act...    76
        Letter on H.J. Res. 103, dated November 21, 2023.........    77
        SMACNA's support of Final Rule, dated January 9, 2024....    78
        Support letter dated October 25, 2023, from Stanley E. 
          Kolbe, Jr..............................................    80
        Letter dated February 13, 2024, from Construction 
          Employers of America...................................    82
        Letter dated February 9, 2023, from Laborer's 
          International Union of North America...................    87
        Letter dated February 8, 2024, from Sheet Metal and Air 
          Conditioning Contractors' National Association 
          endorsing Jessica Looman...............................    98
    Foxx, Hon. Virginia, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of North Carolina:
        Letter dated February 29, 2024 from Engine...............    91
        Letter dated February 5, 2024, signed by the National 
          Association of REALTORS and the Direct Selling 
          Association............................................    93
        Testimony dated February 14, 2024 from SourceAmerica.....    95

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
        Ms. Jessica Looman.......................................    99


                 EXAMINING THE POLICIES AND PRIORITIES



                     OF THE WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION

                              ----------                              


                      Wednesday, February 14, 2024

                  House of Representatives,
             Subcommittee on Workforce Protections,
                  Committee on Education and the Workforce,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:16 a.m., 
2175 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Kevin 
Kiley [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Kiley, Grothman, Miller, Burlison, 
Foxx, Adams, Omar, Stevens, and Scott.
    Also present: Good, Walberg, McClain.
    Staff present: Cyrus Artz, Staff Director; Nick Barley, 
Deputy Communications Director; Mindy Barry, General Counsel; 
Jackson Berryman, Speechwriter; Michael Davis, Legislative 
Assistant; Isabel Foster, Press Assistant; Daniel Fuenzalida, 
Staff Assistant; Sheila Havenner, Director of Information 
Technology; Alex Knorr, Legislative Assistant; Trey Kovacs, 
Professional Staff Member; Andrew Kuzy, Press Assistant; 
Georgie Littlefair, Clerk; John Martin, Deputy Director of 
Workforce Policy/Counsel; Hannah Matesic, Deputy Staff 
Director; Audra McGeorge, Communications Director; Kevin 
O'Keefe, Professional Staff Member; Rebecca Powell, Staff 
Assistant; Kelly Tyroler, Professional Staff Member; Heather 
Wadyka, Professional Staff Member; Seth Waugh, Director of 
Workforce Policy; Joe Wheeler, Professional Staff Member; Maura 
Williams, Director of Operations; Ilana Brunner, Minority 
General Counsel; Scott Estrada, Minority Professional Staff; 
Raiyana Malone, Minority Press Secretary; Kevin McDermott 
Minority Director of Labor Policy; Olivia McDonald, Minority 
Staff Assistant; Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director; 
Swetha Ramachandran, Minority Intern; Jessica Schieder, 
Minority Economic Policy Advisor; Dhrtvan Sherman, Minority 
Committee Research Assistant; Bob Shull, Minority Senior Labor 
Policy Counsel; Banyon Vassar, Minority IT Administrator.
    Chairman Kiley. The Subcommittee on Workforce Protections 
will come to order. I note that a quorum is present. Without 
objection, the Chair is authorized to call a recess at any 
time.
    The Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on the 
Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division's policies and 
priorities. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to today's 
hearing. The Committee convenes today to execute its 
constitutional responsibility to provide oversight of the 
executive branch.
    Upon taking the oath of office, President Biden pledged his 
administration to the highest standards of transparency. We 
plan to hold him to his word. However, Ms. Looman, one glaring 
constitutional anomaly at your Department, the Department of 
Labor, must first be addressed.
    After 337 days, the person purporting to lead the 
Department, Acting Secretary Julie Su, remains an unconfirmed 
Secretary. This has created an embarrassment to your department 
and a crisis of legitimacy with respect to every rule and 
regulation it churns out.
    It is an insult to the Members of the U.S. Senate, who 
carefully considered Ms. Su's nomination for months, who met 
countless times with Ms. Su and administration officials, who 
were on the receiving end of a war room, set up by the Biden 
administration, only to be told it was all play acting, that 
the administration could care less what the Senate thinks or 
what the Constitution requires, that the President was going to 
simply install his preferred Secretary without the 
inconvenience of a vote, even if it happened to be the least 
qualified person in the country for the position. On April 
26th, 2023, I, along with leadership in the House, called on 
President Biden to abandon his failed nominee.
    On July 21st, 2023, unconfirmed Acting Secretary Su set a 
record for time spent in Senate purgatory. That was quite a 
while ago when she set that record, July 21st, 2023. She became 
the longest-stalled nominee ever while her party controlled the 
Senate and White House.
    On January 4th of this year, I wrote a letter along with 
Chairwoman Foxx, making a commonsense request to the President, 
that Ms. Su not be renominated to a position for which she had 
already been rejected. Unfortunately, 4 days later, she was.
    Unconfirmed Acting Secretary Julie Su has now nearly 
tripled the old record for a stalled nominee. Her presence at 
the helm of Labor refutes any notion that the President planned 
on running a transparent administration. Today, I am once again 
calling on President Biden to remove unconfirmed Acting 
Secretary Su from her post. Each day her dubious tenure lasts 
is another day the American people are denied a legitimate 
leader of a massive taxpayer funded department and are denied a 
Secretary who is actually on the side of American workers.
    You see, there is a reason Ms. Su faced bipartisan 
opposition in the Senate. Not only did her mismanagement in 
California cost taxpayers $31 billion, but her regulatory 
agenda is the most anti-worker set of policies perhaps in 
modern American history.
    Which brings us to today. The rules and regulations passed 
down over the past year by the Department of Labor's Wage and 
Hour Division will be extremely harmful to American workers, 
job creators and small businesses. In particular, the 
California-inspired independent contractor rule will deprive 
freelancers across the country of their livelihoods.
    In California, we have seen journalists, writers, 
electricians, countless workers in over 600 professions lose 
their careers because of AB 5, the very law that President 
Biden has cited as his model. The law was so damaging that the 
State legislature exempted 109 categories of workers from it.
    Effective March 11th, thanks to your Ms. Su's new rule, 
millions of independent contractors across America could lose 
their livelihoods, and tens of millions more will be forced 
into working arrangements that they do not desire. I will be 
introducing a resolution of disapproval under the congressional 
Review Act to nullify this harmful rule and stop the Department 
of Labor from this nationwide attack on the American workforce.
    I am also greatly concerned with the Wage and Hour 
Division's proposed overtime rule, which will be especially 
costly for non-profits and small businesses. The rule forced 
businesses to cut hours, let go of workers and divert resources 
to compliance while costing the economy $19 billion.
    Those are not the only two concerning regulations coming 
out of the Wage and Hour Division. What is more, the 
President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request includes $341 
million for the Division. That is a nearly 31 percent increase 
to carry out its agenda.
    Ms. Looman, right now consumer sentiment resembles about 
what it did during the Great Recession. Gas prices and grocery 
prices have shot up during this administration, while real 
wages have gone down. We need to be encouraging economic 
growth, supporting workers and empowering job creators.
    Your division's agenda appears to have precisely the 
opposite objectives. Therefore, I urge you to withdraw the 
proposed overtime rule, to stop the final independent contract 
rule before it takes effective and frankly to re-think any 
regulation that is negatively impacting American workers, job 
creators and small businesses.
    With that, I yield to the Ranking Member for an opening 
statement.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Kiley follows:]
  [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]   
    

    Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you Ms. 
Looman for testifying before the Subcommittee today. The Biden 
administration and congressional Democrats have prioritized, 
excuse me, growing our economy from the bottom up and the 
middle out, resulting in a recovery that has far outpaced 
expectations.
    For instance, the American Rescue Plan Act, which passed 
without the single support of a single congressional 
Republican, helped vulnerable workers make ends meet and keep 
them in the workforce, and the Inflation Reduction Act, which 
also passed without the support of a single House Republican, 
accelerated our economic growth, lowered costs for workers and 
families, and helped families keep a roof over their heads and 
food on their tables.
    Well, do not take my word for it. Do not take my word for 
it, just look at the numbers. I think there should be a slide 
somewhere. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, under 
President Biden, the economy has added 14.8 million jobs with 
2021 representing the second largest years of job growth on 
record. 127,800 of those jobs were created in my district 
within the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia metropolitan area, and 
that is more jobs created in his first 2 years than former 
President Trump created in all four.
    Furthermore, President Biden has fully embraced a 
progressive, pro-worker regulatory agenda by raising Federal 
contract workers' pay to $15 an hour and repealing harmful 
restrictions imposed by the previous administration that 
allowed unscrupulous employers to misclassify workers and evade 
liability for labor violations.
    While wages and salaries have grown faster than prices 
since the beginning of 2021, thanks to the Biden administration 
and congressional Democrats handling the economy, our Federal 
minimum wage has not kept up with prices.
    It is simply not feasible for residents to live off of 
$7.25 per hour, and an increase in the Federal minimum wage is 
something that I have fought for since my days in the North 
Carolina statehouse, and it is indeed needed as much as ever 
today. Working hard is not enough if you do not make enough.
    Last, Americans filed over 5.5 million new business 
applications in 2023, far exceeding the pre-pandemic rate. 
Bidenomics is not only good for workers; it is good for 
business. Contrary to my Republicans colleagues' claims, 
President Biden and Committee Democrats have always been 
committed to supporting workers and business owners.
    The most dangerous proposals for our economy come from 
hardline Republicans who want to turn back the clock on 
fundamental workplace protections that date back to the New 
Deal. Republicans on this Committee have spent more time this 
Congress undermining Acting Secretary Su than protecting 
children from being forced to work in slaughterhouses.
    For example, the Trump administration gave unscrupulous 
employers a free pass to misclassify workers and deny them 
essential protections like overtime, minimum wage, worker's 
compensation, unemployment, and health and safety protections.
    The lack of strong workplace protections winds up costing 
workers, families, and taxpayers billions of dollars. The Trump 
era Fair Labor Standards Act joint employer rule would have 
ultimately cost workers more than $1 billion a year, and the 
Trump era independent contractor rule would have cost workers 
nearly $4 billion each year in lost wages and benefits.
    Workers should get the money that they earned and have the 
workplace protections that they deserve. Congress must support, 
not obstruct, the Wage and Hour Division's progress to deliver 
for workers and their families. Under Ms. Looman's leadership, 
the Wage and Hour Division is expanding overtime pay 
protections for an additional 3.6 million Americans, returning 
millions of stolen wages to worker's pockets, and leading an 
interagency effort to hold unscrupulous employers accountable 
for endangering children through unsafe and illegal child 
labor.
    Unfortunately, years of Republican-led funding cuts have 
undermined the Department's ability to adequately enforce wage 
and hour laws thoroughly, and to thoroughly investigate 
violations. We cannot afford to go backward to a time when 
young children work long hours in hazardous workplaces, when 
employers could demand workers stay on the job for 12 hours a 
day, and when all that it took to break the law was to get off 
the hook.
    Mr. Chairman, again I want to welcome Ms. Looman, and I 
thank you again for appearing before us today, and look forward 
to a productive conversation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield 
back.
    [The prepared statement of Ranking Member Adams follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    

    Chairman Kiley. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(c), all 
Committee members who wish to insert written statements into 
the record may do so by submitting them to the Committee Clerk 
electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m. after 14 days 
from the date of this hearing, which is February 28th, 2024.
    Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 
14 days after the date of this hearing to allow such statements 
and other extraneous material referenced during the hearing to 
be submitted for the official hearing record. I note for the 
Subcommittee that some of my colleagues who are not permanent 
members of this Subcommittee may be waiving on for the purpose 
of today's hearing.
    I will now turn to the introduction of our distinguished 
witness. Our witness today is Hon. Jessica Looman, who is the 
Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division at the U.S. 
Department of Labor, located in Washington, DC.
    Ms. Looman was sworn in as Administrator on November 29th, 
2023, following a Senate confirmation vote of 51 to 46. Ms. 
Looman has led the WHD through the entirety of the Biden 
administration, where she previously held the position of 
Acting Administrator and Principal Deputy Administrator.
    Prior to her Federal service, Ms. Looman was the executive 
director of the Minnesota State Building and Construction 
Trades Council, and Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of 
Commerce. She holds a J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law 
School, and a B.A. from the George Washington University.
    We thank the witness for being here today and look forward 
to your testimony. Pursuant to Committee rules, I would ask 
that you limit your oral presentation to a 5-minute summary of 
your written statement. I would also like to remind the witness 
to be aware of her responsibility to provide accurate 
information to the Subcommittee. I will now recognize Ms. 
Looman.

STATEMENT OF HON. JESSICA LOOMAN, ADMINISTRATOR, WAGE AND HOUR 
      DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, WASHINGTON, D.C.

    Ms. Looman. Thank you so much Chairman Kiley, Ranking 
Member Adams and the members of the Subcommittee, and thank you 
for the opportunity to testify today about the important work 
of the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor.
    The mission of the Wage and Hour Division is to promote and 
achieve compliance with Federal labor standards, to protect and 
enhance the welfare of the Nation's workforce.
    I would like to focus this morning on three areas of the 
Division's work. First, I would like to review the laws that we 
administer and the scope of our engagement with employers and 
workers. Second, I will provide examples of some of the impact 
of our enforcement and compliance assistance. Last, I will 
briefly touch on our work to combat child labor.
    As you know, the Wage and Hour Division administers and 
enforces fundamental workplace protections enacted by Congress, 
including the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Family Medical 
Leave Act, the prevailing wage requirements of the Davis-Bacon 
Act and Service Contract Act, and other Federal labor standards 
laws.
    Collectively, the laws enforced by the Wage and Hour 
Division protect more than 165 million workers at 11 million 
workplaces throughout the United States. These foundational 
protections are as vital today as they were when they were 
enacted, because we know that our Nation's economy is strongest 
when workers get paid what they have earned on payday, and when 
businesses can compete on a level playing field.
    During this last fiscal year, the Wage and Hour Division 
recovered more than $274 million back wages and damages for 
more than 163,000 workers. We also made significant progress to 
combat illegal child labor, conducting 955 investigations that 
found violations affecting nearly 5,800 children, and we 
assessed more than $8 million in penalties for these 
violations.
    The Division conducted more than 4,500 outreach events, 
providing compliance assistance and information to more than 
450,000 stakeholders. We provided confidential compliance 
assistance through almost one million calls to our 54 district 
offices across the country.
    The Wage and Hour Division is fully committed to protecting 
our country's most vulnerable workers and ensuring that workers 
receive their hard-earned wages. For example, in a recent 
investigation in Georgia, we recovered $71,000 in back wages 
for 16 home care workers who were not paid overtime. One of 
these workers told us that the money helped her get caught up 
on her bills and put food on the table.
    We protect employees who are misclassified as independent 
contractors, and who lose the full wage and hour protections 
that they're entitled to. In Florida, we recovered $28,000 in 
back wages for 36 restaurant employees, many of whom were 
dishwashers who had been misclassified as independent 
contractors.
    We addressed retaliation against employees who assert their 
rights and cooperate in wage and hour investigations. We 
protect construction workers who are essential to building our 
Nation's infrastructure. We ensure that eligible employees have 
job-protected leave, and that new mothers have protections to 
pump breast milk at work, including expanded protections 
provided by the Pump Act.
    Of course, one of our greatest priorities is protecting 
children from unlawful child labor. Positive and safe work 
experiences allow young people to develop skills and earn money 
and learn what it is like to be part of a workforce. A job 
should never jeopardize a child's well-being or education.
    We investigate every actionable child labor complaint, tip 
and referral, and since 2019 the Division has seen an 88 
percent increase in the number of children employed in 
violation of Federal child labor laws. I want to be clear that 
this increase is a direct result of our focus on this issue and 
reflects our work in uncovering and investigating more child 
labor cases.
    To address the most egregious forms of illegal child labor, 
last February we launched a National Strategic Enforcement 
Initiative to combat unlawful child labor, and we are also 
taking a whole of government approach through the interagency 
task force to combat child labor exploitation.
    In addition to our enforcement efforts, the Division is 
continuing important rulemakings and guidance and outreach and 
education, to ensure employers understand their 
responsibilities and that workers understand their rights under 
the law.
    At the Department of Labor, we know that the vast majority 
of employers want to comply with the law, and we are committed 
to supporting them. We have held over 14,000 events to provide 
wage and hour information to employers and small business 
owners, workers and other stakeholders since the start of this 
administration.
    We are committed to continuing to look for ways to build a 
strong economy that works for everyone. I want to thank you 
again for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I 
look forward to your questions. Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement of Administrator Looman follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    Chairman Kiley. Under our Committee Rule 9, we will now 
question the witnesses under the 5-minute rule. I will 
recognize the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Burlison, for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Looman, the 
Department of Labor's proposed overtime rule is deeply 
concerning for the well-being of our Nation's small businesses, 
the non-profits, universities and all of the employers really.
    The Department of Labor's approach has raised serious 
issues, particularly regarding the insufficient comment period 
and the lack of consideration for the challenges faced by 
businesses. The rush to push through the rule without a 
reasonable and meaningful comment period is a disservice to 
both employers and workers because a 60-day window is 
insufficient.
    This is particularly concerning because of the fact that 
much of the information necessary to assess the rule accurately 
did not exist yet. During the witness testimony on the proposed 
overtime rule at a hearing held in November before this 
Committee, I was able to ask Mr. Paul DeCamp, who is a Wage and 
Hour attorney and the former Administrator of the Wage and Hour 
Division under the Bush administration if he had ever seen or 
experienced having such a short comment period for a policy of 
this magnitude.
    His answer was that he had not seen anything like this in 
his 25 years of experience in wage and hour issues. Ms. Looman, 
could you tell us why the proposed rule was pushed through so 
quickly and in such an unprecedented manner?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Burlison, for your 
question. As you know, the Fair Labor Standards Act includes 
the protection of workers from overtime. It has been a 
cornerstone of the law since its enactment. Enforcing the 
overtime protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act is 
absolutely a priority of the Wage and Hour Division.
    As a matter of fact, about 84 percent of the back wages 
that we collect for workers is associated with their failure to 
receive the overtime that they have earned on payday. We have 
issued a proposed rule to address a specific exemption from 
protections from the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is the 
exemption that applies to executive administrative or 
professional employees.
    When an employee is exempt under that particular rule, 
under that particular law, that means that they do not get the 
protections of minimum wage or overtime. Therefore, it is very 
important that we are very careful about who is considered 
exempt for purposes of that requirement.
    We have proposed a rule, and the proposed rule was issued 
and will continue to be developed in compliance with the 
Administrative Procedures Act, and we did provide a 60-day 
comment period in which we received over 33,000 comments from 
people who were interested in making sure that we developed the 
best rule that we possibly could.
    Mr. Burlison. Imagine if you had kept that period open to a 
normal length of time, how many comments you would have 
received.
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Burlison. Again, this 
rule is following on a rule that was adopted in 2019. I has 
been about 5 years since we updated the overtime regulation, 
and similarly that rule was adopted under the APA and had a 60-
day comment period.
    Mr. Burlison. You know, the 2016 rule that occurred under 
the Obama administration, it faced serious legal challenges, 
and it was ultimately blocked. I expect and hope that the same 
outcome will happen with this. Our job is to protect the 
interests of small businesses, the non-for-profits and the 
workers across this country, which is done largely by keeping 
the government from over-reaching and causing more problems.
    That is why we must prioritize policies that foster 
economic growth, support job creation and create a system where 
businesses can be successful. The Biden proposed rule does the 
opposite, in my opinion, of these things, which is why I have 
introduced the Overtime Pay Flexibility Act.
    I will be introducing that this week to address these 
issues and to stop the Biden administration from implementing 
these new overtime rules. With that, Mr. Chairman, I would 
encourage other members to take a look at this new bill that I 
will be filing, and with that, I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. I now recognize the Ranking Member, Dr. 
Adams, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you again, 
Ms. Looman, for being here, Ms. Looman. The Republican economic 
agenda in the States appears to hinge on putting children to 
work and making them work for longer hours. What are the risks 
to children's educational outcomes when they work more than 20 
hours per week during the school year?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Adams. 
Addressing child labor and illegal child labor and child labor 
exploitation is a priority of the administration, and as you 
know one of the primary focuses always has been the Fair Labor 
Standards Act, is to protect our most vulnerable workers, and 
that includes children.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you, ma'am.
    Ms. Looman. The reason that we really want to focus on 
making sure that we are protecting children from illegal child 
labor is because it does have detrimental effects on both their 
health and educational opportunities.
    Ms. Adams. Great, thank you very much. The Wage and Hour 
Division assessed a penalty of $1.5 million for Packer 
Sanitation Services, a major cleaning contractor for meat 
packing companies, because it illegally employed more than 100 
children across eight states.
    The Financial Times described this penalty as trivial. Do 
you think the child labor penalties that you are able to assess 
under current law provide an adequate disincentive to 
employers?
    Ms. Looman. Again, thank you for raising this issue, 
Ranking Member Adams. Child labor and child labor exploitation 
to the extent that we are seeing across the country, 
particularly as it relates to certain types of work, where 
children should never be in the first place, including cleaning 
the kill room floors of meat packing facilities across the 
country.
    The penalty that we are able to assess is currently a 
little over $15,000 per violation, and we recognize and we have 
called on and asked for Congress to look at whether or not that 
is a sufficient level of civil money penalty, in order to both, 
you know, penalize for the type of violations and exploitation 
that we are seeing, but also frankly so that we can deter 
future violations of child labor laws, because we know most 
employers are trying to comply with the law.
    When children are exploited and children are employed 
illegally, that really hurts all businesses and all workers.
    Ms. Adams. Okay. I think you have probably answered some of 
it, but can you explain the new approach that you have taken to 
assessing penalties on a per violation basis instead of a per 
child basis, and whether you think that this will help to 
create a disincentive to violate child labor laws?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Adams, and of course the 
way that we are assessing civil money penalties is in 
accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act, as well as in 
accordance to the regulations that have been adopted. The 
statute says that we should be assessing civil money penalties 
per violation of the child labor laws.
    We also recognize that there are different types of child 
labor laws, and so we want to make sure that the civil money 
penalties are assessed appropriately for the most egregious 
type of child labor exploitation.
    Ms. Adams. Okay. According to Anna Stansbury's research 
with the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a 
typical firm would need to expect a chance of at least 77 to 88 
percent that this violation would be detected, in order to have 
an incentive to comply with the FLSA.
    In 1948, the WHD employed roughly a thousand inspectors, 
and 22 million employers were covered by laws in force. How 
many inspectors does your agency currently employ, and how many 
employees are currently covered by laws that your agency 
enforces, and what would it mean in workers and children's 
lives if your agency had sufficiently more inspectors?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Adams. We currently have 
721 investigators to protect 165 million workers at 11 million 
workplaces across the country. Significantly more workers need 
our help. We need to be where workers are. We need to be able 
to be responsive to employers' requests for technical 
assistance and compliance help.
    We absolutely need more resources in the Wage and Hour 
Division to meet the needs of most vulnerable workers, but also 
to make sure that we have an economy that is working for 
everyone.
    Ms. Adams. Absolutely, thank you. I certainly agree. Mr. 
Chairman, I yield back. Thank you very much for your answers.
    Chairman Kiley. I now recognize the gentleman from 
Wisconsin, Mr. Grothman, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Grothman. Thank you. We have had testimony before here 
regarding children who may be working overtime, may be working 
late at night. If your department finds children who you 
suspect may be here from another country, which would indicate 
maybe should not be here, what do you do about it? What is the 
followup with say a 16 year-old child who is working third 
shift?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Grothman. I appreciate 
the opportunity to meet with you today. As you know, protecting 
children from illegal child labor is in fact one of our top 
priorities. In the Wage and Hour Division, when employers are 
employing children in violation, our responsibility is to 
enforce the Fair Labor Standards Act.
    Fundamentally at the end of the day, employers have the 
responsibility for stopping illegal child labor, and we need to 
hold employers accountable if they violate the law.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. If you, if you find a child like that, 
okay, what do you do with the child?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Grothman. We are focused 
on holding employers accountable and ensuring that they are 
complying with the law.
    Mr. Grothman. Yes. What do you do with the child? I mean if 
we have a child who is a minor and working illegally, do we 
call their parents? Do we say, ``do you know your child is 
working at the L&M manufacturing plant at two in the morning?'' 
Do you contact the parents?
    Ms. Looman. Again, Congressman Grothman, we are responsible 
for enforcing the wage and hour laws and the child labor laws. 
What we do, because we know that children are particularly 
vulnerable, and we want to make sure and it is a responsibility 
of everyone across the community to hold, to make sure that we 
are protecting kids.
    We work very closely with community-based organizations. We 
work very closely with other types of agencies that provide 
services, to make sure that kids have access to those services.
    Mr. Grothman. Do you make any kind--do you make an effort 
to find that person's parents, to find out whether they are 
even living with their parents?
    Ms. Looman. Again----
    Mr. Grothman. You do not consider that your responsibility. 
You would just say okay, we found little Johnny at two in the 
morning in the factory. We will call some other agency, and we 
will maybe send a nasty letter to the employer.
    We just do not care if that 15 year-old even has a parent 
in the country. Is that your attitude?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Grothman, I care very, very much, 
and I care very deeply about every child who is employed 
illegally in this country. We of course work very closely with 
everyone who can provide services and meet the needs of those 
kids.
    We also are holding employers accountable for employing 
children illegally in the first place.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. There was an article in the New York 
Times. The Biden administration insisted it was a high number. 
Let us say there is somewhere between 35,000 and 85,000 
unaccompanied minors in this country. By that, I mean the 
parents are not even here, and obviously some people are----
    They are living with somebody. Somebody is making money off 
them. Does that concern you? I mean I would think if I found 
somebody, maybe if they could barely speak English, working 
clearly illegally, even if they were by all accounts an 
American child, I would call their parents and say ``What's 
going on? Why is Johnny at such and such a place at two in the 
morning?''
    Now particularly in light of the fact that according to the 
New York Times, tens of thousands of these minors have been 
lost. We do not even know where they are. Do you think the 
bureaucracy has some duty to find out who is taking care of 
these kids or if their parents are anywhere to be seen?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman. We recognize that many 
times there are children who are particularly vulnerable to 
child labor exploitation, and this could include--and recognize 
that this could include immigrant workers----
    Mr. Grothman. You make no effort to contact their parents. 
I guess that is the final question.
    Ms. Looman. Congressman, I just want to--I just want to say 
that our responsibility is to both keep these kids safe, and 
also to make sure that employers stop employing children 
illegally in this country.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. Well, if you are not contacting their 
parents, I do not see how you are making an effort to keep them 
safe. We will switch to another topic. Independent contractors. 
We all know, or we should know people are independent 
contractors and love it.
    Uber drivers are an example of people who love their job, 
and brag about how much money they are making and blah blah 
blah blah blah.
    Your independent contractor rule, truckers would be another 
one, would prevent these American citizens, who used to mean 
you were free to do kind of what you want, they love this 
independent contractor arrangement where they have a lot of 
freedoms as to how and when they are going to work, make a lot 
of money.
    Does it bother you--you are taking the freedom to enter 
into these contracts with Uber, Uber drivers enter into? Does 
it bother you are taking away from them, who should know what 
is best, you know, for themselves, the ability to work as an 
independent contractor?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman. We are focused on 
addressing misclassification of workers who should get the 
protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act, but we very much 
recognize that independent contractors are running their own 
business or in business for themselves and are really an 
important part of the economy.
    Mr. Grothman. Insurance agents? Does that bother you, that 
a smart Ph.D. insurance agent, you take away him, his or her 
ability to operate as an independent contractor?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman again, in the Wage and Hour 
Division we are focused on addressing misclassification of 
workers who had been misclassified as independent contractors. 
We very much, and our new rule very much protects both 
employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and independent 
contractors who are not covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act 
and are in business for themselves.
    Chairman Kiley. The gentleman's time has expired. I will 
now recognize the gentlewoman from Michigan, Ms. Stevens, for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Stevens. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and it is so great to 
see you, Administrator Looman. I would say since your 
appointment you are the right person at the right time for a 
very critical agency.
    We are thrilled to see that you have recouped those $274 
million just in Fiscal Year 2023 alone, the ``you'' being the 
collective you of the Wage and Hour Division. This is impacting 
163,000 workers across the country. You are recovering more 
than $17 million in back wages for workers on federally funded 
projects alone, whose employers just did not abide by 
prevailing wage laws.
    I just wanted to kind of talk about the process a little 
bit, in how these investigations work and how your team 
identifies these stolen dollars that are owed, and then how 
they end up getting recouped, because that has got to be very 
complicated, and I assume you are not in the business of just 
straight up gotcha.
    We need people to advocate for workers. You know, it is not 
up to those of us on this Committee to say you must enjoy being 
an independent contractor who does not get your full wage, 
right? We know we have got issues with looming retirement gaps, 
Social Security challenges here in this country, and that yes, 
we have got record employment in this country.
    We see that the American people, and this is so pertinent 
to us in Michigan, and throughout the industrial Midwest, which 
is this effort of a good job, right, and so the role in which 
your agency helps individuals maintain the dignity of work and 
maintain the opportunity to earn what is owed to them and 
achieve that tenet of a good job. I just want to kind of 
understand the process here and what your investigators go 
through.
    Ms. Looman. Thank you so much, Congressman Stevens. I 
really appreciate the question, and again, I really value the 
work that we are doing at the Wage and Hour Division, every 
single investigator who wakes up every day to really help 
workers and help employers and ensure compliance with the law.
    The Wage and Hour Division, as you say, we are very much 
focused on making sure that jobs are good jobs, and that 
workers get their hard-earned pay on payday. We do that. A lot 
of the work that we do is really about preventing wage and hour 
violations from happening in the first place.
    Prevention is so important, because we know employers 
really want to get this right. We know they want to comply with 
the law. We also provide a lot of compliance assistance, so 
that employers can understand what their obligations are, and 
workers can understand what their rights are, but really so 
that we can help employers get everything right before there is 
a problem.
    Then we do our enforcement work, and as you have seen, and 
as you have seen a lot of our enforcement work results and 
recovery of back wages for workers who should have gotten those 
pay, that pay on payday. We are very much focused on making 
sure that we have good jobs.
    When we conduct an investigation, and we do that whether it 
is based on a complaint or an agency-initiated effort, or a 
referral or a tip, when we initiate an investigation, we are 
absolutely meeting with the employer, explaining to them what 
we're investigating, the information that we are going to need.
    We keep the employer informed all the way along the 
investigation. We talk to workers. We find out what is 
happening. We understand--we need to learn and understand what 
violations may be occurring, and then of course when we assess 
the back wages and penalties, we are also ensuring that we are 
achieving compliance going forward.
    Ms. Stevens. Yes, and I just--I wanted to give you a minute 
to explain that, and I really think that it is a beautiful 
thing that this Committee needs to absorb and understand that 
is going on in your agency, because it is handholding. It is 
working together.
    Imagine if you are that worker, you know. Who do you turn 
to? Who do you know to go to? I mean I am sitting here. I am a 
Member of Congress, and I need to be supporting your agency, 
your department alongside, by the way, this Acting 
Administrator Julie Su who needs to get confirmed. We need to 
function. We need to continue to grow our economy. We need to 
continue to build off of the successes that Biden's put in 
place.
    I want to make sure my constituents know about this, and 
not because it is a gotcha but because it is a vulnerability, 
right? It is about getting what is owed to you and it is about 
rising costs and putting food on the table, and making sure 
your kid can do all the sports programs, and God forbid there 
is a medical issue.
    Let us keep digging on this. This is an important hearing, 
and thank you so much, Administrator Looman, for your time. I 
will yield back, Mr. Chair.
    Chairman Kiley. I now recognize the gentlewoman from 
Illinois, Ms. Miller, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Miller. Thank you, Chairman. Joe Biden's own Department 
of Health and Human Services and Department of Homeland 
Security have acknowledged the increase in child trafficking 
under the Biden administration. Even the liberal New York Times 
is reporting on the child trafficking crisis that the Biden 
administration has created by opening our southern border.
    You can see on this chart the massive spike in child 
trafficking during the Biden administration, because Joe Biden 
is allowing cartels to traffic children across our border. 
Administrator Looman, do you think the Open Border policies of 
the Biden administration have caused the increase in child 
labor violations?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congresswoman Miller. A pleasure to 
be here with you today. The Biden administration is very much 
focused on ensuring that children are not employed illegally in 
this country, and we have--we have launched several----
    Ms. Miller. The Biden administration has lost 85,000 
children, and actually I was recently at the border and the 
Border Patrol suggested that it was over 100,000. They have 
lost 85,000 children during this disaster at the border.
    The spike is during your administration. You own this. It 
is because of the border policies. Has President Biden taken 
any responsibility for the uptick in child exploitation?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Miller. Absolutely. We 
are doing several things across the administration, including 
we have an interagency task force to address and combat child 
labor exploitation. We are working very closely with the 
Department of Labor, the Department of Homeland Security, the 
Department of Health and Human Services, to make sure that we 
are addressing, combatting and preventing child labor 
exploitation from occurring all across the government.
    We are also working with states and other partners across 
the country to address this really important issue.
    Ms. Miller. Well, you are failing at it because you cannot 
even find the children. 85,000 minor children are missing. It 
is a disaster. DHS is reporting that 85,000 children across the 
border are missing. Does the Department of Labor have any idea 
where these 85,000 children are?
    I have heard that the Biden administration is paying people 
that are here illegally, adults that are not related to these 
children, to care for these children. Do you know where--does 
the Biden administration have any idea where 85,000 children 
have gone?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Miller, again, we are working 
across the entire administration to address and prevent child 
labor exploitation, and this is absolutely an area of focus for 
all of us.
    Ms. Miller. You do not know where these 85,000 children 
are? This is what the Biden administration does. They create 
horrible crises; then they demand Congress give them money to 
fix the crisis; then they use that money to make the crisis 
worse, so they can ask for more money.
    You are allowing cartels to traffic children into our 
country and doing nothing to stop them, and I would not give 
you a penny. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Administrator Looman, my colleague across 
the aisle here, Ms. Stevens, said that Acting Secretary Julie 
Su needs to get confirmed. Do you agree with that?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Chairman Kiley. I am honored and 
privileged to get to work with Acting Secretary Su. Under her 
leadership, we are doing really important work at the Wage and 
Hour Division at U.S. Department of Labor.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay, but the question I asked, can you 
answer that?
    Ms. Looman. Chairman Kiley, I certainly, you know, defer to 
the U.S. Senate as to the confirmation process. Again, it is an 
honor and a privilege to get to work with Acting Secretary Su.
    Chairman Kiley. We have, you know, bipartisan statements 
here, maybe meant a somewhat different way from myself and Ms. 
Stevens, that Acting Secretary Su needs to get confirmed if she 
is going to stay as the head of the Labor Department. Do you 
agree with that?
    Ms. Looman. Chairman Kiley, again I very much admire and 
appreciate and get the opportunity to work with Acting 
Secretary Su.
    Chairman Kiley. Right. Do you think she needs to get 
confirmed?
    Ms. Looman. Chairman Kiley again, I certainly defer to the 
U.S. Senate. Under the Biden administration, we are very much 
focused on protecting workers and making sure that the U.S. 
Department of Labor is functioning in a way that absolutely is 
helping employers be successful in----
    Chairman Kiley. Do you think having an unconfirmed 
Secretary has affected morale at the Department of Labor?
    Ms. Looman. Chairman Kiley, you know again, the team that I 
get to work with and everyone that I get to work with at the 
U.S. Department of Labor is very much focused on protecting 
workers in this country and making sure that we have an economy 
that works for everyone.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay, that is--thank you for that. I asked 
a different question. I said do you think that having an 
unconfirmed Acting Secretary who has set all the records for 
how long she has been there without being confirmed, do you 
think that has affected morale at the Department of Labor?
    Ms. Looman. Chairman Kiley, I think morale at the U.S. 
Department of Labor is exceptional.
    Chairman Kiley. I recognize the gentlewoman from Minnesota, 
Ms. Omar.
    Ms. Omar. Thank you so much for joining us today, 
Administrator. Your agency has been fighting the child labor 
crisis before it became a major news story. The Wage and Hour 
Division's enforcement actions have impacted almost 6,000 
children, marking an 80 percent increase since 2019.
    This is an issue that both Democrats and Republicans should 
prioritize, especially in this Subcommittee, and yet we have 
not held a hearing. We have not seriously discussed or marked 
up useful legislation either. Although Congress's legislative 
and funding focus on child labor has been lacking to say the 
least, I am relieved that this administration is doing whatever 
it can to mitigate child labor violations.
    Administrator Looman, could you describe how your office 
has enhanced its enforcement work, even with limited resources, 
and can you outline actions taken by DOL Task Force on Child 
Labor Exploitation that launched last year?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Omar from the State of 
Minnesota. Absolutely. Child labor and child labor exploitation 
has and continues to be one of the primary focuses of the Wage 
and Hour Division, and the U.S. Department of Labor.
    We have to protect the most vulnerable workers in America, 
and those include children. The work that we are doing, which 
is very resource-intensive when we are looking at Packer 
Sanitation Services, Inc., for example, where we found more 
than 102 children who were working in violation of the child 
labor laws.
    Those--that was across 13 states, excuse me, 13 facilities 
in eight states. There were kids as young as 13, and so this 
has just got to be a priority, a focus, an area where we are 
absolutely putting the full expertise and be laser-focused 
across the Wage and Hour Division to protect these kids.
    We very much launched this National Strategic Enforcement 
Initiative to address child labor exploitation, and this is 
something that we are making sure that all of our investigators 
are equipped with the resources and the tools that they need to 
be able to identify the red flags of child labor violations, 
and then also to enforce those violations.
    We also have the interagency task force, which is the whole 
of government approach, where all the departments across the 
administration are recognizing that they have a role to play in 
helping make sure that we are combatting child labor 
exploitation and keeping kids safe.
    Ms. Omar. You have had some successes recently. Can you 
give us an example of some of those successes?
    Ms. Looman. Yes, absolutely. Thank you, Congresswoman. 
Again, just recently we had a case out of Minnesota where we 
were finding that there were teens that were employed illegal 
to operate dangerous equipment at a food manufacturing 
facility.
    We have some cases across California where we found that 
children were being responsible for the meat packing facilities 
and actually working on the kill room floor killing poultry, 
and that was a $3.8 million recovery for--of civil money 
penalties, as well as violations--as well as other FLSA 
violations.
    Then we have also found children working in food--excuse me 
not food. There we go, automobile. That is the word I am 
looking at, in automobile manufacturing that--where we find 
those children working in violation as well.
    Ms. Omar. Thank you for those examples. I know that, you 
know, we were also having conversations about addressing 
misclassifications. Ms. Looman, could you walk us through the 
process of a typical investigation into misclassification?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congresswoman. Again, 
misclassification of workers as--of employees as independent 
contractors is a priority of the Wage and Hour Division and the 
Department, and we are specifically focused on the most low age 
vulnerable workers, who may be deprived of their opportunity to 
get minimum wage and overtime.
    We are very much looking for and seeing, unfortunately, 
workers like health care workers or construction workers, or as 
I said, dishwashers who have been misclassified as independent 
contractors, and therefore deprived of their opportunity to get 
overtime wages.
    That is what we are particularly focused on and concerned 
about, and that is where we are making sure that we are 
protecting all vulnerable workers, and making sure they get 
their rights under the law.
    Ms. Omar. Yes. Really appreciate that work. Wage theft 
cases have been rising in Minnesota, and our State Attorney 
General, Keith Ellison, has been working really hard to make 
sure we address some of the problems that exist in the gig 
economy.
    I appreciate you and him and all of the people that are 
working on this issue. Thank you so much, and I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Chairwoman Foxx is recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Administrator Looman, in 
November a witness testified before this Subcommittee that 
automatic updates to the Fair Labor Standards Act exempt 
employee salary threshold would violate the notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, 
and potentially the Constitution.
    The proposed overtime rule includes these automatic 
updates. What will you do to address these concerns?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congresswoman Foxx. As we have 
discussed, one of the most important and foundational issues of 
the Fair Labor Standards Act is overtime protections for 
ensuring that workers get time and one-half of their regular 
rate of pay after 40 hours in a work week.
    Ms. Foxx. We know that.
    Ms. Looman. The exemption for some workers to not get those 
protections is something that we are focused on, in making sure 
that when we are adopting an appropriate level of salary 
threshold for that exemption, when workers do not get that 
protection, that is what we are working on----
    Ms. Foxx. I want you to--want you to address my specific 
question. We know what the situation is. Do not waste our time 
on that. Specific question. What are you going to do, because 
you are in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act and 
the Constitution?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congresswoman Foxx. We absolutely 
will adopt and ensure that the adoption of the overtime 
regulation is in accordance with the Administrative Procedures 
Act, and automatically updating the salary level does comply 
with the APA and the Fair Labor Standards Act.
    Ms. Foxx. We will see. Administrator Looman, this Committee 
has received testimony which has been well-documented in 
studies, that Davis-Bacon Act requirements disproportionately 
harm the ability of small businesses to compete for Federal 
construction projects.
    This is especially concerning because more than 82 percent 
of construction industry workers are employed by a small 
business. Regrettably, Democrats in Congress have attached 
prevailing wage requirements to new infrastructure and energy 
projects, and the Biden Wage and Hour Division has expanded the 
scope of Davis-Bacon through its recent final rule.
    With these recent developments, are President Biden and the 
congressional Democrats telling small businesses they need not 
apply on Federal construction projects?
    Ms. Looman. Congresswoman Foxx, again as we have discussed, 
the Biden administration is very much focused on ensuring that 
Federal investments result in good jobs, and the Davis-Bacon 
Act, as you know, currently applies to more than 71 different 
types of investment vehicles that have been passed by the 
Congress.
    We at the Wage and Hour Division are focused on ensuring 
that when the Davis-Bacon requirements apply to Federal 
investment, that those are in fact good jobs that are being 
paid the appropriate prevailing wage as required by law.
    Ms. Foxx. Okay. You are spending taxpayer dollars, not 
making a Federal investment. Let us make that clear. Last year, 
I questioned Acting Secretary Su about the Wage and Hour 
Division's historically abysmal record for its enforcement.
    The numbers are now in for Fiscal Year 2023, and WHD has 
again reached new lows. Specifically, the WHD had the fewest 
number of compliance actions and the smallest amount of back 
wages collected in a decade. This was almost 40 percent fewer 
compliance actions and 15 percent fewer back wages collected.
    WHD's budget is more than 20 percent higher than it was in 
Fiscal Year 202013, demonstrating this is not a resource 
problem for you. It is a management problem. What management 
changes will you commit to making to improve these outcomes?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congresswoman Foxx. Again as we 
discussed, we have about 721 investigators to protect 165 
million workers at 11 million workplaces across the country. We 
are very much focused on ensuring that we are protecting the 
most vulnerable workers.
    That requires that we are particularly strategic with the 
utilization of our resources. We talked a lot about child labor 
and child labor exploitation, and we are making sure that we 
are putting and focusing our resources in that area. We also 
are continuing to protect----
    Ms. Foxx. You had more money and you did less work. That 
does not make any sense. What is the problem?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congresswoman Foxx. As you know, the 
agency has been primarily flat funded for the last decade, and 
that has resulted in, as expenses and costs go up, that we have 
fewer resources to actually provide for the enforcement work 
that needs to happen, which is why we have--the President has 
asked for increased funding for the Wage and Hour Division.
    Ms. Foxx. Mr. Chairman, I yield my time to you.
    Chairman Kiley. Administrator Looman, you said you are 
going to defer to the U.S. Senate on the confirmation of Acting 
Secretary Su. Are you aware that the U.S. Senate returned her 
nomination to the President without confirming last year?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, yes, I am aware of that.
    Chairman Kiley. Would not deferring to the U.S. Senate mean 
putting in someone who they are willing to confirm?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, the President has 
renominated Acting Secretary Su for that position, and I 
recognize that is often the case, that nominees are renominated 
at the expiration of their preliminary nominations.
    Chairman Kiley. The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Walberg, 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to 
waive on here, and I appreciate the witness being here. 
Following up on questions of some of my colleagues, 
Administrator Looman, as you are aware and indicated, in 2023 
the New York Times reported on many children being trafficked 
and forced to work illegally in the United States, which is 
tragic.
    Last year you briefed Committee staff on Wage and Hour 
Division's efforts to collaborate with other agencies via the 
President's Anti-Trafficking Interagency Task Force. You noted 
that the first meeting of that Task Force was on May 23d of 
last year. Was that the only meeting that the task force held?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Walberg, and it was 
great to be able to brief the staff on the work that we are 
doing in the child labor--to prevent and address child labor 
exploitation. The Interagency Task Force to Combat Child Labor 
Exploitation, which is led by the Department of Labor----
    Mr. Walberg. Was that the only meeting that you had?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman. We have met several 
times with cross-agency leadership, as well as addressing 
issues and working along in the interim, to make sure that 
every agency that is participating in addressing this really 
critical, important issue----
    Mr. Walberg. Are these, are these meetings held regularly?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Walberg, we have--we continue to 
convene and we come together to discuss these really important 
issues. We have done that several times.
    Mr. Walberg. Would you commit to having a followup briefing 
with Committee staff on the work of Wage and Hour and the Task 
Force on this issue?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Walberg, absolutely. Would be happy 
to do that.
    Mr. Walberg. Okay. Great, great, because those meetings 
have not been highlighted too much, and that is the reason for 
the question.
    As you may know, I am the lead sponsor of H.Q. 5419, the 
Direct Seller and Real Estate Harmonization Act, which is a 
bipartisan bill. It would incorporate language from the 
Internal Revenue Code into the Fair Labor Standards Act, to 
harmonize the statutes and ensure that individuals who choose 
to work in direct selling or real estate are classified as 
independent contractors under both laws.
    Unfortunately, the Wage and Hour Division declined to 
accept stakeholder recommendations to incorporate this fix in 
the final independent contractor rule, which is disappointing. 
Additionally, the Small Entity Compliance Guide and frequently 
asked questions, released in conjunction with the final rule, 
creates more confusion.
    Ms. Looman, do you commit to working with me to ensure 
additional guidance is provided so legacy independent 
contractors have clarity under both statutes?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Walberg. We absolutely 
want to provide the information guidance that is needed, so 
that everyone can comply with the law. We are absolutely 
committed to making sure we are continuing to develop 
resources, information, but also doing outreach, assistance, 
education and specific compliance help for anyone who needs 
help, to make sure that they understand how to comply with the 
Fair Labor Standards Act.
    Mr. Walberg. I can count on that then? Okay, thank you. In 
September 2023, the DOL published a new proposed overtime rule, 
which would raise the salary threshold an additional 55 percent 
from the most recent adjustment made during President Trump's 
administration just 4 years ago.
    As you are aware, in 2016 the Obama administration's 
overtime rule was blocked by a Federal judge because DOL's 
interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act's overtime 
provision was found to be arbitrary and capricious. Could you 
discuss the legal challenges the new rule may face?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Walberg. As we 
discussed, we are in--overtime is a primary focus of the Fair 
Labor Standards Act, and protecting workers who should be 
receiving overtime is the work that we do at the Wage and Hour 
Division.
    The proposed rule is still in development. As we said, we 
have about--we have received about 33,000 comments on this 
rule, and we are continuing to evaluate those comments and to 
make sure we can publish a final rule. I cannot speculate as to 
what potential litigation might be, but we are very much 
focused on protecting workers and ensuring that they get their 
hard-earned wages on payday.
    Mr. Walberg. I would assume that we have learned from the 
action by the judge on Obama's rule. We will not be going that 
direction again, will we?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Walberg again, we are very much 
focused on reviewing all of the comments that we received and 
finalizing a rule, an overtime rule that will continue to 
protect workers who should be protected by the Fair Labor 
Standards Act.
    Mr. Walberg. Okay. Thank you. My time has expired. I yield 
back.
    Chairman Kiley. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 
Administrator Looman for being with us today. We have heard a 
lot about misclassification that usually is talking about 
independent contractors. In compliance with the Davis-Bacon 
Act, a lot of people are misidentified in their job. Is that 
something that Wage and Hour gets into?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Scott. We are both 
responsible for ensuring that all workers are covered, that are 
covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act receive their hard-
earned minimum wages and overtime. We are also responsible for 
enforcing the worker protections under the Davis-Bacon Act, 
which requires that workers who are performing work on 
federally funded construction projects receive the prevailing 
wages for the type of work that they are performing.
    Mr. Scott. What happens when someone is mis-designated as a 
lower classified worker, when actually they are doing high 
quality work?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Scott. Sometimes there 
is sort of two different types of misclassification. We talk a 
lot about, and we have been talking a lot today about 
misclassification of employees as independent contractors.
    You are absolutely right. Sometimes, when we are looking at 
federally funded construction projects, because we establish 
prevailing wages for different types of workers under the law, 
sometimes a worker may be paid the wrong prevailing wage under 
Davis-Bacon because they are not classified appropriately for 
the type of work that they are performing.
    We very much work with the contractors, the contracting 
agencies, as well as workers, to make sure that they are 
getting the correct prevailing wage.
    Mr. Scott. Flight attendants have raised the question of 
when the work begins, apparently a flight attendant does not 
start on the clock until the door closes, when in fact they 
were doing work-related activities before then.
    The question has come up when you show up at the job and 
suit up, do you start getting paid then or do you start getting 
paid when you get to your job site, cleaning up, and those 
kinds of things.
    How do you know--in the question of flight attendants not 
getting paid until the door closes, how do you know when this 
clock starts for the purpose of minimum wage and overtime?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Scott. One of the 
fundamental issues that we address in every investigation in 
the Wage and Hour Division, but also in our compliance 
assistance and our outreach and education is making sure that 
workers and employers understand when they are required to pay 
minimum wages, and when overtime occurs.
    We very much are focused on making sure that everyone 
understands that off the clock work, as you are very familiar 
with, is not permissible under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 
that workers need to be paid for all hours that they are 
working, and that workers need to make sure that they are paid 
correctly on payday.
    We are very much focused in the Wage and Hour Division of 
addressing when work starts, when work ends, what work is 
compensable, and we provide an enormous amount of guidance for 
employers and work very closely with employers, but also want 
to make sure workers know that they should be getting paid when 
they are working.
    Mr. Scott. Is the question of flight attendants, is that 
before your office now?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Scott, we do not currently have--as 
far as I am aware, I am not aware of any specific issues 
related to the flight attendants' pay at this time.
    Mr. Scott. You indicated that you have been essentially 
flat funded for a decade. The Biden administration Fiscal Year 
24 budget would reverse the trend and allow you to hire almost 
400 new staffers. What difference would that make in allowing 
you to fulfill your mission?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Scott. That very much 
would make an enormous difference in our ability to be able to 
help more workers, help more employers, prevent more wage 
theft, make sure that we are preventing more misclassification 
of workers as independent contractors.
    The fundamental foundational work that we do in the Wage 
and Hour Division, which is make sure that workers get at least 
$7.25 an hour and at least time and a half after 40 hours in a 
work week, all of that work is so important and would only be 
helped, supported and expanded by our ability to have more 
resources.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Many states have eliminated the 14(c) 
program that allows lower payments for those with disabilities. 
Can you discuss how the Wage and Hour's working to protect the 
rights of workers with disabilities under the 14(c) program?
    Ms. Looman. Thank you, Congressman Scott. Yes, it is our 
responsibility to enforce the worker protections under the 
14(c) program. It is also our responsibility to issue 
certificates to employers who are seeking to pay lower than the 
$7.25, less than sub-minimum--less than minimum wage rate to 
workers with disabilities.
    We currently have certificates issued to about 850 
employers who are paying or approved to pay sub-minimum wages. 
This is a dramatic increase over time, and so our 
responsibility is to make sure that when workers are working 
under a 14(c) certificate, that they are getting exactly what 
they are supposed to be getting and are protected.
    It is also our responsibility to hold employers accountable 
when they are not following the requirements of the 14(c) 
program.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Starting my 5 minutes now, I would like to 
talk with you about the newly announced independent contractor 
rule, Administrator Looman. By the way, how many pages is that 
rule?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, I am not sure.
    Chairman Kiley. I think it is like 330. Does that sound 
about right?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, that is very possible.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay. Under this new independent contractor 
rule, would licensed real estate agents, would they be 
classified as employees or independent contractors?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, as you know, the independent 
contractor rule lays out a multi-factor, six factor----
    Chairman Kiley. Sure, and my time is limited, so I am 
asking you about a specific example. Just take your typical 
real estate agent, you know, classic arrangement with a 
brokerage. Are they an employee or an independent contractor?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, the independent contractor 
rule is--helps provide guidance under the Fair Labor Standards 
Act, which requires that employees get minimum wage and 
overtime----
    Chairman Kiley. I mean you are giving me generalities, and 
you are avoiding my specific question. Under the rule that you 
just announced, 330 pages, for the two million real estate 
agents in America, is there an answer in there as to whether 
they are employees or independent contractors?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, as has always been the case 
under the Fair Labor Standards Act, it is a fact-based analysis 
as it relates to the individual worker and how they are 
performing work for their employer.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay. I am just asking about the classic 
arrangement of a real estate agent who is sponsored by a 
brokerage. Would that classic arrangement--take for example 
everyone is exempted by AB 5 in California. Would those folks 
qualify as independent contractors or as employees under the 
rule that you just announced?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, again, the rule that we just 
announced is a reflection of long-standing guidance as well as 
judicial precedent of what it means to be an employee----
    Chairman Kiley. Well good. Then it should be easy to 
answer. Can you tell me whether real estate agents are 
employees or independent contractors under your new rule?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, real estate agents who are 
in business for themselves would continue to be considered 
independent contractors under the new rule.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay. How about truckers, independent 
owner-operators? Are they independent contractors or employees 
under the new rule?
    Ms. Looman. Again, Congressman Kiley, the requirement is 
that workers who are in business for themselves are independent 
contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and workers who 
are economically dependent on their employer are employees and 
get the protections of the law.
    Chairman Kiley. I see. Let me give you an example. Let us 
say that I am a writer, and I publish for Vox and I publish for 
the San Francisco Chronicle, and I publish for a variety of 
local papers. Am I an employee or an independent contractor 
under your rule?
    Ms. Looman. Again, Congressman Kiley, it would depend on 
the facts of that individual relationship----
    Chairman Kiley. I just gave you the facts.
    Ms. Looman. It is a six--it is a six-factor analysis. It 
has always been a six-factor analysis as it relates to the 
judicial precedent, and the long-standing guidance of the 
Department of Labor.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay. You are the person who came up with 
the rule. It has 330 pages, and you cannot tell me here some 
basic examples of standard professions that millions of people 
have, how they qualify? How is anyone supposed to make heads or 
tails out of this?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, again thank you for the 
question, because what we did in the regulation as well as in 
the Small Business Guide is that we provided examples of how 
each of the six factors could apply and indicate an independent 
contractor or an employee for purposes of helping with the 
analysis under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
    Chairman Kiley. Okay. Could you apply those examples to the 
hypothetical I just gave you? Is that an employee or an 
independent contractor for a writer like that?
    Ms. Looman. Again, I am sorry. Congressman Kiley, it would 
depend on the analysis of the six factors to that individual 
worker and the work that they are performing.
    Chairman Kiley. I see, and who is doing that analysis?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, the guidance that we put out 
in the regulation is to help employers do that analysis, and 
then we also, as we have discussed earlier today, we are very 
much looking for misclassification in our cases, when it may 
have deprived a worker of receiving minimum wages or overtime.
    Chairman Kiley. In fact, yes. You gave us some examples of 
the work that your agency has done to address misclassification 
and the recoveries you have gotten to address 
misclassification. To be clear, you are doing that under the 
rule of the prior administration, is that correct?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, again we are doing this 
under the long-standing guidance, as well as the information 
and in compliance with all regulations in effect.
    Chairman Kiley. No, no, no. My question is you have been--
you were touting your success in going after unscrupulous 
employers who are misclassifying workers. You are doing that 
without this new rule that you just announced; correct?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, we are very much focused on 
addressing misclassification and we are----
    Chairman Kiley. Could you just answer my question?
    Ms. Looman [continuing]. Under the standards that----
    Chairman Kiley. You have been able to get judgments and 
recoveries for misclassification without this new rule; 
correct?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, we continue to look at 
misclassification, and this rule is to continue that----
    Chairman Kiley. The answer is yes, so the reason you are 
stating for having this rule apparently is not needed. The rule 
is not needed, because you are able to pursue these cases. Are 
you aware of the opposition that the freelance community has to 
this rule in the form of a lawsuit and many comments through 
the rulemaking process?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, I am aware of that.
    Chairman Kiley. Why do you think it is that they oppose 
this rule so much?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, again I think that one of 
our responsibilities is to continue to do outreach and 
education, to make sure that freelancers who are in business 
for themselves understand they are protected by this rule.
    Chairman Kiley. Yes, and so my time has expired. I just 
want to leave you with that question and give you one more 
chance. Based on your conversations with all these folks, who 
say that this is going to threaten our livelihood. They have 
submitted comments, they have filed a lawsuit. Why do you think 
they are opposed to this rule that you just announced? What is 
your best understanding of that?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, I very much look forward to 
the opportunity to continue to talk with freelancers and other 
small business owners, to make sure that they understand that 
this rule protects them in their ability to be in business for 
themselves.
    Chairman Kiley. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Good, is 
recognized.
    Mr. Good. Thank you, Chairman Kiley for allowing me to 
participate in the hearing today. Thank you, Ms. Looman, for 
being here. Ms. Looman, are you concerned about the national 
debt?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Good----
    Mr. Good. You do not have to say my name each time, by the 
way.
    Ms. Looman. Oh, okay.
    Mr. Good. It is a stall tactic, but you know, are you 
concerned about the national debt.
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Good----
    Mr. Good. You do not have to say my name each time.
    Ms. Looman. Oh sorry.
    Mr. Good. Are you concerned about the national debt?
    Ms. Looman. I appreciate the question. My responsibility at 
the Wage and Hour Division is----
    Mr. Good. You work in the Federal Government, you have a 
budget. Are you concerned about the national debt?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman Kiley, I am concerned about----
    Mr. Good. I am not Congressman Kiley but----
    Ms. Looman. I am sorry, Congressman. I will not say your 
name.
    Mr. Good. You do not have to say my name. That is okay.
    Ms. Looman. Sorry. I am very much----
    Mr. Good. Do you know how much the national debt is?
    Ms. Looman. I do not know off the top of my head what the 
national debt is, sir.
    Mr. Good. Okay. It is 34 trillion, and I am not surprised, 
because you asked for a 31 percent budget increase. Could you 
imagine if every agency and department of the Federal 
Government asked for a 31 percent budget increase?
    According to the Congressional Budget Office, repealing 
Davis-Bacon would save taxpayers $24 billion over 10 years. If 
we ever repeal Davis-Bacon, which is what we should do, it 
would save taxpayers about $24 billion over 10 years. Can you 
tell the American people why we should pay $24 billion more 
than necessary for construction projects, Federal construction 
projects? Why should the taxpayers have to pay 24 billion more 
for Federal construction projects?
    Ms. Looman. Our responsibility at the Wage and Hour 
Division is to enforce the Davis-Bacon Act as enacted by 
Congress, and the 71 Davis-Bacon related acts. We make sure 
that workers get the worker protections under that law, 
including getting paid prevailing wages for the work that they 
are performing.
    Mr. Good. Ms. Looman, most Americans had never heard of 
Davis-Bacon. As you know, it is almost 100 years old, having 
been created in the 1930's as a conglomeration of the many Jim 
Crow era laws. It was intended to inflate wages of government 
contractors and eliminate competition in favor of white union 
workers, in favor of labor.
    My bill, H.R. 720, would actually repeal this 
discriminatory and inflationary policy that is the Davis-Bacon 
Act. Back in August your Department issued a final rule that 
not only did not eliminate Davis-Bacon as we should, but 
updated it. Why would the administration prop up a law with 
such a racist history?
    Ms. Looman. Our focus in the administration is to really 
make sure that Federal investments result in good jobs, and 
we--the Davis-Bacon is one part of ensuring that workers who 
are performing work on federally funded construction projects 
get paid locally prevailing wages.
    Mr. Good. Well, in addition to the history, the racist 
history of the law, it is actually discriminatory today in a 
different--discriminatory today in a different way, because it 
discriminates against the 89 percent of the construction 
workforce that have freely chosen, I know the administration 
does not like that, when workers choose not to join a union, 
but 89 percent of construction workers have freely chosen not 
to be represented by a union.
    Do you have any concern at all that Davis-Bacon 
discriminates against those 89 percent of the workforce that 
are construction workers?
    Ms. Looman. The regulations that we enforce and the Davis-
Bacon Act that we enforce really sets a level playing field for 
construction contractors who are bidding on Federal projects, 
and then also sets a level playing field to ensure that all 
workers are being paid not less than the prevailing wages in 
their local communities.
    Mr. Good. It discriminates, again, against those who are 
not construction--union-represented construction workers. 
Another criticism of Davis-Bacon is that it uses flawed wage 
data to determine the prevailing wage, the metric set by the 
Department of Labor.
    It's been criticism by the Office of Inspector General. The 
GAO have criticized how the prevailing wage I calculated. The 
Heritage Foundation did a study that found that 30,000 more 
construction jobs could be created on an annual basis if the 
Department of Labor actually accurately calculated Davis-Bacon 
rates to find the true prevailing wage.
    However, the new Davis-Bacon rule doesn't do anything to 
improve the wage survey, and I understand that your goal is 
probably to artificially increase wages in favor of unions.
    This does not always work. In my district of 
Charlottesville, the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed--in 
Charlottesville City in my district shows that the market wages 
for cement mason are $22 an hour, but the prevailing wage is 
$15 an hour, so that is a 30 percent difference there.
    How can you justify government intervention that actually 
deflates workers' wages?
    Ms. Looman. As you know, the way that we establish 
prevailing wages in the Wage and Hour Division under the Davis-
Bacon and Davis-Bacon related acts is that we conduct a survey 
of locally paid wages.
    Those surveys are of actual wages paid to actual workers 
performing construction work by county, and that is very much a 
way that we are able to establish what the appropriate 
prevailing wage is.
    To your point, sometimes the prevailing wage surveys get 
outdated, which is one of the reasons why we adopted this new 
rule----
    Mr. Good. Well, I am reclaiming--just a few seconds left, 
if I may. I am sorry, but what we should do is repeal Davis-
Bacon and let the market determine the wages. If not, we ought 
to at least commit to improving this broken wage survey process 
that takes all the workers into account, including those not 
represented by a union, and I yield back, Chairman Kiley. Thank 
you again.
    Chairman Kiley. The gentlewoman from Michigan, Ms. McClain, 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. McClain. Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chairman, for 
the opportunity to waive onto this Subcommittee for this very 
important hearing.
    Administrator Looman, I want to focus on the Department of 
Labor's new independent contractor rule. Before I get there, I 
have a couple of questions, because I want to set the bar 
right. You are in charge of the Wage and Hour Division, 
correct?
    Ms. Looman. Correct.
    Ms. McClain. Wonderful. Good. We are off to a good start. 
Have you ever been a business owner?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman McClain, I have----
    Ms. McClain. It is super simple.
    Ms. Looman. I have had the opportunity to run organizations 
and lead----
    Ms. McClain. This will go a lot faster, right? It is really 
not a trick question. Have you ever been a business owner?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman McClain, I have never owned a 
business, but I have absolutely managed businesses.
    Ms. McClain. Thank you very much. See how good, see how 
simple that is? I asked a question. You do not need to ruffle 
around; you just give an answer to the question I have. It is 
really simple, right, and things will go a lot faster, because 
as the person in charge, do you think you should have some 
answers?
    If you do not have any answers, who should, right? You are 
the boss, and I love it when we have all these people come in 
to testify. They are in charge. I mean they write a 300-page 
rule, but yet when we ask them a simple question, they cannot 
answer it.
    That is pretty disturbing to me. Like if you are in charge, 
you are in charge. I do not think it is too much to ask that 
the person in charge be able to answer a simple question. If we 
could just have some simple ground rules, and I am even all 
right with an ``I don't know,'' right?
    I do not expect you to know everything, but I do expect you 
to know something, right? Let us start with this. You are not a 
business owner, yet you are making laws for business owners. 
How many business owners did you consult before making this 
law?
    Ms. Looman. Congressman McClain, we absolutely 
specifically, as you are talking about the independent 
contractor or employee classification under the Fair Labor 
Standards Act, just to make sure we are talking about the same 
thing.
    Ms. McClain. Yep.
    Ms. Looman. We held listening sessions specifically for 
business owners, and for small businesses.
    Ms. McClain. 10, 20, 100, 1,000, 1,500? Give me a gut feel.
    Ms. Looman. We held--I believe we held about 27, 30 
listening sessions. I do not want to tell you wrong.
    Ms. McClain. That is okay. No, no, I am looking for 
directional answers. It is honestly not a gotcha question, 
because what I think the American taxpayer is frustrated with, 
the American people are frustrated with and the business owners 
is we all are making laws for business owners, yet we don't 
listen to them.
    We do not take their opinion into consideration, and we 
make laws and we do not have any idea of the unintended 
consequences of what those laws will do to the actual people 
who have to, have to administer those laws.
    About 30 listening sessions. What did the actual business 
owners have to say?
    Ms. Looman. Congresswoman McClain, again, and I 
participated personally in a lot of these, so I do want to 
answer this question very clearly.
    Ms. McClain. Wonderful.
    Ms. Looman. Although we had lots of team members that 
were----
    Ms. McClain. Let us get to the answer.
    Ms. Looman. We heard a lot of feedback from business 
owners, that they specifically wanted to make sure they 
understood what the responsibilities were under the Fair Labor 
Standards Act.
    Ms. McClain. Were they in favor of it or against it?
    Ms. Looman. As we were listening to them, we were----
    Ms. McClain. Let us go on to another question that we can 
answer, right? I am going to share with the American people, if 
you get somebody who is in charge, especially in a government 
entity that cannot answer a question, you should ask yourself 
do we need to replace this person who cannot answer a simple 
question?
    I mean my goodness gracious, the disappointment that I 
have, that you cannot even answer a simple question is 
unbelievable. You want to be in charge, and you want to tell 
the very people who you have no clue about their business, what 
they can and cannot do. That to me is repulsive.
    Anyways, enough of my opinions. Why is the DOL focused on 
crushing the economic opportunities for a sector that employs 
64 million people and get this, nearly $1.3 trillion to the 
U.S. economy? Do you believe in entrepreneurship?
    Ms. Looman. Absolutely.
    Ms. McClain. Wonderful. Then why, how does this law 
incentivize entrepreneurship?
    Ms. Looman. This regulation specifically protects workers 
who are in business for themselves, and particularly----
    Ms. McClain. By making it more difficult for them to do 
business? How does that correlate?
    Ms. Looman. This regulation specifically identifies, for 
purposes of implementing the Fair Labor Standards Act--
    Ms. McClain. I would disagree, the truckers would disagree, 
the independent contractors would, you know, the people that 
actually do the job, other than you that sit up there, have no 
answers to any questions, but want to pontificate on what you 
think is in the best interest of a sector that provides jobs 
for 64 million people and contributes $1.3 trillion to the 
economy. Critical.
    I am sorry Mr. Kiley. I am out of time, and I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. I would like to thank the witness for 
taking her time to join us today, and I now recognize Ms. Omar 
for a closing statement.
    Ms. Omar. Sorry about that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and 
thank you Administrator Looman for your testimony today. While 
Committee Republicans have spent their time trying to roll back 
worker protection, the Biden administration and congressional 
Democrats have prioritized building a stronger economy for all.
    The proof cannot be overstated. Almost 15 million jobs 
added since President Biden took office. Wages and salaries 
have grown faster than prices since the beginning of 2021, and 
the last 3 years have seen the highest level on record for new 
business formation.
    Progressive policies are not only good for workers, but 
they are also good for business. In contrast, we are halfway 
through this Congress and Republicans have done nothing 
meaningful to lower cost or protect and uplift workers.
    Instead, they have proposed $7 million cuts in wages to the 
Wage and Hour Division's already constrained budget, and, on 
this very Committee, Republicans have tried to undermine Acting 
Secretary Su, halt the Biden administration's pro-worker 
agenda, and chase after unfounded cultural war conspiracy 
theories. Meanwhile, children are losing their lives working at 
slaughterhouses and other dangerous workplaces, and millions of 
dollars are stolen annually from workers' hard-earned 
paychecks.
    Congress must shift its focus to support, not obstruct, the 
Wage and Hour Division's progress to deliver for workers, 
children, and families. We cannot afford to go backward. I urge 
my Republican colleagues to join Democrats in fighting wage 
theft, securing paid leave rights for all working families, and 
ending the scourge of forced labor.
    I request unanimous consent to enter into the record 
multiple letters from the National Electrical Contractors 
Association, the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors 
National Association, the Construction Employers of America, 
and the Laborers International Union of North America, in 
support of the leadership and policies of the Wage and Hour 
Division, that not only uplifts workers but ensures a fair and 
competitive economy for all employers. Thank you.
    Chairman Kiley. Without objection.
    [The letters follow:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    
    
    
    Chairman Kiley. What we have learned today is that we have 
a division, the Wage and Hour Division and more broadly a 
Department of Labor, that is spending more money than ever, is 
doing a lot of things that don not need to be done, and that 
are actively causing harm like this new, incredibly destructive 
independent contractor rule, but then it is failing to do the 
basic things it is supposed to be doing, such as combat child 
labor and protect the rights of workers.
    This Department of Labor has truly become an anti-worker 
organization in the current administration, and especially 
since Acting Secretary Su took over.
    If you are an American just looking at this Department and 
all of the tax dollars that go toward it and asking what am I 
getting here, you know, this is what they see, that we have an 
unconfirmed Acting Secretary who has been there now for almost 
a year in that capacity, that the President is keeping there 
even though the U.S. Senate has rejected the nomination.
    On top of that, we have the Department spending more money 
than ever, and now requesting a 31 percent increase this year 
in funds. We see that the child labor crisis flowing from the 
activity at the southern border, is not being addressed in any 
meaningful way from the testimony we have heard today, and the 
levels are absolutely beyond anything that we have ever seen.
    We see that the actual collection of back wages for workers 
has fallen significantly from the last administration. Then, 
instead of focusing on those very important matters, such as 
protecting the rights of workers and combatting child labor, 
what is the Department spending its time on? What is this 
Division spending its time on?
    On going after American workers, on trying to upend the 
ability of Americans to make a living on their own terms. That 
is what this independent contractor rule is going to do. The 
Chamber of Progress (sic) estimates it is going to cost more 
than three million jobs.
    That is not speculation. We already have seen this play out 
in California with AB 5. This is the law that President Biden 
called his model, and there was a study that just came out of 
George Mason a few weeks ago, showing that AB 5 led to an over 
10 percent decline in self-employment in California, and an 
over 4 percent decline in overall employment.
    Those are just numbers. I would suggest taking a look at 
the stories of folks who have worked their whole careers to 
become a writer, to become a translator, to become a court 
reporter, to become one of 600 other professions, and then they 
just lost it all. They lost their career because of a law, and 
now this administration, this Department, is trying to do the 
exact same thing to the entire country.
    This is why Americans increasingly are pessimistic about 
the State of our country and the State of our economy, is 
because of actions like this. This Department needs a course 
correction. That starts with replacing the unconfirmed record-
breaking Acting Secretary Julie Su with someone who can get 
support from the U.S. Senate, and it also starts with 
withdrawing this independent contractor rule and looking at 
every rule and regulation and asking how can we actually 
support workers and get our economy back on track.
    Without objection, there being no further business, the 
Subcommittee stands adjourned.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 




    [Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]