[Senate Hearing 118-196]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                   
                                                         S.  Hrg. 118-196


 
                   NOMINATION OF JULIE SU TO SERVE AS


                           SECRETARY OF LABOR

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

                                HEARING

                              [before the]

                    COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
                          LABOR, AND PENSIONS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               ----------                              

                             APRIL 20, 2023

                               ----------                              

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






         NOMINATION OF JULIE SU TO SERVE AS SECRETARY OF LABOR
         
         
         
         
         
         
         



                                                        S. Hrg. 118-196

                   NOMINATION OF JULIE SU TO SERVE AS
                           SECRETARY OF LABOR

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

                                HEARING

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
                          LABOR, AND PENSIONS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                                   ON

EXAMINING THE NOMINATION OF JULIE A. SU, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE SECRETARY 
                                OF LABOR

                               __________

                             APRIL 20, 2023

                               __________

 Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
                                Pensions


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
        
                          ______

              U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 54-474              WASHINGTON : 2023      
        
        
        
        
          COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS

                 BERNIE SANDERS (I), Vermont, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington
ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania   BILL CASSIDY, M.D., Louisiana, 
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin                 Ranking Member
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut   RAND PAUL, Kentucky
TIM KAINE, Virginia                  SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire         LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TINA SMITH, Minnesota                MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            ROGER MARSHALL, M.D., Kansas
JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado          MITT ROMNEY, Utah
ED MARKEY, Massachusetts             TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
                                     MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
                                     TED BUDD, North Carolina

                Warren Gunnels, Majority Staff Director
              Bill Dauster, Majority Deputy Staff Director
                Amanda Lincoln, Minority Staff Director
           Danielle Janowski, Minority Deputy Staff Director
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                               STATEMENTS

                        THURSDAY, APRIL 20, 2023

                                                                   Page

                           Committee Members

Sanders, Hon. Bernie, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, 
  Labor, and Pensions, Opening statement.........................     1
Cassidy, Hon. Bill, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from the State 
  of Louisiana, Opening statement................................     4

                               Witnesses

Su, Julie, Washington, DC........................................     7
    Prepared statement...........................................    10

                          ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.
Sanders, Hon. Bernie:
    Letters in Support of the Julie Su Nomination................    45
Cassidy, Hon. Bill:
    EDD by Nuke Bizzle, Spotify lyrics...........................   185
    NRF Statement on Disruption of West Coast Port Operations....   189
    PMA Statement re SoCal Disruption April 13, 2023.............   190
    Los Angeles Times, Southern California Ports Shutdown 
      Highlights Contract Talks..................................   191
    West Coast Port Labor Negotiations Joint Association Letter 
      to President Biden - Final, March 24, 2023.................   198
    Letters in Opposition to the Julie Su Nomination.............   235
Murray, Hon. Patty:
    IFA Cautions DOL of Overly Broad Independent Contractor Rule.   204
    Department of Labor Proposed Rule,--Our Take--Lyft Blog......   209
Braun, Hon. Mike:
    The Stanford Daily, May 17, 1989.............................   215
    League has played little-known role in campus politics by 
      Michael Friendly...........................................   222

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

Response by Julie Su to questions of:
    Senator Cassidy..............................................   268
    Senator Budd.................................................   331
    Senator Paul.................................................   343
    Senator Tuberville...........................................   353
    Senator Collins..............................................   374
    Senator Braun................................................   378
    Senator Mullin...............................................   404
    Senator Marshall.............................................   417
    Senator Casey................................................   420
    Senator Hassan...............................................   422
    Senator Kaine................................................   424
    Senator Cassidy--Addendum....................................   425


                   NOMINATION OF JULIE SU TO SERVE AS



                           SECRETARY OF LABOR

                              ----------                              


                        Thursday, April 20, 2023

                                       U.S. Senate,
       Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in 
room 430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bernard Sanders, 
Chair of the Committee, presiding.

    Present: Senators Sanders [presiding], Murray, Casey, 
Baldwin, Murphy, Kaine, Hassan, Smith, Lujan, Hickenlooper, 
Cassidy, Murkowski, Braun, Marshall, Romney, Tuberville, 
Mullin, and Budd.

    Also present: Senator Padilla.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SANDERS

    The Chair. The Senate Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions will come to order. This morning, we are 
considering President Biden's nomination of Julie Su to be the 
Secretary of the United States Department of Labor, and I 
welcome her this morning. And let me get directly to the point.

    I strongly support Ms. Su's nomination. She has been an 
excellent Deputy Secretary of Labor for the last 2 years, and I 
believe she will make an excellent Secretary of Labor into the 
future. And I hope very much that she will be confirmed by the 
Senate, and we need her in her job as soon as possible.

    Let us be honest as we gather this morning, the debate over 
Ms. Su really has nothing to do with her qualifications. No one 
can tell us with a straight face that Ms. Su is unqualified for 
this position. In fact, she is extremely well qualified.

    This debate really has everything to do with the fact that 
Julie Su is a champion of the working class of this country who 
will stand up against the forces of corporate greed. That's 
really what this debate is about. And let's be very clear, for 
the last 50 years, middle class and working class of this 
country have been struggling.

    While we have more income and wealth inequality today than 
we have ever had, over 60 percent of our people are living 
paycheck to paycheck and millions are working for starvation 
wages. Julie Su should be confirmed as our Secretary of Labor 
because she has spent her life fighting for those working 
families and they need her now.

    What this nomination is about is really not complicated. 
Today, as we speak, large multinational corporations are 
spending millions of dollars on ads, sometimes ugly ads, in 
various parts of this country trying to defeat her nomination.

    They know what I know. And that is that she is prepared to 
take on powerful special interests and stand up to the needs of 
those working people who desperately need defending today. And 
while many corporate interests, not all but many oppose her 
nomination, she is supported by every major labor organization 
in this country representing over 20 million workers, including 
the AFL-CIO, the United Mine Workers of America, the Teamsters, 
and the SEIU, all strongly support Ms. Su's confirmation.

    Let us be clear, we need a Labor Secretary who understands 
that we must raise the minimum wage to a living wage, something 
that this Committee intends to do. We need a Labor Secretary 
who will work each and every day to make it easier, not harder, 
for workers to exercise their Constitutional right to join 
unions and collectively bargain for better wages, benefits, and 
working conditions.

    We need a Labor Secretary who understands that we must end 
the international embarrassment of the United States being the 
only major country on earth that does not guarantee paid family 
and medical leave or paid sick days, something that this 
Committee will also address.

    This is America, and when your child or your spouse gets 
sick, you should not be fired from your job because you are 
taking care of them. Julie Su understands that. We need a Labor 
Secretary who understands that it is unacceptable that women in 
this country are earning just $0.84 on the dollar compared to 
men, and that we need equal pay for equal work, something this 
Committee will also address.

    We need a Labor Secretary who believes that young people in 
this country should have access to apprenticeship programs 
which give them the skills they need to get good paying jobs, 
rebuilding America, something that this Committee will also 
address. We need a Labor Secretary who understands that 
employees in America who are working 50 or 60 hours a week 
should not continue to be cheated out of the overtime pay that 
they have earned and are entitled to.

    We need a Labor Secretary who will strongly enforce the 
child labor laws that are on the books and expose the 
exploitation of underage workers by unscrupulous employers. We 
need a Labor Secretary who understands that it is unacceptable 
that half of older Americans have no retirement savings and 
that we need to expand, not cut, pensions in our Country. I 
strongly believe that Julie Su will be that Labor Secretary.

    As I think we all know, 2 years ago the Senate voted to 
confirm Julie Su's nomination to be the Deputy Secretary of 
Labor by a vote of 50-47. Every Democrat in the Senate voted 
for her nomination. Every Republican in the Senate voted 
against her nomination. The only thing that has changed since 
that vote is that Julie Su has done an outstanding job as 
Deputy Secretary of Labor.

    Working with former Labor Secretary Marty Walsh, who 
strongly supports her confirmation, Ms. Su has worked to 
successfully expand apprenticeships to more than 30,000 
Americans so that they can go get the high-quality 
manufacturing and construction jobs that are desperately needed 
to rebuild this country.

    Now, I understand that some of my Republican colleagues 
have expressed concerns about the 11 percent unemployment 
insurance fraud rate that occurred in California during the 
height of the pandemic, when Julie Su was California's 
Secretary of Labor. But here is what my colleagues conveniently 
ignore.

    During that same period, the unemployment insurance fraud 
rate was 15.4 percent in Tennessee, 15.3 percent in Arizona, 
14.3 percent in South Carolina, and over 14 percent in 
Massachusetts. All of those states had Republican Governors and 
Republican Labor Secretaries.

    All of those states experienced higher unemployment 
insurance fraud rates than California. I should also--that the 
unemployment insurance fraud rate was 27 percent in Kansas, 23 
percent in Rhode Island, 18 percent in Nevada, 16 percent in 
New York, I don't know what it was in Vermont, but it is pretty 
high in Vermont as well, all substantially higher than 
California.

    The reality is that virtually every state in America face 
major challenges with respect to fraud in the unemployment 
insurance program. Why was that? Now, there are a couple of 
reasons. In the midst of a horrific pandemic, when President 
Trump was in office and Mitch McConnell led the Senate, when 
millions of Americans were rapidly losing their jobs, we all 
remember those terrible days.

    Through no fault of their own, Republicans and Democrats 
came together and passed the CARES Act by a vote of 96 to 0. 
Every Member who was in the Senate at that time voted for it 
who is here today.

    Republicans and Democrats made a conscious decision that 
the top priority in 2020 was to get unemployment benefits out 
as quickly as possible to millions of Americans who desperately 
needed it, and to relax regulations because we were dealing 
with an unprecedented economic and public health emergency.

    That's precisely what we did in the CARES Act that Donald 
Trump signed into law. The truth is that the Trump 
administration failed to provide adequate guidance and 
resources to states on how to administer these emergency 
unemployment benefits. And as a result, fraud went up all 
across the country.

    That was not something that Julie Su did. That is what 
every Republican and every Democrat who was present at the time 
voted for in the Senate. That is what Donald Trump signed into 
law, and that is what the Republican Department of Labor 
administered.

    Further and importantly, under Ms. Su's leadership, 
California was the first state to implement safeguards to 
combat fraud in the Emergency Unemployment Assistance Program. 
These safeguards were later promoted by the Trump 
administration, appropriately so, and implemented nationwide.

    Those are the facts and they are not in dispute. Julie Su 
has the experience, she has the qualifications, she has the 
passion, and she has the ability to be an outstanding Secretary 
of Labor. I am proud to support her nomination, and I am 
pleased to welcome her to our Committee this morning. Senator 
Cassidy, you are now recognized for an opening statement.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CASSIDY

    Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Chairman Sanders. Ms. Su, nice 
to see you. I can actually disagree with Senator Sanders. I 
can--and as much as I think of--as highly as I think of Ms. Su, 
as pleasantly as I regard you, I will disagree with Senator 
Sanders and say with a straight face that I do not think that 
you should be Secretary of Labor.

    The Committee's priority should be, and put differently, 
and to use Senator Sanders' words, we need a Labor Secretary 
who is fair and unbiased when enforcing the Nation's labor 
laws, who should be a leader, who is responsible, experienced 
and skilled, not an activist, with a demonstrated record of 
competence as an administrator and a demonstrated record of 
successfully concluding labor negotiations.

    But there are, as Senator Sanders points out, serious 
concerns about Ms. Su's record. As Secretary of California 
Labor and Workforce Development Agency, Ms. Su was the chief 
enforcer of AB5, a controversial law that dismantled the gig 
economy, such as Uber, DoorDash, Lyft, and removed the 
flexibility of these individuals to work as independent 
contractors. Senator Sanders suggests that all workers will be 
united in supporting this nomination, but those independent 
contractors opposed AB5.

    Ms. Su expressed herself as merely being an enforcer of a 
law passed down by others, but I spoke to people in California 
that said Ms. Su was quite the cheerleader for the law. Now, to 
be clear, independent contractors, freelancers make their own 
hours and choose the type of work they wish to do.

    They are shielded from forced or coerced unionization that 
would strip that flexibility away. This has made eliminating 
freelancing a top priority for large labor unions, those that 
are endorsing this nomination, who want more workers paying 
forced union dues. It is important to know, even in California, 
AB5 is unpopular.

    The Governor and State Legislature had to pass over 100 
exemptions after it was implemented. In fact, the statutory 
exemptions are longer than the text of AB5 itself. Fifty-nine 
percent of Californians voted to further erode the law, which 
naturally labor unions challenged in court.

    In 2019, Ms. Su described employers who oppose California's 
overreaching law as not understanding the economy, that, quote, 
her quote, ``we want in California.'' As Acting and Deputy 
Secretary of Labor, Ms. Su is overseeing the Biden's 
administration push to eliminate independent contracting via 
Federal executive rulemaking, to the detriment of workers. If 
finalized, the new regulation would strip 21 million 
individuals of their ability to be independent contractors, 
enjoying the flexibility this provides.

    The law rejected in California is not a policy that should 
be spread across the Nation. I also wish to hear Ms. Su's 
position on the Department of Labor's effort to uproot the 
franchise model. She had said privately that she will not 
pursue this, but the franchise model employs over eight million 
Americans.

    She has made public comments in support of a new joint 
employer rule, which would impact the almost 800,000 franchises 
operating in our communities. Saddling franchisors with 
liability for thousands of franchise owners that operate as 
small businesses would be a sure way to destroy the system of 
franchising, a model which has empowered underrepresented 
groups in the business community, such as women and people of 
color, giving them the opportunity to live the American dream, 
becoming successful small business owners, creating jobs, and 
lifting other workers out of poverty.

    No one is surprised that the joint employer rule is a major 
priority for large labor unions. It is easier to pressure one 
company to unionize to increase union dues than to pressure 
thousands of independent businesses. President Biden promises 
to have the most pro-union Administration in history.

    At her nomination announcement, Ms. Su responded saying, 
``sign me up for that, I want to help.'' The priority should 
not be whatever makes it easier to forcibly and coercively 
unionize workers while undermining the business model that 
employs them.

    Now, as a Republican, I don't expect to agree with the 
political positions of a Biden nominee, but we should expect 
that the heads of our Federal Government are not driven by 
activism to carry out an agenda for a favored political group.

    We need leaders who will responsibly carry out the duties 
of the office and give all comers a fair shake. It is also the 
responsibility of the Secretary to be a good administrator. As 
Secretary of the California Labor and Workforce Development 
Agency, as Senator Sanders points out, Ms. Su oversaw the 
Employment Development Department, the EDD, the state's 
unemployment program.

    This program lost over $30 billion in fraud by waiving fact 
checking requirements recommended by Department of Labor 
guidance. The California State auditor reported, ``despite 
repeated warnings, EDD did not bolster its fraud detection 
efforts until months into the pandemic, and it suspended a 
critical safeguard.''

    Under Ms. Su, fraud in California was rampant. Rapper Nuke 
Bizzle was arrested, pled guilty, and ordered to pay $705,000 
in restitution after posting a music video bragging about how 
easy it was to defraud the EDD program. The lyrics include, ``I 
gone got rich off of EDD. Ain't hit no more licks because of 
EDD.

    Just last night I was selling peas, and I just woke up to 
300 G's.'' For the record, my interpretation is 300 Gs is 
$300,000, but he was ordered to pay over 700 G's back in 
restitution. The rapper was not held accountable because of Ms. 
Su's oversight, but because he publicly admitted to his crime 
on a rap video. I ask unanimous consent to insert a transcript 
of Nuke Bizzle's music video entitled EDD into the Record.

    The Chair. If you are into rap, we are going to put it into 
the record.

    [The following information can be found on page 185 in 
Additional Material:]

    Senator Cassidy. This mismanagement does not inspire 
confidence that Ms. Su can run a multibillion-dollar 
organization. Now, by the way, former Labor Secretary Marty 
Walsh developed trust for the business community, as well as 
labor unions.

    Setting his politics aside, Marty Walsh had significant 
experience in negotiations and managing organizations. That 
experience is important. But now, with 150 labor contracts 
expiring this year, the potential of replacing him with someone 
who has a history of bias and no direct experience handling 
labor disputes should be concerning to all. I look forward to 
hearing from Ms. Su as she addresses these concerns of the 
Committee. With that, I yield.

    The Chair. Thank you, Senator Cassidy. I now would like to 
welcome our nominee. Julie Su is currently the Acting Secretary 
for the Department of Labor, and for the past 2 years has 
served as the Deputy Secretary to Secretary Marty Walsh. I 
thank her for being here with us today. And now I turn it over 
to Senator Padilla from California to introduce her.

    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member 
Cassidy, for allowing me to introduce Acting Secretary of 
Labor, Julie Su. Julie is a proud Californian, and as you will 
continue to hear, a champion for workers everywhere. Julie is 
indeed a tireless advocate for--was a tireless advocate for 
workers in California for years.

    Two months after I joined the Senate in early 2021, I had 
the honor of introducing her to this very Committee when 
President Biden nominated her to serve as Deputy Secretary of 
Labor. In the time since her first confirmation, she's proven 
to be a highly effective Deputy Secretary of Labor, and now 
Acting Secretary, helping this Administration add more than 
12.5 million jobs to the American economy.

    That is since President Biden's first day in office. That 
is more job gains than any previous President in a 4-year term, 
and that is no exaggeration. And during that time, Julie has 
also been a relentless defender of the rights and dignity of 
workers. Job creation and labor protection are not mutually 
exclusive, indeed they go hand in hand in a strong, responsible 
economy.

    But you see, her service and her track record comes as no 
surprise once you understand where she has come from. She is a 
proud daughter of immigrants and a native of California, and 
she knows personally the sacrifices that many working families 
face just to make ends meet. Her parents worked hard for 
decades in minimum wage jobs before establishing and growing 
their own small business.

    They have seen both sides of a paycheck. They instilled in 
Julie a strong work ethic that led her to take on tough fights 
for workers, as a labor lawyer, as Labor Secretary for the 
State of California, and as Deputy Secretary for the U.S. 
Department of Labor.

    During her time as Secretary of Labor in California, she 
launched the first wage theft is a crime campaign, so that both 
employers, yes, employers as well as low wage workers, better 
understood their rights and responsibilities.

    As the Secretary of the California Labor and Workforce 
Development Agency for the then fifth largest economy in the 
world, now the fourth largest economy in the world, she managed 
seven major departments, boards, and panels to promote quality 
jobs, provide workforce training, and strengthen the state's 
economy.

    Did I mention California is now the fourth largest economy 
in the world? On a personal note, it was a privilege for me to 
work alongside Julie when she led the campaign in California to 
help low wage workers understand their rights and feel 
protected about--when speaking up about labor abuses.

    That is critically important and timely. Colleagues, I know 
that many of you have expressed concern about recent reports 
about child labor violations in America, particularly migrant 
children being exploited in the workplace.

    Several Senators, including many Republican Senators, just 
the other day expressed their dismay in HSGAC, calling on the 
Federal Government to do its part in cracking down on these 
labor violations and holding people accountable. If we are 
genuine and sincere about our dismay about the reported child 
labor violations, then you need to agree that we need Julie Su 
confirmed as soon as possible.

    Her experience and qualifications are unmatched, and I am 
confident that her service will fundamentally strengthen the 
American workforce in the years ahead. Confirming Acting 
Secretary Su to serve as the chief defender of workers and 
workers' rights in the biggest economy in the world will send a 
strong and important message that in America workers are 
valued, workers come first.

    As former Secretary Walsh put it, Julie is a lifelong 
champion of America's workers. And if confirmed as the first 
Asian American to serve as Secretary in President Biden's 
cabinet, millions of Americans will see themselves represented 
in the highest levels of our Government and will take pride in 
her story as a daughter of working-class immigrants.

    Yes, Julie is exactly the pioneering labor champion that 
workers deserve to lead the Department of Labor now. And I am 
thankful that President Biden has chosen to nominate her for 
this position. Colleagues, I urge you to join me in supporting 
her nomination. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Chair. Thank you, Senator Padilla. Ms. Su, the floor is 
yours. Thanks for being with us.

  STATEMENT OF HON. JULIE SU, TO SERVE AS SECRETARY OF LABOR, 
                         WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Su. Chairman Sanders, Ranking Member Cassidy, and 
Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you 
today. I have enjoyed our discussions prior to this hearing 
about the Department of Labor and its role in meeting the 
critical challenges of our time.

    I am grateful to have my daughter, Li May, a college senior 
who is graduating from Yale next month, with me today. As a 
political science major, she, like I, are aware of how amazing 
it is for her to be able to be here, not just for me, but to 
see democracy in action up close.

    My other daughter, Anne Ling, is in her sophomore year at 
Amherst College, where she is on the basketball team and she is 
taking an economics midterm today, so we thought that it was 
better for her to stay on campus.

    My parents, sister, and brother-in-law are all up early and 
watching from California. I want to start by thanking President 
Biden for this incredible opportunity, and Senator Padilla for 
the very warm introduction.

    As Deputy Secretary of Labor, I have worked hand in hand 
with Secretary Marty Walsh to deliver on the President's 
promise of an economy built from the bottom up and the middle, 
out. And the results speak for themselves.

    The U.S. economy has added a record 12.6 million jobs. The 
lowest unemployment rate--it has been less than 4 percent for 
more than a year, which is close to the lowest it has been in 
50 years. All, while labor force participation by prime age 
workers has returned to pre-pandemic levels. When he announced 
my nomination for U.S. Secretary of Labor, the President called 
me the American dream.

    My parents believed in it. I benefited from it. And I want 
to do my part to make sure it is a reality for workers across 
the Nation. The dream for my family began with my mom's 30-day 
voyage on a cargo ship to the United States because she 
couldn't afford a passenger ticket.

    Both of my parents came to America for opportunity, and 
they found it in Provo, Utah where they studied, in Madison, 
Wisconsin, where my sister and I were born, and then in 
Southern California, where they settled and built a life. To 
get through school, my parents worked minimum wage jobs.

    When I was 6 years old, my mom got a job for Los Angeles 
County as an Office Clerk, and this job gave our family two 
crucial things, financial security and health insurance. It 
also afforded my mother a pension, which guarantees my mother 
and father's financial security into their old age.

    This level of economic security was impossible for them to 
imagine as they worked long hours and came home every night 
with the same first question for my sister me, did you finish 
your homework yet? But that is the transformative power of a 
good union job, something I can speak to personally.

    While I was growing up, my family also saw opportunity and 
their shot at the middle class in the form of small business. 
They owned a dry cleaning and laundromat business and then a 
franchise pizza restaurant.

    For years my dad worked his day job and then head right to 
the pizza shop, returning home after 10.00 p.m., often with a 
pizza for my sister and me to take to lunch the next day. I 
know small business owners are the engines of our economy 
because I have watched it and I saw it every day.

    I also grew up translating for my parents, a common 
experience in immigrant families. After college, I went to law 
school and became the first lawyer in my family. My experience 
as a translator at home shaped my commitment to making the law 
understandable and meaningful to individuals and communities 
too often left out of our economy.

    Immediately after law school, I spent nearly two decades 
representing workers. What I learned is that too many people 
still work full time, year-round, and live in poverty. Too many 
are denied a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

    At the same time, I learned that working people, when given 
a chance to organize, to be heard, not only make things better 
for themselves, but help to bring the American dream within 
reach to those around them.

    If confirmed, I will bring these lessons and experiences to 
my role as we continue to rebuild the economy. I will work to 
ensure that hard work pays off for workers and for small 
businesses, just like it did for my family.

    Prior to coming to the Department of Labor, I served the 
people of California for a decade. I saw firsthand that 
Government has a meaningful role to play in providing support 
to the overwhelming majority of employers who play by the 
rules.

    One of these roles is investments in workforce programs to 
provide training to meet employers' need for skilled workers, 
and to give more workers access to quality jobs. Over the last 
2 years, Secretary Walsh and I worked side by side to expand 
apprenticeships in in-demand industries and training 
opportunities for jobs like building roads and bridges, 
manufacturing semiconductors, building wind turbines, solar 
panels, and so much more.

    Many of these jobs do not require a 4-year degree. We 
created a national youth employment work strategy and expanded 
investments in rural communities, tribal communities, and 
mental health, along with other initiatives to ensure that our 
Nation's workers are ready to meet the needs of employers in 
jobs across America.

    I have been a leader dedicated to finding and expanding the 
vast areas of common ground between employers and employees. 
While my job as Deputy Secretary meant that my primary focus 
was on the internal operations of the department, Secretary 
Walsh's leadership style was to involve me as a true partner.

    I was with him for the 20-hour negotiation between port--
between rail employers and rail unions that took place in our 
office. And I have traveled from New Orleans to Detroit, from 
Indianapolis to Nashville, from San Juan to Houston, where I 
have seen firsthand the strength and creativity of America's 
workers and small businesses.

    Secretary Walsh and I also expanded our compliance 
assistance for employers and employees, providing real time 
information through MSHA's new Miner Safety and Health app to 
keep miners safe, helping employers work with employees with 
disabilities to put job accommodations in place, and supporting 
employers to adopt workplace health and safety programs, 
including how to find and fix hazards.

    I believe that the Department of Labor should make it as 
easy as possible for employers to keep workers safe on the job. 
If confirmed, you can count on me to listen to employers' views 
about how best to do that. So, all of this brings me to today.

    President Biden asked me to finish the job that Secretary 
Walsh and I started. If confirmed as Secretary of Labor, I 
would work to preserve and expand the American dream for all 
Americans, and I look forward to working with all of you in 
partnership on this shared endeavor. I look forward to your 
questions.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Su follows:]
                     prepared statement of julie su
    Chairman Sanders, Ranking Member Cassidy, and Members of the 
Committee, I am honored to appear before you today. I have enjoyed our 
discussions prior to this hearing about the Department of Labor and its 
critical role in meeting some of the most pressing challenges of our 
time.

    I am grateful to have my daughter, LiMei, a college senior who is 
graduating from Yale next month, with me today. As a political science 
major, she--and I--are aware of how amazing it is for her not only to 
be here for me, but also to get to see democracy in action up close. My 
other daughter, AnLing, is in her sophomore year at Amherst College, 
where she is on the basketball team, and is taking an Economics midterm 
today, which we decided she should not miss. And my parents, sister, 
and brother-in-law are all up early watching from California.

    I want to start by thanking President Biden for this incredible 
opportunity. As Deputy Secretary of Labor, I have worked hand in hand 
with Secretary Walsh to deliver on the President's promise of an 
economy built from the bottom up and middle out. And the results speak 
for themselves: the U.S. economy has added a record 12.6 million jobs, 
and the unemployment rate has been below 4 percent for more than a 
year--close to the lowest it has been in more than 50 years, all while 
labor force participation by prime age workers has returned to pre-
pandemic levels.

    When he announced my nomination for U.S Secretary of Labor, the 
President called me ``the American Dream.'' My parents believed in it, 
I benefited from it, and I want to do my part to make sure it is a 
reality for workers across the Nation. The dream for my family began 
with my mom's 30-day voyage on a cargo ship to the United States 
because she couldn't afford a passenger ticket. Both of my parents came 
to America for opportunity, and they found it: in Provo, Utah, where 
they studied; in Madison, Wisconsin, where my sister and I were born; 
and in Southern California, where they settled and built a life.

    To get through school, my parents worked minimum wage jobs. When I 
was 6 years old, my mom got a job working for Los Angeles County as an 
office clerk. That job gave our family two crucial things: financial 
security and health insurance. It also afforded my mother a pension--
something that guarantees my mother and father's financial security 
into their old age. This level of economic security seemed impossible 
as they worked long hours and came home every night with the same first 
question for my sister and me, ``Did you finish your homework?'' But 
that is the transformative power of a good union job, something I can 
speak to personally.

    While I was growing up, my family also saw opportunity and their 
shot at the middle class in the form of small businesses. They owned a 
dry cleaning and laundromat business, and then a franchise pizza 
restaurant. For years, my dad would work his day job and then head 
right to the pizza shop, returning home after 10 pm, often with 
leftover pizza for our school lunches the next day. I know small 
business owners are the engines of our economy, because I watched it 
every day.

    I also grew up translating for my parents, a common experience in 
immigrant families. After college, I went to law school and became the 
first lawyer in my family. My experience as a translator at home shaped 
my commitment to making the law understandable and meaningful to 
individuals and communities too often left out of our economy.

    Immediately after law school, I spent nearly two decades 
representing workers. What I learned is that too many people still work 
full-time, year-round and live in poverty. Too many are denied a fair 
day's pay for a fair day's work. At the same time, I learned that 
working people, when given a chance to organize, to be heard, not only 
make things better for themselves, but bring the American Dream within 
reach to those around them. If confirmed, I will bring these lessons 
and experiences to my role as we continue to rebuild the economy. I 
will work to ensure that hard work pays off for workers and small 
business owners, just like it did for my family.

    Prior to coming to the Department of Labor, I served the people of 
California for a decade. I saw firsthand that government has a 
meaningful role to play in providing support to the overwhelming 
majority of employers who play by the rules. One of these roles is 
investments in workforce programs to provide training to meet 
employers' need for skilled workers and to give more workers access to 
quality jobs.

    Over the last 2 years, Secretary Walsh and I worked side by side to 
expand apprenticeships in in-demand industries and training 
opportunities for jobs like building roads and bridges, manufacturing 
semiconductors, building wind turbines, solar panels, and so much more. 
Many of these jobs do not require a 4-year degree. We created a 
national Youth Employment Works Strategy and expanded investments in 
rural communities, tribal communities, mental health, and other 
initiatives to ensure that our Nation's workers are ready to meet the 
needs of employers in jobs across America. I have been a leader 
dedicated to finding and expanding the vast areas of common ground 
between employers and employees.

    While my job as Deputy Secretary meant my primary focus was on the 
internal operations at the Department, Secretary Walsh's leadership 
style was to involve me as a true partner. I was with him for the 20-
hour negotiation between rail employers and rail unions in our office. 
I have traveled from New Orleans to Detroit, Indianapolis to Nashville, 
San Juan to Houston, where I have seen first-hand the strength and 
creativity of American workers and business owners.

    Secretary Walsh and I also expanded our compliance assistance for 
employers and employees--providing real-time information through MSHA's 
new Miner Safety and Health app to keep miners safe; helping employers 
work with employees with disabilities to put job accommodations in 
place; and supporting employers to adopt workplace health and safety 
programs, including how to find and fix hazards. I believe that the 
Department of Labor should make it as easy as possible for employers to 
keep workers safe on the job. If confirmed, you can count on me to 
listen to employers' views about how best to do that.

    All of this experience brings me to today. President Biden asked me 
to ``finish the job'' that Secretary Walsh and I started. If confirmed 
as the Secretary of Labor, I would work to preserve and expand the 
American Dream for all Americans, and I look forward to working in 
partnership with you on this shared endeavor. Thank you, and I look 
forward to your questions.
                                 ______
                                 
    The Chair. Ms. Su, thank you very much. And as the son of 
an immigrant who came to this country without a nickel in his 
pocket, I very much appreciate what you have said. It is the 
story of millions of Americans.

    I want you to continue your opening statement in terms of 
giving us your sense of what your major accomplishments have 
been, what you are proud of in terms of the work you did in 
California, what you have done in the last several years here 
in the Department of Labor, and maybe more importantly, what 
your vision is.

    What do you want to do? What are the problems that you see 
out there, and what do you want to accomplish as our Secretary 
of Labor?

    Ms. Su. Well, thank you so much, Chairman Sanders. Thank 
you also for the meeting that we had. I know that we talked 
about how we need a Secretary of Labor who is going to deliver 
in this moment, and I really enjoyed our conversation.

    Thank you for that question. You have already laid out so 
clearly what a historic economic recovery this has been. This 
President says it himself all the time. This is what it looks 
like to build an economy from the bottom up and the middle, 
out.

    I have been a part of the Administration for the last 2 
years, have been very proud to see what good, thoughtful policy 
and implementation look like. Because of that work in 
partnership with Congress, our economy continues to defy 
expectations.

    12.6 million jobs represent a mom getting back to work 
after the disruption of COVID. It represents a veteran coming 
back from military service and getting a seamless transition 
into civilian life.

    One woman I met is now laying pipes 30 feet underground and 
doing a job that she never imagined for herself. And when she 
comes home, at the end of the day, her hands are dirty, but she 
says her children are really proud of her.

    I think that 12.6 million jobs are 12.6 million stories 
like that.

    The Chair. Let me ask you this, and you touched on it in 
your remarks, and something this Committee, I hope, will be 
able to deal with in a bipartisan way.

    You mentioned that there were, in so many words, there are 
millions of young people who do not necessarily want to go to 
college, who are prepared to get their hands dirty go out and 
earn good wages, doing some of the important work that needs to 
be done to rebuild America. Talk a little bit about your vision 
of strong apprenticeship programs for our Country.

    Ms. Su. There is so much we can do there. Thank you so 
much, Chairman Sanders. And we have been doing over the last 2 
years at the Department of Labor. We have dramatically expanded 
apprenticeships across the country.

    We have, just in the last 2 years, over 4,600 new 
apprenticeship programs representing 11,000 or so employers. 
These are opportunities to make sure not only that jobseekers, 
and in particular young people, get the high quality skills 
training that they need, but that employers who are looking for 
skilled workers to do the many things that we are doing right 
now, rebuilding roads and bridges, and ensuring broad--internet 
accessibility to communities all across the country, and making 
sure that every family that turns on the faucet gets clean 
drinking water out of it, building coast to coast electric 
vehicle charging stations.

    All of this work needs workers. And employers have been 
saying that, what are we going to do to make sure that we have 
the workers that we need? And apprenticeship programs are a big 
part of that answer.

    Our overall workforce development system is a big part of 
that answer. And my team has heard me say this in the 
Department of Labor many, many times. We can build physical 
roads and bridges. We also have to build the roads and bridges 
that connect people to the jobs they need. That is what this 
system will do.

    The Chair. What I am hearing from you, as Secretary of 
Labor, you are prepared to work with this Committee to greatly 
expand apprenticeship programs in this country. Child labor is 
an issue, as Senator Padilla mentioned a moment ago, of great 
concern. You have some experience in that issue. Tell us what 
you would like to accomplish to make sure that kids in this 
country are not exploited by unscrupulous employers.

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much for that question too, Chairman 
Sanders. As we have seen, there has been increased attention to 
the truly horrific examples of child labor that we have seen of 
late.

    To be clear, we are not talking about a young person who is 
getting their first summer job at the local retail store, 
working the cash register, where they are learning how to show 
up on time and work with customers.

    In the most recent case that the Department of Labor found, 
it was over 100 children as young as 13 working in meat packing 
facilities on the nightshift, doing cleaning work.

    I think we can all agree that is exploitative child labor 
that we do not want to see, and the Department of Labor is not 
only continuing to enforce the law, we are also leading an 
inter-agency task force across the Federal Government to make 
sure that we are exchanging information as needed and bringing 
all of our resources to bear.

    That is another thing I would look forward to working with 
this Committee and Congress on, if asked.

    The Chair. Okay. Thank you very much. Senator Cassidy.

    Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Ms. Su. Let me just first 
express admiration for your incredible personal story. And all 
of us are one or two generations from a story like that, and 
yours is more immediate, so let me just first express that.

    Speaking about policy issues, though, AB5 is controversial. 
In the many quarters in California, it is unpopular, and you 
supported and helped to implement it. In 2019, you described 
those who do not want to comply with the overreaching law, as 
not understanding the economy, that ``we want in California.''

    What we want is kind of a royal, we. And it is important to 
note that the Legislature had to go back and pass almost 100 
exemptions. So, I say that because I think one thing that 
concerns us, would you commit to not trying to force an AB5 
type regulation upon the rest of the country, that which was 
done in California?

    Ms. Su. Thank you for the question, Senator. The short 
answer to your question is yes. The context to your question is 
that the ABC test in California was first adopted by a 
unanimous California Supreme Court decision that was written by 
a Republican appointed chief justice.

    Senator Cassidy. Now, isn't it fair to say that this 
greatly, AB5 greatly expanded that decision and covered workers 
that were not necessarily covered by that decision, but went 
far beyond?

    Ms. Su. Well, following that decision, the California 
Legislature did pass AB5 that codified the test. To be 
extremely clear, I was not part of the Legislature. I have 
never been a legislator. I have tremendous respect for what you 
all do. I have not done that job. And so, the ABC test was 
codified in California.

    It is not the only state that has it. But when the 
Department of Labor issued our rule on independent contractor 
versus employee classification, we explicitly did not include 
the ABC test in our rule.

    That is why I answered, yes, to your question. Only 
Congress can adopt the ABC test. I cannot----

    Senator Cassidy. Well obviously, it could be done through a 
rule that gets at the same point, even if it does not include 
the ABC. So, is that an equal kind of commitment to not attempt 
to do through a rule that which may be absent ABC, but 
otherwise has the same sort of effect?

    Ms. Su. I will commit with absolute certainty and 
commitment that I will always have full faith and fidelity to 
Federal law, to the laws you pass----

    Senator Cassidy. Now, that is different because I can 
promise you, I have learned you give me a smart attorney and 
they can find all sorts of interpretations of Federal law. Up 
is up and down is down. But no, sometimes up is down.

    Let me move on, though, just because I have got limited 
time. When we met, you said you would not pursue changes to the 
joint employer regulations, if confirmed. We know this is a 
priority for labor unions. Could you again, and for the record, 
give assurances that you will not pursue changes to the joint 
employer rule as Secretary of Labor?

    Ms. Su. Senator, I know you mentioned the concern about 
franchisees and franchisors, and we enjoyed our conversation. I 
mentioned that my family, my parents had a franchisee business. 
The reason my sister and I were able to go to college----

    Senator Cassidy. I got limited time----

    Ms. Su. Okay. So, I understand the importance of the model. 
There is not a joint employer rule on our regulatory agenda. It 
was not on our agenda that came out last year.

    Senator Cassidy. Is that to say it would not be on the 
agenda at a later point?

    Ms. Su. It will not be on our agenda that comes out in 
June, correct, Senator.

    Senator Cassidy. Next, Ms. Su--thank you. There are about 
150 labor contracts coming up, representing 1.6 million workers 
expiring this year. And one of the concerns about your 
nomination is that you lack direct experience negotiating and 
handling labor disputes. And so, can you point to any 
experience negotiating successful outcomes from labor disputes?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator, for that. So, I did 
work very closely with then Secretary Marty Walsh on the 
negotiations that concluded on our part in September that 
involved the rail unions and the rail employees.

    Senator Cassidy. Now, is it fair to say that it actually 
took Congress and the President to step in and conclude those 
negotiations? Those were not successful, fair?

    Ms. Su. When we concluded our 20-hour negotiation, a 
tentative agreement was reached. It was reached then averted 
what everyone was then saying would have been a national 
disaster. It is true that there were other parts of the 
process, as there always are, in collective bargaining 
negotiations at the table.

    The other thing, to your question, Senator, is that one of 
the other big issues that is looming is what is happening at 
the West Coast ports, the ports of L.A. and Long Beach, in my 
hometown, involving parties and people that I have known for 
some time, and I have been actively engaged in that 
conversation as well.

    Senator Cassidy. Now, it is fair to say, though, that those 
seem to be breaking down. There was a press release in February 
with optimism, but subsequently there have been other reports 
not quite so optimistic. So, it would be a stretch to say it is 
a successful process, correct?

    Ms. Su. They are not concluded yet, Senator. That is true. 
My role, if confirmed, would be to, when asked, help make sure 
that the parties stay at the table, that they are able to 
grapple with some of the hard issues that they face, and that 
if asked to come assist, I would do so. I would not give up on 
those negotiations at this time, Senator.

    Senator Cassidy. Okay. And, Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous 
consent to enter into the record a letter concerning the 
ongoing disruptions of the West Coast ports to President Biden 
from over 300 retailers, urging him to step in and negotiate 
between the union and management to prevent disruption to the 
supply chain and American consumers.

    The Chair. Without objection.

    [The following information can be found on page 198 in 
Additional Material:]

    Senator Cassidy. With that, I yield. Thank you.

    The Chair. Thank you.

    Senator Murray.

    Senator Murray. Acting Secretary Su, it is great to see you 
here today. Thank you so much. You have just been a reliable 
and a fair partner since your confirmation.

    I really look forward to continuing to work with you on 
implementing bipartisan priorities that Members of this 
Committee on both sides of the aisle passed and just last 
Congress, like the SECURE 2.0 and Mental Health Parity and the 
Pump Act which helps make sure working moms have the simple 
right to a break and a place to pump at work.

    Thank you for the work you have done. Let me ask you, as 
HELP Committee Chair, I led a group of Senators commenting on 
the department's proposed rule regarding employee 
classification, and I have been extremely frustrated regarding 
all the handwringing from some of my colleagues who are 
misrepresenting this issue.

    DOL explicitly states in the proposed rule that the Fair 
Labor Standards Act does not have an ABC test like the test in 
California. DOL has been very clear. It does not have the 
authority, as you just stated, to implement an ABC test.

    That is something that only Congress can do, and everyone 
out there fearmongering about an ABC test knows this. In fact, 
and several of them have put out statements acknowledging that 
after the proposed rule was issued in the fall on October 11th 
of last year, Lyft stated this about the independent contractor 
rule, and I quote, ``importantly, this rule, No. 1, does not 
reclassify Lyft drivers as employees.

    Two, does--employers--and two, does not force Lyft to 
change our business model. This approach previously applied to 
Lyft and app-based companies and did not result in 
reclassification of drivers.''

    On December 14th of last year, the International Franchise 
Association submitted a statement saying, and I quote, ``IFA 
applauds the proposal for its express recognition that the ABC 
test does not apply to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 
appropriately clarifying that the franchise relationship falls 
outside of its coverage.''

    Chairman Sanders, I would like unanimous consent to 
introduce both the statement from Lyft and the statement from 
the International Franchise Association that I have here with 
me into the record.

    The Chair. Without objection.

    [The following information can be found on page 204 in 
Additional Material:]


    Senator Murray. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Acting Secretary 
Su, do you agree with those statements that I just read from 
Lyft and from the IFA?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator Murray. I mean, Lyft 
knows their business model. I would definitely confirm your 
point, and what I said to the Ranking Member, that our rule 
does not include the ABC test.

    It cannot include the ABC test because only Congress can 
adopt that test. And our rule is meant to be in full compliance 
with the Fair Labor Standards Act and decades of Federal law on 
the issue.

    Senator Murray. Is it true that DOL has already stated it 
does not have the authority under the FLSA to implement an ABC 
test absent an act of Congress?

    Ms. Su. That is correct, Senator.

    Senator Murray. Good. I think that is pretty 
straightforward and I hope that clears it up for all of our 
colleagues who are here. Let me turn to something else. At the 
end of last year, I was able to work with the bipartisan and 
bicameral leadership of the three other pension committees to 
pass a huge bipartisan retirement package in SECURE 2.0.

    DOL is going to oversee the implementation of a 
considerable number of the provisions, like establishing new 
emergency savings accounts, which I believe will help expand 
coverage, creating a retirement savings lost and found to make 
sure that workers have access to the money they saved at past 
employers, and many other priorities.

    If confirmed, will you commit to working with me and all of 
my colleagues across the aisle to ensure that the provisions of 
SECURE 2.0 are implemented correctly and in a timely manner?

    Ms. Su. I absolutely will, Senator. And I still hastily 
answered the first question. I didn't also first say thank you 
for your leadership as Chair of this Committee when I came as 
Deputy Secretary. And also, you mentioned the Pump Act, and as 
a mother who breastfed both of my children, had to pump at 
work, I want to thank you for that, too.

    But yes, as the SECURE 2.0--of course we would--we are 
going to implement it and look forward to working with you on 
it. The law does require the department to establish a lost and 
found program, as you mentioned, to make sure that people, 
Americans who have saved their entire lives for retirement are 
able to access those benefits when they retire.

    Sometimes people change jobs and they lose track or maybe 
they forget, and that is why a program like that is so 
important. The Department of Labor, actually under our Employee 
Benefits Security Administration, or EBSA, launched a similar 
program in 2017 that was really more of an individual case by 
case one.

    Through that work it's recovered $6 billion of retiree 
benefits for retired Americans. And so, SECURE 2.0 is going to 
let us do that for all retirees, and we look forward to working 
with you to make sure that becomes real.

    Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much. And thank you 
for all of your work as Acting and as Deputy Secretary. Look 
forward to working with you in your new position. Thank you.

    Ms. Su. Thank you, Senator.

    The Chair. Senator Romney.

    Senator Romney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Deputy 
Secretary Su. We now know that unaccompanied minor children are 
being trafficked in illegal labor markets across the country.

    Your department wrote last year that violations have 
increased by some 70 percent since 2018. Was that communicated 
to the White House prior to this year? Is that something you 
have communicated them, that this is a major, major problem?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator, for the question. As 
we discussed a little bit earlier today, we are seeing----

    Senator Romney. No, no I have a very specific question, and 
very limited time. Did you communicate that as a department to 
the White House prior to this year?

    Ms. Su. I don't know the answer to that question, Senator.

    Senator Romney. Okay. Thank you. My second question, which 
is during your last 2 years at the department, the public 
calendar shows that you had a standing meeting with unions on a 
regular basis.

    But until 6 weeks ago, you had not met with any business 
associations. Unions on a regular basis, but not with business 
associations. I guess it is really hard to understand how when 
we think about putting two groups together and getting to the 
compromise, negotiating, how we could have any confidence that 
you would be seen as an unbiased, neutral arbiter, but instead 
would be biased in such a way that businesses associations are 
not going to be able to trust the Department of Labor to play a 
meaningful role. But of greater concern to me is your record in 
California.

    This is something I have raised with you before, but the 
fact that under your lead, unemployment insurance payments in 
California of some $31 billion went to people who were 
basically receiving money on a criminal basis, illegally 
receiving money from the Federal Government--$31 billion.

    That is about as much as we provided in military aid to 
Ukraine. That is almost twice the total budget of the 
Department of Labor. Under your leadership in California, $31 
billion was fraudulently paid out.

    Now, there is a principle in all sorts of enterprises known 
as the Peter principle, which is people get promoted to a point 
where their competence is no longer been established. In this 
case, your record there is so severely lacking, I don't know 
how in the world it makes sense for the President to nominate 
you to take over this department.

    To work behind Marty Walsh is one thing and to learn from 
him. But you haven't had experience negotiating a major deal 
between unions and management, and your leadership of an 
enterprise resulted in $31 billion of fraudulent payments. What 
am I missing?

    Ms. Su. Senator, thank you, on both those points. In terms 
of business leaders, I think that business leaders and industry 
associations who have worked with me would paint a different 
story about both my openness and my desire----

    Senator Romney. But you have got to meet with them, for 
them to do so. If you haven't met with them for the first 2 
years until 6 weeks ago, and you have met with unions 
regularly, that sends a pretty clear message to those business 
leaders.

    Ms. Su. 100 percent that relationships are very important. 
I believe that I have them, and I would be happy to talk to you 
more about them at any time. But as I said in my opening 
statement, I think anybody who knows my record would say that I 
am someone who is communicative, transparent, and really sees 
that there is tremendous areas of common ground between 
employers who are job creators, and employees who do the work.

    Senator Romney. That is as accurate as it is irrelevant to 
your competence to be able to lead a negotiation fraught 
between unions and management. Help me with a $31 billion.

    Ms. Su. Thank you for that, Senator.

    The vast majority, over 95 percent of the fraud in the 
unemployment system, not just in California but across the 
Nation, was in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program, a 
program that was passed by Congress to meet a very, very urgent 
need, an unprecedented crisis that was viewed to require an 
unprecedented solution.

    That pandemic unemployment assistance program did not have 
the safeguards that regular unemployment insurance does.

    Senator Romney. You set those safeguards. There are 
guidelines in California you chose to waive to get that money 
out, $31 billion. You realize what $31 billion would have meant 
to the people in Ukraine, had we been able to double our 
military support there?

    Ms. Su. Yes, yes. And that is why I--fraud, waste and abuse 
of any kind is completely unacceptable. That is why in 
California, as soon as we knew that there was fraud happening, 
I shut the front door to that fraud.

    I made changes to the program that would ensure that people 
couldn't get in the front door. But to be very clear, the state 
auditor, who did many audits, never said--never found that my 
eliminating eligibility requirements resulted in any of the 
pandemic unemployment situation that we are talking about.

    Senator Romney. I am sorry, my time is up. The buck stops 
at the top. You are the person running UI. You are the one that 
decided to waive the guardrails--$31 billion. The idea of 
promoting a person who has had that experience to a position of 
leadership of the entire Department of Labor makes no sense at 
all. Thank you.

    Ms. Su. Respectfully, Senator, if I may. Just on the 
unemployment insurance fraud issue, California's unemployment 
insurance fraud rate, which was different from the pandemic 
unemployment assistance, was really about comparable to what it 
has been before.

    The high rates that you are talking about were in a program 
that did not have the safeguards in its design.

    The Chair. Senator Baldwin.

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Acting 
Labor Secretary Su. I want to revisit a couple of the questions 
you have gotten from my colleagues across the aisle, because I 
didn't hear you get an adequate opportunity yet to answer.

    My colleagues have suggested that you are inexperienced in 
negotiating labor contracts. However, as you mentioned, you 
stood shoulder to shoulder with former Secretary Walsh for 
those marathon negotiating sessions to get to a deal to avert a 
national rail strike and economic shutdown.

    Further, your nomination is supported by both the 
Teamsters, representing 340,000 UPS workers, for whom the 
largest private sector collective bargaining agreement expires 
in July of this year, and the port of L.A., whose 15,000 
workers facilitated $200 billion in trade last year.

    The collective bargaining agreement for these workers 
expired in July 2022, and your experience and relationships 
with the L.A. port will be invaluable in ensuring both sides 
reach a fair agreement and avoid supply chain disruptions.

    Ms. Su, isn't it true that you are significantly 
experienced and qualified to negotiate vital labor agreements?

    Ms. Su. Thank you so much, Senator. I appreciated our 
meeting and I appreciate that question. And yes, I believe that 
I am.

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. To hear some of my colleagues 
tell it, you are also writing regulations with no regard to the 
impact on small businesses. Your track record, not to mention 
your life story, tells a very different story.

    Not only are you endorsed by your hometown's Chamber of 
Commerce in Los Angeles, but you have worked with National 
Chamber and many industry associations throughout your tenure.

    Can you talk a little bit about some of the initiatives you 
have had, that you have worked on as Deputy Secretary, and how 
you proactively sought out and incorporated the input of the 
industries involved in those initiatives.

    Ms. Su. Yes. Thank you so much for that question, Senator. 
Over my tenure as Deputy Secretary, again, working very closely 
with Secretary Marty Walsh, we spent a lot of time talking to 
employers, individual employers, industry associations, about--
especially about their workforce needs.

    How are we going to match the needs that employers have for 
workers, with the desire that workers have for good jobs, for 
better jobs, and for training programs that will align the two 
things.

    I sat down in Michigan with both employers and unions about 
what it is going to look like as we build more electric 
vehicles, for example. I have sat down with employers and, 
across the country around how we can support them in expanding 
their apprenticeship programs, or creating, not just employer 
by employer training, but looking at the sector as a whole.

    The needs that we have today require more than just 
matching between employers and job seekers, but really building 
capacity in communities to do training on a sector wide basis. 
And sector industry leaders representing employers are really 
key to that, which is why I have met with them and why those 
who do know me will say that I am very much committed to 
working in partnership, understanding their needs and their 
challenges, and figuring out what Government can do to help 
meet them.

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. I am also the incoming new 
chair of the Labor Health and Human Services Subcommittee on 
Appropriations, which drafts annual legislation to fund the 
Department of Labor.

    One point of significant bipartisan cooperation within the 
Labor HHS bill has been support for increasing funding for 
apprenticeships. Over the last several years, we have seen 
funding increased from $90 million in the year 2016 to $285 
million in last year's omnibus.

    I would like to hear you talk a little bit more about how 
that funding has been used at the Department of Labor, and how 
it might help employers, and especially smaller communities 
like we have so many of in Wisconsin to--how it would help 
employers find workers with the skills that they need.

    Ms. Su. I so appreciate the chance to talk about this. 
Thank you, Senator. So, we are very proud of the work we have 
done in apprenticeship programs. We have done it in multiple 
industries in terms of expanding.

    Cybersecurity is one of those in-demand industries with 
high paying jobs where there is a need for skilled workers. In 
just a 6-month period, we were able to expand apprenticeship 
programs in cybersecurity to the tune of 16,000 individual 
apprentices, bringing the total across the country to 43,000. 
Teacher apprenticeships.

    When we came in 2021, there were two states that--teacher 
apprenticeships, now there are 17. In terms of your question 
about smaller communities. Actually, in Wisconsin, we have a 
grant. It is our women apprenticeships in nontraditional 
occupations grant.

    Is a way of looking at all these good jobs that we are 
creating should be available to all communities, and I have 
seen that when you give women a chance to do work that they did 
not imagine doing, they can change their own lives.

    They can change a family's lives. And we do have a grant 
just like that with the Wisconsin Regional Training 
Partnership, which is going to help at least 950 people in a 
small community to join apprenticeships and apprenticeship 
programs.

    The Chair. Senator Tuberville.

    Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Su, thanks 
for being here today. Now, you have a long history of activism 
on behalf of organized labor. I think that is understood, but 
very few examples of impartiality. You have been biased.

    For instance, you wrote in 2005 that businesses perpetuate 
economic injustice and use abuse and exploit poor people. I 
have some legitimate concerns that you won't be fair and 
neutral, if confirmed.

    I am not confident that your ability to act as a neutral 
and fair Secretary won't be compromised by a personal view. So, 
Ms. Su, your nomination is opposed by at least 32 business 
groups and coalitions, and the primary concern we are hearing 
is that your confirmation would be devastating to a wide number 
of industries and businesses.

    I am not an expert in labor law, but I have to say this 
much opposition concerns me. You have tried to assure critics 
that you would wear a different hat and be less of an activist, 
but I find that very hard to believe with all this opposition.

    Can you explain that and how you are going to overcome 
that?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator. I am not sure if I 
should still call you coach. I know you said that I could----

    Senator Tuberville. Sure, you can. I have been called 
worse.

    Ms. Su [continuing]. In our meeting but thank you for that. 
I also want you to know that I did tell my daughter that you 
said that she could come see you to talk about the intersection 
between athletics and education, both of great interest to her.

    I appreciate that question. I do believe that employers and 
employer associations that have worked with me could help to 
round out the perception of those who have not yet had a chance 
to work with me.

    I also have shared and will say again, my own personal 
background has given me a front row seat to the needs, the 
issues, the struggles, the challenges, the difficulties, and 
the incredible work of small business owners who are the 
lifeblood and the job creators in all of our communities.

    My family now, my cousins, my aunts have businesses in 
California. So, I have not only the personal perspective about 
how important it is, I think my record really demonstrates, 
especially in my work since I have been in Government, how to 
build big tables, bring employers and employees together, labor 
and unions together.

    We have been doing so much of that just to build training 
partnerships, understanding that if you build a training 
partnership where participants know at the beginning of 
training that they are going to end up with a good job at the 
end of it, that is a very simple way to design a program that 
is going to work, and is going to let you recruit people to it, 
and have people want to stay in the program.

    Senator Tuberville. Following-up on Senator Romney's 
question, have you made an effort to meet with non-union 
businesses and groups in your last 2 years?

    Ms. Su. Absolutely, Senator. Yes.

    Senator Tuberville. How is that going?

    Ms. Su. I think it has gone well. I mean, I think, again, 
employers are both excited about the opportunities created in 
this Administration.

    We have seen that it's not just the historic Federal 
investments that are going to bringing manufacturing back to 
the United States and all of the infrastructure investments. It 
is not just Federal investments.

    There have been hundreds of billions of dollars in private 
investments. It has been called crowding in to meet the moment, 
to take advantage of what the Federal Government is doing. That 
is the President's vision for how we reimagine industrial 
policy and create an economy that works for everybody.

    Senator Tuberville. Let me get my last question real quick. 
You have consistently worked to oppose and block efforts to 
stop illegal immigration. You reportedly sent a memo to staff 
during your time as California labor commissioner instructing 
them to turn away any Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
agents who show up at labor offices without a Federal warrant.

    I am concerned about the fact that our Southern border is 
wide open. I think we all are, most of us, and the negative 
impact that this is having on our Country. Could you provide 
that memo to us, to this Committee?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator. I----

    Senator Tuberville [continuing]. Do you remember it?

    Ms. Su. I don't remember it--I don't remember it well. I 
don't have access to it at this time.

    I do want to say, Senator, again, I think that my 
background is really about a commitment to the dignity of work 
and of the importance of making sure that workers have the 
protections that they need when they go to work so that they 
get a fair day's pay for a fair day's work, and that every 
worker who walks into the workplace comes home healthy and safe 
at the end of the day.

    I think that regardless of where you live in the United 
States, that is part of the basic promise of this country. And 
we want all workers to be able to put food on the table at the 
end of the day and put a roof over their heads, and that is the 
record of work that I have done in my career.

    Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Chair. Thank you. Senator Murphy.

    Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good to 
see you. Ms. Su, thank you for coming and spending some time 
with me talking about issues that are important to Connecticut.

    I may get to one of those if I have time, but first, I 
really wanted to give you an opportunity to expand a little bit 
on the answers that you were giving to Senator Romney. 
California is a really big state, and so every number coming 
out of California is going to be a big number.

    When you look at this, question of unemployment insurance 
fraud, right, $100 billion is a lot of money. But, I was 
looking at the percentages from other states when it came to 
insurance fraud. And there are some big numbers, too.

    The number in California is about 11 percent of benefits 
paid. But, in Tennessee, it was 15 percent. In Alabama, it was 
14 percent. South Carolina, it was 14 percent. In Kansas, it 
was 27 percent. Every state had issues here.

    But what seems important to me is that you led when it came 
to implementing reforms, so much so, that as I understand it, 
the Trump administration ended up adopting some of the reforms 
that you put in place.

    It didn't sound like you got the chance to fully give the 
Committee the information on the reforms that eventually became 
standard practice or recommended to other states, and just 
wanted to let you finish out that answer.

    Ms. Su. Senator, thank you so much. And thank you for 
meeting with me prior to this hearing as well. First, let me 
just state again very clearly that there is no place for fraud, 
waste, or abuse in systems like this.

    The criminal enterprises that took advantage of the lack of 
eligibility requirements built into the pandemic unemployment 
assistance program made--it was not only bad because it was a 
fraud on taxpayers, it was also bad because it made it even 
more difficult for states to actually pay out claims to those 
who were eligible.

    It was--there was really--it was really a horrible 
situation that there was so much fraud on the system. But you 
are absolutely right, Senator, that once we saw that it was 
happening, and it happened because the pandemic unemployment 
assistance program, and the state auditors said this too, it 
did not have safeguards in place at the get go.

    It was meant to go out quickly because we were facing a 
massive crisis in which people were out of work, through no 
fault of their own, in unprecedented numbers. So, it allowed 
people to self-attest that they were eligible.

    It had a minimum payment amount--a minimum payment should 
be paid. It had an automatic backdating in it. So, it was if 
you applied in August but you were unemployed as of February, 
you got all of that, the amount back to February.

    Those were built into the program that states worked 
mightily to stand up very quickly on outdated technology and 
the rest, which is well known. Once--as California Labor 
Secretary, one of the things that I did was I stopped the 
automatic backdating, and that is believed to have stopped over 
$60 billion worth of fraudulent payments that could have gone 
out.

    After I did that, the Department of Labor under the prior 
Administration did issue a directive to all states to do the 
same thing. Since I have been Deputy Secretary, what we have 
been doing at the Department of Labor is really trying to learn 
from those lessons to make sure they are never repeated again, 
to work in collaboration with states to be clear about the 
things that we should do on a national level to fight that kind 
of fraud.

    That kind of fraud went from state to state. But also, to 
shore up the unemployment insurance safety net so that in the 
next crisis it can really deliver.

    Senator Murphy. Thank you for that response. I wanted to 
make sure we got as much of that on the record as possible. I 
am going to ask you a second question and just ask a commitment 
from you to work with me because I am running out of time.

    You and I talked at length in my office about the challenge 
we have with the defense industrial base in Connecticut. We 
have to hire 5,700 new workers in Connecticut and Rhode Island 
at Electric Boat to meet the demands of the submarine fleet.

    We are producing more submarines than ever before. That is 
a real challenge for us, and it is a challenge we can't meet 
without assistance from the Department of Labor for 
apprenticeship programs and workforce training programs.

    I just want to ask for your commitment to work with me and 
other Members of this Committee who are going to need DOL's 
help and need the Secretary's help directly in making sure that 
we have enough resources to train all the people we are going 
to need in order to fill the needs of our defense manufacturing 
base in Connecticut and throughout the country.

    Ms. Su. 100 percent, Senator. Yes.

    Senator Murphy. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Chair. Senator Mullin.

    Senator Mullin. Thank you. And thank you for being here 
today. It was a pleasure meeting you. I do have to kind of 
address something beginning. Our Chairman came out with a very 
strong comment, daring everybody, basically, that if they 
disagreed with your qualifications to say it with a straight 
face.

    As always, he talks about starvation wages in which I 
thought, man, he is really setting the tone here. But then I am 
just starting to figure out, that is just your personality, no 
offense there, but this is your personality.

    But then I still understand--I don't understand the lack of 
knowledge, basic knowledge, when this is the health, education, 
labor, and pension, the basic knowledge to understand what 
labor costs really is.

    As a business owner who has employed truly hundreds of 
people, labor is always going to have a beginning wage. And 
everything else goes from there. So, you can't call the 
beginning wage a starvation wage if there is always going to be 
a beginning wage.

    I don't care what industry you are in, it is always going 
to start in something, and the product that industry is making 
is going to adjust, whatever the cost of that final product is, 
is going to be delivered to everybody.

    But that is actually what an apprenticeship program is too, 
because that is supposed to get people into the program to 
start working toward that. But yet apprenticeship programs 
themselves can actually be kind of restrictive because a lot of 
people that are entering these workforces that are going to 
maybe you start requiring apprentices, they didn't want to go 
to college.

    But yet we keep expanding apprenticeship programs from 1 
year to 2 year to 3 year to some apprenticeship programs of 4 
years and longer. And individuals are like, look, I didn't want 
to go to college, so I entered this workforce to begin with.

    We have got to think about what we are talking about when 
we start expanding apprenticeship programs. But it also 
understands the lack of people that are running these programs, 
running the industry of actually understanding what business is 
like.

    Which is why so many of us--while you are a--seems like a 
super nice individual, and we had a great conversation, that 
doesn't mean being nice qualifies you to be Secretary of Labor.

    Because if you don't have that basic understanding of 
knowing what it is like, then how can you relate and truly 
represent both sides? For instance, have you ever been an 
employer of a business? That is yes or no, I am sorry.

    Ms. Su. I have not, Senator, but my parents have. And my 
family.

    Senator Mullin. Have you ever done it?

    Ms. Su. I have not.

    Senator Mullin. You don't understand what it is like, how 
hard it is to actually sit awake at night trying to figure out 
how you are going to man a job when you don't have the people 
there and, you are going to have to do it.

    Have you ever created or balanced a budget for business? 
Yes, or no? These are yes or no, real quick. I want to run 
through them as quick as I can. I am going to take that as a 
no. Have you ever acquired or sold a business?

    Ms. Su. I have not, Senator.

    Senator Mullin. Have you ever had to raise capital in order 
to launch a new business?

    Ms. Su. I have not, Senator.

    Senator Mullin. Which goes back to one of your comments 
that you wrote about that I will get to later. Have you ever 
had to provide quarterly reports to shareholders?

    Ms. Su. Senator, I have not done these things----

    Senator Mullin. I am just going--this is qualifications 
because the Chairman said, can you actually say with a straight 
face if you are qualified on this, and these are points we are 
trying to make. Have you ever decided which health insurance 
plan you are going to offer to employees?

    Ms. Su. Senator, if I may, if I am confirmed----

    Senator Mullin. I am going through these because I am 
making a point. The Chairman is one the one that threw down the 
gantlet and said, I dare anybody to say this with a straight 
face. I am just trying to make a point here. So, have you 
ever--have you ever----

    Ms. Su. I have not chosen a health insurance plan for----

    Senator Mullin. Have you ever had an employee file a 
worker's comp that you had to either work with or fight 
against?

    Ms. Su. As an employer, no, Senator.

    Senator Mullin. Do you know what a worker's comp experience 
mod is?

    Ms. Su. I do, based on my work in Government----

    Senator Mullin. But you have never had to actually apply it 
to your bottom line to figure out what your profit margins and 
bottom line is going to be. Have you ever filed taxes on behalf 
of business?

    Ms. Su. I have not, Senator.

    Senator Mullin. Have you had to comply with Federal 
regulations on a small business?

    Ms. Su. No.

    Senator Mullin. It is really hard to understand what it is 
like when you are getting mandated and regulations are coming 
at you. Have you ever--have you ever had your business model 
threatened by the Federal Government's overreach of 
regulations?

    Ms. Su. No, Senator.

    Senator Mullin. See, I have. And that is what drove me here 
today. And when you have someone like yourself that makes a 
comment like this, like you did in 2005, says, the very 
definition of a corporation as an entity that is created to 
permit maximum income and designed to insulate individuals who 
profit from the liability. That is your opinion about a 
corporation. Do you still stand by that?

    Ms. Su. Senator, I don't remember when I wrote that, but 
the context in which I wrote it, I don't----

    Senator Mullin. It doesn't--there is no context in which 
this can be taken out of context. Do you still believe that 
corporations are just insulation to shield individuals like 
myself? Because we don't have any liabilities and we have no 
financial liabilities at all as a corporation, as an owner at 
all. I mean, I don't understand that. But do you still stand by 
that comment, yes or no?

    Ms. Su. I will tell you what I do stand by, Senator----

    Senator Mullin. No, no, I just need a yes or no. I am about 
out of time and I have got one more question. Do you stand by 
that comment?

    Ms. Su. I do stand by the important role that both 
employers and employees bring to our economy----

    Senator Mullin. Do you believe that American society was 
built on white privilege and systemic racial subordination to 
what you have written also?

    Ms. Su. Can I--can I say what I do stand by, Senator?

    Senator Mullin. No, I just--those are your comments. I am 
asking you, do you still believe on both those comments? You 
wrote those in your comments. It is just, do you stand by those 
comments or do you not? You wrote them. Do you stand by them or 
not?

    Ms. Su. I believe that we can't----

    Senator Mullin. No, ma'am. I am just--do you believe what 
you said? Is a yes or no.

    Ms. Su. I will say this, Senator. I think it is a longer 
conversation.

    Senator Mullin. But you can't answer heck no on this, Ms. 
Su, then that is a huge problem, because just like our Chairman 
sometimes lead with a gavel with a biased opinion toward labor, 
you also will lead the Secretary--as Secretary of Labor or 
Labor Department with bias because you cannot say those type of 
statements like that and represent all sides. With that, I 
yield back.

    The Chair. Senator Kaine.

    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Secretary Su, 
thank you for meeting with me earlier and talking about issues 
that I am concerned with in Virginia, the tight labor market, 
seasonal visas for a lot of our seafood workers.

    I really appreciate it. I look forward to supporting you 
and working with you on those issues. I just want to summarize 
some topics, and I want you to tell me if I am wrong at all in 
summarizing what I have heard before.

    Business interaction, Senator Romney asked--said that you 
had only started to meet with business associations recently, 
but during your 2 years you met with businesses repeatedly, 
correct?

    Ms. Su. Yes.

    Senator Kaine. Chambers of Commerce, United Airlines, 
businesses connected with ports all around the country, 
railroad industry. So, you have had dialog with businesses 
constantly during your 2 years. Isn't that accurate?

    Ms. Su. That is correct.

    Senator Kaine. Business groups like the Los Angeles Chamber 
of Commerce have said about you, Secretary Su ``has worked with 
the Chamber numerous times to bring a reasonable, balanced 
voice to labor issues.'' That is one of the biggest chambers of 
commerce in the United States. Isn't that correct?

    Ms. Su. I don't know for a fact, but yes, I do believe that 
is what they said. Thank you.

    Senator Kaine. The Society for Human Resources Management, 
which manages H.R. professionals, businesses around the 
country, they support your nomination.

    I think in business interaction, it seems like you have 
been engaging in the dialog with businesses, to Senator 
Mullin's point, you haven't run a business. We have cabinet 
members who have. I think cabinet members should bring diverse 
experiences to the table. You bring a set of experiences.

    You can't have all experiences, but other members of the 
cabinet--Gina Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, had a very 
active role in the private sector before her public service 
career. With respect to the concern about independent 
contractors, folks are concerned with this particular 
California AB5 law.

    It began with the California Supreme Court decision. You 
have never been on the California Supreme Court. It was 
codified by the California Legislature. You were not a member 
of the California Legislature.

    You were obligated to implement state laws, just as you 
would be obligated to implement Federal laws. In your capacity 
as Deputy Secretary of Labor, you have issued a regulation in 
this space that does not incorporate the ABC test for 
determining who is an employee and who is an independent 
contractor.

    Major groups that were concerned with AB5, like Lyft and 
the Franchise Association, have praised the Federal standard 
that you have issued as, thank goodness this standard does not 
include the thing we didn't like about the California standard. 
So, there is a PR campaign, don't California, Arizona, or don't 
let Julie Su California our workplace.

    Very explicitly the independent contractor rule the 
Department of Labor is issuing now is not the AB5 rule, so the 
attacks on the AB5 rule really are not relevant to what the 
Department of Labor is doing today.

    On the unemployment insurance issue, I agree with Senator 
Romney and others, fraud is outrageous, and especially people 
taking advantage and defrauding a program that was designed to 
help the Nation out of a crisis. But many states, as Senator 
Murphy said, had fraud rates much higher.

    For people who just didn't focus on this, let's be really 
clear about what this fraud was. I am going to give you some 
statistics. The week that ended March 14, 2020, which was the 
last pre-pandemic week, 278,000 Americans filed unemployment 
insurance claims. The next week, it was 2.9 million Americans. 
The week after that, it was 5.9 million aware Americans.

    The week after that, it was 6.1 million Americans. So, our 
Nation's employment agencies that have been used to dealing 
with 278,000 claims a week nationally, we are now dealing with 
20 times that. And what did Congress do? We did three things 
that added to your workload, even beyond that explosion of 
claims.

    We first said you have to give benefits for more weeks. We 
second said, you have to increase the amount of benefits to get 
us through this economic catastrophe. But the third thing, and 
this is where all the fraud was, in every state including 
Virginia, we made you pay unemployment benefits to a whole 
class of people who are not part of the unemployment system, 
independent contractors, gig workers.

    Congress required you to do that. People who weren't in the 
California system, who weren't in the Virginia system, and we 
did it to save the economy. 95 percent of the fraud in 
California was in that program, and that 95 percent number was 
probably the same in virtually every state.

    It was Congress that required you, at a time when your 
workforce was low because unemployment claims were low. But now 
unemployment claims were expanding 20-fold. Just in your normal 
business, we made you do three things, including one thing, was 
adding people who hadn't been in the system at all, and some 
scammers took advantage of it.

    It infuriates me when scammers take advantage of seniors, 
when scammers take advantage of something like that. But you 
were dealing with a reality that--you can blame Congress for 
this. But I can be honest about how this problem got created.

    I am upset with the fraud, but I am not upset that Congress 
did what because it helped this Nation get through the worst 
public health emergency and one of the most serious economic 
challenges in the last 100 years.

    I think you did a fine job under challenging circumstances 
trying to negotiate through this extraordinary set of programs. 
And I think you have done a fine job in your 2 years as Deputy 
Secretary, and I look forward to supporting your nomination.

    The Chair. Senator Budd.

    Senator Budd. Thank you, Chairman. And Deputy Secretary, 
thank you for being here today. You are on record supporting 
AB257 and this bill creates a fast-food council of ten 
unelected Government bureaucrats to dictate wages and working 
conditions for California restaurant businesses.

    This bill forced unionization on workers who never even 
asked for it, and it took independence away from small business 
owners and it gave it to unelected bureaucrats. Deputy 
Secretary Su, California voters have gathered enough signatures 
to prevent AB257 from taking effect.

    Will you push policies as the Secretary of Labor like you 
did in California that take away the independence of job 
creators?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator. It is nice to see you 
here today. I believe that bona fide independent contractors 
will always have a place in our economy. They have and they 
will, and they are very, very important. I am not positive if 
AB257--I believe you are talking about a----

    Senator Budd. Let me just go back to the last part of the 
question, which is where you push policies as Secretary of 
Labor like you did in California that take away the 
independence of job creators? That is more of a yes or no, with 
a minor explanations.

    Ms. Su. No. And to be clear, I would absolutely respect the 
authority of this body, of you, to make laws that I, if 
confirmed, will be charged with enforcing.

    Senator Budd. Thank you. You have called the ABC test a 
model for the country. Yet voters in California decided that it 
shouldn't even be a model in that state, with nearly 60 percent 
of voters overturning the part of the law that applies to app-
based ride sharing and delivery services.

    AB5 also resulted in a list of carve outs for industries 
that was longer than the law itself. Aside from the fact that 
California lawmakers are obviously picking winners and losers, 
it seems obvious that a law requiring more than 100 separate 
carve outs is deeply flawed.

    Deputy Secretary, do you believe that California's AB5 is a 
model for the Department of Labor to build its Federal labor 
policy on?

    Ms. Su. Thank you, Senator. I believe that AB5 was a bill 
passed by the California Legislature and given to me in my then 
role to enforce. I do not believe that the ABC test that is 
codified in AB5 is Federal law, and I do not believe that I 
could make it Federal law unless you all made it Federal law.

    Senator Budd. Let me push this a little more. So, in your 
comments to Senator Cassidy, you said the Department of Labor 
does not have the authority to implement the ABC test. But do 
you still think it is a good model for the country?

    Ms. Su. I think, Senator, that bona fide independent 
contractors have a place in our economy and need to be able to 
operate.

    I also believe that misclassification, meaning when you 
have someone who should be an employee but is called an 
independent contractor, maybe they work side by side with other 
people who are doing the exact same thing as they are, but they 
are called an independent contractor, so they are not protected 
by minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, and other 
laws, and the employees are, that is a problem in our economy 
that needs to be addressed.

    Senator Budd. Thank you. I want to shift gears to 
rulemaking. The fiduciary rule is still on the regulatory 
agenda this year, despite the fact that the last time this rule 
was issued, it had devastating effects, causing 10.2 million 
low and middle income individuals to lose access to investment 
assistance.

    I have serious concerns with the DOL re-implementing a 
failed standard, not to mention the potential mismatch of 
industry standards that might arise between it and the SEC's 
reg best interest.

    I am curious how much taxpayer money the DOL and the DOJ 
previously spent on implementation and litigation of the 
disastrous 2016 fiduciary rule, and how much both departments 
would project to spend should the Labor Department move forward 
with another rule?

    Any idea how much you would spend on that, on 
implementation and litigation?

    Ms. Su. Senator, thank you. I don't know the answer. I was 
not here in 2016. I will say that your point is precisely why 
it is so important for us to engage with all stakeholders 
before adopting any rule.

    Senator Budd. Hopefully that includes 10.2 million low and 
middle income individuals who have lost access to investment 
assistance. So, I am out of time. I am going to be opposing 
your nomination. I do appreciate your time today, and I yield 
back to the Chair.

    Ms. Su. Thank you, Senator.

    The Chair. Senator Hassan.

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want 
to thank you and Ranking Member Cassidy for the hearing. And 
Acting Secretary Su, it is good to see you. Thank you for 
meeting with me.

    Before I start with questions, I want to take a moment to 
echo some of my colleagues' comments this morning and reiterate 
how important it is to crack down on the alarming increase in 
child labor violations, expand access to career training 
pathways that will lead to good paying jobs, and support 
workers who experience disabilities.

    I want to start with a question about workforce training. 
People need access to high quality workforce training that 
leads to good paying jobs. As you may know, I, along with 
Senators Young, Collins, and Cain are authors of the bipartisan 
Gateway to Careers Act, which would establish a career pathway 
grant program for community colleges, technical colleges, and 
workforce development partners to provide job training for 
unemployed or underemployed individuals.

    The bill would also provide support to workers who face 
barriers such as transportation and access to childcare. If 
confirmed, how will you increase access to workforce training 
and supports that boost program completion?

    Ms. Su. Thank you so much for that question, Senator, and 
for your work and leadership in this space. I really enjoyed 
our conversation about this and other issues.

    As Deputy Secretary alongside Secretary Walsh, and as 
Acting Secretary, and if confirmed as Labor Secretary, this 
would really be a top priority for the Department of Labor. We 
are seeing the need for skilled workers in a whole bunch of 
different industries.

    That is why the Department of Labor recently put out an $80 
million grant to expand nursing, training for nursing. I know 
this is something that this Committee has already brought to 
light as well.

    In that stakeholder engagement and listening to what the 
needs are industries, we found that the need is not only for 
nurses themselves, but also for clinical instructors, and so 
the funding opportunity does address both those issues. We have 
expanded apprenticeships in trucking.

    That is what I haven't talked about yet. And I know, a 
point was made earlier that it takes too long for apprentices 
to finish programs. I do think that we have to look at ways to 
recruit and to train and to get people in high quality--with 
high quality training into good jobs as quickly as we can. And 
if confirmed, I would love to work with you on this, Senator.

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you. I want to turn to a 
slightly different topic. In January 2023, the labor force 
participation rate for people experiencing disabilities was 
around 25 percent, compared to about 65 percent of those 
without a disability.

    We have to do better as a country at removing barriers and 
creating opportunities for individuals experiencing a 
disability so that they can enter and remain in the workforce. 
I deeply value the work that the Department's Office of 
Disability Employment Policy is doing to increase employment 
opportunities for these individuals and help employers better 
understand ways to support them.

    To this end, Acting Secretary Su, can you detail some of 
the major initiatives currently underway by the Office of 
Disability Employment Policy?

    Ms. Su. Yes. Thank you so much for that question, Senator.

    I was going to say, and you beat me to it, that the 
Department of Labor does have our own sub agency that is 
devoted to exactly the issue that you are raising, because we 
see and understand that it is critically important if we are to 
build an economy where no one is left behind, to make sure that 
communities that are not participating in the labor force to 
the extent that they want to and could, have an opportunity.

    That is the primary focus of our Office of Disability 
Employment Policy, or ADEP. And one of the biggest priorities 
for ODEP is, I think what you are alluding to, which is 
competitive, integrated employment.

    Making sure that people with disabilities are able to work 
up in the labor force alongside workers without disabilities 
and get the training and the pathways for upward mobility that 
they need and deserve. And so, we have been doing that 
competitive, integrated employment work in multiple areas.

    We do it through technical assistance grants. We do it 
through collaboration with states to make sure that funding 
that states are providing are all driving toward a holistic set 
of policies that will actually make a difference in the lives 
of people with disabilities on the ground.

    We have done it in the form of technical assistance and 
work directly with employers so that they understand how to 
integrate these kinds of policies in the workplace.

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you very much, and I look 
forward to working with you on that. I have another question 
that I will submit for the record on apprenticeships, because I 
understand, one, I am out of time, and I understand other 
people have touched on it.

    But it is an area in which New Hampshire leads and we would 
very much appreciate working with the department moving forward 
and with people on both sides of the aisle to improve 
apprenticeships and make them more available in this country. 
Thank you.

    The Chair. Senator Braun.

    Senator Braun. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Sanders 
likes to keep things on time here. I like that, too. I am from 
the logistics business. I enjoyed our conversation yesterday. I 
am going to read a statement here because like I told you, I 
think so much of what you expect in the future, you got to pay 
attention to what might have happened in the past.

    Neera Tanden, in her capacity as President of the Center 
for American Progress, held a panel on wages and benefits in 
December 14 with you, Wage and Hour Administrator David Weil, 
who recently did not get nominated into a spot, and Labor 
Secretary Tom Perez.

    On this panel, and I am quoting what you said, just this 
last term, the Governor of California signed a bill that 
creates a concept of client employer that gets to the whole 
fissured workplace that David Weil has talked so much about. 
Fissured workplace is the definition of franchised or 
franchisee.

    About the idea here that a century of labor laws are 
premised on employer, employee relationship. So, when you have 
these middlemen and subcontracting, you really start to take 
away from that, from the protections between those at the top 
who contract or labor, and those at the bottom.

    The client employer concept is if you hire workers through 
a labor contractor as part of your regular course of business, 
and there is a whole definition for what regular course 
business means, but then you as a client employer are 
responsible for all the wage liabilities as if you were the 
employer.

    I think this has a potential to be a very important tool to 
get at the insulation between the top and bottom layers, 
meaning franchisors and franchisees. I am not going to ask you 
to respond to it because I am reading your statement.

    I will say this, a franchisor, franchisee is the most 
normal way you enter into the world of owning a small business, 
and I don't think this indicates that you would be working 
toward keeping that kind of structure there.

    We also talked about gig economy, which we had a different 
conversation on. And I think there you were acknowledging that 
was different maybe from a franchisor, franchisee. Here is 
where I am going to--I want you to respond to this.

    I think a lot of what has to do with anybody coming to a 
position of responsibility, you have got to probably justify 
some of the things in the past. I want to read this. I think 
character is important and I want you to respond to it.

    In 1989, you took part in the seizure of the President of 
Stanford University's office in a protest known as the takeover 
89. And I have got it from the Archives of Stanford Library, 
which I would like to submit into the record, Chairman.

    [The following information can be found on page 215 in 
Additional Material:]

    Senator Braun. Thank you. Stanford's President described 
the 10-hour occupation of his office as unlawful and as one of 
the gravest student protests in the last 16 years. Three years 
after the takeover 89 at Stanford, you were a key participant 
of the Griswold 9, a group of radicals that seized and occupied 
a Harvard Dean's office.

    In 1995, you told the L.A. Times, I guess, well, I was 
arrested, but, well, in the end, all the charges were dropped. 
Please comment on that. That is on your record. It is in the 
archives of the Stanford Library.

    How can that possibly be something that would make us feel 
confident about you filling this spot?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator. Thank you for the 
time that you spent with me. I know we had a lively discussion 
and I appreciate your questions and I am going to try to 
address them.

    If I may just say, Senator, one of the first cases I ever 
had was a case involving garment workers who have been 
trafficked into the country and forced to work behind barbed 
wire and under armed guard for as long as 18 hours a day.

    What we discovered in that case was it was not just their 
captors who had a role in that, there were contractors up the 
chain who knew about what was happening----

    Senator Braun. You wouldn't generalize that into an example 
that would be descriptive of franchisors and franchisees?

    Ms. Su. Exact--in fact, franchisers and franchisees had 
nothing to do with it whatsoever.

    Senator Braun. But that was my question earlier on----

    Ms. Su. Nothing to do with it whatsoever. For me, when 
everybody talks about how franchise--having a franchise company 
is a way that especially immigrants get into, get--own their 
first business and get a toehold into the middle class, that is 
my family. That is what--that was my experience. So,----

    Senator Braun. Before you get gaveled out, do you want to 
comment on what happened at Stanford and Harvard?

    Ms. Su. Yes. Just one more thing. The client employer is 
a--it was a concept of state law, not a Federal law. And I will 
assure this Committee that my fidelity to Federal law is 
complete. Okay, so we are talking about 19--what happened in 
1980?

    Okay. Senator, let me just say this, I don't know if this 
is responsive and I know you can stop me if it is not.

    I have an anecdote to share with you about this, which is, 
and my memory may be fuzzy about this, but at my Harvard 
graduation, the dean of the law school, Dean Robert Clark, who 
was the dean during the sit in, actually said at the graduation 
ceremony that it was good to see Julie Su sitting in my office, 
talking about how to address the issues that she sat in about 
in her first year rather than sitting in again.

    I share that with you because I do think there are many 
ways to make change. There are many ways to make the world a 
better place. And I have been somebody who sits down at the 
table and is willing to talk to anyone who,----

    Senator Braun. The past is apparently----

    Ms. Su [continuing]. Find common ground----

    Senator Braun [continuing]. Of the future. So, thank you.

    Ms. Su. Thank you.

    The Chair. Senator Smith.

    Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Acting 
Secretary Su, I agree with you. There are many ways to make the 
world a better place. And I have to say, looking at all of the 
work that you have done, I can see that you have devoted your 
entire life to making the world a better place.

    I strongly support your nomination. You have done an 
outstanding job as Deputy Secretary at the Department of Labor, 
working as a key partner with Secretary Walsh. You have a well-
deserved reputation for inclusive leadership, working with 
workers and business and industry associations alike to fulfill 
the mission of the Department of Labor and to implement the 
laws that Congress has passed.

    That would be your job as the Secretary of Labor. And let's 
just remind everybody that the mission of the Department of 
Labor is to foster, promote, and develop the welfare of wage 
earners, job seekers, and retirees in the United States; to 
improve working conditions; advance opportunities for 
profitable employment; and to assure work related benefits and 
rights.

    I think it is important to remember that is the mission 
that you would swear to uphold if you, as I dearly hope, become 
our next Labor Secretary. I want to just note that there have 
been some questions raised today about whether or not you have 
any experience negotiating large labor contracts.

    You probably aren't even aware of this because this just 
happened, but I understand that you played an important role in 
the contract negotiations between the International Longshore 
and Warehouse Union and the Pacific Maritime Association, and 
apparently this morning they have just reached a settlement and 
an agreement, which is a very important moment and something 
that I am sure you are delighted to know and to be aware of.

    Maybe you could just take a minute to talk a bit about your 
experience in this case, being a part of an important 
negotiation that impacts really the entire country.

    Ms. Su. Thank you. Thank you very much for that, Senator. 
Those are parties that I have known through my--before I came 
to this role.

    They are in the midst of a very important negotiation that 
has--that is extremely consequential, not only for the parties, 
but certainly for the parties, and also for our supply chain 
and our economy as a whole.

    I have been engaged with the parties, and our role is to 
help support them stay in the table, help support them 
resolving their issues. I did recently impress upon them the 
urgency of the issue, and I am pleased that they have made real 
progress that has been announced.

    There will still be a few issues that the parties need to 
resolve, but I think this is a good example of how the 
collective bargaining process really works. So, thank you very 
much for noting that, Senator.

    Senator Smith. I think it is also an example of how 
important it is for leaders like you to be integrally engaged 
in this. And I am just going to offer for the Committee, this 
is a quote from Gene Seroka, who is Executive Director of the 
Port of L.A. and he said, this is just--this is just like brand 
new.

    He said communication has been daily, hourly by the minute. 
Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su has been on the phone with us 
morning, noon, and night. That is the kind of leadership that 
you have demonstrated, and it is why you are respected by folks 
in both labor and in business who have had an opportunity to 
work with you, because they value effectiveness and they value 
somebody who is about seeking solutions to problems rather than 
making problems.

    Speaking of making problems, Mr. Chairman, sometimes it 
happens that big business lobbyists decide collectively that 
they are going to flex their muscle and to try to defeat a 
highly qualified candidate.

    Often those attacks have very little connection to the 
actual person or their record. In fact, they are about politics 
and money. And I think that this is one of those situations 
where you have the big business lobby putting up billboards in 
the states of Senators on this Committee attacking a nominee.

    What is going on here. They are trying to use their money 
to influence this process. And it is our job, Mr. Chairman, to 
cut through all of that and to get to the real person and their 
qualifications.

    I think the record is clear that you are highly qualified 
to serve as Labor Secretary, and I am very grateful for the 
opportunity to support you, and I look forward to seeing you in 
that seat. Thank you.

    Ms. Su. Thank you so much, Senator.

    The Chair. Senator Murkowski.

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Acting 
Secretary Su. Welcome back to the Committee. First question for 
you is regarding a project that I had some time to spend with 
former Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh. Secretary Walsh was very 
helpful in his capacity as the head of the Department of Labor 
in supporting the Willow Project.

    This is a resource development project in my state that 
promises great opportunities for Alaskan workers at a time when 
our economy is struggling. He recognized the value of that, the 
value that this project could create over 2,500 construction 
jobs, 300 long term jobs, and really contribute to our Nation's 
energy security.

    As I look back over your tenure there at the department, I 
see that you have held 22 meetings with the EPA or climate 
related advocacy groups. Not too many that I have noted with 
industry or employer groups.

    The question for you this morning is whether you would 
continue Secretary Walsh's support for projects like the Willow 
projects that clearly create jobs, improve our energy security, 
regardless of what part of the energy sector that they are in.

    It is one thing to say that you support renewable energy 
jobs, but in my state, we are still--the basis of our economy 
is still resource production, resources that this country 
relies on. So, your support for projects like the Willow 
Project?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator. It is good to see you 
again. I know that specific project wasn't something we talked 
about last time, but many of the issues facing Alaska were, and 
I appreciated that chance to speak with you then.

    Secretary Walsh and I worked very closely over the last 2 
years. He treated me as a true partner, and when the President 
nominated me to become Labor Secretary, he said that he wanted 
me to help finish the job. So, the idea of continuity, the idea 
of making sure that we deliver on the many big important things 
that we were trying to do as we continue the robust economic 
recovery that we have had, are things that I am very, very 
committed to.

    I stand by the decisions that were made during his tenure, 
and obviously under the leadership of the President on the 
issue that you raised, the project that you are talking about.

    Senator Murkowski. Well, you haven't told me that you 
support the Willow Project and the fact that it will provide 
significant jobs, which, again, are very important to my state. 
But it is not just projects that have gone through that 
pipeline, so to speak.

    We have considerable opportunities when it comes to 
critical minerals, responsible mining projects that, again, 
will put in place significant economic opportunities and job 
opportunities while producing the raw materials.

    I would hope that again, there would be a recognition that 
even if you have to drill or dig, that these are jobs that this 
country needs and that the Department of Labor, and certainly 
the Secretary of Labor, would support those.

    I want to ask about unemployment insurance. And when you 
first came before this Committee, I expressed a concern at the 
time because in my state we have a very aged or aging system 
when it comes to our UI system.

    We provided funding here in Congress for the specific 
purpose of helping states modernize their aging systems. We 
clearly need it. It is estimated to cost us about $50 million. 
But the State of Alaska did not see any of this that Congress 
had allocated.

    It is my understanding that instead those funds were 
dispersed for DOL tiger team project. We don't know exactly 
what that is, but we do know that states like Alaska who are 
desperately in need of these modernization and updates didn't 
receive it.

    The question to you is why? Why DOL did not use the funding 
that we provided to support the creation of new UI systems. And 
then, whether or not you recognize that this has to be a 
priority for us.

    Ms. Su. Yes, Senator, thank you. To take the second 
question first, I absolutely recognize why it has to be a 
priority.

    As someone who was at the state level during the pandemic, 
I know--we have had a conversation about the outdated 
technology and the need to really build the system so that it 
can be flexible and reliable enough when we have crises.

    I want to--I don't know the answer about Alaska, but I will 
tell you that one of the things that I have been working on 
over the last 2 years is making sure that the $2 billion or so 
in American Rescue Plan money that was meant for states is 
going out to states. Some of it has happened in phases.

    Some states have, and I know in some of my meetings we 
talked about how much has gone to a certain state for fraud 
prevention, for improving equity and access to unemployment 
insurance, and the like. I will look into what has happened 
with Alaska.

    It may be that--and some of this was done in conjunction 
with where the states were in terms of their engagement with 
us. But our plan is to get the vast majority of that funding 
out to states in the way that they were intended by June.

    The Chair. Senator Hickenlooper.

    Senator Hickenlooper. Just because--just to finish that, I 
think you were about to say you do support the Willow Project.

    Ms. Su. Yes, I support decisions that have been made in 
this Administration. And I think your point, Senator, was that 
there are other projects that are coming, and I absolutely 
commit to you to sit down with you to understand the issues, to 
make sure that the people of Alaska and the important economy 
of Alaska is heard and well represented in the decisions made 
at the Department of Labor, if I am confirmed.

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you. Thank you, Senator 
Hickenlooper.

    Senator Hickenlooper. I have made no secret of my 
admiration and appreciation for Julie Su, and I appreciate you 
being here again and going through this.

    As someone who, I spent 8 years as the Mayor of Denver, 8 
years as Governor of Colorado, I spend a lot of my time trying 
to recruit and attract people to public service who in many 
cases could make enormously more money, have more prestige or 
celebrity status.

    Although your celebrity status is pretty good here right 
now, I have to say. And I have to say I can't think of anyone I 
ever was able to hire who has and brings to the table the skill 
set and the experiences that you bring to the table.

    I think as a child of small business owners, your firsthand 
experience gives you an insight into what it is like to run a 
franchise, to be a small businessperson is as a first 
generation American.

    You understand what so many workers and families across 
this country are facing every day. And I think your focus on 
being transformative, for so many people, is unbelievably 
powerful.

    Last, as a mom, you recognize the need to invest in our 
next generation of workers by making sure that pipeline works, 
that we have a 21st century pipeline that does work. And it is 
great that your daughter is here through thick and thin, and I 
have a son who is taking exams today myself out in a college in 
California.

    Anyway, I look forward to you getting confirmed. I want to 
talk to you a little bit, and I know that apprenticeships has 
been covered thoroughly already. I don't want to--you can't say 
beat a dead horse because it is too powerful and too important 
to refer to in such terms.

    But we talked previously about how apprenticeship maybe 
needs a rebranding and a refreshing, because a big impediment 
is convincing not just students, but their parents that this is 
an experience that might be a good fit.

    For every individual, it is going to be different, but we 
need to rebrand it so that it is not a--it doesn't drag down 
the opportunities for so many people. Do you want to comment on 
that, this idea of refresh?

    Ms. Su. I mean, I agree with that. Thank you so much, 
Senator, for all your comments, and for our conversations, and 
for your support. I agree that--and it is funny, I just had 
this conversation yesterday with a large employer association 
who said the exact same thing.

    That one of the challenges we face as we seek to expand the 
manufacturing sector in the United States and build good jobs 
to manufacture semiconductor chips and all kinds of things 
across this great nation, that we need to rebrand some of the 
jobs that have been for a long time--the jobs are new.

    That there are ways to do them that are different, that 
also make them much more accessible to whole communities that 
might not have been included before. And so, I think making it 
clear that a pathway to an apprenticeship for someone who is 
going to get a job that does not require a 4-year degree is 
just as valid, is just as worthy of our respect and our praise, 
as going to a 4-year college, is something that I commit to 
you.

    I know it is something you care deeply about that we should 
be engaged in that rebranding, that we should use the privilege 
of being in these seats and having our voices to make sure that 
happens.

    I think that will really help with the commitment to 
creating a very robust manufacturing industry in the United 
States.

    Senator Hickenlooper. Right. And again, I can't--I don't 
think we can emphasize enough--I know the Ranking Member, I 
know the Chairman agree with us on this, that this is one of 
the looming opportunities that is there for the taking. It just 
takes will and great leadership at the top, which I think you 
could provide.

    I am down to 25 seconds, but at some point, maybe for the 
record, you can look at it. I know we have talked a little bit 
about small business employers and they are--the paperwork 
makes it hard for them to go through the apprenticeship 
process, and just they are so busy.

    At some point, I hope that we can work together with the 
Department of Labor to facilitate that so there is less--
obviously I understand the security in the forms, but less red 
tape, less bureaucracy.

    Ms. Su. I absolutely commit to working with you on that, 
Senator.

    Senator Hickenlooper. Great. Thank you.

    Ms. Su. Thank you.

    The Chair. Senator Casey.

    Senator Casey. Acting Secretary Su, great to be with you 
and thanks for your public service. I am going to support your 
nomination proudly. And you are not only prepared to do this 
job and well-qualified, I think you will serve with distinction 
as you have in the Department of Labor in your work already.

    I think it is important to put a few things on the record. 
It may prevent me from getting to my questions, but I will 
start with the mission of the department. I think it has been 
lost here in the discussion in Washington.

    Sometimes Washington is--you have a debate that is grounded 
in facts, and sometimes there is a lot of hot air, and we have 
heard a lot of that of late. Here is the mission statement for 
the United States Department of Labor. And it is a mission 
statement today. It was a mission statement under the prior 
Administration.

    Here it is, ``to foster, promote, and develop the welfare 
of low wage earners, job seekers, and retirees of the United 
States, and also to improve working conditions, advance 
opportunities for profitable employment, and assure work 
related benefits and rights.''

    It is not the department of corporations. It is not the 
department of employers and employees, and all the talk you 
heard here today. It is the Department of Labor. I want a 
Department of Labor that is fighting every day for workers, not 
as some have characterized it.

    It is a department that has to administer some 180 Federal 
laws for 150 million workers and 10 million workplaces. There 
is a lot of work to do to protect workers. If corporations were 
doing their job, we wouldn't need a Department of Labor, but 
you need one in the United States of America.

    A couple of things about unemployment insurance. This is 
where the hot air is in Washington, in this debate about this 
nomination. So, I want to clarify a few things. The first being 
California is a huge state. You pay out more claims than 
anybody. One in five of all unemployment claims in the country. 
Is that correct?

    Ms. Su. That is correct, Senator.

    Senator Casey. Isn't it true that 95 to 98 percent of the 
fraud in California was not from the regular, the regular 
unemployment program that you administered, but actually from 
the specially created pandemic unemployment assistance program 
created by the U.S. Senate and the House in the middle of the 
pandemic. Isn't that true?

    Ms. Su. That is true, Senator.

    Senator Casey. Here is what we have. We had a special 
unemployment program set up for the pandemic, the worst crisis 
in 100 years. And a lot of things went well and a lot of things 
didn't go very well.

    Here is what Bloomberg Law said. This isn't me. Bloomberg 
Law said this, ``many of the fraudulent claims in California 
and across the country have stemmed from a Federal virus relief 
program.'' They did then put it in parentheses, the CARES Act, 
that 96, every United States Senator voted yes on.

    This program launched in April to support independent 
contractors and other workers not previously eligible for 
benefits. Guidance from the Department of Labor last year 
directed states to begin paying benefits to claimants under 
this program who had yet to provide documentation verifying 
their past earnings.

    ``The ability of states to accept self-certifications 
allowed vulnerable workers to get faster payments, but also 
exposed the system, the state systems to paying out false 
claims.'' That is Bloomberg Law talking about what the Congress 
did and that the states had to administer.

    I think it is pretty clear that there has been a lot of hot 
air and a lot of fiction flying around Washington about what 
happened in California. I hope there is a similar examination 
of every state's unemployment insurance record as well.

    Here is my question in the minute that I have left, it is 
about a topic that you made reference to with Senator Hassan, 
sub-minimum wage. We are trying to do everything we can to 
phase it out, to get rid of it. It is not good for our workers, 
not good for workers with disabilities.

    We are trying to get rid of it, to be blunt about it. I 
want to phase it out and to make sure that people with 
disabilities have a fair shot in the workplace. Senator Daines 
and I have a bipartisan bill, the Transformation to Competitive 
Integrated Employment Act that will lift up workers with 
disabilities and raise their wages.

    I want to ask you again, I know this is by way of 
reiteration, what is the Administration doing to ensure that we 
have competitive, integrated employment for people with 
disabilities? And specifically, how are you enforcing the 14(c) 
requirements?

    Ms. Su. Well, thank you very much for our meeting, Senator, 
and for this question, which is very important.

    Competitive, integrated employment is the North Star. It is 
where we want to make sure that all workers with disabilities 
are able to access the same good jobs we keep talking about, 
get the training that they need to succeed in those jobs, the 
supports that they need in the workplace, and pathways to 
upward mobility in those jobs.

    Just as workers without disabilities have. And at the 
Department of Labor, our sub-agency, the Office of Disability 
Employment Policy, is laser focused on that work. And I have 
been engaged with them over the last 2 years as Deputy 
Secretary on making sure that we are finding every possible way 
to expand such programs, to support employers who are adopting 
those programs, to provide technical assistance to employers, 
to do outreach to workers with disabilities----

    Senator Casey. I know we have got to conclude. We will work 
with you on this, and I just look forward to working with you 
on it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Ms. Su. I do too. Thank you, Senator.

    The Chair. Senator Marshall.

    Senator Marshall. All right. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you 
for being here, Ms. Su. As has been alluded to here, that 
nationally we had a significant problem with the unemployment 
insurance benefits.

    But what I want to talk about is the statute of 
limitations. So, we approached $200 billion of improperly paid 
unemployment insurance benefits, and many of those statutes of 
limitations on these cases will be expiring in 2025.

    We have legislation that would extend the statute of 
limitation on fraud for another 5 years that would be 
consistent for the statute limitations for PPP and COVID idle 
fraud. How do you feel about extending the statute of 
limitations on those cases?

    Ms. Su. Thank you very much, Senator. I know I have said 
this already, but I feel like it bears repeating that the 
fraud, waste, and abuse in the system was unacceptable. It is 
intolerable.

    That is why I took the steps I took, and that is why at the 
Department of Labor, I have been so focused on making sure that 
we are creating an unemployment insurance system in conjunction 
with states that is going to stop fraud at the front door, 
deliver benefits to eligible individuals, be the safety net it 
is intended to be for workers who are out of a job through no 
fault of their own, and to be good stewards of taxpayer money.

    As I have also said a few times today, but not about this 
particular issue so I appreciate your question, I have full 
deference to the authority of this body and of the decisions 
that Congress makes about the right policies in this case and 
in others.

    If that is something that Congress were to pass and entrust 
the Department of Labor to enforce, then if confirmed as Labor 
Secretary, I would----

    Senator Marshall. Do you agree, there is a lot of money 
still out there and these cases are still ongoing, and we could 
gain back some of those moneys if we continued those 
investigations?

    Ms. Su. Senator, that is a very good question. I don't 
know--I don't believe that there are new fraudulent payments 
going out every day in the same way that we have talked about. 
I mean, obviously, the pandemic unemployment assistance----

    Senator Marshall. No, no, so I am talking about cases that 
are, or already should have been opened that are not closed 
yet. So, extending the statute of limitations would allow us to 
keep going after the old ones.

    Ms. Su. Yes, I will say, Senator, one thing is that at the 
Department of Labor, our Office of Inspector General has also 
been doing work to investigate cases to try to recover moneys 
where possible. And I do think that is an important part of the 
fight against fraud.

    Senator Marshall. I want to turn and talk about the rules 
on joint employer definitions that have gone through 
significant changes in the past decade. Previous 
Administrations rule provided a clear cut, defined, and 
accurate definition of a joint employer. And again, you may 
have answered this question already.

    We are bouncing between Committees. Under your leadership, 
this rule was rescinded and has not been replicated with 
anything. This has caused quite a bit of uncertainty for 
businesses.

    To that end, would you agree that an employer should be 
considered a joint employer only if directly, actually, and 
immediately exercises significant control over the primary 
elements of employment?

    Ms. Su. Senator, thank you so much for that question. The 
joint employer rule that was put in place by the prior 
Administration was actually vacated by a Federal judge. Meaning 
a Federal judge said that rule could not stand.

    As a result, the Department of Labor rescinded it. What 
that did was restore the state of the law to the place it was 
before that rule came into place, which was based on decades of 
Federal cases interpreting who a joint employer is and under 
what circumstances it would apply.

    Senator Marshall. Do you agree with what I defined a joint 
employer was a second ago? I am going to go through that again. 
Would you agree that an employer should be considered a joint 
employer only if it directly, actually, immediately exercises 
significant control over the primary elements of employment?

    Ms. Su. Thank you for that question, Senator. The joint 
employer test, I know you know this, is a fact specific test. 
It is a test that is based on the relationship between two or 
more----

    Senator Marshall. I define it one way. Would you agree with 
the way I define it? I think it is a yes or no question.

    Ms. Su. Senator, I am not familiar enough with the case law 
to say that summary of it is an accurate statement of it. But I 
think to the point----

    Senator Marshall. Then last, and I understand that--
business has been waiting over a year for an answer from the 
Department of Labor. Do you think that they deserve an answer 
sooner so they can make plans? There is nothing worse for a 
small business, for any business, than uncertainty.

    Ms. Su. I 100 percent agree with that. I think the 
regulatory certainty is very, very important. I know that from 
my family's history of having a small business as well as my 
family, my extended family's current status as business owners.

    The joint employer test as it stands is based on case law 
that has been developed over several decades. The Department of 
Labor does not have in its current agenda a plan to issue 
another rule about that.

    Senator Marshall. Okay. Thank you. I yield back.

    Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Marshall.

    Senator Cassidy.

    Senator Cassidy. Yes. Again, thank you, Ms. Su. Again, a 
wonderful personal story, and you have handled yourself very 
well in a very stressful situation. I would like to clear up a 
couple of things that were said. Senator Smith suggested that 
there had been a final agreement achieved in the international 
longshoremen's strike. That is not the case.

    Just for the record, the Pacific Maritime Association 
stated last night, we have reached a tentative agreement, but 
we are still on things. We have been negotiating major issues 
yet to be discussed, much less reach agreement on, just for the 
record.

    Second, I have to disagree with my good friend Bob Casey. 
The Department of Labor should also be about employees and not 
just unions.

    I am sure you meant that but implied not. And there are a 
lot of gig workers, freelancers who objected to AB5 who would 
feel as if their interests were not adequately represented, and 
that is what a lot of this discussion has been about.

    Last, part of our discussion--I am a doctor. You might 
guess, I suspect--I am very suspicious of attorneys. But 
regarding the ABC test, the prior Administration's rule had 
been vacated by a district court but was on appeal.

    It is not clear--it is not for sure--that it would have 
been continued to be vacated. And indeed, I am told that is 
consistent with Falk v. Brennan from the Supreme Court, if I 
got that correctly.

    Last, that the subsequent rule put out by this 
Administration began to redefine roles much more consistent 
with an ABC test as opposed to that which has been precedent. I 
say all that for the record. And again, Senator Casey, thank 
you for your indulgence.

    Ms. Su. If I could just say one thing, Senator. I will 
accept your suspicion of attorneys, but say I love doctors. And 
my mother, who is watching would want me to say to you, as I 
said to you once, that a liver surgeon saved her life at one 
point. And so, I thank you in your profession for all you have 
done, including for my mom.

    Senator Cassidy. Thank you

    Senator Casey. Well, let me just also say for the record 
that the mission statement I read from was not about one kind 
of worker, union versus nonunion. It was the mission of the 
Department is to foster, promote, and develop the welfare of 
three groups, wage earners, job seekers, and retirees.

    I think that should be kept in mind. And as opposed to a 
different name for having corporations as opposed to employees. 
But we can continue to debate that, I guess. But thanks very 
much. I will read a statement for Chairman Sanders.

    This concludes our hearing. Thank you, Ms. Su, for joining 
us today. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record 68 
letters from labor and advocacy organizations, businesses and 
individuals in support of Ms. Su's nomination.

    As a reminder, the Committee will vote on Ms. Su's 
nomination next Wednesday at 10.00 a.m. in this hearing room. 
For any Senators who wish to add additional questions, 
questions for the record will be due tomorrow, Friday, April 
21st at 5.00 p.m.

    Senator Cassidy. I was supposed to--I am sorry, I forgot to 
do this. I ask unanimous consent to enter letters in opposition 
to Ms. Su's nomination, representing 50 organizations and 
business groups expressing concerns.

    [The following information can be found on page 235 in 
Additional Material:]

    Senator Cassidy. Without objection. The Committee stands 
adjourned.

                          ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
                          
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
                          





   INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS,
                                             Washington DC.
                                                    April 11, 2023,
Hon. Bernie Sanders, Chairman,
Hon. Bill Cassidy, Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
428 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.

    Re: JuHe Su nomination as U.S. Secretary of Labor

    Dear Chairman Sanders and Ranking Member Cassidy:

    On behalf of the more than 775,000 active and retired members of 
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), I write in 
support of the nomination of U.S. Deputy Secretary of Labor Julie Su as 
the next U.S. Secretary of Labor. She is a nationally recognized expert 
on workers' rights who is already overseeing the Department of Labor's 
workforce, managing its budget and executing the priorities of the 
administration. Supremely qualified from years administering labor 
policy in Washington and as California labor commissioner, Su is a 
highly accomplished successor to departing Secretary Marty Walsh.

    Ms. Su has dedicated her distinguished legal career to advancing 
justice on behalf of workers, implementing key administration policies 
on workers' rights, including modernizing prevailing wage laws under 
the Davis-Bacon Act. At the Labor Department, she also helped improve 
access to good jobs through the Good Jobs Initiative and is ensuring 
that the jobs created in critical sectors like semiconductor 
manufacturing and broadband are good-paying, stable and accessible to 
all.

    Before coming to the Labor Department, she served as secretary for 
the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency and as state 
labor commissioner, where she enforced strong on-the-job health and 
safety protections and cracked down on wage then.

    A champion for workers and experienced litigator, Ms. Su has served 
as a trusted partner to Secretary Walsh and can be relied upon to 
continue the Biden-Harris administration's vision of a strong, 
resilient, inclusive economy with worker well-being at its center. 
Julie Su played a key leadership role in the Department of Labor over 
the past 2 years, demonstrating the power of collective bargaining and 
the importance of labor-management collaboration to build the top-notch 
workforce that employers and our economy need.

    The citizens of the United States will be well served by such a 
talented, effective advocate in the role of Labor Secretary, and I ask 
that her confirmation is swiftly moved forward.

            Sincerely yours,
                                         Kenneth W. Cooper,
                                    International President
                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

                                 
                                                     March 24, 2023
Hon. Joseph R. Biden, President,
The White House,
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC.

    Dear President Biden:
    On behalf of the undersigned organizations, and the millions of 
businesses and employees we represent, we are writing to you once again 
regarding the ongoing West Coast port labor negotiations between the 
International Longshore and Warehouse Union and the Pacific Maritime 
Association. The labor contract has now been expired for over 8 months. 
Negotiations have been ongoing for over 10 months, with little to no 
progress toward a new long-term agreement. It is imperative that the 
Administration work with the parties to quickly reach a new agreement 
and ensure there is no disruption to port operations and cargo 
fluidity.

    We previously shared our concerns on July 1, 2022 when the contract 
initially expired. At that time we called upon the administration to 
engage with the parties as well as urged the parties to agree to a 
contract extension while negotiations continued. We applaud the 
engagement from former Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh through the 
negotiations. Now that he has departed the Administration it is 
critical that a new Administration point person be named to continue 
engagement with the parties as they negotiate. With the lack of 
progress to date, we would also encourage the administration to offer 
mediation services to the parties in their negotiations.

    As we have witnessed, significant cargo flows have shifted away 
from the West Coast ports because of the uncertainty related to the 
labor negotiations. While there certainly are other issues impacting 
the West Coast ports, many cargo interests have expressly stated that 
they shifted cargo as a result of the negotiations. That cargo will not 
return to the West Coast until after a contract is final and approved 
by both parties. The longer there is no ratified contract only 
increases the probability that some portion of the freight will never 
return to the West Coast ports.

    Businesses have already made their shipping decisions for the all-
important peak shipping season, which will begin this summer. Even 
though cargo volumes have dropped, we continue to experience supply 
chain stress and challenges. While many continue to recover from 
pandemic related issues, the ongoing stress of inflation and economic 
uncertainty continues to impact supply chain stakeholders as well.

    The lack of a labor contract adds to this uncertainty. While we 
appreciate that the parties agreed not to engage in a strike or a 
lockout, we are aware of several instances of activities that have 
impacted terminal operations. We need the administration to ensure 
these activities do not continue or escalate.

    We know that significant issues remain for both parties to resolve. 
However, the only way to resolve these issues is for the parties to 
remain at the bargaining table and actually negotiate. We encourage the 
Administration to provide any and all support to the parties in their 
negotiations to reach a final agreement.

    As we have said previously, the only way the parties can reach an 
agreement that will ensure the continued competitiveness of the ports 
and the supply chain stakeholders who rely upon them is to remain at 
the table until a new agreement is finalized. Thank you for your 
leadership on this important issue.

            Sincerely,
                            Agribusiness Council of Indiana
                         Agricultural Retailers Association
                 Agriculture Transportation Coalition--AgTC
     Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
                                  Airforwarders Association
         Alliance for Automotive Innovation Almond Alliance
                                                      Amcot
             American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA)
            American Association of Exporters and Importers
                                American Bakers Association
                                 American Chemistry Council
                           American Clean Power Association
              American Composites Manufacturers Association
                       American Cotton Shippers Association
                          American Down and Feather Council
                            American Farm Bureau Federation
                         American Feed Industry Association
                        American Forest & Paper Association
                                   American Foundry Society
                       American Herbal Products Association
                         American Home Furnishings Alliance
      American International Automobile Dealers Association
                              American Lighting Association
                          American Pyrotechnics Association
                            American Seed Trade Association
                           American Spice Trade Association
                             American Trucking Associations
                              Arizona Retailers Association
                               Arizona Trucking Association
                        Associated Builders and Contractors
                          Associated Equipment Distributors
                  Associated General Contractors of America
                          Association of American Railroads
                             Association of Food Industries
                Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers
                                      Auto Care Association
                                        Autos Drive America
                                           Bay Area Council
                                             Beer Institute
                  California Alfalfa and Forage Association
                    California Association of Wheat Growers
                       California Bean Shippers Association
                   California Building Industry Association
                 California Business Properties Association
                             California Chamber of Commerce
                                   California Citrus Mutual
          California Cotton Ginners and Growers Association
                      California Grain and Feed Association
                      California Hotel+ Lodging Association
                           California Retailers Association
                                 California Rice Commission
                                California Seed Association
                        California State Floral Association
                            California Trucking Association
                           California Warehouse Association
                                Can Manufacturers Institute
                               Cascade Shippers Association
           CAWA--Representing the Automotive Parts Industry
               Coalition of New England Companies for Trade
                        Colorado Motor Carriers Association
    Columbia River Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association
        Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA)
                                Consumer Brands Association
                            Consumer Technology Association
                                  Corn Refiners Association
                       Cotton Growers Warehouse Association
                          Council for Responsible Nutrition
             Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA)
           Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals
                                                       CPMA
      Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of Northern 
                                                 California
        Customs Brokers & International Freight Forwarders 
                            Association of Washington State
                      Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S.
             Fashion Accessories Shippers Association, Inc.
            Fashion Jewelry & Accessories Trade Association
                               Florida Trucking Association
                         FMI--The Food Industry Association
        Footwear Distributors & Retailers of America (FORA)
                                  Foreign Trade Association
                               Forest Resources Association
                  Fresh Produce Association of the Americas
                                Gemini Shippers Association
                         Georgia Motor Trucking Association
                                  Glass Packaging Institute
                                 Global Cold Chain Alliance
                     Grain and Feed Association of Illinois
                              Greenabl Shippers Association
                            Halloween & Costume Association
                                Harbor Trucking Association
                          Hawaii Transportation Association
                          Home Fashion Products Association
                Household & Commercial Products Association
                                                       ICSC
                                Idaho Retailers Association
                      Illinois Retail Merchants Association
                         Independent Electrical Contractors
                            Indiana Motor Truck Association
              Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc.
                       Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference
               International Casual Furnishings Association
                      International Dairy Foods Association
         International Foodservice Distributors Association
                        International Franchise Association
                    International Fresh Produce Association
                       International Housewares Association
              International Warehouse Logistics Association
                               Iowa Motor Truck Association
          ISSA, The Worldwide Cleaning Industry Association
                Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association
                                             Kansas Chamber
                          Kansas Motor Carriers Association
                                      Kansas Retail Council
                                 Kentucky Retail Federation
                         Littler Workplace Policy Institute
                       Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
                     Los Angeles County Business Federation
        Los Angeles Customs Brokers and Freight Forwarders 
                                                Association
                            Louisiana Retailers Association
Maryland Retailers Association MEMA, The Vehicle Suppliers 
                                                Association
                             Michigan Retailers Association
                       Minnesota Grain and Feed Association
                            Minnesota Retailers Association
                      Minnesota Soybean Growers Association
                           Mississippi Trucking Association
                             Missouri Retailers Association
                                 Montana Retail Association
                                Motorcycle Industry Council
                                NAIOP Inland Empire Chapter
                                        NAIOP of California
                                                NAIOP SoCal
                 National Association of Beverage Importers
              National Association of Chemical Distributors
                      National Association of Manufacturers
            National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors
                         National Confectioners Association
                          National Corn Growers Association
                                    National Cotton Council
                    National Council of Farmer Cooperatives
    National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of 
                                                    America
              National Electrical Manufacturers Association
                National Federation of Independent Business
                               National Fisheries Institute
                                   National Hay Association
                  National Industrial Transportation League
    National Lumber & Building Material Dealers Association
                         National Milk Producers Federation
                            National Pork Producers Council
                                    National Potato Council
                            National Restaurant Association
                                 National Retail Federation
                                 National Sorghum Producers
                        National Sporting Goods Association
             National Wooden Pallet & Container Association
                               Natural Products Association
                                 Nebraska Retail Federation
                              Nebraska Trucking Association
                      New Hampshire Motor Truck Association
                    New Jersey Retail Merchants Association
                            New Mexico trucking Association
New York New Jersey Foreign Freight Forwarders and Brokers 
                                           Association Inc.
North American Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers 
                                                    (NAFEM)
                North American Home Furnishings Association
                              North American Meat Institute
                       North American Renderers Association
                North Carolina Retail Merchants Association
                     North Dakota Grain Growers Association
                            Northwest Horticultural Council
                           Ohio Council of Retail Merchants
                             Orange County Business Council
                                      Oregon Retail Council
                                Oregon Trucking Association
                               Outdoor Industry Association
                          Outdoor Power Equipment Institute
      Pacific Coast Council of Customs Brokers and Freight 
                                     Forwarders Assns.--PCC
                        Pacific Coast Renderers Association
                                   Pacific Seed Association
                         Pennsylvania Retailers Association
                                  Plant California Alliance
                       Plumbing Manufacturers International
                                Portland Cement Association
                                   PRINTING United Alliance
      Promotional Products Association International (PPAI)
                                   Railway Supply Institute
       Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association (ROHVA)
                                Renewable Fuels Association
                               Retail Association of Nevada
                           Retail Council of New York State
                        Retail Industry Leaders Association
                                 Retail Merchants of Hawaii
                     Retailers Association of Massachusetts
                    Rhode Island Trucking Association, Inc.
                                    RV Industry Association
                      San Diego Customs Brokers Association
                    San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership
                                         SNAC International
                                Snowsports Industry America
     Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates (SOCMA)
                   South Dakota Association of Cooperatives
                           South Dakota Soybean Association
                     Southern California Leadership Council
                               Specialty Crop Trade Counci1
                     Specialty Equipment Market Association
                           Specialty Soya & Grains Alliance
              Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (SVIA)
               Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA)
                      Tag and Label Manufacturers Institute
                        Tea Association of the U.S.A., Inc.
                                   The Fertilizer Institute
                         The Game Manufacturers Association
                                    The Hardwood Federation
                            The Nevada Trucking Association
                                      The Sulphur Institute
                                        The Toy Association
            Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA)
                             Travel Goods Association (TGA)
                                     U.S. Apple Association
                                   U.S. Chamber of Commerce
                                  U.S. Dairy Export Council
                          U.S. Fashion Industry Association
                                 U.S. Forage Expo11 Council
                                U.S. Meat Export Federation
           United States Council for International Business
                                                   USA Rice
                          Utah Retail Merchants Association
                            Vennont Truck & Bus Association
                                 Virginia Retail Federation
                              Washington Retail Association
                         Washington State Potato Commission
                    Washington State Tree Fruit Association
                           Washington Trucking Associations
                        West Virginia Retailers Association
                Western Agricultural Processors Association
                                            Western Growers
                    Window & Door Manufacturers Association
                Wine and Spirits Shippers Association, Inc.
                        Wisconsin Agri-Business Association
    CC:The Honorable Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, Department of 
Transportation

    The Honorable Julie Su, Acting Secretary, Department of Labor

    The Honorable Gina Raimondo, Secretary, Department of Commerce

    The Honorable Tom Vilsack, Secretary, Department of Agriculture

    The Honorable Lael Brainard, Director, National Economic Council 
General Stephen Lyons, Supply Chain and Ports Envoy

    Mr. Willie Adams, President, International Longshore and Warehouse 
Union

    Mr. James McKenna, Chairman and CEO, Pacific Merchants Association
                                 ______
                                 
       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

                                 
                                 
                                
                                 
                                 ______
                                 

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
                        
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
                        


                                 ______
                                 
    [Whereupon, at 12:12 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                   