[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.]