[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 82 (Friday, May 10, 2024)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E475-E476]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE 
 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD RELATING TO ``STANDARD FOR DETERMINING 
JOINT EMPLOYER STATUS''--VETO MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED 
                                 STATES

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. BETTY McCOLLUM

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                          Tuesday, May 7, 2024

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address my intended vote against 
H.J. Res. 98, a joint resolution providing for congressional 
disapproval of a rule submitted by the National Labor Relations Board 
relating to a ``Standard for Determining Joint Employer Status.''
  In January, House Republicans brought forward a resolution to block a 
rule issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to clarify the 
definition of who is considered a joint employer under federal law. I 
voted against the resolution in January because, not only would it have 
blocked the NLRB's rule, it would have prohibited the Biden 
administration and any future administrations from issuing similar 
rulemaking to clarify the definition of who is considered a joint 
employer. The resolution passed the House in January in a vote of 206-
177 and passed the Senate in April in a vote of 50-48. When the 
resolution was sent to President Biden's desk he vetoed the resolution. 
When the resolution to override the President's veto comes to the 
floor, I intend to vote no because I still believe we should not tie 
the hands of the National Labor Relations Board from ever taking up a 
similar attempt to clarify essential protections against labor rights 
violations in situations where multiple companies have control of a 
worker's conditions.

[[Page E476]]

  Let's also be clear about why House Republicans are bringing up this 
resolution and attempting to override the President's veto. They didn't 
do it because they're the party of workers' rights. They brought forth 
H.J. Res. 98 simply as another way to attack the Biden Administration 
and try to stop the federal government's regulatory and rulemaking 
authority.
  Tuesday afternoon, shortly before the House floor vote on H.J. Res. 
98, I met with a group of St. Paul area realtors to discuss several 
issues including the importance of protecting independent contractor 
status for real estate agents. Eighty-seven percent of realtors are 
classified as independent contractors. When the National Labor 
Relations Board and the Department of Labor are issuing rules relating 
to joint employers and independent contractors, the agencies must keep 
in mind the unique classification of realtors as independent 
contractors. That is why I am a cosponsor of H.R. 5419 which would 
amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(e)) to ensure 
that the status of realtors as independent contractors is protected.
  The NLRB should work to issue regulations that address the concerns 
of independent contractors like realtors and protect the rights of 
working-class Americans whose working conditions are impacted by 
multiple employers. But it would be prohibited from ever doing that 
essential work if this veto override was passed, and so I will oppose 
this legislation.

                          ____________________