Fashionable Unions – H&M Workers in NYC Ratify First Contract

by reiner.kraft (flickr)

A Quick test:  When you think of unions and New York City, what comes to mind?  I’m guessing it’s not slim cardigans, GQ-worthy suits and adult-sized under-oos. 

Well, shows what you know.  As the New York Times reported, over 1,000 NYC employees of the international, high-fashion-low-cost retailer H&M are going to work today under a union contract that will raise their hourly pay and place restrictions on the company’s ability to change schedules at the last minute.   

The H&M workers actually voted for representation by the Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union back in November of 2007; their first contract was ratified on May 20th of this year.  According to the RWDSU’s press release, the new 3-year contract promises a 3% wage increase this year, with reopeners on wages for years 2 and 3, and allows for annual, merit-based increases. 

The contract also guarantees that employees will know their schedules at least a week in advance – a provision that should make anyone who’s grunted through a mall job jealous.  Frank Bail, the President of RWDSU local 1102 pointed out that over-flexibility in weekly schedules can be difficult for some employees with young children. 

It’s unlikely that the H&M contract is a sign of big changes in the labor movement.  I can’t see midwestern malls being taken over by organizing campaigns in the near future.  But in urban areas like New York, Chicago and L.A., the workers at these places are probably more insulated and the turnover rates are lower (well, maybe not in L.A.).  Plus, the close proximity of multiple storefronts could create a large enough worker base for organizing to be worthwhile.  It’s something retail employers in major metropolitan areas should at least consider.

For now, it seems like NYC union workers are going to have to think a little harder about what they wear to the hall.  Skinny up those jeans, and swap that hard hat for a trilby.  And remember, it’s summer, so no felt - straw is much more breathable for your scalp.

Wal Mart 2, States 0: Suffolk County, NY Fair Share Act Shot Down.

I am now more interested to see if the Massachusetts universal health care plan suffers the same fate. The best thing going for that law is that apparently RILA doesn’t believe it causes the same harm to its members as the Maryland and Suffolk County law and has not yet challenged it on ERISA preemtion grounds.

If the only difference between the Fair Share Acts and the Massachusetts UHC plan is that RILA hasn’t bit yet, then we’re in for a serious fight. RILA’s press release doesn’t make it sound like they’re too afraid to go again. The Fair Share provisions are definitely a big piece of the Massachusetts puzzle. And with other states like California possibly signing onto the Massachusetts mantra, this could get real interesting real fast.

Harmon agrees, focusing on what these decisions mean for any law trying to tax an employer for healthcare coverage under the RILA rulings’ interpretation of ERISA preemption:

The idea appears to be that, so long as the tax is not imposed on ERISA plans and does not explicitly suggest a connection with such plans, some form of “pay or play” regime may be imposed on employers as a part of healthcare financing. After Retail Industry Leaders Association v. Fielder, — F.3d —-, 2007 WL 102157, C.A.4 (Md.) January 17, 2007), however, these proposals deserve careful reconsideration.

While [previous decisions] give good reason to believe that lawmakers may impose surcharges on patients or providers, the Fourth Circuit opinion in the RILA decision … poses a substantial risk to any notion that States may look to employers to supply healthcare financing for State healthcare programs. To the extent [the Court] abandons “literal textualism” and looks to the Congressional purpose of ERISA’s enactment, little can be gleaned that would suggest that ERISA will peacefully co-exist with a multiplicity of State-based employer tax regimes dedicated to the funding of multiple State healthcare programs.

- Another Fair Share Law Bites ERISA Preemption Dust