Senator Boxer: Stem Cell Research Needed

June 28, 2007

Last week President Bush again put politics ahead of progress and vetoed stem cell legislation. With his pen, he denied hope to the millions of Americans suffering from diseases and conditions for which there is currently no cure.

I recently was proud to stand with researchers at the University of California, Irvine’s Stem Cell Research Center.  I heard them tell of the amazing progress they have had in making stem cell treatment a reality.  I also heard from two people, one with Parkinson’s disease and one with a spinal cord injury, who told of their tremendous hope that stem cell treatment will change their lives.  And I heard the frustration from everyone that the federal government is not their partner and, in fact, continues to hold back their research efforts.

Stem cell research holds the key to treatment and cures for many diseases including juvenile diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and even cancer. These diseases and conditions currently affect more than 100 million Americans, which is one reason why more than 70 percent of Americans support ethically based stem cell research. No one knows how many lives we might save with stem cells, but denying hope to those who are suffering is disgraceful.

You can count on me to continue to work to make America a leader on stem cell research.

Sincerely,

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

******

Senator Boxer Floor Statement on the Employee Free Choice Act
June 20, 2008

Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the Employee Free Choice Act. For far too long, our nation’s labor laws have created an environment that has made it harder and harder for workers to organize and form unions.

The current system overwhelmingly favors employers, who too often use their advantage to intimidate and coerce their employees.

The end result of this system has led to a squeeze on America’s middle class families, and the time has come to put an end to a union election system where employer intimidation tactics prevent middle class workers from earning decent wages, health care, and fair working conditions.

It should come as no great surprise that middle class families are facing increased economic hardships because of the Bush Administration’s policies.

Corporate profits have jumped 83 percent since 2001, with the richest Americans getting richer while health care, energy, food, and education costs have skyrocketed, creating the largest income gap in 65 years.

In 2005, households in the bottom 90 percent experienced a .6 percent income loss while workers at the top enjoyed a 16 percent increase in income.

Real wages for U.S. workers are lower today than in 1973, and in California, the real median hourly wage fell by 2.7 percent between 2003 and 2005.

In addition to seeing their wages squeezed, many middle class workers are unable to provide health care for their families.

Over 7 million Californians are uninsured, and the numbers of uninsured increase every year.

In fact, from 1999 to 2005, the number of Californians with employer-provided health care dropped from 60 percent to 55 percent.

To put into perspective the pressure being placed on the middle class, I recently found my son Doug’s pay stub from when he worked as a checker at a supermarket in 1986.

Twenty-one years ago, a checker at his supermarket earned $7.41 per hour. According to the United Food and Commercial Workers union, an entry-level checker starting today would earn around $8.90 per hour, which is $4.86 less than my son’s 1986 wages adjusted for inflation.

This downward pressure on middle class wages must stop – and increased union participation can help solve this problem.

Encouraging more participation in unions is a simple and proven way to help middle class families.

Union wages are on average more than 30 percent higher than non-union wages. Union cashiers earn 46 percent more than non-union cashiers. Union food preparation workers earn 50 percent more than non-union workers.

To help increase participation in unions, the Employee Free Choice Act puts to an end the current culture of intimidation and coercion that surrounds some union elections, and instead presents a choice to workers contemplating unionization.

Under EFCA, workers can choose to proceed with union elections through secret ballot or they can choose organization through a simple card-check procedure. Under current law, only the employer can choose how its employees elect union representation.

Responsible employers, like Kaiser Permanente and Cingular, gave their employees such a choice, and the results have been great.

At a Kaiser Permanente health care facility in Orange County, California, nurses were able to quickly and easily form a union without fear of intimidation and illegal firings. The smooth unionization process has led to an all-time low nurse vacancy rate and low nurse-to-patient ratios, which has increased the quality of health care provided to Kaiser’s patients.

But workers who have not been given a choice on how to proceed with union elections have faced unfairly harsh consequences.

Employer intimidation and coercion are serious problems.

In 2005, over 30,000 workers lost wages or were fired because they were involved in union organizing activities.

The current union election system is badly broken and breeds fear in the workplace.

Workers under open threat of firings and layoffs from their employers are not given a real choice in choosing to organize a union.

Workers are fired in 25 percent of all private-sector union organizing campaigns, and one in five workers involved in union organizing efforts is fired.

Over 75 percent of private employers require managers to give anti-union messages to employees, and over half of all employers threaten to close or relocate the business if workers elect a union.

At a Rite Aid Distribution Center in Lancaster, California, workers thought forming a union would help them negotiate better working conditions. Workers at this distribution center work with no job security, mandatory overtime after 10-hour shifts, and no temperature controls in the warehouse.

When the union movement began to gain momentum, one of the lead employees, who had worked there for six years with a spotless record, was fired for poor performance.

Said the worker after his termination, “people were afraid to sign union cards because they saw what happened to me.”

At the Los Angeles Airport Hilton hotel, two workers leading the union effort were fired on trumped-up charges. One of them, Alicia Melgarejo, is a single mother of a 14-year-old daughter.  Alicia worked as a housekeeper at the hotel for eight years.

Despite the fact that her she had never been disciplined in eight years on the job, she was immediately fired after being accused by management of stealing towels.

She asked management to show her video to back up their claim, but they refused. She believes she was simply fired for her role in union organizing efforts and her active support of Los Angeles’ living wage law.

Under current law, these gross examples of intimidation can only be penalized by what amounts to a slap on the wrist for large companies. Employers can ruin lives, like they did to Alicia and her daughter, yet they often build into their budgets the costs of union-busting activities and the small penalties authorized by the National Labor Relations Board.

The current union election system creates a battle between employer and employee, with no real winner.

Our workers have earned the right to work in an environment free from fear, and they should be given the right to choose if they want a union through a process that doesn’t provide incentives for employers to coerce and intimidate their employees.

EFCA changes the game and provides workers with a fair choice in choosing to organize.
It also takes away incentives for employers to break the law and illegally fire union organizers by requiring back pay for workers who are fired or retaliated against, increasing civil fines to up to $20,000 for each illegal act, and authorizing Federal court injunctions to immediately return fired workers to their jobs.

EFCA provides employees with a choice in choosing a union, gives teeth to penalties for violations to prevent employer bullying and intimidation, and levels the playing field for workers seeking well-deserved living wages, health care, and fair workplace treatment.

I urge my colleagues to support cloture on the motion to proceed to this bill.

Back to top