engaged in any unfair labor practice that significantly interferes with, restrains, or coerces employees in the exercise of such guaranteed rights.
Source: Employee Free Choice Act 09-HR1409 on Mar 10, 2009
Rated 0% by CEI, indicating a pro-worker rights voting record.
Peters scores 0% by CEI on union issues
The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a public policy organization dedicated to the principles of free markets and limited government, has created a Congressional Labor Scorecard for the 112th Congress focusing on worker issues. The score is determined based on policies that support worker freedom and the elimination of Big Labor`s privileges across the country.
Votes in the current Congress score include:- Bill: H.R. 658, LaTourette Amendment No. 21: NO on repealing changes to the Railway Labor Act`s voting rules.
- Bill: H.R. 658, Gingrey Amendment No. 18: YES to prohibit Federal Aviation Administration employees from using official--that is, taxpayer sponsored--time for union activities during the official workday.
- Bill: H.R. 1, Price Amendment No. 410: YES to defund the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
- Bill: H.R. 1, Guinta Amendment No. 166:
YES to prohibit imposing `prevailing wage` and other requirements in project labor agreements that advantage unionized contractors.
- Bill: H.R. 2017, Scalise Amendment No. 388: YES to prohibit project labor agreements in DHS contracts
- Bill: H.R. 2055, LaTourette Amendment No. 411: NO on funding for federal project labor agreements.
- Bill: H.R. 1, King Amendment No. 273: YES to eliminate the `Davis Bacon` prevailing wage rate requirement for federal projects.
- Bill: H.R. 2017, Gosar Amendment No. 386: YES to eliminate the `Davis Bacon` prevailing wage rate requirement for Department of Homeland Security contracts.
- Bill: H.R. 2354: Gosar Amendment No. 655: YES to restrict application of the Davis-Bacon Act to contracts exceeding $20 million.
- Bill: H.R. 2017: Rokita Amendment No. 2: YES to prohibit collective bargaining at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
Source: CEI website 12-CEI-H on May 2, 2012
Raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour by 2016.
Peters co-sponsored Minimum Wage Fairness Act
Congressional summary: Increases the federal minimum wage for employees to:
- $8.20 an hour beginning 6 months after enactment
- $9.15 an hour beginning 1 year later,
- $10.10 an hour beginning 2 years later, and
- an amount determined by increases in the Consumer Price Index, beginning annually after 3 years.
- Increases the federal minimum wage for tipped employees to $3.00 an hour beginning 6 months after enactment, with annual CPI adjustments.
Proponent`s argument in favor (RaiseTheMinimumWage.com): The federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour remains decades out of date, and the federal minimum wage for tipped workers--$2.13 per hour--has not increased in over 20 years. The minimum wage of the past provided significantly more buying power than it does today. The minimum wage of $1.60 an hour in 1968 would be $10.56 today when adjusted for inflation.
Opponent`s argument against: (Neil King in Wall Street Journal,
Feb. 24, 2014): The CBO concluded that a jump in the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour could eliminate 500,000 jobs. For Republicans, the report provided ammunition that a higher minimum wage would kill jobs. Democrats pointed to the CBO`s findings that the higher wage would lift 900,000 people out of poverty. But both sides missed a key finding: That a smaller hike from the current $7.25 to $9.00 an hour would cause almost no pain, and still lift 300,000 people out of poverty while raising the incomes of 7.6 million people.Congressional Budget Office report:: Once fully implemented, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3%. Some people earning slightly more than $10.10 would also have higher earnings, due to the heightened demand for goods and services. The increased earnings for low-wage workers would total $31 billion. Accounting for all increases and decreases, overall real income would rise by $2 billion.
Source: S.1737 & H.R.1010 14-H1010 on Mar 6, 2013
Let Senate cafeteria workers organize their own union.
Peters signed unionizing Senate cafeteria workers
Excerpts from Letter from 31 Senators to the Compass Group: Senate cafeteria workers are currently pushing for a union through the majority sign up process, but their employer, the Compass Group, has resisted the drive, even after the NLRB upheld charges against the company regarding discriminatory behavior. Although the Compass Group promised the NRLB they would end further unlawful intimidation, the Compass Group has discouraged their organizing campaign.
We request there that the Compass Group commit to reaching an agreement with the union seeking to organize these workers, and recognize the union as the worker`s exclusive bargaining representative on the basis of majority representation of signed authorization cards.
OnTheIssues explanation: At issue is how the workers would unionize: the controversial aspect is the `majority of authorization cards,` known as `card-check,` which makes unionization much more likely.
Opposing argument:
(Cato Institute, `Labor`s Day is Over,` Sep. 6/2009): Card-check would effectively abolish the secret ballot in workplace elections for union representation. It would also require employers to submit to binding government arbitration if they cannot reach an agreement with union representatives, forcing companies to submit to contracts that may imperil their very survival.
Opposing freedom argument: (Heritage Foundation, `Card Checks Block Free Choice,` Feb. 21, 2007): Union activists argue that publicly signing a union membership card in the presence of union organizers, known as card-check organizing, is the only way that workers can freely choose to unionize. However, with card checks, union organizers know who has and has not signed up to join the union. This allows them to repeatedly approach and pressure reluctant workers. With this technique, a worker`s decision to join the union is binding, while a decision to opt out only means `not this time.`
Source: Letter to Compass Group 15LTR-COM on Nov 13, 2015
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue.
Peters signed Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to declare that an unlawful employment practice occurs when:- a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted;
- an individual becomes subject to the decision or practice; or
- an individual is affected by application of the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid.
Allows an aggrieved person to obtain relief, including recovery of back pay, for up to two years preceding the filing of the charge, where the unlawful employment practices that have occurred during the charge filing period are similar or related to practices that occurred outside the time for filing a charge. Applies the preceding provisions to claims of compensation discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
[Note: A woman named Lilly Ledbetter filed a lawsuit for gender-based discriminatory compensation. The Supreme Court ruled that Ms. Ledbetter could only sue for damages going back 180 days, and the 180 days was calculated from the time her employment contract was initiated, i.e., her hire date. This new law changes the 180-day period to two years, and also calculates the date from the time of each paycheck, rather than the hire date. -- Ed.]
Source: S.181&H.R.11 2009-S181 on Jan 29, 2009
Stronger enforcement against gender-based pay discrimination.
Peters signed Paycheck Fairness Act
A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide more effective remedies to victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex.- Revises the exception to the prohibition for a wage rate differential based on any other factor other than sex. Limits such factors to bona fide factors, such as education, training, or experience.
- Prohibits employer retaliation for inquiring about, discussing, or disclosing the wages of the employee in response to a sex discrimination investigation.
- Makes employers who violate sex discrimination prohibitions liable in a civil action for either compensatory or punitive damages.
- States that any action brought to enforce the prohibition against sex discrimination may be maintained as a class action in which individuals may be joined as party plaintiffs without their written consent.
Source: S.182&H.R.12 2009-S182 on Jan 8, 2009
Sponsored bill for strengthening union organizing.
Peters co-sponsored PRO Act
H.R.842 & S.420: Protecting the Right to Organize Act: This bill expands various labor protections related to employees` rights to organize and collectively bargain in the workplace:
- revises the definitions of employee, supervisor, and employer to broaden the scope of individuals covered by the fair labor standards;
- permits labor organizations to encourage participation of union members in strikes initiated by employees represented by a different labor organization (i.e., secondary strikes); and
- prohibits employers from bringing claims against unions that conduct such secondary strikes.
The bill also allows collective bargaining agreements to require all employees represented by the bargaining unit to contribute fees to the labor organization for the cost of such representation.Biden Administration in SUPPORT: The Administration strongly supports The PRO Act. America was not built by Wall Street. It was built by the middle class,
and unions built the middle class. Unions put power in the hands of workers. H.R. 842 would strengthen and protect workers` right to form a union by assessing penalties on employers who violate workers` right to organize.
Rep. Mo Brooks in OPPOSITION: H.R. 842 [is] a radical union bill that tramples the rights of citizens by forcing them to enter into union servitude, including:
- Overturns right-to-work laws in 27 states, thereby forcing citizens, against their will, to pay millions of dollars in dues to labor unions.
- Denies citizens` rights to vote by secret ballot on whether to join a union by imposing a biased `card-check` scheme.
- Deprives individuals of entrepreneurial opportunities. The PRO Act would eliminate the franchise industry and sharing economy as we know them.
Legislative Outcome:Passed House 222-204-4 (Rollcall 82) on 03/09/2021; received and read in the Senate on 3/23; no further Senate action during 2021.
Source: H.R.842/S.420 21-HR842 on Feb 4, 2021
|
|
|
Other candidates on Jobs: |
Gary Peters on other issues: |
MI Gubernatorial:
Aric Nesbitt
Dick Posthumus
Garlin Gilchrist
Garrett Soldano
Gretchen Whitmer
James Craig
Jocelyn Benson
John James
Mike Cox
Mike Duggan
Perry Johnson
Tom Leonard
Tudor Dixon
MI Senatorial:
Debbie Stabenow
Elissa Slotkin
Haley Stevens
James Craig
Joe Tate
Leslie Love
Mallory McMorrow
Mike Rogers
Peter Meijer
MI politicians
MI Archives
|
Senate races 2026:
AK:
Dan Sullivan(R,incumbent)
vs.Andy Barr(R)
vs.Mary Peltola(D)
AL:
Tommy Tuberville(R,retiring)
vs.Barry Moore(R)
vs.Steve Marshall(R)
AR:
Tom Cotton(R,incumbent)
vs.Dan Whitfield(I,withdrew)
vs.Ethan Dunbar(D)
CO:
John Hickenlooper(D,incumbent)
vs.Janak Joshi(R)
vs.Julie Gonzales(D)
vs.Mark Baisley(R)
DE:
Chris Coons(D,incumbent)
vs.Mike Katz(I)
FL:
Ashley Moody(R,appointee)
vs.Alan Grayson(D)
vs.Angie Nixon(D)
GA:
Jon Ossoff(D,incumbent)
vs.Buddy Carter(R)
vs.Mike Collins(R)
vs.John F. King(R,withdrew)
IA:
Joni Ernst(R,retiring)
vs.Ashley Hinson(R)
vs.Bob Krause(D)
vs.Jim Carlin(R)
vs.J.D. Scholten(D,withdrew)
ID:
Jim Risch(R,incumbent)
vs.David Roth(D)
vs.Todd Achilles(I)
IL:
Richard Durbin(D,retiring)
vs.Juliana Stratton(D)
vs.Raja Krishnamoorthi(D)
vs.Robin Kelly(D)
KS:
Roger Marshall(R,incumbent)
vs.Patrick Schmidt(D)
KY:
Mitch McConnell(R,retiring)
vs.Charles Booker(D)
vs.Daniel Cameron(R)
vs.Pamela Stevenson(D)
LA:
Bill Cassidy(R,incumbent)
vs.John Fleming(R)
vs.Julia Letlow(R)
MA:
Ed Markey(D,incumbent)
vs.Seth Moulton(D)
vs.John Deaton(R)
ME:
Susan Collins(R,incumbent)
vs.Janet Mills(D)
MI:
Gary Peters(D,retiring)
vs.Haley Stevens(D)
vs.Joe Tate(R,withdrew)
vs.Mallory McMorrow(D)
vs.Mike Rogers(R)
|
MN:
Tina Smith(D,retiring)
vs.Angie Craig(D)
vs.David Hann(R)
vs.Peggy Flanagan(D)
vs.Royce White(R)
MS:
Cindy Hyde-Smith(R,incumbent)
vs.Ty Pinkins(D)
MT:
Steve Daines(R,incumbent)
vs.Reilly Neill(D)
NC:
Thom Tillis(R,retiring)
vs.Michael Whatley(R)
vs.Roy Cooper(D)
NE:
Peter Ricketts(R,incumbent)
vs.Dan Osborn(I)
NH:
Jeanne Shaheen(D,retiring)
vs.Chris Pappas(D)
vs.John Sununu(R)
vs.Scott Brown(R)
NJ:
Cory Booker(D,incumbent)
vs.Justin Murphy(R)
NM:
Ben Ray Lujan(D,incumbent)
vs.Matt Dodson(D)
OH:
Jon Husted(R,appointee)
vs.Sherrod Brown(D)
OK:
Markwayne Mullin(R,incumbent)
vs.Troy Green(D)
OR:
Jeff Merkley(D,incumbent)
vs.Jo Rae Perkins(R)
RI:
Jack Reed(D,incumbent)
vs.Connor Burbridge(D)
SC:
Lindsey Graham(R,incumbent)
vs.Catherine Fleming Bruce(D)
vs.Paul Dans(R)
SD:
Mike Rounds(R,incumbent)
vs.Brian Bengs(I)
TN:
Bill Hagerty(R,incumbent)
vs.Diana Onyejiaka(D)
TX:
John Cornyn(R,incumbent)
vs.Ken Paxton(R)
vs.Wesley Hunt(R)
vs.James Talarico(D)
vs.Jasmine Crockett(D)
VA:
Mark Warner(D,incumbent)
vs.David Williams(R)
WV:
Shelley Moore Capito(R,incumbent)
vs.Jeff Kessler(D)
vs.Tom Willis(R)
WY:
Cynthia Lummis(R,retiring)
vs.Harriet Hageman(R)
vs.Reid Rasner(R)
|
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology
War/Peace
Welfare
Other Senators
Congressional Votes (analysis)
Congressional Ratings
Affiliations
Policy Reports
Page last updated: Feb 15, 2026; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org
|
