| Author |
Message |
    
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 1804
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - 11:26 pm: | 
|
I received this via email, had not heard about it previously and thought I would pass along for your perusal...
Stop Senate Bill 477!
At Issue
Healthcare Tax, Living Wages and Workplace Mandates
Impact Costly Workplace Rules Set-up by Each County, Municipality
Action Contact your Senators, Labor Committee Members
Timing Act Now!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At a time when businesses are struggling to cope with a sluggish economy and skyrocketing healthcare costs, some State Senators want to permit counties and municipalities to establish their own workplace requirements for EVERY employer located within their boundaries.
On Thursday, May 11, the Senate Labor Committee is scheduled to vote on a draft committee substitute for S-477. This bill would allow every municipality and every county to set up its own workplace rules for businesses within its boundaries. That means the local government could require you to provide paid family leave to your workers, raise the minimum wage to more than $9 per hour, tell you when and for how long you must provide employee rest breaks and even dictate how much you spend on healthcare coverage through a costly healthcare tax.
We need your help to defeat this horrendous bill. The committee will vote on Thursday, May 11. Please contact your State Senator and members of the Senate Labor Committee today and tell them to support business, support jobs and OPPOSE S-477. Use our quick and easy Voter Voice system to send an e-mail message or call them. Then Join the Coalition for a Competitive New Jersey and learn more about what you can do to stop this outrageous piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
Philip Kirschner
President
New Jersey Business & Industry Association
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJBIA - Serving more than 23,000 Member Companies
This information has been sent to you by NJBIA because it contains information that we believe you will find useful. If you have questions about NJBIA membership, contact Lynn Sabo at 609-393-7707, ext. 238. New Jersey Business & Industry Association (NJBIA), 102 West State Street, Trenton, NJ 08608. www.njbia.org.
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 14193
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - 11:46 pm: |
|
From my point of view, this bill looks good.
Well, maybe letting each municipality and county have its own employment laws is too whacky, but raising minimum wage sounds good to me.
|
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 1807
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - 11:51 pm: |
|
I'm worried about decisions made at the municipal level. Can you imagine a minimum wage varying from SO to Mwood to Millburn? Varying laws/ordinances would definitely be a challenge for any company doing business in NJ that has multiple locations and could create headaches for the small business owner - depending on thresholds and parameters in the bill which I haven't seen... Just seems odd at first glance. Maybe there's is some underlying value? I don't know. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4882
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 1:17 am: |
|
complete text: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bills/S0500/477_I1.HTM
from the introduction
Quote: d. That historic trend changed with the recent rise of certain large employers who operate superstore retail establishments with substandard wages and benefits that create destructive competition, forcing many other employers either to do the same or be driven out of business;
e. Superstore retail operators conduct operations on such a large scale that they may, without proper regulation, have a significant adverse effect on the economic standards and civic life of communities in the State;
f. Taxpayers are often subject to increased costs when businesses that provide health care benefits to their employees are replaced by those that do not and instead rely on city health clinics, public hospitals, and publicly funded programs such as NJ KidCare, NJ FamilyCare, the Health Care Subsidy Fund and Medicaid to provide health care to their employees;
Guess who will be leading the fight against this? Hint: They'll be creating destructive competition on the site of the driving range before too long. |
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 1809
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 7:23 am: |
|
The concerns about healthcare should be addressed at the state level, not by municipalities. If a town doesn't want a Wal-Mart, they can find other ways to keep it out of their community.
And, come to think of it, if Wal-Mart replaced the driving range, would Maplewood citizens who would probably be more adversely affected by traffic and such, be able to voice any concern since, I believe, that area is either Union or Springfield? It seems that legislation like this wouldn't help a community where the business is just across the border. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1311
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 8:57 am: |
|
It sounds outrageous on the face of it. I agree with SO Ref. These types of issues are best handled in one place. I can just imagine the law community waiting in the wings to sue everybody over any technicality due to missed local rules.
|
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 887
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 9:17 am: |
|
If you really want to completely destroy every single business in your county and state, go ahead and pass this bill. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 14196
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 10:55 am: |
|
OK, I agree. But maybe the bill will stir up more debate and, we can hope, some action at the state and national levels.
This bill won't really pass, will it?
|
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1381
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 11:20 am: |
|
"At a time when businesses are struggling to cope with a sluggish economy"
Huh? WTF planet is Mr. Kirchner living on?
-SLK |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1382
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
SO Ref-
The driving range is in Union. I also heard about a Target going in there as well...
Build em I say...
-SLK |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4884
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 11:26 am: |
|
Never, ever believe what an industry group tells you about a new law or regulation. Never. Industry groups are in the business of stopping such things in their tracks and will tell you whatever they think you need to hear to get you against it, too.
The bill says no such thing. Read it yourself. They've taken the clause, "The bill states that it is not to be construed as preempting, limiting or affecting the applicability of any other law, regulation or standard of the State or any of its subdivisions or instrumentalities for payment of higher or additional wages or benefits," and twisted it to try and make you believe that they are all of a sudden allowing municipalities to set their own standards.
The transparent meaning of it of course really is that they are not changing the status quo. Municipalities will have no more, and no less, authority to override state standards than they do now.
The law has nothing to do with municipalities setting their own standards
What it is, is a new state minimum wage and benefit law. Now you may honesty disagree with that as a concept, or disagree with the particulars; but please, don't let lobbyists blow smoke up your ••• by telling you it's something that it's not. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5596
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 9:51 pm: |
|
Along these lines, there's discussion in the Senate to allow people in small businesses to be able to buy healthcare coverage from entities out of state that don't necessarily conform to state regs. As an example -- NJ might demand that insurers in the state cover, say, pap smears. An insurer that provides coverage that doesn't include pap smears and has a lower cost can't operate in NJ. That lower price might prompt a company that offers no health coverage to purchase it, except the state won't allow it.
When you mandate a minimum of coverage (like a minimum wage?), there are people who will say rather than opt to provide coverage or wages at that level, they won't cover/hire.
What say you? (I'm waiting for the 'race to the bottom' argument here). |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page