SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Let’s contrast the lengths to which this administration will go to forcibly remove productive, noncriminal immigrants and their families, with a recent and mostly unnoticed action the Trump Labor Department took a few weeks ago.
U.S. President Donald Trump claims to be all about law enforcement. But what laws he chooses to prioritize, and which get the back seat, or are ignored entirely, speak volumes about the heart and soul of this administration. Recent developments in immigration and labor law enforcement offer some trenchant examples.
I spent the entirety of my almost-40-year civil service career enforcing federal worker protection laws with the U.S. Department of Labor, including the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), whose purpose is to guarantee that the workers actually receive at least the minimum wage and overtime pay that Congress has mandated.
Enforcing laws like the FLSA for the benefit of workers in the U.S.—across the many millions of workplaces in this country, with very limited investigative and attorney staff—is no easy task. How closely any given federal agency can approach the goal of widespread compliance depends on many factors, most prominent being the level of resourcing Congress has made available, and the effectiveness of the strategies the agency chooses to deploy.
On the immigration front, the president has broadcast far and wide his intention to remove everyone who’s in this country without legal authority (a civil, not criminal violation) as his top enforcement priority. His just-signed budget bill massively increases the funds available for “building the wall” and ramping up Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency whose job will be to penetrate every community in the country, find those “without papers,” and arrest and deport them. And then there are prisons like “Alligator Alcatraz” in the Everglades, and the notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in El Salvador, designed to terrify as many as possible into self-deporting, and to detain indefinitely those who fail to comply.
Immigrants have known for a while where they stand with Trump. The picture has never been pretty, and it’s a whole lot uglier now. Workers, including those who voted for him, are beginning to learn where they stand too.
The flood of dollars slated to supercharge the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) enforcement capacity, along with its terror strategy designed to induce self-removal, will no doubt make serious headway toward the president’s goal. But there are so many reasons why this is both a cruel and foolish policy—including, because the U.S. will be left with fewer workers (citizen and noncitizen), fewer people spending money, and a smaller economy overall. But it’s an example, albeit a dark and nefarious one, of how enforcement results can be accomplished if the administration has both the will and the political power to get them done.
Let’s contrast the lengths to which this administration will go to forcibly remove productive, noncriminal immigrants and their families, with a recent and mostly unnoticed action the Trump Labor Department took a few weeks ago.
Large numbers of workers in the U.S. are cheated out of the minimum wage or overtime they’re entitled to under the FLSA—an unlawful practice known colloquially as “wage theft”—to the tune of billions of dollars per year. A primary reason for this high rate of noncompliance by employers inclined to evade the law is the paltry level of funding the department’s enforcement divisions receive, relative to the millions of businesses they’re responsible to oversee. Given the size of their mission to protect workers, the Labor Department’s (DOL) ranks are tiny, have shrunk significantly due to the Trump administration’s efforts to slash the federal budget, and are slated to be cut 35% in the FY 2026 budget.
While staffing today is exceptionally bare-bones, the DOL has always needed to deploy its limited resources for maximum impact. Fifteen years ago, I was part of a team that developed a wage law compliance-enhancing strategy that wouldn’t depend on hiring more enforcement personnel. It was founded on FLSA’s mandate that when an employer commits wage theft, it will owe the worker both the amount of the underpayment and an equal amount in “liquidated damages,” with very limited exceptions.
The law’s requiring payment of double back wages makes sound enforcement sense. It compensates workers for costs they incurred on account of being underpaid, and it also incentivizes unscrupulous employers to comply. If an employer who shorted his workers is only required to pay back what he owed in the first place, he’s really getting an interest-free loan that the worker never agreed to. That’s hardly a recipe for encouraging compliance.
And yet, for too long, that’s how the vast majority of DOL investigations finding wage underpayments were resolved. So, 15 years ago DOL assembled a team to address this serious enforcement deficiency, and we conceived a new strategy. Employers who engaged in wage theft were given a choice: be sued for double back pay, or settle for that amount without having to go to court. If the employer believed they shouldn’t have to pay double, or shouldn’t have to pay at all, no gun was pointed to their head. They could go to court and challenge DOL’s claims. But if, recognizing they’d likely lose in court and that settlement was a better option, they’d need to pay the workers the double back wages the law says they owe.
The Labor Department began implementing this policy in 2010, and over the past decade and a half, workers in scores of cases have received millions of dollars in back wages and liquidated damages, DOL’s litigation resources have been spared, and U.S. district courts are less clogged than they would have been if these resolutions in lieu of litigation hadn’t happened. Since 2010, this enforcement strategy has been challenged only once, and the court found it to be reasonable. It also exemplifies sound enforcement strategy designed to spur compliance, and government efficiency, to boot.
And yet, on June 27, the acting administrator of DOL’s Wage and Hour Division saw fit to prohibit DOL staff from entering into any wage theft settlements in which workers receive double back pay, if the case hasn’t been filed in court. The clear impact will be that most workers who are victims of wage theft will once again become unwilling interest-free lenders to their employers, and corner-cutting employers will have no incentive to comply with the law. Regrettably, this isn’t the first such slap against workers, and undoubtedly won’t be the last.
To recap: On immigration enforcement, the Trump administration, and a compliant Republican-majority Congress, are pulling out all the stops to remove unauthorized immigrants—whether law-abiding, taxpaying, contributing members of our communities or not—as part of a dreadfully misguided but comprehensive DHS enforcement policy designed to intimidate and coerce.
The Trump Labor Department, meanwhile, just went out of its way to end a successful, court-approved enforcement strategy designed to make whole workers victimized by wage theft, and to deter unscrupulous employers from engaging in these types of violations.
Immigrants have known for a while where they stand with Trump. The picture has never been pretty, and it’s a whole lot uglier now.
Workers, including those who voted for him, are beginning to learn where they stand too. Suffice it to say: not exactly at the front of the line.
Enforcing laws like the FLSA for the benefit of workers in the U.S.—across the many millions of workplaces in this country, with very limited investigative and attorney staff—is no easy task. How closely any given federal agency can approach the goal of widespread compliance depends on many factors, most prominent being the level of resourcing Congress has made available, and the effectiveness of the strategies the agency chooses to deploy.
On the immigration front, the president has broadcast far and wide his intention to remove everyone who’s in this country without legal authority (a civil, not criminal violation) as his top enforcement priority. His just-signed budget bill massively increases the funds available for “building the wall” and ramping up Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency whose job will be to penetrate every community in the country, find those “without papers,” and arrest and deport them. And then there are prisons like “Alligator Alcatraz” in the Everglades, and the notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in El Salvador, designed to terrify as many as possible into self-deporting, and to detain indefinitely those who fail to comply.
Immigrants have known for a while where they stand with Trump. The picture has never been pretty, and it’s a whole lot uglier now. Workers, including those who voted for him, are beginning to learn where they stand too.
The flood of dollars slated to supercharge the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) enforcement capacity, along with its terror strategy designed to induce self-removal, will no doubt make serious headway toward the president’s goal. But there are so many reasons why this is both a cruel and foolish policy—including, because the U.S. will be left with fewer workers (citizen and noncitizen), fewer people spending money, and a smaller economy overall. But it’s an example, albeit a dark and nefarious one, of how enforcement results can be accomplished if the administration has both the will and the political power to get them done.
Let’s contrast the lengths to which this administration will go to forcibly remove productive, noncriminal immigrants and their families, with a recent and mostly unnoticed action the Trump Labor Department took a few weeks ago.
Large numbers of workers in the U.S. are cheated out of the minimum wage or overtime they’re entitled to under the FLSA—an unlawful practice known colloquially as “wage theft”—to the tune of billions of dollars per year. A primary reason for this high rate of noncompliance by employers inclined to evade the law is the paltry level of funding the department’s enforcement divisions receive, relative to the millions of businesses they’re responsible to oversee. Given the size of their mission to protect workers, the Labor Department’s (DOL) ranks are tiny, have shrunk significantly due to the Trump administration’s efforts to slash the federal budget, and are slated to be cut 35% in the FY 2026 budget.
While staffing today is exceptionally bare-bones, the DOL has always needed to deploy its limited resources for maximum impact. Fifteen years ago, I was part of a team that developed a wage law compliance-enhancing strategy that wouldn’t depend on hiring more enforcement personnel. It was founded on FLSA’s mandate that when an employer commits wage theft, it will owe the worker both the amount of the underpayment and an equal amount in “liquidated damages,” with very limited exceptions.
The law’s requiring payment of double back wages makes sound enforcement sense. It compensates workers for costs they incurred on account of being underpaid, and it also incentivizes unscrupulous employers to comply. If an employer who shorted his workers is only required to pay back what he owed in the first place, he’s really getting an interest-free loan that the worker never agreed to. That’s hardly a recipe for encouraging compliance.
And yet, for too long, that’s how the vast majority of DOL investigations finding wage underpayments were resolved. So, 15 years ago DOL assembled a team to address this serious enforcement deficiency, and we conceived a new strategy. Employers who engaged in wage theft were given a choice: be sued for double back pay, or settle for that amount without having to go to court. If the employer believed they shouldn’t have to pay double, or shouldn’t have to pay at all, no gun was pointed to their head. They could go to court and challenge DOL’s claims. But if, recognizing they’d likely lose in court and that settlement was a better option, they’d need to pay the workers the double back wages the law says they owe.
The Labor Department began implementing this policy in 2010, and over the past decade and a half, workers in scores of cases have received millions of dollars in back wages and liquidated damages, DOL’s litigation resources have been spared, and U.S. district courts are less clogged than they would have been if these resolutions in lieu of litigation hadn’t happened. Since 2010, this enforcement strategy has been challenged only once, and the court found it to be reasonable. It also exemplifies sound enforcement strategy designed to spur compliance, and government efficiency, to boot.
And yet, on June 27, the acting administrator of DOL’s Wage and Hour Division saw fit to prohibit DOL staff from entering into any wage theft settlements in which workers receive double back pay, if the case hasn’t been filed in court. The clear impact will be that most workers who are victims of wage theft will once again become unwilling interest-free lenders to their employers, and corner-cutting employers will have no incentive to comply with the law. Regrettably, this isn’t the first such slap against workers, and undoubtedly won’t be the last.
To recap: On immigration enforcement, the Trump administration, and a compliant Republican-majority Congress, are pulling out all the stops to remove unauthorized immigrants—whether law-abiding, taxpaying, contributing members of our communities or not—as part of a dreadfully misguided but comprehensive DHS enforcement policy designed to intimidate and coerce.
The Trump Labor Department, meanwhile, just went out of its way to end a successful, court-approved enforcement strategy designed to make whole workers victimized by wage theft, and to deter unscrupulous employers from engaging in these types of violations.
Immigrants have known for a while where they stand with Trump. The picture has never been pretty, and it’s a whole lot uglier now.
Workers, including those who voted for him, are beginning to learn where they stand too. Suffice it to say: not exactly at the front of the line.
"Workers who can least afford to bear the cost of lost earnings—particularly low-wage workers—are disproportionately vulnerable to wage violations," according to Economic Policy Institute researchers.
A report published Friday by the progressive-leaning think tank the Economic Policy Institute found that federal, state, and local efforts were able to recover more than $1.5 billion in stolen wages between 2021 and 2023.
Wage theft, which includes things like paying workers less than the legal minimum wage or denying workers their legal meal breaks, "is pervasive across all industries and income levels," according to the report's authors, "but workers who can least afford to bear the cost of lost earnings—particularly low-wage workers—are disproportionately vulnerable to wage violations."
Wage theft is extremely costly to workers. Prior research cited by the EPI report estimates that workers lose $15 billion annually from minimum wage violations alone. For comparison, FBI data shows that robberies accounted for $598 million in losses in 2018, and $482 million the year after, so less than $2 billion over a two-year period, according to the report.
Action at multiple levels of government can help recover what's lost. At the federal level, the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division reports that it recovered $659.8 million between 2021 and 2023, which comes out to wage recovery for 510,534 workers, and an average of $1,292 in recovered wages per worker.
As an example of this kind of enforcement effort, the authors recounted that the Department of Labor (DOL) went after four Los Angeles sewing contractors, which yielded $1.1 million in back wages and damages for over 160 garment workers.
Meanwhile, at the state level, 34 departments of labor and attorneys general recovered a total of $203.3 million over those three years. The other 16 states either did not respond, did not have the requested data, or could not provide the requested data.
Class action settlements are another important avenue for wage recovery. According to the authors, the value of the top ten wage and hour class action settlements tallied $641.3 million in 2021—putting it on par with the DOL wage recovery for the full 2021-2023 period. The report, which includes class action settlement research done by the firm Seyfarth Shaw LLP, does not include class action data for 2022 and 2023.
"This class action data illustrates that workers are more effective in recovering stolen wages on a collective versus individual basis. However, many workers are barred from joining class action cases, because they are subject to forced arbitration agreements," the authors wrote.
When it comes to policy solutions, the authors noted that there have been a number of positive enforcement changes at the state level. For example, "many states have strengthened penalties for wage theft violations, enforcing them as criminal statutes" while some have "established laws allowing victims of wage theft to obtain a lien on employer property to ensure payment of back pay."
At the federal level, the authors advocated for increased funding for DOL’s Wage and Hour Division in order to boost enforcement efforts. The division has not seen a significant funding increase in over a decade, they wrote. The authors also argue in favor of a number of pieces of legislation, including the Wage Theft Prevention and Wage Recovery Act and the Protecting Right to Organize (PRO) Act—which would strengthen the right of private sector workers to unionize and collectively bargain.
While many in the labor movement expect U.S. President-elect Donald Trump to advance an anti-worker agenda, his pick to head the Department of Labor was met with cautious optimism by some corners of the labor world. Trump tapped Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.) for the role. She co-sponsored the PRO Act in 2023—though at least one critic called this move "mostly symbolic."
In response to the news that Trump had picked Chavez-DeRemer, EPI's Celine McNicholas wrote in November that if workers truly have an ally in her, she "will advance policies that improve workers' lives."
According to McNicholas, those include funding the Department of Labor and protecting workers' overtime pay—as well as refusing to reinstitute the Payroll Audit Independent Determination program that was instituted during the first Trump administration, which mandated that if "if an employer proactively notified DOL of the failure to pay minimum wage or overtime or for taking illegal deductions from workers' paychecks, then DOL waived all penalties and liquidated damages," according to McNicholas.
The program "essentially permits employers who have stolen workers' wages to confess and get out of jail free," she wrote.
If workers truly have an ally in Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.), she will advance policies that improve workers’ lives.
President-elect Donald Trump recently announced his nomination of Oregon Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer to serve as secretary of labor.
She is one of only three House Republicans to cosponsor the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act and one of only eight Republicans to cosponsor the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act. Both bills would help reform our nation’s badly broken system of labor law. While Rep. Chavez-DeRemer’s support for these needed reforms is encouraging, if confirmed, she will be secretary of labor for a president who steadfastly pursued an ambitious anti-worker agenda during his first term in office.
Chavez-DeRemer has stated that “working-class Americans finally have a lifeline” with President-elect Trump in the White House. If workers truly have an ally in Chavez-DeRemer, she will advance policies that improve workers’ lives. Here are a few policies that will reveal whether the second Trump administration will actually aid working-class Americans or be a continuation of his first administration’s agenda attacking workers’ rights.
If confirmed as secretary of labor, Chavez-DeRemer should not follow the playbook of Trump’s first administration that used populist pro-worker rhetoric while advancing an anti-worker agenda that proved deeply harmful to U.S. workers.
Win funding for the Department of Labor (DOL) that enables the agency to serve the U.S. workforce: DOL and other worker protection agencies have been chronically underfunded. As the workforce has grown, the budgets of these agencies have shrunk, leaving workers without effective enforcement of basic minimum wage and overtime and health and safety protections. Chavez-DeRemer should fight for and secure at least a $14 billion budget to ensure that U.S. workers have health and safety inspectors and wage and hour investigators on the job to enforce their rights.
Protect workers’ overtime: Overtime pay ensures that most workers who put in more than 40 hours a week get paid 1.5 times their regular pay for the extra hours they work. Most hourly workers are guaranteed the right to overtime pay, while salaried workers’ eligibility is based on their pay and the nature of their duties. DOL recently issued a rule to raise the pay threshold for salaried workers to be eligible for overtime, which stands to benefit 4.3 million workers. Despite this benefit to U.S. workers, corporate interest groups and conservative states challenged the rule in court. Chavez-DeRemer should fight for workers’ right to overtime and continue to defend this rule in litigation. She should not allow the Trump administration to, once again, institute a low-salary threshold for overtime eligibility that leaves millions of workers without these protections and forced to work long hours for no additional pay.
Refuse to reinstitute the Payroll Audit Independent Determination program: This program was instituted during Trump’s first administration and essentially permits employers who have stolen workers’ wages to confess and get out of jail free. If an employer proactively notified DOL of the failure to pay minimum wage or overtime or for taking illegal deductions from workers’ paychecks, then DOL waived all penalties and liquidated damages. Wage theft is rampant, costing U.S. workers as much as $50 billion each year. Any program that makes it easier and less costly for employers to steal workers’ wages is a program that hurts U.S. workers and their wages. Chavez-DeRemer should make it harder for employers to steal workers’ wages, not easier.
Promote policies to protect workers’ health and safety: DOL’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for ensuring U.S. workers are safe on the job. Still, 344 workers die each day from hazardous working conditions. Under the prior Trump administration, OSHA scaled back safety inspections. Chavez-DeRemer should ensure that OSHA does not repeat this under her watch and instead expands inspections to ensure that all workers have a safe workplace. Further, she should fight to protect safety standards like the recently proposed standard protecting workers from extreme heat. Workers’ health and safety must be a priority for any secretary of labor and administration claiming to be pro-worker.
Hold employers accountable for exploiting workers: Some employers use workers’ immigration status as leverage to exploit workers, threatening them with deportation if they report violations of labor and employment laws. For workers in labor disputes, the current administration granted deferred action, which is a determination to defer removal (deportation) of an individual from the U.S. In order to qualify for deferred action, a worker’s employer must be the subject of an open investigation at a labor agency, like DOL, and the labor agency conducting the investigation must submit a letter supporting deferred action to the Department of Homeland Security which oversees the program. Deferred action helps hold lawbreaking employers accountable, and Chavez-DeRemer should continue to support this for workers whose employers are being investigated for violating the law. If she is confirmed, she should fight to ensure the Trump administration provides deferred action for workers whose rights have been violated and should work to issue letters in support of deferred action for eligible workers.
These are just a few actions Chavez-DeRemer could take to demonstrate her commitment to workers. If confirmed as secretary of labor, Chavez-DeRemer should not follow the playbook of Trump’s first administration that used populist pro-worker rhetoric while advancing an anti-worker agenda that proved deeply harmful to U.S. workers.