Transcripts For CSPAN3 Labor Secretary On Department Policie

Does the Administration Support the threshold set by the Obama Administration and supported by worker advocates, or does it support the business communitys position . Congressman, thank you for the question, and let me note at the outset, when we talk about the overtime rule, we tend to talk about it in the context of salary thresholds, but if you look at the law passed by this congress, this congress did not say whether or not you are exempt or not exempt, whether or not youre subject to overtime or not is set by a salary level. But it set a very different test. And so, the salary level is, in essence, a shorthand way of getting to the law. Now, a federal court looked at this, and the federal court said that the way the 47,000 was set and that level was not in accordance with the law. And so, its not simply do we support and you chose not to contest or appeal that decision. And you do believe that you have the authority to set the salary threshold, is that correct . And so, i was saying, irrespective of whether we support or not and we chose not to support that level because we believe both it is a shock to the system and not in accordance with the law we do believe we have authority to set a salary level that acts as a proxy for the test just to be clear, you do believe you have the authority, but yet, your department chose not to appeal that decision. Congressman, we appealed the decision with respect to the authority, not with respect to the salary level. Thank you. My time is up. I yield back. Gentlemans time has expired. Mr. Walberg, youre recognized for three minutes. I thank the chairman and thank the secretary for being here. Appreciate a number of things that you have pushed forward and worked on. Let me ask you, the Retirement Security issue is big on our venue and our consideration. Policies that empower americans to put money aside for retirement is a leading priority for this committee. Safe harbor, annuities safe harbor issue we believe needs some more clarity in how its dealt with. So let me ask you this question. Does the Department Plan to revise the existing annuity safe harbor to make sure it provides a certainty that Plan Sponsors need to consider these types of products . Congressman, i will have to consult with the department and get back to you with that answer. Id appreciate that. That is an issue that comes up as we consider the pbgc question, and that was addressed thus far. Anything relative to making sure that we have safe harbors, that we have better opportunity, it would be greatly appreciated. So let me congressman yes. Let me just say as a general matter, i think safe harbors are very important. I think having there is a value to certainty and predictability, and that value is substantial. And so, i understand the premise of your question. Thank you. Jumping over to a totally different area, silica. Under the Previous Administration, osha promulgated a rule related to the proposal of silica in the Construction Industry that i and many other members of congress have concerns with. We believe its extremely challenging for many in the Construction Industry to implement and comply with this rule. Are you willing to further stay the enforcement of this rule until youve worked to ensure that this rule is feasible and your employees are able to adequately educate employers throughout the country . Congressman, thank you, again. The silica rule is a major rule. My understanding is that it is in litigation. My understanding is that the parties were close to resolution as to what would be a sensible outcome. We provided a 30day extension to provide the parties time to address this. The parties were a little late at coming back to the table, but it is my hope that the parties can come together, that they can express their concerns and that we can find a sensible outcome to this rule. That would be an improvement, so i appreciate that. Thank you, madam chairman. I yield back. Thank you very much. Ms. Blunt rochester, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman foxx, Ranking Member scott, and secretary acosta for being here. In your testimony, your written testimony, you briefly discussed employment of people with disabilities. And as im sure youre aware, nearly one in five americans have a disability, about almost 57 million individuals. And in the interest of time, ill submit the bulk of my questions in writing, but i would love to hear about competitive, integrative employment, also collaboration amongst agencies like rsa and how youre going to work together. But because i have very limited time, i want to focus on one other question. The president s proposed budget calls for about a 40 cut to workforce innovation and opportunity act programs and also the elimination of the Senior Community Service Employment program, even though Congress Just reauthorized the Older Americans act on a bipartisan basis. What is the rationale behind eliminating the Senior Community Service Employment program . Congresswoman, briefly, first, let me say that i thank you for the questions on individuals with disabilities. And you know, something that ive heard that i thought was a useful way to think about this is that were all temporarily abled, because at some point in our life, most of us at some point will have a disability, particularly as time goes by. Going to your second question, the hope in the budget, and ultimately, that will be up to congress, and congress may not agree, is to try to consolidate all the disparate programs into one Large Program so that there are efficiencies, so that there are flexibilities at the state level. The budget made some hard decisions, and congress has the discretion to change those decisions, to pass the budget that it wishes, but the intent of the budget was to, rather than have the money in separate programs, to combine them into one Large Program. So, mr. Secretary, its my understanding that on this program in particular, which has been around maybe since 1965, that the performance measures, the Program Actually exceeded the performance measures. So, can you just help me understand, if youre going to consolidate, wouldnt you maybe get rid of programs that arent effective but maintain ones that impact Senior Citizens across our country . Well, by consolidating, it doesnt mean that the program isnt in existence. It means that its not a separate budget item. But where it is successful, i would argue, you want to continue programs that are successful, that have positive outcomes, and you want to look at those Outcome Measures and focus the monies, whether they come through a general budget line or through a specific budget line, on just those outcomes, so were getting to the same end point. My time is expired, but i would encourage you to support senior employment programs in addition to employment of people with disabilities. Thank you so much. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. Mr. Smucker, youre recogni recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you for being here. I want to thank you for your leadership in the department and thank the administration for the focus on creating opportunity for americans through job creation, through creating an environment where businesses are focused on growing and creating those jobs. I can tell you that businesses in my area are responding. I just was part of a roundtable recently in my area where a business owner, a family farm said we feel like weve been unleashed again. And so, businesses are investing, theyre growing their businesses, and theyre creating jobs. So, thank you so much. Its refreshing to see that kind of approach and that kind of focus. Im also very pleased with the attention and focus on Apprenticeship Program. One of the things ive always noticed, having served in the state senate and now in this position, you have individuals who are unemployed, and at the same time, you have businesses on the other hand who are looking to fill jobs, and its becoming theyre almost desperate to fill jobs. And so, what it really takes, and in fact, the best way to promote upward mobility, promote lifting people out of poverty, is connecting people with great paying jobs that are available. I think Apprenticeship Program is a tremendous tool to do that. Its one thats been underutilized here, so im very, very thrilled with the initiative and look forward to working the administration to create scaleable Apprenticeship Programs across the country. And with that, i have about a minute. I do have a question. One of the areas that businesses have been concerned about in my district is on osha compliance. And in fact, employers understand that it is important to provide a safe workplace, a healthy workplace for their employees but are concerned about the approach that osha has taken over the past number of years, where its more punitive, rather than collaborative. So, id like to hear your thought on that. What ideas do you have to create an environment where businesses are receiving assistance to comply and to assure that they have a safe workplace . Congressman, thank you for your words and thank you for the question. Briefly, let me say, on the one hand, we have asked for additional funding for a program called vpp, which is, in essence, a compliance assistance program, a voluntary compliance program. And as a general matter where you have employers that are trying to do the right thing, you want to help them do the right thing. Let me say, that has to be balanced with a vigorous enforcement program. And so, where you have an employer that has engaged in repeated violations in willful violations, my view is you have to enforce and enforce vigorously. And as a former u. S. Attorney, if need be, you should even refer those where theres willful violations that result in death or serious harm, refer those for prosecution. And so, i think its important to have compliance assistance and a very fulsome compliance assistance for all those employers who are just trying to do the right thing, while we acknowledge, as with every situation, the congresswoman earlier asked me to say, you know, does every american not every employer is like that. And where the employer is repeated and willful, there needs to be vigorous enforcement. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Norcross, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair and secretary acosta. Good to see you again. Seems were hearing quite a bit about the Apprenticeship Program, which has been around since the middle ages, so we are slow, usually not that bad. Theyve referred to it as the other fouryear degree. It is a system that works. Unfortunately, the United States, primarily the Building Trades who are doing such a great job, and when you were asked about the job centers, some of the issues that were taking place there, i was really happy to hear you talk about Graduation Rates and does it lead to a job. A piece of paper on the wall Means Nothing if you dont have a job. When we were in switzerland, they said the United States has the besttrained Unemployed People in the world, which goes to the point in the question that we want to talk about. White collar, commercial jobs is a nice area that we can go into, but we want to make sure, particularly with the trades, who have a proven history of doing this great im not throwing the baby out with the bath water. Their Graduation Rates are between 80 and 90 . But what we had found over the course of the last decade, not everybodys following that. Everybody becomes a firstyear apprentice and stays there. A, they never graduate. And this is indicative of a program that isnt working. So, when youre looking at creating the next generation, are you going to keep the very issues that we talked about in mind, Graduation Rates, and does it lead to a job . Congressman, absolutely. I think the outcome measurements are so critical, whether its a university, whether its an Apprenticeship Program, whether it is a hybrid. How many graduate, and does it lead it a job is the goal, and thats what we should focus on. One of the issues that we found coming off the Great Recession is we have all these openings. Training somebody for a job that doesnt exist is nothing short of cruel. The cycles in the construction ebbs and flows. So if we had the amount of people ready to go to work today, that means they were unemployed for many years. So the industry does react, but theres always a lag here. The system works remarkably well, remarkably well. And as you pointed out, with virtually no federal or state money. But there are standards, and we heard from others. Nobody wants to burden the employers. They have a great way of giving input. But everybody cant create their own standards, no core competency. So when we go to look at the new system, as susan davis talked about, we want to make sure that were in partnership. The joint programs are the ones that work best. And i yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, mr. Norcross. Mr. Ferguson, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chairman and mr. Secretary, thank you so much for being here today. A couple of questions. First of all, as i understand it, on july 6th of this year, the department of labor published a request for information examining the fiduciary rule, is that correct . I dont recall if thats the exact date, but thats generally correct. Okay, good. Now that the Comment Period is closed, im assuming the department is reviewing and considering the next steps. Congressman, that is correct. We are. Okay. Have there been discussions with the s. E. C. On the next steps with the fiduciary regulation . Congressman, i in a wall street journal editorial, opinion editorial that i published, i very publicly, as a matter of fact, suggested that the s. E. C. Should be a partner in this effort. The s. E. C. Declined to be a full partner in the past administration, and i do believe that they have an Important Role to play. They are part of the regulatory structure of this industry and should be a partner, and therefore, yes, we have had discussions. And that is good to hear, because weve heard a lot from our constituents that believe that the dol and the s. E. C. Should be collaborating on this to address the issues and solve the problems associated with it, so thank you for your commitment to continue going down that road. Also, i just want to make a comment about the approval of the georgia wesep application. I know some of your staff came down to the district to look at one of our programs. I want to thank you so much for that support and learning whats going on in our district. You know, being able to do this and work with states, and particularly, the Georgia Consortium for advanced technical training, we see this as a great opportunity to begin to prepare our young people to go to work in a 21stcentury economy, and its a step in aligning our Education System with, you know, with the direction that the economy is going. So i know that you and the administration are very much focused on closing the skills gaps. Thats something that we believe is vitally important to do. And we believe that innovative apprenti apprenticeships are a very valuable part of this. So again, i want to thank you for the work that yall are doing on that. I think that that is something that every person on this committee can agree with, that preparing our young people to take advantage of the jobs that are being created is vitally important. So, thank you. Madam chairman, i yield back. Thank you, congressman. Thank you very much. Ms. Adams, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman foxx and Ranking Member scott, and thank you, mr. Secretary, for being here. I was interested in the response that you gave to congresswoman fudge, so i want to follow up for just a moment. Controlling family timing and size can be key to unlocking opportunities for economic success, education, and equality, and access to contraception can help women complete their education, join the workforce, planning, delaying and spacing births will also appear to help women achieve their education and career goals. And so, with all of the economic benefits that access to contraceptive brings, it seems a bit illogical to me for the department to issue interim final rules that erodes a womans right to access comprehensive, Preventive Health care. My question is, have you done, the department, have you done a complete assessment of the number of women and dependence and risa plans that could lose access to contraceptive coverage . And if so, whats the number . Congresswoman, as i said previously, the rule recognizes that for some organizations, their religious freedoms should allow them to not offer that coverage. It provides the option for that organization. It was enacted pursuant to the administrative procedures act. Within the apa, there is a requirement that the apa process engage in a costbenefit analysis, and that would be contained within that costbenefit analysis. Thats something that we certainly could provide to you or to your staff. So you have done an assessment . You know how many, is that what youre saying . What im saying is that within any rule, there is a costbenefit analysis that takes place, and that assessment is required by the administrative procedures act. And so, that assessment can certify okay. Thank you very much, and i would like to receive that. So, you know, according to the National Womens law center, when we think about the