It’s 2026. Psychological Safety Is a Core Worker Right.

As 2026 begins, workers aren’t just tired. They’re carrying years of accumulated stress from instability, understaffing, and workplaces that demand resilience without offering protection. Burnout is no longer an individual issue. It’s a systems failure.

Psychological safety means more than feeling “comfortable” at work. It’s the ability to speak up about harm, set boundaries, report misconduct, and ask for support without fear of retaliation, dismissal, or being labeled “difficult.” For workers, it’s essential to health, dignity, and long-term participation in the workforce.

From a legal perspective, the foundation already exists. Workers have the right to a workplace free from harassment, discrimination, and retaliation under federal and state laws. Employers are required to engage in good-faith accommodation processes, protect whistleblowers, and address hostile work environments,  including those that cause psychological harm. Yet too often, these rights are under-communicated, inconsistently enforced, or framed as risks to manage rather than responsibilities to uphold.

A burnout-avoidant workplace starts with power-aware practices:

  • Clear, trusted systems for reporting concerns
  • Manager training that prioritizes accountability over control
  • Workloads that are realistic, humane, and transparent
  • Policies that explicitly protect mental health, leave, and accommodations

For advocates and workers alike, 2026 must be the year we stop individualizing burnout and start naming its root causes. Psychological safety is built when workers know their rights, trust that harm will be addressed, and believe they won’t be punished for telling the truth.

Candidate Spotlight: Sherrod Brown

Long before affordability powered Mikie Sherill, Abigail Spanberger and Zohran Momdani to election in November 2025, Sherrod Brown focused on working-class economic issues in the House and in the Senate.

He has been a strong supporter of organized labor, and Sherrod and his wife Connie proudly drive union-made Jeeps manufactured in Toledo, Ohio. After noting that his home zip code had the highest rate of housing foreclosures in the country, he said, “I want to devote the rest of my career to helping people have affordable, decent, clean, safe housing.”

Brown was elected to the U.S. House in 1992 in a district in northeast Ohio. He served in that seat until 2008, when he was first elected to the Senate. He was defeated in 2024, in a race in which crypto interests donated $40 million to his Republican challenger. Brown is again running for the Senate, in the seat vacated by Vice President Vance, a seat that has been filled by Sen. Jon Husted for the last year.

He voted for the Affordable Care Act in 2010, supported Medicare for All, sponsored legislation to make Medicare eligible to people at age 55, and was a leader in an effort to expand the child tax credit, an effort that temporarily cut the U.S. child poverty rate in half.

Brown supported the Employee Free Choice Act, which would have required certification of a labor union, without an election, if a majority of employees in the bargaining unit had signed authorization cards. He advocated for a higher minimum wage. In addition to this, he supported investing in infrastructure, supported small businesses and supported green energy initiatives.

When it comes to oppositions, he has opposed the outsourcing of American job by supporting tariffs and protectionist trade policies. He voted against ratification of the NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and successfully opposed ratification of the Central American Free Trade Agreement. During Trump’s first term, he supported renegotiation of NAFTA. However, Brown voted against ratification of its replacement because he felt that its worker protection provisions were insufficient.

He led an effort in 2008 to preempt future bank bailouts by breaking up “too-big- to-fail” banks by limiting the size of banks eligible for federal financial assistance. Brown fought against legislation that reduced the regulations on banks with more than $50 billion but less than $250 billion in assets, pointing out the Senate was engaged in “collective amnesia” by repealing rules designed to avoid future bank bailouts.

Brown supported legislation to more tightly regulate crypto, due to the lack of adequate consumer protections and the use of crypto by terrorist groups and international criminal interests. Fairshake, a pro-crypto industry PAC, spent more than $40 million in advertisements (which didn’t mention crypto) to defeat Brown in 2024.

Those same interests will probably spend similar amounts of money to elect Husted and to defeat Brown in 2026. Right now, Brown is ahead of Husted by 1% and is trailing Husted by 3% in two recent polls. Brown’s election chances will depend on whether Ohio voters’ opposition to Trump and their concerns about affordability are outweighed by out-of state interests’ spending to support Husted. In other words, Brown’s chances will be based on whether crypto spending – which has nothing to do with the issues that concern Ohioans – will control the election results.

Written By Barry Roseman, SU4W Board Member & Treasurer

Cracks In MAGA’s Base Encourages Worker Advocates Preparing For Fall Elections

As the new year begins, the seemingly unending series of missteps by the current White House, especially on the economy, is feeding a growing number of defections of Trump loyalists away from their unbreakable bond to the chief executive.

This turn away from him, shown by recent polling, gives additional openings for worker advocates to return a pro-worker majority to Congress come November.

An NBC poll from last month reported a drop of 8 points among respondents “strongly” favoring the chief executive, down from a high of 78% in April. Such a support loss is significant considering the chief executive’s narrow margin of victory in 2024.  The same poll showed the percentage of “MAGA” Republicans has dropped from 57% in April to 50% last month.

The data shows voters increasingly disapprove of his handling of the economy, with just 26% believing Trump is doing a good job. The New York Times reported that as of January 2,  Trump’s disapproval rating was at 54%, compared with approval of 42%. Also, a majority of Americans, including one-third of Republicans,  now hold Trump more responsible than Biden for the economy.

Trump has also seen faltering numbers within his own party: only 75% of Republicans approved of his handling of the economy in November, down from 82% in July, according to Marquette University polling; and his approval rating among white, college-educated men dropped to 40% from 47% in June according to Fox News polling.  

The president has experienced several notable breaks with his MAGA base in recent months. Despite his resistance, the House approved legislation last month requiring the Justice Department to release documents detailing its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. Trump endorsed the bill after it won enough Republican support to pass, however, his Department of Justice has still reportedly failed to produce some million additional pages.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post reports that leaders of the Republican “MAGA” wing, alienated by his obliviousness to the cost of living, are “checking out” on Trump. In effect, it reports that Trump has reneged on the most important promises he made to win MAGA votes, including halting cost of living and inflation increases, as well as his prioritizing of international affairs.

A recent Economist/YouGov poll (Nov. 28-Dec. 1) found Trump had a 38% approval rating and 57% disapproval rating, the seventh week in succession that his rating was a -15% or lower. He ends the year with 39% approval and 56% disapproval ratings in this poll, a downward trend since the start of his second term: 51% of respondents said the economy is getting worse.

Under a November poll by NPR/PBS/Marist, Democrats have an advantage headed into next year’s midterms, with 55% saying they were more likely to vote Democratic, compared to 41% saying they would vote Republican. 

Potentially more ominous for the administration, polls reflect disillusionment with the chief executive among some groups whose support was key to his victory.  Specifically, Hispanic and Latinx voters are reconsidering their choices, according to media interviews. This offers an answer to the question whether the favorable swing of these voters was a permanent or momentary realignment.

Pew Research Center polling reflects this change. Latinos have grown pessimistic since the 2024 presidential election. Most say their situation has worsened, and as Trump’s second term unfolds, Latinos are increasingly critical of his job performance and immigration/economic policies – key issues for Latino voters.

In a striking result, some 55% of Latinos feel “very strongly” that Trump has done a bad job as president, contrasted with 18% who feel “very strongly” the opposite. The same polling finds pessimism has spiked among Latinos. 68% of Hispanic adults say the situation in the U.S. is worse for Hispanics today than a year ago, the first time in the poll’s two-decade history that a majority said their situation deteriorated. 61% of U.S. Latinos said Trump’s policies worsened the economy, while roughly one-third struggled to pay for groceries, medical care, and housing.

Blunders committed in acting on policy fronts may help explain the rising disillusionment. As one example, the demolition of the White House East Wing, has been met with disapproval from a broad spectrum of voters in polls. Trump building a $400 million dollar gilded “ballroom” while increasing numbers of Americans have trouble feeding and housing their families cannot have assuaged voters’ economic disappointment.

The recent, and apparently misdirected, military strike in Nigeria, ostensibly to help Christian residents but landing in an overwhelmingly Muslim province, appears to be an attempt at shoring up failing support among fundamentalist Christians, and may betray concern among advisers about softening of support from this element of their base.  

The plethora of actions aimed at institutionalizing the racist and white supremacist attitudes of Trump and his key advisers, including Stephen Miller, may also offer a basis for worker advocates to energize other minority group members. Indeed, while polling shows support for the administration’s efforts to tighten the southern border, it also reflects negativity towards the efforts to remove immigrants generally. The New York Times reported in November that most Americans favor reforming the legal immigration process instead. Decisions to halt visiting rights and immigration application processing for nearly forty (largely Black or brown) nations can hardly comfort Americans with relatives there. This is particularly striking when contrasted with the widely publicized policy granting accelerated immigration processing to (white) South Africans.  

It is too soon to know the American public’s view of the latest international-law-breaking gambit: the raid to have U.S. troops apprehend Venezuela’s president, after conferring with U.S. oil companies. But, the often-stated goal of seeing these corporations take over oil production can hardly be expected to mollify Trump voters annoyed with his prioritization of international matters.

In sum, a worker advocate campaign strategy emphasizing the administration’s failure to address the crowning themes of improving economic conditions and immigration control should resonate with a wide range of voters come November. Careful attention to the specific issues most important in individual districts, combined with the general economic pain theme, offers promise of change that will make a difference for the workers on whom the economy truly depends.

Written By Paul Merry, SU4W Board Member