In the U.S., everyone, regardless of immigration status, has certain rights. As ICE activity continues across U.S. cities, it’s important to know what these rights are. Consider sharing this resource with your network or in your workplace.
Note: This resource highlights federal rights. These may vary by city and state.
It was a casual meeting.
At my health club in the beginning of February, a manager from one of Minneapolis’s major construction firms told me his company runs 22 crews across the metro. The day before, only four workers showed up. Four out of more than a hundred! Not because of weather. Not because of illness. Not because these workers were illegal. Because these workers were hiding in their homes too afraid of being swept up in the federal government’s immigration surge to go to work.
Their fear was not imagined. Thousands of immigrants have been detained in the Twin Cities since the start of Operation Metro Surge, and the vast majority should never have been taken in the first place. According to the University of Minnesota, roughly 75% were released because they were either U.S. citizens or have perfectly legal immigration status. Yet the damage is already done: the fear spread to everyone—documented and undocumented workers alike.
The economic fallout is visible across Minneapolis. Construction sites have slowed dramatically as migrant tradespeople, including those with legal status, stay home to avoid encounters with federal agents. Unions and contractors report that job-site visits by ICE have worsened an already tight labor market and delayed projects across the region. The broader workforce impact is staggering. A joint study by North Star Policy Action and the W.E. Upjohn Institute found that Twin Cities workers lost $106 million in wages between early January and mid-February. During that same period, the number of employees working in the metro fell, the number of operating business locations dropped and hours worked declined nearly 2%.
Small businesses—especially those serving immigrant communities—have been hit hardest.
One North Minneapolis grocer reported losing 90% of his business as both workers and customers stayed home, terrified that a routine errand could end in detention. His workforce shrank from 70 employees to 19. This is what happens when a federal crackdown treats an entire community as suspect. It doesn’t just target the undocumented. It freezes whole neighborhoods. It empties job sites. It drains paychecks. It punishes families who have every legal right to be here.
I’ve lived in Minneapolis since 1980. I know this city. I know its workers. I know its heart. What’s happening now is not who we are, and the people paying the price are the ones who have built, cleaned, cooked, cared for, and sustained this community for decades.
And this could be coming to a city near you!
Written By Jim Kaster, Board Chair of Stand Up For Workers
Whether you are a barista, a middle manager, or a factory supervisor, you probably don’t spend your Tuesday mornings checking the federal judicial nomination list. It feels like “D.C. noise”—distant, political, and largely irrelevant to your daily shift.
But as a plaintiff’s lawyer in Austin, TX who fights for workers nationwide, I’m here to tell you: The person sitting behind that federal bench may have more power over your career than your own boss does.
And, the current administration is changing the game on judicial nominations and the face of the judiciary in a way that may harm workers’ rights for decades to come. As we start 2026, the rules of the game are changing, and politics is to blame. If you’ve ever dealt with employment law or care about these issues, the latest news from Washington should be on your radar.
Recent reports from Reuters confirm that the administration has launched into 2026 with four new judicial nominees, including Anna St. John, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Reuters, Jan 7, 2026). St. John comes from the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute, a group known for its “crusade” against class action settlements—the very tool workers use to band together when a company steals wages or discriminates on a mass scale.
This follows a year of rapid appointments aimed at reshaping the courts with younger, “originalist” judges. Some of these lifetime appointees have raised serious alarms. For instance, Whitney D. Hermandorfer, a 37-year-old nominee for the Sixth Circuit, has faced intense scrutiny for her lack of trial experience and her history as lead counsel defending restrictive state laws that intersect with worker privacy and health (Truthout, June 10, 2025).
At the same time, Bloomberg Law notes a significant change in how these nominees are being revealed. By bypassing traditional vetting periods—shrinking the window from the standard 28 days to as little as 48 hours for some nominees—the opportunity for regular citizens and legal experts to scrutinize these lifetime appointments has virtually vanished (Bloomberg Law, Nov 10, 2025).
Why does this matter to the average worker? Because these judges generally have a broad skepticism of worker protections and a deep-seated affinity for corporate autonomy. Furthermore, we are seeing a judiciary increasingly friendly to mandatory arbitration. You likely signed one of these in a stack of paperwork on your first day. It’s a clause that says if the company breaks the law, you can’t sue them in public court. Instead, you have to go to a private, secret hearing.
The 2025-26 nominees are largely pro-arbitration and anti-class action. This means that for the millions of Americans in retail, healthcare, and tech, the “right to a trial” is becoming a relic of the past. When judges refuse to strike down unfair arbitration clauses or make it impossible to file a class action, they effectively hand large corporations a “get out of jail free” card.
The law is only as strong as the person interpreting it. While 2026 brings new challenges for the American worker, it doesn’t mean you and I are powerless. It just means you have to be smarter, better prepared, and more involved than before.
Lifetime appointments mean these decisions will affect not just your current job, but your children’s jobs. We must use the ballot box and our collective voices to ensure that those who hold the gavel actually respect the rights of the people who do the work.
Written By Austin Kaplan, SU4W Board Member and Attorney at the Kaplan Law Firm, PLLC
Democrat Chris Pappas, a candidate for the U.S. Senate for the New Hampshire seat being vacated by Sen. Jean Shaheen, has had an impressive political career thus far.
He has kept to a moderate path on many issues, but his voting record on legislation supported by the Stand Up for Workers PAC and his near-100% rating by the AFL-CIO, along with his strong odds of success in the upcoming elections, make him an attractive candidate for the PAC.
The young Harvard College graduate was elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives in 2002 at 22, the youngest person elected to that body, serving two terms before winning election as Hillsborough County treasurer, as which he served until 2010. He was elected to the New Hampshire Executive Council in 2012. He won re-election in 2014 and 2016, was first elected to Congress in 2019, and re-elected three times since. And, he is also the first openly gay representative elected by New Hampshire.
Before entering politics, Pappas helped manage a family-owned Manchester restaurant called the Puritan Backroom, a popular visiting spot for presidential candidates campaigning in the early-primary state. (His grandfather also invented chicken tenders at the Puritan in 1974.) He and his husband live in Manchester, the state’s largest city.
Pappas represents New Hampshire’s First District, which covers principally the eastern half of the state, but which doesn’t include many of the communities which line the state’s southern border with Massachusetts, where many liberal leaning tax refugees from that state are thought to live. Perhaps in part due to the fairly rural demographics of his district, Pappas has been careful to pursue a moderate course during his time thus far in the House. He was ranked the most bi-partisan Democrat in the House in 2023 by the Lugar Center. He has, unsurprisingly, a strong record on supporting gay rights, and actively advocated for restoring federal subsidies to make health insurance premiums affordable for many Americans, including many workers not receiving employment-related health insurance.
Most significantly for the PAC, Pappas has a 99% lifetime rating from the AFL- CIO. He has voted for, among other bills, Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act, the Paycheck Fairness Act, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, and the Raise the Wage Act. Pappas has drawn arguably the greatest criticism for his support of the Laken Riley Act. This act, which arose from the killing in Georgia of a woman named Laken Riley by an undocumented immigrant, requires that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) agency detain certain non-citizen aliens without bail during their immigration proceedings. This detention requirement applies to any individual who “… is charged with, is arrested for, is convicted of, admits having committed, or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of any burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, or assault of a law enforcement officer … or any crime that results in death or serious bodily injury to another person.”
These requirements apply irrespective of whether there was any process, such as investigation or trial, involved. Many national civil rights organizations opposed the bill, including the Center for Constitutional Rights, the League of Women Voters, the NAACP Legal Defense, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
Recently, Pappas has called for Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security, to resign or to be impeached. He has stated that ICE is “out of control, violating due process, the public trust, and standards of law enforcement.” On January 22, 2026, two days before Alex Pretti was murdered in Minneapolis, he introduced a bill that would redirect almost $75 billion in federal funding away from ICE and to local law enforcement, supporting the hiring of 200,000 more law enforcement officers. Pappas is well ahead of all comers in fundraising in the Senate race, having raised $4,284,014 and holding $2,612,761 on hand. This compares with $33,218 raised and $18,329 on hand for his sole Democratic competitor in the September 8 primary, Karishma Manzur; and $968,538 raised and $802,763 on hand for the Republican Scott Brown. (These numbers are as of end of September 2025. Numbers were not available for the second Republican, John E. Sununu, who served in the U.S. Senate from 2003 to 2009.)
Pappas’ only primary challenger, Karishma Manzur, describes herself as a doctoral degree holding medical science researcher, science writer and community volunteer, who also sits on the New Hampshire Democratic Party Rules Committee. She has included her support for workers’ rights prominently in her campaign materials, and she has called for the abolition of ICE following the killing of two demonstrators by ICE agents in Minneapolis.
The most recent polling, by Granite State Polling, from January 19, 2026, which tested Pappas against Brown, showed Pappas with a ten-point lead, 52% to Brown’s 42%. Pappas led also in the other pairing against Sununu on the same date, whom he bested by 50% to 45%. Other polling, from December 2025, shows Pappas ahead of these two competing candidates by slightly narrower, but comparable, margins. Kamala Harris defeated Donald Trump in both of New Hampshire’s congressional districts in 2024. The Cook Political Report and Inside Elections both rate New Hampshire as “leaning Democratic” coming up to the fall elections.
Assuming he succeeds in the Democratic primary on September 8th, Pappas will be vying in the general against either carpetbagger Scott Brown, former Senator from Massachusetts and ambassador to New Zealand in Trump’s first term; or John Sununu, son of a successful former governor and himself a prior holder of a New Hampshire Senate seat. Brown’s populist positions, including one of the key votes that ended the United States ban on assault weapons, earned him the opprobrium of many Massachusetts progressives. His affecting of a barn coat and pickup truck, though, won him support from the (admittedly small) right leaning constituencies in Massachusetts, and will likely sell well to the more rural New Hampshire electorate. But, there is also ample anti-Massachusetts sentiment in the state to cost Brown votes.
Sununu may represent a more serious challenge to Pappas, with his strong name recognition and long family history of public service to the state as well as his prior holding of a Senate seat. In addition, Trump recently endorsed Sununu’s candidacy. Sununu’s fundraising success thus far, though, has not been demonstrated, and his campaign also appears to have generated limited buzz.
Pappas is regarded by commentators as the front-runner for the seat. Given his strong record of favoring workers’ rights, the retrograde views of his Trump-leaning opponent Brown (and the historically solid Republican Sununu), and given the importance of winning control of the Senate for Democrats, our PAC may decide to support his candidacy.
Written by Paul Merry, SU4W Board Member
Interested in supporting the PAC as we prepare for the upcoming election cycle? Learn more and donate here.
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:
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.
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
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
Most U.S. workers can be fired for almost any reason under the at-will system. But imagine a workplace where termination had to be fair, documented, and based on real evidence instead of personal bias, convenience, or political pressure.
That’s what just cause provides.
“Just cause” is a standard that requires employers to show a legitimate, well-supported reason for firing or disciplining a worker. It’s commonly found in union contracts and in a few jurisdictions with strong worker protections.
Under just cause, an employer must demonstrate:
This structure protects workers from arbitrary or politically motivated punishment; something especially important in periods of economic instability or governmental transition.
With mass layoffs, automation, AI restructuring, political turnover, and pressures on federal and public-sector employees, workers are more vulnerable than ever to sudden job loss.
Just cause can:
Several cities and states (most notably, Oregon, where we are supporting the campaign) are exploring just-cause policies as a way to improve job stability, especially for workers who have historically faced discrimination or instability in employment.
Even without legal mandates, workers can pursue just-cause protections through:
Job security shouldn’t be a privilege. It should be a basic expectation.
We’re committed to advancing that expectation to workers across the country. We champion policies that strengthen job security, defend access to the courts, and ensure employers can’t sidestep accountability. When workers understand their rights, and when the law recognizes their humanity, entire communities benefit.
Together, we can build a stronger future where fairness is the norm, not the exception.
If you care about labor and employment law issues, you should down a stiff drink and then contemplate this incomplete list of Trump’s destruction of those rights during the first ten months of his second term:
Employment discrimination
U.S. Department of Labor
National Labor Relations Board
Federal Employees’ Rights
Layoffs of Federal Employees
Written By Barry Roseman, Secretary of the SU4W Board
Senior U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia is one of the first senate candidates the SU4W PAC supported and is currently being considered for support again as he runs for re-election.
In his last election in 2020, Ossoff, along with junior Sen. Raphael Warnock, set new “firsts” for Georgia, as Ossoff was the first Jewish candidate, and Warnock the first African-American, to be elected to the U.S. Senate from the state. Ossoff, whose race has been called the most expensive in U.S. history, defeated Republican incumbent David Perdue in a January runoff election after no candidate won a majority in the general election. Ossoff’s and Warnock’s victories gave Democrats control of the Senate. At thirty-eight years of age he is currently the youngest senator in office.
Ossoff graduated from Georgetown University‘s Walsh School of Foreign Service with a Bachelor of Science in culture and politics, and earned a Master of Science degree in international political economy from the London School of Economics in 2013. Elements of Ossoff’s background of interest to worker advocates include his serving as intern for civil rights leader and U.S. Representative John Lewis. From 2007 to 2012 he served as legislative assistant for foreign affairs and defense policy for U.S. representative Hank Johnson.
From 2013 to 2021, Ossoff was the managing director and chief executive officer of Insight: The World Investigates (TWI), a London-based investigative television production company that works with reporters to create documentaries about corruption in foreign countries. The firm produced BBC investigations about ISIS war crimes and death squads in East Africa. He invested a previously received inheritance of an unknown amount to the TWI venture.
Ossoff ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 2017. Though he lost, The New York Times reported that he “produced probably the strongest Democratic turnout in an off-year election in at least a decade“, “brought a surprising number of irregular young and nonwhite voters to the polls,” and nearly doubled youth turnout in the 6th district from the 2014 midterm election, in a district where Republicans far outnumber Democrats.
Ossoff won the support of our PAC by his pledge respecting federal judicial appointments, that if elected he would vote to approve only judicial nominees who have stated their openness to and support of the rights of workers; and by his avowals of commitment to endorsing and promoting legislation that broadens or strengthens worker rights. Along with SU4W PAC’s endorsement, in the 2020 race he also won the endorsement of the Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund.
As senator, Ossoff has been active in a variety of areas, but pro-worker legislation has not appeared to be a major focus for him. He initiated the Solar Energy Manufacturing for America Act, which was passed by the senate in 2022, and which held the promise of more manufacturing jobs. It was incorporated into the Infrastructure and Jobs Act. He also sought more control over the U.S. postmaster general in the wake of a mail service meltdown. Earlier this year the Associated Press noted Ossoff’s bipartisan work with Republicans, advancing the interests of Georgia’s farmers and military bases.
Ossoff voted for the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, and has supported legislation that significantly benefited workers along with others, including the Affordable Care Act and the Equality Act, which would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. He has also called for the repeal of “wasteful, anti-competitive special interest subsidies that make it hard for entrepreneurs to raise capital … [and] create jobs … .” He describes his support for the LGBTQ community as “unwavering” and supports comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship for immigrants not currently documented.
In 2022, he blocked a proposed titanium mine in the Okefenokee Swamp after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service warned of severe potential damage to the wildlife refuge. The mine was proposed by Twin Pines Minerals LLC in 2018.
Alongside his votes supporting workers, however, Ossoff’s Senate record also appears to include at least one less-than-supportive item. The United Farm Workers and the S.E.I.U. union report that he joined forces with a Republican, Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, to introduce a bill delaying a five-percent wage increase for H-2A Visa workers for nine months. A March 2022 statement from Tillis announced that Ossoff had joined him in sponsoring the legislation to support farmers. Ossoff, who the unions note also supported legislation raising the federal minimum wage to fifteen dollars, denies favoring wage cuts for farm workers and points out that he has been a champion for paid leave and for the right to join a union. Agriculture represents more than five percent of Georgia’s economy, so it may not be surprising that Ossoff joined in that bill, and it may be that this bipartisan step explains why in one recent poll of voters, Ossoff was supported by some twenty percent of Georgia Republicans.
In the final analysis, living in a democratic system of government calls for pragmatism and compromise. While Ossoff may not prioritize workers’ rights as highly as advocates may wish, his record overall is almost certainly preferable to the Republican candidate (whoever that turns out to be) for the seat.
Written By Paul Merry, SU4W Board Member
