|
Who do you
trust? Transcribed from The Oregonian
Daily Briefing: a roundup of business activity in the Northwest Claims adjusters’ class-action case against
Farmers Insurance begins in Portland A trial began Monday in Portland involving 2,700 insurance claims
adjusters from seven states who allege Farmers Insurance Exchange improperly
withheld overtime pay. The employees involved in the class-action lawsuit, filed in US
District Court, contend that Farmers violated federal and state laws by
classifying them as salaried employees ineligible for overtime pay. The plaintiffs, many of them still
employed by Farmers, seek an unspecified amount of back pay and overtime pay in
the future. The plaintiffs have made no estimate of how much the Farmers Insurance
Group of Companies subsidiary owes, but one of their attorneys, Robert Stoll,
said the amount is significant. In
2001, a California jury awarded 2,400 Farmers claims adjusters $90 million for
improperly classifying them as exempt from overtime. The case in Portland includes adjusters from Oregon, Washington,
Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and New Mexico. In some states, their claims date to
1998. The liability portion of the
trial before US District Judge Robert Jones could last a month or more. Farmers attorney Lee Paterson argued Monday that the adjusters should
be exempt from overtime pay under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act because they
make significant judgement calls and have authority to settle claims. Stoll argued
that adjusters don’t qualify for an exemption because they
work under strict rules and constant supervision and have no hiring, firing or
oversight authority. Democrats Set to Vote
to Block Bush Overtime Rules WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats predicted that a divided U.S.
Senate would defy a threatened White House veto on Wednesday and vote to block
an administration proposal that foes say could cost millions of Americans
overtime pay. It remained unclear,
however, if the proposed expansion of overtime exemptions for white-collar
workers under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act would ultimately die or become law
as other twists and turns await the measure. Foes of the proposal
had sought to have the vote on Tuesday, when four Democratic presidential
contenders were available to take their Senate seats, cast ballots and score
points with labor, which opposes the administration proposal. Republicans refused to allow that. But they later agreed to a vote on
Wednesday after Democrats pledged to work to complete a broader $138 billion
health, labor and education spending bill, to which the overtime provision
would be attached. Democrats say they
have bipartisan support in the Republican-led Senate for their amendment
blocking the proposed work rule changes.
"We will win this fight for our working families," said Sen.
Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat and chief sponsor of the amendment. The White House has said President
Bush's advisors would recommend he veto the entire spending bill if the
amendment is attached to it. Even if the Senate
approves the amendment, the House of Representatives would still have to agree
to it, and both chambers would have to override any presidential veto with a
two-thirds vote. The House narrowly rejected a similar
amendment earlier this year, but foes hope to build new momentum for it in the
Senate. The administration,
along with the business community, argues the proposed changes are needed to update antiquated work rules.
But opponents say the changes would unfairly strip workers of overtime
protection and allow companies to make them work longer hours without pay. Democrats wanted the
four Senate Democrats running for president on hand for the vote. The four --
Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, Bob Graham of Florida, John Edwards of North
Carolina and John Kerry of Massachusetts -- have been out of town campaigning
much of the year, missing scores of votes. But they made themselves available on Tuesday -- before they
were to square off in a debate in Baltimore -- to vote on the amendment. Republicans refused to allow it, saying they
set the chamber's schedule, not Democrats. As part of the
agreement to vote on the amendment, the Senate will also now attempt to wrap up
work on the overall spending bill on Wednesday night. Democrats -- who argue domestic priorities like health and
education are being shortchanged even as Bush seeks another $87 billion for
Iraq -- have sought to add billions of dollars in spending in those areas to
the bill. But those efforts have
so far been beaten back by Republicans,
who say federal spending must be restrained in the face of a budget deficit set
to top $500 billion next year.
(Additional reporting by
Andrew Clark) Alerted yesterday by MoveOn.org that Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) was a
swing vote on the Harkin amendment, I used the toll free number and talked to a
staff person, who retorted that the Harkin amendment would “shortchange the
legislative process” and when asked by me if the President was indeed going to
veto it, said “Why would he do that?”
They seem to be much more attentive to constituents on official
letterhead than over the phone in Sen. Smith’s office, I’ve learned, but he is
in a tight spot representing the GOP all by himself on the West Coast, and
these days, that task is more difficult than ever when Oregonians are even less
secure about jobs and corporations keeping their word. Enron owned the PGE utility and our state
pension program was gutted like other state pension programs by Enron, to say
nothing of PGE employees who lost their 401(k)s.. We have a special ballot election currently to amend the
constitution to go into debt to bail out PERS. - KWC |
