H.R. 2870 the "Working Families Flexibility Act"; H.R. 2312 the "Tipped Employee Protection Act"; H.R. 2299 the "Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025"
Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities
2025-11-20
Loading video...
Summary
The House Committee on Education and the Workforce met to consider three bills aimed at modernizing the Fair Labor Standards Act, supporting employees, and promoting workplace flexibility, following the welcome of new Representative Adelita Grijalva.[ 00:02:15-00:02:29 ] [ 00:09:02-00:09:17 ] The meeting involved extensive debate between Republican and Democratic members, highlighting significant partisan differences on labor policy.
Themes
Welcome of Representative Adelita Grijalva
Representative Adelita Grijalva was warmly welcomed to the committee by Chairman Brad Sherman and Ranking Member Robert Scott. Her father, Raul Grijalva, was a long-serving member of the committee, and her experience includes two decades on the Tucson Unified School District Governing Board and the County Board of Supervisors, where she championed educational equity and workforce initiatives. Representative Grijalva expressed honor at the opportunity and emphasized her commitment to protecting public education and the Department of Education, particularly against current administration attacks on essential access and equity programs.[ 00:05:14-00:06:34 ]
H.R. 2870: Working Families Flexibility Act
This bill proposes allowing private sector workers to choose compensatory time off (comp time) instead of traditional overtime pay, an option already available to public sector employees.[ 00:09:45-00:10:03 ] Proponents argued it provides workers with greater flexibility and choice, enabling them to decide between extra pay or paid time off to spend with families, without sacrificing existing worker protections. Opponents, however, contended that the bill primarily benefits employers by allowing them to deny comp time requests and avoid paying time-and-a-half for overtime, thus reducing workers' take-home pay and control over their time.[ 00:39:04-00:39:21 ] Critics labeled it a "scam" that leaves workers with less pay and unclear scheduling, especially for those earning under $35,000 annually who rely on overtime to make ends meet.
H.R. 2312: Tipped Employee Protection Act
This legislation aims to redefine "tipped employee" in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to provide clarity for businesses and prevent complex timekeeping requirements.[ 00:10:27-00:11:12 ] Supporters stated that it replaces an outdated and difficult-to-enforce "80-20 rule" (limiting untipped tasks for tipped workers), thereby reducing red tape for businesses and allowing the Department of Labor to focus on actual wage violations. Opponents countered that the bill would make workers more vulnerable to wage theft by expanding the pool of employees who can be paid a sub-minimum wage, allowing employers to manipulate job definitions and pay periods. Concerns were raised that it would decrease workers' earning power and predictability, potentially affecting those who receive tips only occasionally, and undermining state laws that provide stronger protections.
H.R. 2299: Ensuring Workers Get Paid Act
This bill seeks to permanently authorize the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program at the Department of Labor, allowing employers to self-audit and self-report FLSA violations without penalties.[ 00:11:15-00:11:23 ] Proponents argued that this program successfully returned back wages to workers faster, reduced compliance costs for businesses, and fostered a better relationship between employers and the government by removing acrimony over inadvertent mistakes. Critics, however, asserted that the bill enables wage theft by allowing employers to avoid penalties, damages, and accrued interest, effectively treating stolen wages as interest-free loans. They highlighted that it undermines workers' rights to pursue legal action, preempts state and local enforcement, and was found to be ineffective during its pilot phase by the Government Accountability Office.
Tone of the Meeting
The tone of the meeting was largely formal and procedural, with a strong undercurrent of partisan division.[ 00:01:48-00:02:29 ] Republican members consistently advocated for the bills, emphasizing themes of flexibility, choice, and reducing regulatory burdens for businesses, often portraying their proposals as "common sense solutions."[ 00:11:48-00:12:01 ] In contrast, Democratic members expressed sharp opposition, using strong language such as "scam," "shameful," and "wage theft" to describe the potential impacts on workers. They criticized the bills for allegedly prioritizing corporate interests over worker protections and exacerbating economic challenges for low-wage earners.[ 00:15:45-00:15:57 ] The debate was passionate and highlighted fundamental disagreements on the role of government in regulating labor and protecting workers' rights.
Participants
Transcript
Sign up for free to see the full transcript
Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.