Punching In: Trump’s ‘Golden Age’ for Training a Long Way Away

Monday morning musings for workplace watchers

Apprenticeship Changes| Slow Moving Lawsuits

Rebecca Rainey: The Trump administration released its vision for getting one million workers into new apprenticeships, setting lofty goals for states and the federal government to simplify licensing rules while also tying funding to performance.

That plan would greatly expand the Labor Department’s apprenticeship program and allow federal agencies to cut failing programs while rewarding successful ones. It’s a great idea, but one that will take years to come to fruition, according to John Pallasch, who served as employment and training chief during Trump’s first term. Pallasch said the administration may be underestimating how much work it will take and predicted that each pillar of the plan would likely take at least a decade to implement.

“It’s impossible to do in three and a half years,” he said. “That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it,” he added. But, “don’t put out a 29-page document as though you’re going to have this done by the midterms, because you’re not.”

President Donald Trump instructed the Departments of Labor, Education, and Commerce to come up with a “Comprehensive Worker Investment and Development Strategy” in an April executive order calling for a full-scale review of the federal workforce development programs.

That strategy, released last week, sets out five pillars to “fuel the golden age of the American economy” including scaling the DOL’s registered apprenticeship system, targeting unemployed populations for training, consolidating training programs into a single system run by the DOL, and expanding regulatory waivers to allow for the development of new programs, particularly in AI. Part of the plan also would permit agencies to terminate grants that fail to meet “first year benchmarks” and redirect funding to “providers that demonstrate real success in connecting people to high-wage jobs.”

The 29-page document lays out the most detailed map so far from the DOL on how it will deliver the president’s goals of growing the blue collar workforce and signing up a new record number of apprentices.

The DOL has canceled several job training grant funds that it has criticized as poor performing, wasteful, or focused on “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.”

The Biden administration similarly attempted to overhaul the DOL’s 80-year-old registered apprenticeship system, but included requirements for diversity outreach, wrap-around assistance services, and other equity goals that are absent from Trump’s plan.

Those in the workforce development space have largely praised the tenets of the Trump strategy, but also note it lacks concrete details about how those goals will be effectuated.

“While high level, these are promising early signs for Registered Apprenticeship,” Apprenticeships for America, an advocacy group, said in a statement on the Trump strategy. “We are particularly pleased to see references to using pay-for-performance funding models and supporting the development of high-impact intermediaries.”

A cyclist rides past a US Labor Department building in Washington, DC, on Aug. 18, 2020.

Photographer: Erin Scott/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Tre’Vaughn Howard: The ongoing legal challenges against two major safety rules have left employers across industries in a holding pattern, attorneys say.

The US Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s walkaround rule broadens the scope of who can accompany an OSHA compliance officer on workplace inspections. And the US Mine Safety and Health Administration’s silica rule requires mines to cut the amount of breathable silica that workers are exposed to in half.

Both are being contested in courts. Neither lawsuit has seen substantive movement this year, leaving their futures uncertain.

In MSHA’s case, the parties have again requested an extension from the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to delay the enforcement of the rule as they discuss a resolution.

“There are so many variables either if a settlement is reached or, if the case goes to decision, what the outcome might be,” said Arthur Wolfson, a partner at Fisher & Phillips who represents clients in the mining industry. Neither party seems to be in a rush for the court to rule, he noted.

MSHA announced a temporary enforcement pause—which would’ve technically ended today—but the appeals court temporarily blocked enforcement of it in April.

Still, mine operators should prepare as best they can for compliance with the rule, since the court could lift the stay at any point, Wolfson added. Notably, the Trump administration hasn’t taken a clear position in the legal challenge.

“The Department of Labor and MSHA should be fighting to implement this rule immediately, not kicking enforcement down the road yet again,” said Cecil E. Roberts, international president of United Mine Workers of America.

The silica challenge focuses on MSHA’s restrictions for how a mine operator can limit its employees’ exposure to silica dust. The mine trade associations argue specifically the agency arbitrarily blocks job rotations and respirators to reduce silica exposures, which in turns makes compliance infeasible.

In contrast, the walkaround legal challenge centers on whether OSHA has the power to make this change and if big business can prove having more eyes on these inspections would actually cause them harm.

Business will be relieved when there’s a court decision because there’s clear political implications by allowing a third-party representative on an inspection, according to Alana Genderson, a partner at Sidley Austin LLP.

“Even though we’re not seeing the rule used a ton on the ground, employers still have plans in place and are preparing for the possibility of OSHA enforcing the rule,” said Genderson.

The group of twelve associations including the Associated Builders and Contractors challenges the rule’s constitutionality by arguing it intrudes on their property rights under the Fifth Amendment and by extension the Fourth Amendment as well.

As it stands, OSHA is looking to have the suit thrown out, arguing the businesses lack Article III standing and that the court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

“Many people anticipate that the administration will no longer move forward with the prior position in the litigation,” she added. This would result in rendering the lawsuit moot—which means the underlying dispute has been resolved as a result of a change in circumstances to the case.

We’re punching out. Daily Labor Report subscribers please check in for updates during the week, and feel free to reach out to us.