Letter Opposing ACCESS to Recordings Act
May 30, 2018
The Honorable Ron Wyden
United States Senate
221 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Wyden,
On behalf of the 24 national unions in the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I write to express strong opposition to the recently introduced Accessibility for Curators, Creators, Educators, Scholars, and Society to Recordings Act (“ACCESS to Recordings Act”). This bill is a significant threat to the economic security of our country’s legacy creators and working musicians and vocalists, many of whom are members of DPE affiliate unions. The ACCESS to Recordings Act also undermines these music professionals’ ability to end discriminatory pay practices.
Recording artists, like all professionals, deserve a fair return on their work. Music professionals must be able to benefit from the intellectual property they created in order to be properly compensated. The full term previously established and promised by Congress in 1998 for creators to benefit from their works must be fulfilled. The ACCESS to Recordings Act breaks that promise and takes several years of compensation away from music professionals, denying them the pay and retirement security they have earned. Shortchanging musical artists by stripping away years of compensation undermines the promise of a better deal for these working professionals.
DPE strongly supports S. 2823, the Music Modernization Act (MMA), which includes the Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service, and Important Contributions to Society (CLASSICS) Act. The MMA would stop unfair, discriminatory pay practices against older musicians by some digital services while providing efficiencies and exceptions for users, curators, educators, scholars, archives, libraries, and digital music services during the current term already established and promised by Congress.
DPE asks that you reconsider stripping away the current rights of music professionals and support full and fair compensation to those artists who have contributed immensely to our nation’s culture and society. If you have any questions, please contact DPE Legislative and Outreach Director, Michael Wasser at (202) 638-0320 x.119.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Almeida, President
Letter Supporting the Serrano Amendment
May 16, 2018
Re: Fiscal Year 2019 (FY19) Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) appropriation bill
Dear Representative,
On behalf of the 24 national unions in the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I write to you regarding the House Appropriations Committee’s May 17th mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2019 (FY19) Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) appropriation bill. DPE urges you to support an amendment we understand Representative José E. Serrano will offer that protects the judicial independence of Immigration Judges (IJs) and the due process rights of people who appear before them.
Rep. Serrano’s amendment prevents the Department of Justice (DOJ) from carrying out its planned use of production quotas and case completion deadlines in the performance evaluations of IJs. DPE believes that using production quotas and case completion deadlines will threaten the professional integrity of the IJs and the political independence of the immigration courts, without actually producing the desired efficiency.
Production quotas and case completion deadlines do not offer a fair, accurate assessment of an IJ’s performance. Rather these standards simply measure the speed at which IJs move cases through the docket. Prioritizing speed in the immigration courts can and will come at the expense of individuals’ due process rights and the immigration courts’ own independence.
By disallowing DOJ from imposing production quotas and case completion deadlines, Rep. Serrano’s amendment helps ensure IJs can conduct impartial hearings. Fair hearings, in turn, reduce the number of appeals instigated by individuals who assert their rights were sacrificed for expediency’s sake. Since appeals take time and cost taxpayer money, Rep. Serrano’s amendment contributes to a more efficient immigration courts system.
If you have any questions, please contact DPE Legislative and Outreach Director, Michael Wasser at (202) 638-0320, x.119
Sincerely,
Paul E. Almeida, President
Letter Opposing Quotas for Immigration Judges
April 17, 2018
The Honorable Chuck Grassley The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
135 Hart Senate Office Building 331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510 Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein,
On behalf of the 24 national unions in the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I write regarding the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Executive Office of Immigration Review’s (EOIR) intention to include production quotas and case completion deadlines in the performance evaluations of Immigration Judges (IJ). DPE believes that such measures will threaten the professional integrity of the IJs and the political independence of the immigration courts, without actually producing the desired efficiency.
IJs should have their performance fairly evaluated in a manner that is in line with established judicial standards of evaluating the job performance of judges. Production quotas and case completion deadlines do not allow for a fair, accurate assessment of an IJ’s performance. Instead these performance measures merely indicate the speed at which IJs move cases through the docket. While we all desire efficient public services, an undue focus on expediency in a setting like the immigration courts can and will come at the expense of individuals’ due process rights and the immigration courts’ own independence.
DPE recommends that you take immediate steps to stop DOJ and EOIR from evaluating IJs based on production quotas by working with appropriators to defund implementation of the planned quotas policy through the Fiscal Year 2019 (FY2019) Commerce, Justice and Science appropriations bill. We also recommend that you introduce and work to pass bipartisan legislation that removes the immigration courts from DOJ’s jurisdiction in order to safeguard the immigration courts’ role as a neutral, independent body.
If you have any questions, please contact DPE Legislative and Outreach Director, Michael Wasser at (202) 638-0320, x119.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Almeida, President
Letter Opposing the Immigration Innovation (I-Squared) Act of 2018, S. 2344
February 5, 2018
Re: S. 2344, the Immigration Innovation (I-Squared) Act of 2018
Dear Senator,
On behalf of the 23 national unions in the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I urge you to oppose S. 2344, the Immigration Innovation (I-Squared) Act of 2018. Recently introduced by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ), this legislation would dramatically expand the H-1B visa program without adequate protections for American professionals or the people working on H-1B visas. As such, the legislation would exacerbate the existing problems with the H-1B visa program, including employer use of the H-1B visa to outsource and offshore good jobs. DPE asks that you not co-sponsor the I-Squared legislation, and that you vote against S. 2344 as either a standalone bill or an amendment to other immigration legislation should the opportunity arise.
S. 2344 More than Doubles Size of H-1B Visa Program without Adequate Worker Protections
I-Squared would increase the number of capped H-1B visas from 65,000 annually to as many as 195,000 visas, while also eliminating the annual cap of an additional 20,000 H-1B visas for post-graduate students graduating from U.S. universities and colleges with STEM degrees. In addition, I-Squared would exempt multiple classes of H-1B visas from the cap, further increasing the total size of the H-1B visa program. Under I-Squared, the number of capped H-1B visas would increase based on the number of filed H-1B petitions. Because I-Squared would continue to allow the majority of H-1B employers to forego attesting that they looked for qualified, available U.S. workers, filed petitions only reveal employer interest in hiring H-1B workers, not evidence of a labor shortage.
S. 2344 Would Allow Employers to Continue Outsourcing and Offshoring Good Jobs
The H-1B program permits employers to pay H-1B workers below market wages and does not expressly forbid displacement of existing workers. The lack of displacement protections made it possible for employers like Abbott Labs; Cargill; EverSource Energy; Harley Davidson; New York Life Insurance Company; Southern California Edison; the University of California, San Francisco; Walt Disney World; and many others to layoff their U.S. workers and replace them with cheaper, more exploitable H-1B guest workers.
I-Squared does not correct the flaws with the current H-1B program that employers exploit. Employers would still be able to pay H-1B workers below the going rate for a U.S. counterpart in a given occupation and area. Meanwhile, I-Squared would require displaced workers show their employers’ knowledge and intent to replace them with H-1B workers, a nearly-impossible standard to prove. DPE has no doubt that employers and their capable attorneys will devise schemes that show a lack of knowledge or intent of displacement, but the effect will be the same: more news stories about Americans who have lost their jobs because companies outsourced their work to H-1B employers.
Real Reforms Needed to Fix H-1B Visa Program
DPE does not oppose the existence of the H-1B visa program, but it must be reformed to work for U.S. workers, highly-skilled foreign workers, and employers. Such reform must include recruitment and non-displacement requirements for all H-1B employers, higher wages for H-1B workers, and robust enforcement of H-1B program rules. DPE also believes that H-1B workers should have the ability to self-petition for legal permanent residence and be able to more easily change jobs, both in the H-1B program and while waiting for available immigrant visas. However, enhanced job portability is not a panacea by itself, particularly when employers can continue to underpay H-1B workers and displace working Americans. It is for that reason that I urge you to oppose S. 2344.
If you have any questions, please contact DPE Legislative and Outreach Director, Michael Wasser at (202) 638-0320 x. 119.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Almeida, President