AEMI Sign-on Statement for Record of Senate HELP Committee Hearing on Portable Benefits
July 17, 2025
The Honorable Bill Cassidy Chairman,
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
428 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Bernie Sanders Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
428 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Chairman Cassidy and Ranking Member Sanders,
The below listed Arts, Entertainment, and Media Industries (AEMI) coalition unions within the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE) urge the committee to reject any legislation that would make it easier for employers to misclassify workers or evade their responsibilities under federal and state workplace laws.
The AEMI coalition consists of national unions that represent professionals in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. By virtue of its size and scope of coverage, the AEMI is the leading voice in the labor movement on public policy in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. The AEMI unions’ members include actors, cinematographers, choreographers, dancers, directors, musicians, photographers, recording artists, stage managers, singers, technicians, stagehands, and other crafts. They help power a sector of the economy that regularly generates four percent of the United States’ gross domestic product (GDP), creates a positive trade balance, and employs more than five million people.
The vast majority of AEMI union members are no different than working Americans in any other sector. They are everyday employees who depend on finding work in the businesses of others in order to put food on the table, pay next month’s rent, and support their families.
What distinguishes AEMI union members is that most work gig-based employment. A union creative professional is likely to have many employers in a year, and may even have multiple employers in the same week, due to the short duration of a single production or performance. In each of these short-term, W-2 jobs, AEMI union members will receive pay and high quality portable benefits at each union-covered job they work.
AEMI union members are proud that they have helped build a sector through collective bargaining that demonstrates people can work in flexible W-2 jobs for multiple employers that provide family-supporting pay and high-quality portable benefits like health care, defined benefit pensions, and training funds that are consistent from job to job.
AEMI union members are deeply concerned about efforts to misclassify employees as independent contractors. While protected by strong union contracts, union creative professionals still rely on proper employee classification for their rights under employment, civil rights, and workers’ compensation laws.
Short-term “gig” work is not a new phenomenon. AEMI union members have been working gig jobs for over a century. Creative professionals know as well as anyone that employers can provide portable benefits and properly classify W-2 employees in industries where short-term work is an inherent industry feature. They also know that their industries are better off because workers have a voice through collective bargaining.
Instead of finding ways to limit the rights of working Americans, the below signed unions urge this Committee to pursue legislation like the PRO Act that would empower more professionals to negotiate portable benefit plans and other innovations with their employers that lead to long-lasting, successful industries.
If you have any questions, please contact DPE’s Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser, at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Actors’ Equity Association (Equity)
American Federation of Musicians (AFM)
American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA)
American Guild of Variety Artists (AGVA)
Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE)
Directors Guild of America (DGA)
Guild of Italian American Actors (GIAA)
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE)
Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU)
Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA)
Stage Directors and Choreographers Society (SDC)
AEMI Statement to Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee regarding FY 26 NEA and NEH Funding
June 12, 2025
Dear Chairwoman Murkowski and Ranking Member Merkley,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I urge the Subcommittee to fund the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) at no less than $209 million each in Fiscal Year (FY) 2026.
Many members of DPE’s affiliate unions in the arts, entertainment, and media industries earn their living working on NEA and NEH-supported productions and programs. Still more union creative professionals who are employed now in the commercial parts of these industries started their careers working in the nonprofit arts and public media.
Providing no less than $209 million each for the NEA and NEH will ensure that the agencies can continue to support good-paying, family-supporting jobs for middle class Americans across communities in every state. The two agencies are economic drivers that help put people to work creating artistic and educational content, and often in places far from large cultural centers. NEA and NEH-funded programs help veterans heal from the invisible scars of war, inspire the next generation of creators and innovators, and unite people across small towns and big cities. Increasing the NEA and NEH annual funding level to no less than $209 million in FY 2026 is also an important step toward a historical full funding level of $341 million, or $1 per capita.
NEA and NEH funding is also good for local economies. Research shows that audiences spend an estimated $38.46 per person, per event, beyond the cost of admission, on goods and services within the communities where they attend arts and cultural programs.
In addition, for many Americans, NEA and NEH-funded programs are an entry point to careers in commercial arts and entertainment, particularly people living in rural areas. NEA and NEH-funded programs provide these individuals opportunities to develop valuable skills, gain on-the-job experience, and build professional connections.
Put simply, the NEA and NEH continue to be critical agencies for America’s workers and its local economies. Both endowments deliver a high return on investment and cannot be replaced by the private sector. I urge the Subcommittee to fund the NEA and NEH at no less than $209 million each.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser, at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
AEMI Statement to House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee regarding FY 26 NEA and NEH Funding
April 4, 2025
Dear Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Pingree,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I urge the Subcommittee to fund the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) at no less than $209 million each in Fiscal Year (FY) 2026.
Many members of DPE’s affiliate unions in the arts, entertainment, and media industries earn their living working on NEA and NEH-supported productions, programs, and performances. Still more union creative professionals who are employed now in the commercial parts of these industries started their careers working in the nonprofit arts and public media.
Providing no less than $209 million each for the NEA and NEH will ensure that the agencies can continue to support good-paying, family-supporting jobs for middle-class Americans across every state and congressional district. The two agencies are economic drivers that help put people to work creating artistic and educational content, and often in places far from large cultural centers. NEA and NEH-funded programs help veterans heal from the invisible scars of war, inspire the next generation of creators and innovators, and unite people across small towns and big cities. Increasing the NEA and NEH annual funding level to no less than $209 million in FY 2026 is also an important step toward a historical full funding level of $341 million, or $1 per capita.
NEA and NEH funding is also good for local economies. Research shows that audiences spend an estimated $38.46 per person, per event, beyond the cost of admission, on an assortment of goods and services within the communities where they attend arts and cultural programs.
In addition, for many creative professionals, NEA and NEH-funded programs have served as an entry point to careers in commercial arts and entertainment, particularly people who grew up in rural areas. NEA and NEH-funded programs provided these individuals opportunities to develop valuable skills, gain on-the-job experience, and build professional connections.
Put simply, the NEA and NEH continue to be critical agencies for America’s workers and its local economies. Both endowments deliver a high return on investment and cannot be replaced by the private sector. I urge the Subcommittee to fund the NEA and NEH at no less than $209 million each.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser, at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
DPE Statement for Record for DOGE Subcommittee Hearing on NPR/PBS
March 25, 2025
Dear Chairwoman Greene and Ranking Member Stansbury,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I wish to share our perspective on the importance of public media and the need for Congress to continue funding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).
By way of introduction, DPE is a coalition of 24 national unions representing over four million professionals in nearly every sector and industry. Members of six DPE affiliate unions – American Federation of Musicians (AFM), Directors Guild of America (DGA), International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), and the Writers Guild of America East (WGAE) – work for public television and radio stations across the United States, and on productions created for these outlets. Union members in public media are local reporters, broadcast journalists, writers, editors, producers, control room operators, directors, stage managers, audio and video engineers, technicians, makeup artists, hair stylists, stagehands, performers, musicians, accountants, and graphic designers, among other roles.
Union professionals working on air and behind the scenes across public media demonstrate the economic case for continued, full CPB funding. These are everyday, middle class Americans who are able to sustain careers that provide family-supporting pay, health insurance, and retirement security. They are part of the more than 19,000 people living in big cities and small towns who make real public media’s mission to educate and inform by creating quality, often local, content that is available to virtually every American.
Indeed, for many of these professionals, a commitment to public media’s mission is the reason why they have passed up on more lucrative opportunities in commercial media. They are proud to contribute to quality educational children’s programs, to tell stories about the uniqueness of the American experience, and to take part in their local public media stations’ community enrichment initiatives. Union public media professionals know that the programs they help create – including well-known, long-running public television shows like This Old House, American Masters, and Antiques Roadshow, and popular public radio shows like American Routes – are meaningful to their communities and the American public. Public media union professionals also hold themselves to rigorous ethical standards, a virtue recognized by Americans consistently saying they trust public media.
For some union members, public media has served as an entry point to careers in commercial media, particularly people who grew up in rural areas far from the country’s larger media markets. Local public television and radio stations provided these individuals opportunities to develop valuable technical skills, gain on-the-job experience, and build professional connections.
In closing, I urge this Subcommittee to recognize the economic value of CPB funding and to appreciate the contributions of the professionals who work in public media across the United States. Slashing funding for any part of public media will cost jobs and economically hurt everyday people, while disadvantaging Americans who currently enjoy and benefit from public media programming.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director Michael Wasser.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
Reimagining Federal Support for the Arts and Public Media
The nonprofit arts and public media enjoy broad, bipartisan public support because they power local economies in every state and make it possible for Americans of all means, geographies, and abilities to have access to high-quality artistic and educational content. Federal support through the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) has been essential to the sector’s success, and reimagining federal support will ensure its sustainable future.
Many members of our unions earn their living working on nonprofit productions and programs that receive funding from the NEA, NEH, and CPB. Even more employed now in the commercial sector established their careers through federally-supported work in the nonprofit cultural sector. We are committed to the nonprofit arts and public media because we know firsthand its economic and cultural power.
Informed by the experiences of our members, we believe that reimagining federal support for the arts and public media will require strengthening labor protections and, not only increasing NEA, NEH, and CPB funding, but also including a greater worker voice in grantmaking and modernizing grantmaking rules.
Federal funding for the arts, humanities, and public media must include strong labor protections
Taxpayer money should encourage high-road employment practices that raise industry standards and strengthen local economies. Strong, uniform labor protections and workplace safety requirements are central to ensuring that all people can pursue a career with fair pay and benefits. These requirements should protect all people employed on federally-supported cultural and news programming, and they must provide effective remedies to deter low-road business practices.
Necessary actions:
Strengthen the NEA/NEH prevailing wage requirement (20 U.S.C. §§ 954(m)) by providing for civil monetary penalties in cases when employers violate the law and allowing for a private right of action.
Modernize 29 C.F.R. Part 505 to reflect current industry employment practices and changes in union names.
Improve staffing requirements for CPB grantees in consultation with stakeholders, including public media professionals and their unions, to address stations’ unsustainable reliance on outsourcing and temporary employees.
Professionals working in the nonprofit arts and public media must have a voice in grantmaking
Union professionals contribute immensely to the quality, success, and bipartisan popularity of the nonprofit arts and public media, and they offer an important perspective on how federal arts funding can be used to greatest effect. Yet, too often, nonprofit arts employers, managers at CPB-funded stations, and producers of CPB-funded programming ask the members of our unions to do more for less, counting on their commitment to their employer and craft. Even then, these employers cut costs at the expense of our members and quality jobs. Omitting the workers who make nonprofit arts and media successful from the grantmaking process shuts out an essential voice; runs counter to the community-minded mission of publicly supported arts, humanities, and media; and erodes standards for all professionals in the sector.
Necessary action:
Prioritize seats for worker advocates on the National Council on the Arts, the National Council on the Humanities, and the CPB’s Board of Directors.
Federal grantmaking must be modernized to sustain employment in the nonprofit arts and public media
Sustainable careers in the nonprofit arts and public media requires that the employing organizations receive sufficient support to sustain their operations, not just productions or special projects. The current approach of smaller-dollar, project-specific federal grants does not provide the level of certainty and sustainability that employers need to support the infrastructure necessary to launch and maintain productions and thus employ our members across seasons. In public media, station funding formulas have shifted money away from the larger stations where union members work to smaller stations that have little potential for an employment impact. NEA, NEH, and CPB grants should take into account employment impact and be accompanied by strong labor protections that will help nonprofit institutions and public media stations maintain their roles as critical economic drivers for communities across the United States.
Necessary action:
Authorize larger-dollar general operating grants through the NEA, NEH, and CPB with a worker-centered approach to grantmaking.
For questions, please contact DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org
AEMI Letter in Support of the NO FAKES Act
August 26, 2024
Re: S. 4875, the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act
Dear Senator,
On behalf of the Arts, Entertainment, and Media Industries (AEMI) coalition within the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I urge you to co-sponsor S. 4875, the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act. This bipartisan legislation would protect individuals, including AEMI union members, from unauthorized digital replicas of their voice and visual likenesses in audiovisual works and sound recordings.
By way of introduction, the AEMI coalition consists of 12 national unions that represent professionals in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. By virtue of its size and scope of coverage, the AEMI is the leading voice in the labor movement on public policy in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. The AEMI unions’ members help power a sector of the economy that regularly generates four percent of the United States’ gross domestic product (GDP), creates a positive trade balance, and employs more than five million people.
Artificial intelligence (AI), including generative artificial intelligence (GAI), is a double-edged sword that has the potential to empower and democratize storytelling and creation to an unprecedented degree. At the same time, AI poses a significant threat of abuse absent proper safeguards. Without smart policymaking and requisite safeguards, AI may upend the livelihoods of union creative professionals who rely more than ever on effective intellectual property rights to earn compensation and benefits and ensure future career opportunities in today’s digital era.
Federal protections against unauthorized digital replicas are a critically important intellectual property right for the members of AEMI unions who earn their livelihoods through their voices and likenesses. Most are everyday Americans who go to work using their lifetime of training in performances that connect with audiences and generate commercial success. Unauthorized AI-generated digital replicas of these individuals represent a theft of their voice and visual likenesses, denying them hard earned pay and threatening their future career opportunities.
Union creative professionals know too well the dangers and damages that will result if Congress fails to put a stop to the unauthorized use of digital replicas in audiovisual and sound recordings. AEMI unions’ members have already been subjected to image-based sexual abuse, misappropriation for commercial gain, and a proliferation of disinformation using public figures without their consent.
In closing, the AEMI is proud to join the broad coalition of supporters - including industry employers and tech companies - united in support of the NO FAKES Act. This commonsense, bipartisan legislation would establish vital safeguards for union professionals without stifling the ethical, human-centric use of AI.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE’s Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
DPE response to U.S. Department of Labor's Request For Information Regarding Modernization of Schedule A
May 13, 2024
Dear Administrator Pasternak,
On behalf of the 24 national unions in the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Request for Information (RFI) regarding “Labor Certification for Permanent Employment of Foreign Workers in the United States; Modernizing Schedule A To Include Consideration of Additional Occupations in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and Non-STEM Occupations” (RIN 1205-AC16).
The RFI is directly relevant to DPE’s affiliate unions, which represent over four million professional, technical, and other highly skilled workers. The members of DPE’s unions come from a diverse array of backgrounds, nationalities, and immigration experiences. Within our coalition are U.S. citizens, permanent residents, DACA and TPS beneficiaries, and people working on F, J, H, O, and P nonimmigrant visas. Members of DPE affiliate unions work in both STEM and non-STEM occupations in nearly every industry and sector.
DPE’s response is informed by its long-time advocacy for fundamental reforms to the U.S. immigration system to ensure enforceable workers’ rights and labor standards in any visa program affecting professionals. We oppose low-road immigration policies that benefit corporate interests by allowing differential treatment of workers as a source of cheap labor, and we support smart policies that ensure all working people can earn a fair return on their work. DPE’s guiding belief is that U.S. immigration policies must work for professionals, and not just employers.
Schedule A Should Not Be Expanded At A Moment of Great Disruption For Professionals
Instead of serving as a dynamic, accurate indicator of occupational shortages in the labor market, Schedule A Group I, in its current form, exists as a sclerotic tool useful only to employers who wish to bypass U.S. workers and avoid investing in training and sustainable working conditions for all professionals. Indeed, Schedule A’s existence largely correlates with a timespan when training for younger workers went from an average of two and half weeks per year in 1979 to most young workers reporting in 2011 that they received no on-the-job training in the previous five years.
Professional nurses provide a useful example. Schedule A Group I has listed professional nurses as a shortage occupation for over 30 years. However, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimates no shortage of nurses, projecting a sufficient number of Registered Nurses nationwide to meet demand in 2030. To the degree professional nurses are leaving their jobs, it is due to poor working conditions. Conversations with nurses indicates that attention should be placed on improving unsafe staffing ratios and addressing workplace violence.
The experience of professional nurses as a Schedule A occupational designation also demonstrates a simple reality: no national labor shortage is permanent or indefinite. Like with all markets, supply and demand for professionals in various occupations and areas waxes and wanes over time, and employers, as participants in the labor market, should be expected to respond to these changes appropriately.
DPE is also concerned with the very timing of this RFI, which DOL issued in response to President Biden’s Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The executive order acknowledges AI’s potential to “displace and disempower workers,” and reports already indicate that more than 4,000 layoffs in professional occupations in the very short time window from May 2023 to date were due to AI.
Given the expected upheaval in the labor market for professional occupations, DPE believes that no professional occupation should be added to Schedule A until the impact of AI on the workforce is more fully understood, particularly as substantial layoffs in STEM industries persist. Instead, DOL should remove professional nurses from Schedule A in response to the evidence of an ample occupational supply.
True Labor Market Test Remains Best Way to Identify Real-Time Occupational Shortage
DPE believes that a true labor market test at the initial point of hire is the best way to identify a labor shortage in real time. Employers should be required to test the labor market at the earliest point of hire, whether that be when filing an initial I-129 petition to hire a nonimmigrant worker or filing an I-140 for someone based outside the United States. The labor market test should include mandatory, good-faith recruitment efforts, including digital job postings targeted at a national, diverse pool of both people presently in the workforce and people preparing to graduate from U.S. colleges and universities. Employers should also be required to share the job posting with relevant unions that have members working in their industry. Since DOL can assist employers with contacting unions, this important step should not be burdensome and, given unions’ close proximity to workers, may even help provide employers with a more cost-efficient recruitment process.
Should DOL decide to add occupations to Schedule A Group I, DPE recommends that DOL adopt a series of rigorous, relevant indicators that can provide the most precise, real-time signal of an actual labor shortage. Indicators must include rising wages, high retention rates, investment in training, and workforce diversity. Occupations with significant numbers of recent layoffs should not qualify for Schedule A. DOL must also consult with unions that have members working in relevant occupations and industries. Taken together, these indicators allow DOL to isolate evidence of an actual labor shortage, rather than symptoms of employers’ correctable recruitment and retention practices. In comparison, unemployment rates, whether considered in isolation or in comparison with the full national unemployment rate, should not alone be considered evidence of a labor shortage.
DOL must also ensure that these indicators are reviewed much more frequently than present practice. Otherwise occupational shortage designations will persist unnecessarily. The experience of professional nurses shows the harm to professionals when shortage designations are not revisited regularly.
DOL should not take the corporate lobby and industry-supported advocacy groups at their word when they claim occupational shortages. In recent years, DPE has watched too many employers claim they cannot find qualified workers only to layoff their employees, including members of our unions, and require them to train their foreign replacements as a condition for their severance. In 2022, for instance, the top 30 H-1B employers - mostly tech and IT outsourcing firms - hired 34,000 new H-1B workers, while laying off at least 85,000 workers in 2022 and the start of 2023.
The Need For Improved Tracking Of The Education To Workforce Pipeline
Underpinning any conversation on recruiting workers from abroad is the question of the supply of available, qualified professionals in the United States. DPE renews its call for improved tracking of the education to workforce pipeline because DOL must have the most accurate statistical picture possible.
DPE urges the Biden-Harris Administration to work with Congress to take concrete steps to improve STEM education and workforce research and data and to help workers, employers, and educators make informed decisions. Currently, national surveys by the Census Bureau (Community Population Survey) and Bureau of Labor Statistics (Occupational Employment Statistics Survey) are the basis for identifying education and occupation trends. The surveys provide valuable and suitable information for a variety of purposes, but the data produced does not effectively identify state, regional, and national trends for STEM education and the STEM workforce.
Unemployment Insurance (UI) wage records, which are filed on a quarterly basis by employers, provide a picture of industry employment and separations, hours worked, and wages. Unfortunately, UI records are currently a missed opportunity to capture accurate and dynamic occupational data. Done correctly, the inclusion of occupational data in UI wage records would give policymakers, education systems, and all stakeholders insight to national, regional, and local labor markets. Enhanced UI wage records could connect credentials and training to specific occupations and provide career mapping information over the course of changes and shifts to the economy. These records would also allow DOL to better identify the presence and absence of occupational shortages.
Following the recommendations of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Workforce Information Advisory Council, the Administration should commit the federal government to pursuing a phased-in, well-managed, and properly funded process for collecting and analyzing high-quality occupation data via states’ UI systems’ wage records. This policy commitment should be supported with increased funding for research and IT needs at the various state agencies performing education and workforce analysis. The benefit of overhauling and aligning UI records to provide occupational data should be articulated to the business community, education systems, and workers and students in the education-to-workforce pipeline and/or career transition.
DOL Must Ensure Worker Protections For Any Schedule A Occupations
DOL must ensure that professionals hired through a Schedule A occupational designation can feel confident that they will not face employer coercion or workplace abuse if they come to work in the United States. Further, employers who benefit from an exception to the normally-required labor market test must be held to a high-road standard.
The experiences of internationally-recruited nurses showcases the need for strong worker protections in the Schedule A program. These hard working professionals make a positive contribution everyday to the well being of America’s communities. Yet, in return they are regularly exposed to abusive recruitment and employment practices. Too many of the hundreds of thousands of nurses hired through Schedule A over the years were recruited with abusive contract provisions. To be hired with green cards, these nurses are forced to sign multiyear, one-sided contracts that use the threat of financial ruin to bind them to a single employer. Under these contracts, nurses who want to change jobs must pay high “breach” fees.
DPE believes the coercive practice of “breach fees” and non-compete clauses in employment contracts and the charging of recruitment fees and associated costs to workers must be prohibited. DOL should require that Schedule A employers provide the recruitment contract to any person offered employment before departure to the United States. In addition, workers hired for Schedule A occupations should, prior to departure, receive written information in their native languages on their rights under U.S. workplace laws and how to access these rights.
Continued Support for High-Road Immigration Policies That Empower Professionals
The Administration must also remain focused on high-road legislative approaches to international recruitment. DPE strongly urges support for the Keep STEM Talent Act, bipartisan legislation that enables talented graduates from U.S. colleges and universities to continue contributing to the American economy while ensuring that they can earn a fair return on their work. Under this legislation, international graduates who earn STEM advanced degrees from American universities are exempt from the annual green card caps so long as their employers receive approved labor certifications and pay them above the median wage level for the occupation and geographic area. The Keep STEM Talent Act offers in-demand graduates a direct path to permanence, rather than forcing them to accept precarious, temporary visas. This approach reinforces the professionalism of the STEM workforce and affords individuals agency in the labor market.
DPE’s commitment to a high-road immigration system is also why we advocate for policies that empower professionals, including a path to citizenship for recipients of TPS (Temporary Protected Status,) DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and DED (Deferred Enforced Departure). DPE supports allowing professionals to self-petition for permanent status and providing labor market mobility to individuals with approved I-140s.
Conclusion
There are better approaches to recruiting and retaining the world’s talent than through expanding Schedule A occupational designations. However, should DOL decide to proceed with possible new Schedule A occupational designations, DPE urges a regular review of indicators that identify actual labor market needs. DPE also urges DOL to adopt guardrails that ensure all professionals, regardless of immigration status, can earn fair, family-supporting pay in an environment free from exploitation.
If you have any questions, please contact DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
Letter to House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Leadership in Support of Increased Federal Arts Funding in FY25
April 30, 2024
Dear Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Pingree,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I urge the Subcommittee to fund the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) at no less than $211 million each in fiscal year (FY) 2025.
Many members of DPE’s affiliate unions in the arts, entertainment, and media industries earn their living working on NEA and NEH-supported productions, programs, and performances. Still more union creative professionals who are employed now in the commercial parts of these industries started their careers working in the nonprofit arts and public media.
Providing at least $211 million each for the NEA and NEH will ensure that the agencies can continue to support good-paying, family-supporting jobs in every state and congressional district for creative professionals, including the members of DPE’s unions. Through grants, seed money, and technical support, the two agencies help put people to work creating artistic and educational content that is available to Americans of all means, geographies, and abilities. NEA and NEH-funded programs help veterans heal from the invisible scars of war, inspire the next generation of creators and innovators, and unite people across small towns and big cities. Increasing the NEA and NEH annual funding level to at least $211 million in FY 2025 is also an important step toward a historical full funding level of $333 million, or $1 per capita.
Increased funding for the NEA and NEH is also good for local economies. Research shows that audiences spend an estimated $38.46 per person, per event, beyond the cost of admission, on an assortment of goods and services within the communities where they attend cultural events.
In addition, DPE believes the NEA and NEH are critical to advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. In February 2021, DPE and our affiliate unions in these industries released a “Policy Agenda for Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Arts, Entertainment, and Media Industries,” which contains policy solutions aimed at creating diverse talent pipelines and developing an arts workforce that looks more like America. The NEA and NEH have a central role to play in this work.
In sum, the NEA and NEH are critical agencies for working people and local economies. Their work delivers a high return on investment and cannot be replaced by the private sector. I urge the Subcommittee to fund the NEA and NEH at no less than $211 million each.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser, at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
DPE's Response to the U.S. Copyright Office AI Study's Request for Information
October 30, 2023
Dear Ms. Perlmutter,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I write in response to the United States Copyright Office’s (USCO) August 30, 2023 notice of inquiry regarding the USCO’s study on artificial intelligence (AI). For the purposes of this filing, I am specifically discussing generative artificial intelligence (GAI) technologies. It is challenging to fully discuss all the ways in which these technologies will impact creative professionals.
By way of introduction, DPE is a coalition of 24 national unions, 12 of which are unions representing creative professionals working in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. These unions’ members work as actors, stagehands, craftspeople, choreographers, dancers, directors, directorial team members, editors, musicians, stunt performers, instrumentalists, writers, singers, stage managers, recording artists, broadcasters, audio engineers, cinematographers, and many other creative positions. They help power a sector of the economy that regularly generates four percent of the United States’ gross domestic product (GDP), creates a positive trade balance, and employs more than five million people.
DPE appreciates USCO’s efforts to examine the impact artificial intelligence has on the copyright framework and enforcement as well as its impact on creators’ rights and a changing business environment. This is an issue that directly impacts the members of DPE’s affiliate unions in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. While not typically the copyright holder, many of these middle-class creators earn collectively bargained pay and contributions to their health insurance and pension plans from the sales and licensing of the content they help create. In 2021, for instance, creative professionals represented by the American Federation of Musicians (AFM), Directors Guild of America (DGA), International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), and Writers Guild of America, East (WGAE) received over $2.8 billion in residuals. In addition, union creative professionals’ future work opportunities depend on legitimate sales and licensing.
AI is a double-edged sword that is empowering and democratizing storytelling and creation to an unprecedented degree in history. It opens doors to new jobs and new markets to monetize creative works in a beneficial way. In addition, creative professionals are harnessing AI as a tool to increase efficiency and support their work. At the same time, AI poses a significant threat of abuse absent proper safeguards.
AI has the ability to upend the creative industries by disrupting employment opportunities, revenue streams, and an effective ecosystem that is shaped by personal services agreements, collective bargaining agreements, and licensing arrangements. Absent safeguards to ensure consent and compensation for the use of copyrighted works and individual intellectual property rights, and appropriate transparency of training sets, AI will be used as a sophisticated, deceptive tool for content theft, unauthorized digital replication of individual’s voices and likenesses, and cultural misappropriation. Developers will be incentivized to train their AI technologies on the creative works and the creative talents that the members of DPE’s affiliate unions develop, design, and bring to life.
The copyrighted works of expression being ingested into AI models would not exist but for the human likenesses, sounds, labors, and creativity of working people like the members of DPE’s affiliate unions. The founders of this country intended to encourage human creativity, not machinery, when it drafted the copyright clause of the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, the First Amendment was intended to protect human expression from censorship and suppression.
AI is not on the horizon; it is already our reality. We are witness to the hyper-realistic replication of performers’ voices, faces, and individual instrumental sounds, and the automation of sound recordings, compositions, performances, film editing, cinematography, and more through GAI. Animators, directors, musical composers, performers, writers, and countless other craftspeople are seeing their creative works fed into AI models, yielding convincing machine- generated results. If today’s policymakers and government officials fail to secure guardrails to this technological revolution, creative professionals will suffer from their inaction. It is no longer a question of being proactive; the time has passed, and the government is now compelled to respond defensively.
DPE appreciates your continued attention to this pressing issue. In the digital era, copyright protections, and other intellectual property rights, have become increasingly vital for union creative professionals who rely on them to safeguard their livelihood and careers. In the following responses, I address questions related to copyright protections. Please note that while this filing concentrates on copyright issues, individual members of DPE are also submitting comments that delve into their specific requirements and concerns, such as international author rights for directors and writers; rights to one’s name, image, voice, and likeness; and related rights for other craftspersons.
As described above, GAI systems have the ability to produce material that would be copyrightable if it were created by a human author. What are your views on the potential benefits and risks of this technology? How is the use of this technology currently affecting or likely to affect creators, copyright owners, technology developers, researchers, and the public?
Modern technologies can aid creative processes and expand the limits of human expression. Among these, AI emerges as a powerful force, capable of pushing frontiers of visual and auditory depictions. Moreover, AI excels in streamlining and automating certain aspects of content creation to the benefit of workers.
Creative professionals have been using several types of AI technologies for decades across diverse mediums, such as music, motion pictures, live performances, and literature. However, it remains crucial for policymakers to acknowledge that the essence of great art, entertainment, and media derives from human emotions and lived experiences, elements that AI lacks. In essence, without people, GAI is culturally without value.
AI models pose challenges for creative professionals and copyright holders. The AI models rely on ingesting copyrighted works of expression and likenesses to operate. AI has the power to mutilate an artist’s creative vision or point of view on any given topic. A machine cannot produce a painting without first ingesting the works of painters, develop an unauthorized television episode without first ingesting episodes from the rest of the underlying series, or produce a portrait without first ingesting the likenesses of others. In fact, ingesting GAI produced works appears to produce inferior, lower-quality results when compared to machine-created content created by ingesting original works of human authorship.
Creative professionals are actively working to adapt to the changes brought by AI, which may necessitate training and upskilling opportunities to stay relevant in evolving industries. Additionally, new job classifications may lend themselves to labor organizing.
Does the increasing use or distribution of AI-generated material raise any unique issues for your sector or industry as compared to other copyright stakeholders?
AI’s threat to jobs and livelihoods has been a serious issue in the entertainment industry. For example, films can be mutilated into virtual reality experiences, or a third party can change the artist’s creative vision and point of view. ChatGPT can regurgitate a screenplay, which has the potential to take the job of a human screenwriter. Voice cloning, as another example, is enabling employers to do away with foreign language dubbing jobs for working performers. Deepfakes will forever seed doubt in what we hear and see and cause serious reputational or emotional harm to those depicted and those who created the underlying work. For these reasons, we need international authors’ rights, likeness and voice rights, and protections for other creative professionals.
Looking at the copyright framework, union creative professionals often have a unique relationship to employers and their intellectual property. Members of DPE’s affiliate unions often work for a variety of production companies over the course of their career (or even in any given month or year), and the copyright for the productions that they create are owned by the employers or contracting party.
Nevertheless, the safeguarding of the rights and interests of these individuals is many times achieved through collective bargaining agreements (CBA). These CBAs play a pivotal role in ensuring that professionals in the art, entertainment, and media industries receive their fair share of the revenue generated by their work. Additionally, union creative professionals may have individually negotiated agreements that go above the terms of their union contract to also receive additional profit participation and/or creative control of their work and likeness.
Are there any statutory or regulatory approaches that have been adopted or are under consideration in other countries that relate to copyright and AI that should be considered or avoided in the United States? How important a factor is international consistency in this area across borders?
The arts, entertainment, and media industries have evolved into global enterprises that cater to audiences worldwide. Creative professionals should benefit from the worldwide distribution of their work. Works created by these artists must be equally protected in the United States and abroad for the system to work.
GAI knows no borders; it is essential for the United States to work with foreign countries and international organizations to develop basic floors and fundamental standards for the ethical and acceptable uses of this technology. We strongly support the commitment of the G7 countries - to which the United States belongs - to respecting material protected by intellectual property rights, including copyright-protected content, and ensuring transparency of data sets.
DPE feels strongly that the United States should not adopt special fair use standards for this technology. It is concerning that certain countries, such as Japan, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, have, to varying degrees, elected to pass legislation to grant technology companies permission to ingest copyrighted works of expression without consent or compensation. Such exemptions lack merit and run counter to treaty obligations. For instance, Japan allows for the ingestion of copyrighted works for use in commercial works and does not require a party to first have legal access to those works. The U.K. has taken a more restrained, still problematic, approach by granting an exemption for non-commercial research purposes and the country does at least require legal access. To be clear, DPE does not support any changes that would expand the existing fair use provisions of the U.S. Copyright Act.
This situation may present an opportunity for the international community to strengthen the enforcement of intellectual property laws on a global scale. Just as foreign holders of copyrights encounter obstacles and exorbitant fees to enforce their rights here, American copyright holders face similar challenges when attempting to protect their rights abroad, even when laws allow for extraterritorial enforcement.
Should copyright owners have to affirmatively consent (opt in) to the use of their works for training materials, or should they be provided with the means to object (opt out)?
The United States, or any foreign country, should not adopt an opt-out system. Such a system places the onus on copyright holders and will leave them vulnerable to exploitation by technology companies. Consequently, it would put the members of DPE’s affiliate unions at even greater disadvantage because they would have no enforcement rights. If third parties wish to use copyrighted works to train AI models and generate GAI materials, it should be incumbent upon them to receive permission from the copyright holder.
It is essential that policymakers hold AI companies and users of AI models accountable for the unauthorized use of copyrighted works. In the absence of a legally recognized exemption, ingestion is a violation of the copyright holder’s exclusive right to reproduce or to make a copy. This violation occurs without the need for further distribution, performance, or the creation of a new work. In fact, a pure copy is less likely, not more, to qualify for the fair use defense as there is no new meaning, purpose, or transformation of the original work. It is merely taking something one would pay for in the market.
It is evident that the copyrighted works in questions are of enormous value to AI companies and that value should result in fair compensation for creative professionals. An opt-out system would create an intellectual property framework that runs counter to the principles of copyright law, sanctioning a windfall of riches for technology companies at the expense of copyright holders and hardworking creative professionals. Such an approach would be regressive and would create more problems than good.
Should Congress consider establishing a compulsory licensing regime?
The United States should firmly resist the urge to adopt a compulsory licensing regime. Mandatory licensing schemes devalue works of expression and force copyright holders to unwillingly go into business with third parties.
It is imperative that Congress preserve the open marketplace for licensing and intellectual property transactions, as well as to reinforce the bargaining power of labor unions in securing fair compensation for the use of works in secondary markets. DPE is concerned that lawmakers and regulators may change the rules as a reaction to the volume of copyrighted works required for AI ingestion and the speed at which AI models can produce new works.
The compulsory licensing scheme established for musical compositions, and in some cases, cable television transmission, has often been criticized for devaluing the true market value of a work and denying a copyright holder the fundamental right to withhold consent. It would be problematic to insert an independent collective management organization into the ecosystem, especially if it involves government interference.
In the United States, labor unions are the most qualified entities to oversee collective licensing schemes for their members. Labor unions possess the expertise and capacity to negotiate with employers and establish formulas, especially when dealing with large-scale licensing. For example, through collective bargaining, union members are paid residuals for the reuse of works in secondary markets, such as paid television.
The film and television industry serves as a prime example of a sector that relies on and flourishes from free market negotiation. This applies whether it be the licensing of a single highly valuable motion picture or the right to distribute an entire catalog of works with varying levels of market value.
In order to allow copyright owners to determine whether their works have been used, should developers of AI models be required to collect, retain, and disclose records regarding the materials used to train their models? Should creators of training datasets have a similar obligation?
Yes, to both questions. As seen in the courts, authors are encountering challenges to prove that their work was ingested into the system. For example, Sarah Silverman is having to go to great lengths to show that her book was ingested into the ChatGPT system after it was able to produce a detailed summary of the book.
Without appropriate transparency and robust recordkeeping, creative professionals and the entities that employ them lack the requisite knowledge to enforce their rights.
There are challenges in relying on watermarks and meta data to track files floating around on the Internet or being ingested into GAI models, as bad actors may simply use technology to remove digital fingerprints.
In a closed model, such as those utilized by the major motion picture studios, the companies can collect specific information to better trace the use of copyrighted work. For instance, in the case of the new 2023 Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny film, Disney used its own footage of Harrison Ford from previous movies.
DPE’s affiliate unions are, or will be, negotiating AI-specific terms into their collective bargaining agreements. Certain aspects of the use of AI significantly impact the wages and working conditions of labor union members and may constitute mandatory subjects of bargaining. Labor unions would greatly benefit from having access to searchable information about which works are being ingested and/or used to create new works.
Furthermore, if a harmed party or labor union can demonstrate that a work was ingested without a corresponding record, the courts should be prepared to provide relief in the form of monetary damages, costs, and fees. This will ensure that rights holders and labor unions have the necessary tools and incentives to protect their interests in a changing landscape.
Under copyright law, are there circumstances when a human using a generative AI system should be considered the “author” of material produced by the system? If so, what factors are relevant to that determination? For example, is selecting what material an AI model is trained on and/or providing an iterative series of text commands or prompts sufficient to claim authorship of the resulting output?
This is a complex question as the use of GAI in and of itself should not disqualify a work from copyright protection. In fact, this technology is already being ethically used in the creative process as a tool. Judges and policymakers should exercise caution in responding to wholly GAI material or human-prompted GAI material versus creative professionals that use, mold, and direct GAI at a more intricate level where a person or multiple people are providing enough creative control and modification to transform the GAI material into the work of those people.
GAI lacks the capacity to understand the lived experiences of individuals from diverse backgrounds, such as a Latina, a member of the LGBTQ+ community, an immigrant, a soldier, and/or someone who grew up in a specific location. Only when GAI is molded by a person can it serve as a human expression deserving of legal protection. Ultimately, it is only a human who requires the incentive to create new works and deserves to be rewarded for their creative efforts and aspirations. These principles align with the foundational constitutional justifications for copyright law in the first place.
In the context of AI, the law should uphold these principles by distinguishing between works that are by and large machine-generated and those that are the result of human guidance, molding, and creative control. AI-generated materials - including visual, audio, and literary works - lack sufficient human control and should not be copyrighted. A machine-generated prompt is at most an idea, and ideas are not copyrightable.
In closing, thank you again for your attention to this important issue. Absent smart policymaking and requisite safeguards, AI has the potential to upend the livelihoods and economic security of union creative professionals who rely more than ever on adequate and effective copyright protections to earn compensation and benefits in today’s digital era.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE’s Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
DPE's Response to Department of Commerce and Department of State's Request for Stakeholder Input on Draft G7 AI Principles
October 24, 2023
Dear Secretary Raimondo and Secretary Blinken,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I write in strong support of the language in Principle 11 of the G7’s International Draft Guiding Principles for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems. I urge the United States government and the G7 to continue supporting explicit language on respecting material protected by intellectual property rights, including copyright-protected content, and ensuring transparency of data sets, as part of promoting safe, secure, and trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology worldwide.
AI is an issue that directly affects the members of DPE’s 12 affiliate unions in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. These unions’ members work as actors, stagehands, craftspeople, choreographers, dancers, directors, directorial team members, editors, musicians, stunt performers, instrumentalists, writers, singers, stage managers, recording artists, broadcasters, audio engineers, cinematographers, and in many other creative professions. They help power a sector of the economy that regularly generates four percent of the United States’ gross domestic product (GDP), creates a positive trade balance, and employs more than five million people.
Union creative professionals depend on strong copyright protections and an effective copyright enforcement system for their economic security. While not typically the copyright holder, many of these middle-class workers earn collectively bargained pay and contributions to their health insurance and pension plans from the sales and licensing of the content they help create. In 2021, for instance, creative professionals represented by the American Federation of Musicians (AFM), Directors Guild of America (DGA), International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), and Writers Guild of America, East (WGAE) received over $2.8 billion in residuals. In addition, union creative professionals’ future work opportunities depend on legitimate sales and licensing.
Absent worldwide safeguards to ensure consent and compensation for the use of copyrighted works and individual intellectual property rights, and appropriate transparency of training sets, AI will be used as a sophisticated, deceptive tool for content theft, unauthorized digital replication of individual’s voices and likenesses, and cultural misappropriation. Developers will be incentivized to train their AI technologies on the creative works and the creative talents that the members of DPE’s affiliate unions develop, design, and bring to life.
AI abuse threatens the economic livelihoods of union creative professionals. These individuals will lose out on the aforementioned collectively bargained royalties, residuals, and contributions to their health care and retirement funds that come from exploitation of the creative works they helped make. They will be faced with job displacement and job replacement. Ingested stolen content will train AI technologies that circumvent labor contracts, minimize or eliminate the need for human workers, and, in worse case scenarios, replace a creative professional with a digital double of that professional or a replication of their work. In effect, union creative professionals will be unwitting contributors to their own economic demise.
The potential for abuse and the catastrophic ramifications from it are why the stakes have never been higher for the everyday, middle-class Americans who are members of DPE’s affiliate unions in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. For this reason, I strongly support the language in Principle 11 of the G7’s International Draft Guiding Principles for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems and urge the United States government and the G7 to continue supporting explicit language on respecting copyright and ensuring transparency.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or Michael Wasser, DPE’s Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
DPE Letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee in Support of Deborah Robinson's Confirmation as IPEC
September 5, 2023
Dear Chairman Durbin and Ranking Member Graham,
On behalf of the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I write in strong support of Deborah Robinson’s nomination to serve as the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC). Ms. Robinson’s more than two-decade legal career, including real world enforcement experience, makes her well-qualified to serve in this critical role.
Within DPE are 12 unions that represent people who work in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. These unions’ members are actors, stagehands, craftspeople, choreographers, dancers, directors, musicians, stunt performers, instrumentalists, writers, singers, stage managers, recording artists, broadcasters, audio engineers, photographers, editors, and other creative professionals. They power a sector of the economy that regularly generates over four percent of the United States’ GDP, creates a positive trade balance, and is responsible for more than five million jobs.
Union creative professionals depend on strong intellectual property protections for their economic livelihoods. Many earn collectively bargained pay and contributions to their health insurance and retirement plans from the sales and licensing of the creative content they help create. Revenue from authorized sales and licensing also funds the projects of tomorrow that these unions’ members count on for future jobs. That’s why, while not typically the copyright holders, the theft and unlicensed use of copyrighted content threatens these middle-class professionals’ economic security. Union creative professionals also are harmed when their voices, images, and likenesses are used without consent. Public figures, including prominent union professionals, are at heightened risk of image-based sexual abuse (deepfake or revenge porn), privacy violations, defamation, and commercial misappropriation.
The IPEC is the only position within the Executive Office of the President that has specific statutory authority to engage in and coordinate the Administration’s actions on copyright policy issues. With Congress and the Biden-Harris Administration right now confronting the rapid emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI), there is an even more urgent need for the Senate to confirm Ms. Robinson as IPEC so she can participate fully in these important policy discussions. What gets decided in the coming months with regard to AI will directly affect the ability of union creative professionals to continue earning family-supporting pay in their chosen careers.
In closing, I believe Ms. Robinson meets the mark both in terms of technical qualifications and understanding the importance of intellectual property rights for middle-class creative professionals. For this reason, I urge the Judiciary Committee, and the Senate as a whole, to move swiftly on Ms. Robinson’s confirmation. Previously, the Senate has confirmed IPEC nominees in both Democratic and Republican administrations with overwhelming bipartisan support, and Ms. Robinson should be no different.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director, Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
DPE Urges House Members to Support H.R. 2871, the Performing Artist Tax Parity Act (PATPA)
July 17, 2023
Dear Representative,
On behalf of the 24 national unions in the Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), I strongly urge you to co-sponsor H.R. 2871, the Performing Artist Tax Parity Act (PATPA), and vote for the bill on the floor. Introduced by Reps. Vern Buchanan (R-FL) and Judy Chu (D-CA), this bipartisan legislation would update the Qualified Performing Artist (QPA) deduction, modernizing a provision that has been on the books since President Reagan signed it into law. By updating the QPA deduction, PATPA will ensure that middle-class entertainment workers can again deduct common business expenses.
Actors, stage managers, dancers, musicians, cinematographers, and many other creative professionals working as W-2 employees spend 20 to 30 percent of their income on necessary expenses to secure and maintain employment, including travel to auditions, talent agents, and camera equipment. Prior to the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, these creators could claim miscellaneous itemized deductions for business expenses. Without the ability to deduct these expenses, middle-class creative professionals, including members of DPE’s affiliate unions, have experienced significant tax increases, and struggled to make ends meet.
PATPA would restore tax fairness for middle-class creative professionals by updating the eligibility threshold for the QPA deduction. QPA is a provision of the tax law that allows certain performing artists the option to take an “above the line” deduction for expenses incurred in the course of their employment. Currently, the adjusted gross income threshold for the QPA deduction is $16,000, a level unchanged since QPA’s inception in 1986. PATPA would raise the threshold to $100,000 for single taxpayers and $200,000 for joint filers, and also add a built-in phase out to help transition the taxpayer out of the deduction.
The ability to claim the QPA deduction would have a meaningful impact on the lives of creative professionals and their families. According to information from the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program, a creative professional in Media, Pennsylvania, would have realized a tax savings of nearly 36 percent under PATPA. A Charlotte, North Carolina-based creative professional would pay about 20 percent less in taxes. A creative professional in Brooklyn, New York, would save just under 64 percent in taxes. These individuals’ experiences are not unique. PATPA will allow hundreds of thousands of middle-class professionals to put money that now goes to pay higher tax bills toward the next month’s rent, putting food on the table, and contributing to their local economies.
PATPA is common sense, consensus legislation that will have an immediate impact on working people with negligible budgetary impact, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. In the 117th Congress, 92 House members from both parties co-sponsored PATPA, and the bill enjoys wide support from employers and professionals across the arts and entertainment industries.
Now is the time to restore tax fairness for hundreds of thousands of middle-class creative professionals, and to correct a flaw in the U.S. tax code that punishes these individuals for seeking work. For these reasons, I ask you to co-sponsor H.R. 2871 and support its passage on the floor.
If you have any questions, please contact me or DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Dorning, President
A Policy Agenda for Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in the Arts, Entertainment, and Media Industries
118th Congress
As unions, we hold a fundamental belief that diversity is a strength. We work inside and outside the traditional collective bargaining process to create more and better opportunities for underrepresented people. Smart policy solutions aimed at creating diverse talent pipelines, incentivizing diversity in hiring, and supporting collective bargaining will help our workplaces and our industries move forward.
Ensure That Creators Can Pursue Middle Class Careers
All creative professionals must be able to pursue a career with fair pay and benefits. Otherwise careers in the arts, entertainment, and media industries will be limited to a narrow, non-inclusive set of people – notably those who can afford to hold out for the promise of a future payday that may never arrive. Creative professionals must be able to enforce their workplace rights, including the right to join together in union and negotiate collectively with their employers. Through collective bargaining, people of color and women have raised their pay, narrowed the racial wage gap,[1] and established mechanisms for addressing intentional and unintentional racism in their workplaces.[2] Creative professionals also need strong copyright protections because they depend on the sale of legitimate content for their pay and benefits. Too often creative professionals of historically marginalized communities are not able to realize the full economic value of their intellectual property, an impediment to maintaining a career that utilizes their unique talents and abilities.
Congress should:
Pass the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act;
Pass the Performing Artist Tax Parity Act;
Pass the Restoring Justice for Workers Act;
Pass the American Music Fairness Act; and
Support copyright reforms aimed at combating content theft, such as reforming Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to restore balance between content creators and online platforms and ensure that creative professionals can earn a fair return for their work.
Address Systemic Barriers to Careers in the Arts, Entertainment, and Media
Every person should have the opportunity to pursue a career in the arts, entertainment, and media industries. As unions, we work through the collective bargaining process to ensure that our employers respect the equal rights of all in their workplaces. Still more must be done to remove the systemic, societal barriers that hold too many people back to help ensure that our industries can fully reflect the mosaic of America.
Congress should:
Pass the Create a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair (CROWN) Act;
Pass the Equality Act;
Protect the right of people to make their own reproductive healthcare decisions; and
Provide term-limited federal financial support to ensure that workplaces are safe and accessible for all creative professionals.
Increase Federal Arts Funding and Establish DEI Objectives for Grant Recipients
Through grants, seed money, and technical support, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) ensure that Americans of all means, geographies, and abilities have access to artistic and educational content. The NEA, NEH, and CPB also help bolster local economies and put creative professionals to work on nonprofit productions and performances, including members of our unions. These gigs have also provided entry points to careers in the for-profit side of our industries for many of our members through the opportunity to develop skills, experience, and professional connections. Congress can help ensure that more of these career opportunities are available to people who are underrepresented in our industries.
Congress should:
Increase funding for the NEA, NEH, and CPB;
Work with stakeholders, including unions, to develop diversity hiring and reporting objectives for grant recipients, such as requiring that applicants provide a three-year look-back report on recruitment, hiring, and promotion; and
Establish an incubator grant program to help underrepresented people pursue creative projects and make connections with industry mentors.
Leverage Federal Tax Incentives to Encourage Diverse Hiring
Recognizing the boost provided to state and local economies, Congress has established tax benefits for American-based film, television, and live entertainment productions. Tax incentives are important because they create work opportunities for our members that may otherwise go abroad. We know from the state level that tax policy can also offer a “carrot” approach for our industries’ employers to hire more inclusive casts and crew.
Congress should:
Follow the lead of states like Illinois, New Jersey, and New York to identify effective diversity requirements for federal tax incentives that will spur more inclusive hiring in film, television, and live entertainment.
If you have any questions, please contact DPE Assistant to the President/Legislative Director Michael Wasser at mwasser@dpeaflcio.org
[1] McNicholas et al. (2020). “Why unions are good for workers - especially in a crisis like COVID-19.” Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Available here: https://www.epi.org/publication/why-unions-are-good-for-workers-especially-in-a-crisis-like-covid-19-12-policies-that-would-boost-worker-rights-safety-and-wages/.
[2] “Toolkit: Advancing Racial Justice in the Professional Workplace.” (2020). Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO. Available here: https://www.dpeaflcio.org/other-publications/toolkit-advancing-racial-justice-in-the-professional-workplace
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