Bill Overview
Title: Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act of 2022
Description: This bill excludes Indian tribes and tribal enterprises and institutions on tribal land from requirements for employers under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). (Currently under the NLRA, employers may not engage in unfair labor practices and must allow employees to form unions, engage in collective bargaining, and take collective action.)
Sponsors: Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]
Target Audience
Population: People associated with tribal enterprises and institutions on tribal land
Estimated Size: 2500000
- The bill impacts tribal enterprises and institutions on tribal lands since it excludes them from the requirements under the National Labor Relations Act.
- There are approximately 574 federally recognized Native American tribes in the U.S., each with potentially varying sizes of tribal enterprises that could be affected.
- The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) previously had jurisdiction over labor practices in tribal enterprises on tribal lands, impacting their operations and relationships with employees.
- The exclusion from NLRA means these tribal enterprises may not have to recognize employee efforts to unionize or engage in collective bargaining.
Reasoning
- The Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act primarily impacts Native American tribes with businesses on tribal lands. However, given the broad range of tribal enterprises and their unique contexts, not all will be equally affected. For instance, a large casino might feel the impact differently compared to a small cultural crafts store.
- The $1,500,000 budget in year one suggests a limited implementation scale, likely focusing on communication and initial adjustment resources for tribal employers and employees.
- Long-term budget of $15,000,000 over 10 years indicates sustained support, primarily benefiting a population clustered around tribal enterprises.
- With approximately 2.5 million Native Americans potentially impacted, the direct influence of the policy will vary widely, ranging from high-impact scenarios for key tribal industries to minimal effects for smaller, supplementary tribal operations.
- Including diverse perspectives in simulation is crucial; this encompasses workers within tribal enterprises, business leaders in the tribal communities, and non-tribal employees working on reservations.
Simulated Interviews
Casino Worker (Navajo Nation, AZ)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry that without the NLRA protections, I'll lose the ability to negotiate better conditions with my employer.
- Before, we had a union to voice our concerns. Now, without it, I feel less secure in my job.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Tribal Business Owner (Cherokee Nation, OK)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides us more sovereignty in handling our business practices.
- I see potential benefits in tailoring labor practices to fit our community needs, rather than abiding by broad federal guidelines.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Hotel Supervisor (Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, SD)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy could hurt us; it's already tough to negotiate fair shifts and pay.
- Without a union, I'm concerned about how grievances will be handled.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Construction Worker (Pine Ridge Reservation, SD)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not sure how it will affect me directly—most jobs are seasonal or project-based.
- It's always been a challenge finding stable work, union or no union.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Casino Owner (Seminole Tribe, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having experienced-times, we value any increase in operational flexibility and decision-making power.
- The more we can decide locally, the better for our long-term goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
General Store Clerk (Blackfeet Nation, MT)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Doesn't seem to change much for someone like me who's part-time and off reservation.
- My priority is school, but stable work conditions would still be preferable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Healthcare Worker (Yakama Nation, WA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish there was more clarity about what this change means for healthcare workers in tribal facilities.
- There's concern about ramifications for clinic operations and patient care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Teacher (Warm Springs Reservation, OR)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a teacher, I'm concerned about staff contracts and benefits being impacted.
- Education can be overlooked in policy changes, but it's crucial for our community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Security Staff at Casino (Mohegan Tribe, CT)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm generally in favor, as I think the tribe will handle things fairly.
- But there's always some wariness about losing federal protections.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Environmental Consultant (Lummi Nation, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might indirectly affect funding for environmental projects if tribal enterprises redirect focus or funding.
- I’m concerned about the overall governance impact, potentially affecting cooperative efforts with external partners.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 2: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 3: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 5: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 10: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 100: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy primarily offers autonomy to tribal enterprises, potentially reducing federal regulatory compliance costs.
- It could lead to economic development on tribal lands due to increased operational flexibility.
- Shifts in employment and unionization rights might impact worker-employer relations within tribal enterprises.
- Legal challenges or disputes related to jurisdiction and labor rights might arise, potentially requiring judicial clarification.