Bill Overview
Title: Wage Theft Prevention and Wage Recovery Act
Description: This bill requires employers to make initial and modified disclosures to employees of the terms of their employment, provide such employees with regular paystubs, and make a final payment to an employee for uncompensated work hours within 14 days of the employee's termination. Employers must also allow employees access to wage records. An employer must compensate an employee at the rate specified in an employment contract, including a collective bargaining agreement, that specifies a rate of pay higher than the minimum wage rate. The bill makes all of such unpaid wages recoverable through civil enforcement. The bill establishes new and increased civil and criminal penalties for violations of overtime or minimum wage requirements, including referral to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution of employers who engage in wage theft, falsification of wage records, or retaliation against employees. The Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor must provide grants to specified organizations, including nonprofits and educational institutions, to enhance the enforcement of wage and hour laws. The Government Accountability Office must study and report on successful grant programs.
Sponsors: Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals who are employees potentially impacted by wage theft
Estimated Size: 80000000
- Wage theft primarily affects employees who are paid hourly wages or those in industries where wage violations are more common, such as hospitality, retail, construction, and agriculture.
- Employees who work under collective bargaining agreements are impacted since the bill specifies adherence to such agreements when they stipulate higher wage rates.
- The bill provides mechanisms for recovering unpaid wages, indicating it affects employees who have experienced wage theft in the past and those at risk of future incidents.
- As the bill increases penalties for wage theft, employers across various sectors must comply, indirectly impacting a broad range of workers by potentially improving wage practices across the board.
Reasoning
- The policy targets employees who have been affected by wage theft, a practice more common in certain industries like hospitality, retail, and agriculture. Therefore, interviews should include individuals from these sectors.
- Considering geographical diversity is important, as wage theft might differ in prevalence depending on state laws and enforcement.
- The policy also indirectly affects employers, who may have to change practices to comply, so the indirect impact on employee wellbeing should also be considered.
- We have to include people who are not impacted at all to understand the variance in policy effect.
- It's also important to note the budget limits of the policy might mean not all affected individuals will experience immediate benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Waitress (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy will really help ensure I get paid on time, especially the overtime I've worked.
- Sometimes it's hard to argue with the manager about unpaid wages.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Construction Worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having a formal channel to claim unpaid wages will make my life less stressful.
- I hope my union supports implementing this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retail Manager (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I need to update our wage recording practices, but it's good for accountability.
- Making sure everyone gets paid as they should is a priority.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Barista (Chicago, IL)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Regular paystubs will help me budget better.
- It's frustrating when hours are missing from my paycheck.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Software Developer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't affect me much since my salary is clear and we follow regulations.
- It's great for those who need it, but I'm fine either way.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Grocery Store Cashier (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the policy prevents unpaid hours, that's a huge help.
- Often, it's hard to keep track of everything on my own.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Freelancer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see this changing much for freelancers like me.
- The regular wage workers will benefit the most from this.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Nurse (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This may help ensure my overtime is better compensated in the future.
- We are already unionized, but more enforcement can't hurt.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Farm Worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ability to claim unpaid wages is huge for workers like me.
- I hope this leads to fairer treatment overall.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retail Store Owner (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm already paying my employees fairly, but this policy sets a good standard.
- Small businesses might need resources to comply fully, but it's the right thing to do.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $400000000)
Year 2: $310000000 (Low: $260000000, High: $420000000)
Year 3: $320000000 (Low: $270000000, High: $440000000)
Year 5: $350000000 (Low: $290000000, High: $480000000)
Year 10: $380000000 (Low: $320000000, High: $520000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1300000000)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring adequate federal funding for enforcement is crucial for the policy's success.
- Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms will be needed to measure the policy's effectiveness over time.
- The administrative impacts on small businesses require careful management to prevent undue burden while maintaining compliance.
- Collaboration with state labor departments and agencies could optimize enforcement efforts nationally.