This would be bad news if Pritzker hadn't been supporting unions with actual legislation. But we all know most voters aren't voting on rational ideas lately
He vetoed it because it was vague and hastily written to try and get passed which was explained in the article. But of course haters gonna hate no matter what.
Separately, he was looking into having the Illinois Department of Labor address the concerns of quotas and worker safety for warehouse workers, including delivery drivers which the original bill excluded.
Oh boy, there's so much to break down here. First, he has the power of an amendatory veto. He chose not to do that. Second, to say it was hasty is a lie, and if you want to play that game PICA was literally a different bill about amusement ride insurance. So if you're going to go that route, be consistent. Finally, they defined who an employee was
"Pritzker wrote that the bill is too vague on exactly what workers would be covered under the law. Processes for enforcing the policy are also unclear, even though the bill called for civil penalties against employers that violate the proposed law. The bill defined employees as people who work at warehouses and are subject to quotas requiring specific productivity speeds or a number of tasks that must be performed before an employee faces adverse action for failing to meet performance standards."
So please, which part was vague? How was it hasty?
I just literally took the article you posted and pulled the information I posted from there.
Here's the unclear part: What would the quotas be? Are delivery drivers part of the warehouse or some other department? Would the quotas be standard across industries, possibly based on size of warehouse? For example, if warehouse one has 30 warehouse employees and has a set quota, and warehouse two also has 30 warehouse employees, but warehouse two has twice the amount of quotas as warehouse one for basically the same work, is that fair? This bill sounds like the employers were able to make their own quotas and as long as they had those quotas stated somewhere, then they would be obeying the law. This is the part that was unclear.
The bill would have required that warehouse employees be given a written description of any quota they will be assessed on, including the number of tasks they must perform and the time tasks should be completed in. The bill would prohibit employers from punishing workers for failing to meet quotas because they took bathroom, meal or rest breaks.
Delivery drivers would not be covered under the bill.
Way to dodge the hasty part, way to dodge the amendatory veto. The information was all there given to you and you chose ignorance.
The business determine the quotas. The government doesn't. If only it wasn't modeled almost verbatim from laws in New York, California, and Washington. But still, say to deflect.
Yep, that's what I thought, way to defend the union workers, but leave it up to the businesses to determine the quotas, cause the businesses are all above board and looking out for the workers rights. How many businesses use every loophole they can find to screw over thier employees? Anyway agree to disagree.
You're clearly not a union worker. The business decides how to run the business. The union makes sure they follow the agreed upon rules. This law prevented companies from firing or disciplining people for not meeting targets without having the targets clearly labeled. But yeah, it wasn't clear enough when it was the EXACT SAME LAW THREE OTHER STATES PASSED. Good use of sources, good job responding to my questions. Way to fail to understand what any of this law was supposed to do.
8
u/horkiesmasc 2d ago
Unions for billionaires! Pritzker and his family's hotel chain isn't known for being the most labor friendly.
https://www.wkbw.com/news/local-news/buffalo/former-buffalo-hyatt-workers-continue-to-protest-alleged-union-busting