Transcripts For CSPAN3 Labor Secretary On Department Policie

Does the Administration Support the threshold set by the Obama Administration and supported by worker advocates, or does it support the business communitys position . Congressman, thank you for the question, and let me note at the outset, when we talk about the overtime rule, we tend to talk about it in the context of salary thresholds, but if you look at the law passed by this congress, this congress did not say whether or not you are exempt or not exempt, whether or not youre subject to overtime or not is set by a salary level. But it set a very different test. And so, the salary level is, in essence, a shorthand way of getting to the law. Now, a federal court looked at this, and the federal court said that the way the 47,000 was set and that level was not in accordance with the law. And so, its not simply do we support and you chose not to contest or appeal that decision. And you do believe that you have the authority to set the salary threshold, is that correct . And so, i was saying, irrespective of whether we support or not and we chose not to support that level because we believe both it is a shock to the system and not in accordance with the law we do believe we have authority to set a salary level that acts as a proxy for the test just to be clear, you do believe you have the authority, but yet, your department chose not to appeal that decision. Congressman, we appealed the decision with respect to the authority, not with respect to the salary level. Thank you. My time is up. I yield back. Gentlemans time has expired. Mr. Walberg, youre recognized for three minutes. I thank the chairman and thank the secretary for being here. Appreciate a number of things that you have pushed forward and worked on. Let me ask you, the Retirement Security issue is big on our venue and our consideration. Policies that empower americans to put money aside for retirement is a leading priority for this committee. Safe harbor, annuities safe harbor issue we believe needs some more clarity in how its dealt with. So let me ask you this question. Does the Department Plan to revise the existing annuity safe harbor to make sure it provides a certainty that Plan Sponsors need to consider these types of products . Congressman, i will have to consult with the department and get back to you with that answer. Id appreciate that. That is an issue that comes up as we consider the pbgc question, and that was addressed thus far. Anything relative to making sure that we have safe harbors, that we have better opportunity, it would be greatly appreciated. So let me congressman yes. Let me just say as a general matter, i think safe harbors are very important. I think having there is a value to certainty and predictability, and that value is substantial. And so, i understand the premise of your question. Thank you. Jumping over to a totally different area, silica. Under the Previous Administration, osha promulgated a rule related to the proposal of silica in the Construction Industry that i and many other members of congress have concerns with. We believe its extremely challenging for many in the Construction Industry to implement and comply with this rule. Are you willing to further stay the enforcement of this rule until youve worked to ensure that this rule is feasible and your employees are able to adequately educate employers throughout the country . Congressman, thank you, again. The silica rule is a major rule. My understanding is that it is in litigation. My understanding is that the parties were close to resolution as to what would be a sensible outcome. We provided a 30day extension to provide the parties time to address this. The parties were a little late at coming back to the table, but it is my hope that the parties can come together, that they can express their concerns and that we can find a sensible outcome to this rule. That would be an improvement, so i appreciate that. Thank you, madam chairman. I yield back. Thank you very much. Ms. Blunt rochester, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman foxx, Ranking Member scott, and secretary acosta for being here. In your testimony, your written testimony, you briefly discussed employment of people with disabilities. And as im sure youre aware, nearly one in five americans have a disability, about almost 57 million individuals. And in the interest of time, ill submit the bulk of my questions in writing, but i would love to hear about competitive, integrative employment, also collaboration amongst agencies like rsa and how youre going to work together. But because i have very limited time, i want to focus on one other question. The president s proposed budget calls for about a 40 cut to workforce innovation and opportunity act programs and also the elimination of the Senior Community Service Employment program, even though Congress Just reauthorized the Older Americans act on a bipartisan basis. What is the rationale behind eliminating the Senior Community Service Employment program . Congresswoman, briefly, first, let me say that i thank you for the questions on individuals with disabilities. And you know, something that ive heard that i thought was a useful way to think about this is that were all temporarily abled, because at some point in our life, most of us at some point will have a disability, particularly as time goes by. Going to your second question, the hope in the budget, and ultimately, that will be up to congress, and congress may not agree, is to try to consolidate all the disparate programs into one Large Program so that there are efficiencies, so that there are flexibilities at the state level. The budget made some hard decisions, and congress has the discretion to change those decisions, to pass the budget that it wishes, but the intent of the budget was to, rather than have the money in separate programs, to combine them into one Large Program. So, mr. Secretary, its my understanding that on this program in particular, which has been around maybe since 1965, that the performance measures, the Program Actually exceeded the performance measures. So, can you just help me understand, if youre going to consolidate, wouldnt you maybe get rid of programs that arent effective but maintain ones that impact Senior Citizens across our country . Well, by consolidating, it doesnt mean that the program isnt in existence. It means that its not a separate budget item. But where it is successful, i would argue, you want to continue programs that are successful, that have positive outcomes, and you want to look at those Outcome Measures and focus the monies, whether they come through a general budget line or through a specific budget line, on just those outcomes, so were getting to the same end point. My time is expired, but i would encourage you to support senior employment programs in addition to employment of people with disabilities. Thank you so much. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. Mr. Smucker, youre recogni recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you for being here. I want to thank you for your leadership in the department and thank the administration for the focus on creating opportunity for americans through job creation, through creating an environment where businesses are focused on growing and creating those jobs. I can tell you that businesses in my area are responding. I just was part of a roundtable recently in my area where a business owner, a family farm said we feel like weve been unleashed again. And so, businesses are investing, theyre growing their businesses, and theyre creating jobs. So, thank you so much. Its refreshing to see that kind of approach and that kind of focus. Im also very pleased with the attention and focus on Apprenticeship Program. One of the things ive always noticed, having served in the state senate and now in this position, you have individuals who are unemployed, and at the same time, you have businesses on the other hand who are looking to fill jobs, and its becoming theyre almost desperate to fill jobs. And so, what it really takes, and in fact, the best way to promote upward mobility, promote lifting people out of poverty, is connecting people with great paying jobs that are available. I think Apprenticeship Program is a tremendous tool to do that. Its one thats been underutilized here, so im very, very thrilled with the initiative and look forward to working the administration to create scaleable Apprenticeship Programs across the country. And with that, i have about a minute. I do have a question. One of the areas that businesses have been concerned about in my district is on osha compliance. And in fact, employers understand that it is important to provide a safe workplace, a healthy workplace for their employees but are concerned about the approach that osha has taken over the past number of years, where its more punitive, rather than collaborative. So, id like to hear your thought on that. What ideas do you have to create an environment where businesses are receiving assistance to comply and to assure that they have a safe workplace . Congressman, thank you for your words and thank you for the question. Briefly, let me say, on the one hand, we have asked for additional funding for a program called vpp, which is, in essence, a compliance assistance program, a voluntary compliance program. And as a general matter where you have employers that are trying to do the right thing, you want to help them do the right thing. Let me say, that has to be balanced with a vigorous enforcement program. And so, where you have an employer that has engaged in repeated violations in willful violations, my view is you have to enforce and enforce vigorously. And as a former u. S. Attorney, if need be, you should even refer those where theres willful violations that result in death or serious harm, refer those for prosecution. And so, i think its important to have compliance assistance and a very fulsome compliance assistance for all those employers who are just trying to do the right thing, while we acknowledge, as with every situation, the congresswoman earlier asked me to say, you know, does every american not every employer is like that. And where the employer is repeated and willful, there needs to be vigorous enforcement. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Norcross, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair and secretary acosta. Good to see you again. Seems were hearing quite a bit about the Apprenticeship Program, which has been around since the middle ages, so we are slow, usually not that bad. Theyve referred to it as the other fouryear degree. It is a system that works. Unfortunately, the United States, primarily the Building Trades who are doing such a great job, and when you were asked about the job centers, some of the issues that were taking place there, i was really happy to hear you talk about Graduation Rates and does it lead to a job. A piece of paper on the wall Means Nothing if you dont have a job. When we were in switzerland, they said the United States has the besttrained Unemployed People in the world, which goes to the point in the question that we want to talk about. White collar, commercial jobs is a nice area that we can go into, but we want to make sure, particularly with the trades, who have a proven history of doing this great im not throwing the baby out with the bath water. Their Graduation Rates are between 80 and 90 . But what we had found over the course of the last decade, not everybodys following that. Everybody becomes a firstyear apprentice and stays there. A, they never graduate. And this is indicative of a program that isnt working. So, when youre looking at creating the next generation, are you going to keep the very issues that we talked about in mind, Graduation Rates, and does it lead to a job . Congressman, absolutely. I think the outcome measurements are so critical, whether its a university, whether its an Apprenticeship Program, whether it is a hybrid. How many graduate, and does it lead it a job is the goal, and thats what we should focus on. One of the issues that we found coming off the Great Recession is we have all these openings. Training somebody for a job that doesnt exist is nothing short of cruel. The cycles in the construction ebbs and flows. So if we had the amount of people ready to go to work today, that means they were unemployed for many years. So the industry does react, but theres always a lag here. The system works remarkably well, remarkably well. And as you pointed out, with virtually no federal or state money. But there are standards, and we heard from others. Nobody wants to burden the employers. They have a great way of giving input. But everybody cant create their own standards, no core competency. So when we go to look at the new system, as susan davis talked about, we want to make sure that were in partnership. The joint programs are the ones that work best. And i yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, mr. Norcross. Mr. Ferguson, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chairman and mr. Secretary, thank you so much for being here today. A couple of questions. First of all, as i understand it, on july 6th of this year, the department of labor published a request for information examining the fiduciary rule, is that correct . I dont recall if thats the exact date, but thats generally correct. Okay, good. Now that the Comment Period is closed, im assuming the department is reviewing and considering the next steps. Congressman, that is correct. We are. Okay. Have there been discussions with the s. E. C. On the next steps with the fiduciary regulation . Congressman, i in a wall street journal editorial, opinion editorial that i published, i very publicly, as a matter of fact, suggested that the s. E. C. Should be a partner in this effort. The s. E. C. Declined to be a full partner in the past administration, and i do believe that they have an Important Role to play. They are part of the regulatory structure of this industry and should be a partner, and therefore, yes, we have had discussions. And that is good to hear, because weve heard a lot from our constituents that believe that the dol and the s. E. C. Should be collaborating on this to address the issues and solve the problems associated with it, so thank you for your commitment to continue going down that road. Also, i just want to make a comment about the approval of the georgia wesep application. I know some of your staff came down to the district to look at one of our programs. I want to thank you so much for that support and learning whats going on in our district. You know, being able to do this and work with states, and particularly, the Georgia Consortium for advanced technical training, we see this as a great opportunity to begin to prepare our young people to go to work in a 21stcentury economy, and its a step in aligning our Education System with, you know, with the direction that the economy is going. So i know that you and the administration are very much focused on closing the skills gaps. Thats something that we believe is vitally important to do. And we believe that innovative apprenti apprenticeships are a very valuable part of this. So again, i want to thank you for the work that yall are doing on that. I think that that is something that every person on this committee can agree with, that preparing our young people to take advantage of the jobs that are being created is vitally important. So, thank you. Madam chairman, i yield back. Thank you, congressman. Thank you very much. Ms. Adams, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman foxx and Ranking Member scott, and thank you, mr. Secretary, for being here. I was interested in the response that you gave to congresswoman fudge, so i want to follow up for just a moment. Controlling family timing and size can be key to unlocking opportunities for economic success, education, and equality, and access to contraception can help women complete their education, join the workforce, planning, delaying and spacing births will also appear to help women achieve their education and career goals. And so, with all of the economic benefits that access to contraceptive brings, it seems a bit illogical to me for the department to issue interim final rules that erodes a womans right to access comprehensive, Preventive Health care. My question is, have you done, the department, have you done a complete assessment of the number of women and dependence and risa plans that could lose access to contraceptive coverage . And if so, whats the number . Congresswoman, as i said previously, the rule recognizes that for some organizations, their religious freedoms should allow them to not offer that coverage. It provides the option for that organization. It was enacted pursuant to the administrative procedures act. Within the apa, there is a requirement that the apa process engage in a costbenefit analysis, and that would be contained within that costbenefit analysis. Thats something that we certainly could provide to you or to your staff. So you have done an assessment . You know how many, is that what youre saying . What im saying is that within any rule, there is a costbenefit analysis that takes place, and that assessment is required by the administrative procedures act. And so, that assessment can certify okay. Thank you very much, and i would like to receive that. So, you know, according to the Administration Support<\/a> the threshold set by the Obama Administration<\/a> and supported by worker advocates, or does it support the business communitys position . Congressman, thank you for the question, and let me note at the outset, when we talk about the overtime rule, we tend to talk about it in the context of salary thresholds, but if you look at the law passed by this congress, this congress did not say whether or not you are exempt or not exempt, whether or not youre subject to overtime or not is set by a salary level. But it set a very different test. And so, the salary level is, in essence, a shorthand way of getting to the law. Now, a federal court looked at this, and the federal court said that the way the 47,000 was set and that level was not in accordance with the law. And so, its not simply do we support and you chose not to contest or appeal that decision. And you do believe that you have the authority to set the salary threshold, is that correct . And so, i was saying, irrespective of whether we support or not and we chose not to support that level because we believe both it is a shock to the system and not in accordance with the law we do believe we have authority to set a salary level that acts as a proxy for the test just to be clear, you do believe you have the authority, but yet, your department chose not to appeal that decision. Congressman, we appealed the decision with respect to the authority, not with respect to the salary level. Thank you. My time is up. I yield back. Gentlemans time has expired. Mr. Walberg, youre recognized for three minutes. I thank the chairman and thank the secretary for being here. Appreciate a number of things that you have pushed forward and worked on. Let me ask you, the Retirement Security<\/a> issue is big on our venue and our consideration. Policies that empower americans to put money aside for retirement is a leading priority for this committee. Safe harbor, annuities safe harbor issue we believe needs some more clarity in how its dealt with. So let me ask you this question. Does the Department Plan<\/a> to revise the existing annuity safe harbor to make sure it provides a certainty that Plan Sponsors<\/a> need to consider these types of products . Congressman, i will have to consult with the department and get back to you with that answer. Id appreciate that. That is an issue that comes up as we consider the pbgc question, and that was addressed thus far. Anything relative to making sure that we have safe harbors, that we have better opportunity, it would be greatly appreciated. So let me congressman yes. Let me just say as a general matter, i think safe harbors are very important. I think having there is a value to certainty and predictability, and that value is substantial. And so, i understand the premise of your question. Thank you. Jumping over to a totally different area, silica. Under the Previous Administration<\/a>, osha promulgated a rule related to the proposal of silica in the Construction Industry<\/a> that i and many other members of congress have concerns with. We believe its extremely challenging for many in the Construction Industry<\/a> to implement and comply with this rule. Are you willing to further stay the enforcement of this rule until youve worked to ensure that this rule is feasible and your employees are able to adequately educate employers throughout the country . Congressman, thank you, again. The silica rule is a major rule. My understanding is that it is in litigation. My understanding is that the parties were close to resolution as to what would be a sensible outcome. We provided a 30day extension to provide the parties time to address this. The parties were a little late at coming back to the table, but it is my hope that the parties can come together, that they can express their concerns and that we can find a sensible outcome to this rule. That would be an improvement, so i appreciate that. Thank you, madam chairman. I yield back. Thank you very much. Ms. Blunt rochester, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman foxx, Ranking Member<\/a> scott, and secretary acosta for being here. In your testimony, your written testimony, you briefly discussed employment of people with disabilities. And as im sure youre aware, nearly one in five americans have a disability, about almost 57 million individuals. And in the interest of time, ill submit the bulk of my questions in writing, but i would love to hear about competitive, integrative employment, also collaboration amongst agencies like rsa and how youre going to work together. But because i have very limited time, i want to focus on one other question. The president s proposed budget calls for about a 40 cut to workforce innovation and opportunity act programs and also the elimination of the Senior Community<\/a> Service Employment<\/a> program, even though Congress Just<\/a> reauthorized the Older Americans<\/a> act on a bipartisan basis. What is the rationale behind eliminating the Senior Community<\/a> Service Employment<\/a> program . Congresswoman, briefly, first, let me say that i thank you for the questions on individuals with disabilities. And you know, something that ive heard that i thought was a useful way to think about this is that were all temporarily abled, because at some point in our life, most of us at some point will have a disability, particularly as time goes by. Going to your second question, the hope in the budget, and ultimately, that will be up to congress, and congress may not agree, is to try to consolidate all the disparate programs into one Large Program<\/a> so that there are efficiencies, so that there are flexibilities at the state level. The budget made some hard decisions, and congress has the discretion to change those decisions, to pass the budget that it wishes, but the intent of the budget was to, rather than have the money in separate programs, to combine them into one Large Program<\/a>. So, mr. Secretary, its my understanding that on this program in particular, which has been around maybe since 1965, that the performance measures, the Program Actually<\/a> exceeded the performance measures. So, can you just help me understand, if youre going to consolidate, wouldnt you maybe get rid of programs that arent effective but maintain ones that impact Senior Citizens<\/a> across our country . Well, by consolidating, it doesnt mean that the program isnt in existence. It means that its not a separate budget item. But where it is successful, i would argue, you want to continue programs that are successful, that have positive outcomes, and you want to look at those Outcome Measures<\/a> and focus the monies, whether they come through a general budget line or through a specific budget line, on just those outcomes, so were getting to the same end point. My time is expired, but i would encourage you to support senior employment programs in addition to employment of people with disabilities. Thank you so much. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. Mr. Smucker, youre recogni recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you for being here. I want to thank you for your leadership in the department and thank the administration for the focus on creating opportunity for americans through job creation, through creating an environment where businesses are focused on growing and creating those jobs. I can tell you that businesses in my area are responding. I just was part of a roundtable recently in my area where a business owner, a family farm said we feel like weve been unleashed again. And so, businesses are investing, theyre growing their businesses, and theyre creating jobs. So, thank you so much. Its refreshing to see that kind of approach and that kind of focus. Im also very pleased with the attention and focus on Apprenticeship Program<\/a>. One of the things ive always noticed, having served in the state senate and now in this position, you have individuals who are unemployed, and at the same time, you have businesses on the other hand who are looking to fill jobs, and its becoming theyre almost desperate to fill jobs. And so, what it really takes, and in fact, the best way to promote upward mobility, promote lifting people out of poverty, is connecting people with great paying jobs that are available. I think Apprenticeship Program<\/a> is a tremendous tool to do that. Its one thats been underutilized here, so im very, very thrilled with the initiative and look forward to working the administration to create scaleable Apprenticeship Program<\/a>s across the country. And with that, i have about a minute. I do have a question. One of the areas that businesses have been concerned about in my district is on osha compliance. And in fact, employers understand that it is important to provide a safe workplace, a healthy workplace for their employees but are concerned about the approach that osha has taken over the past number of years, where its more punitive, rather than collaborative. So, id like to hear your thought on that. What ideas do you have to create an environment where businesses are receiving assistance to comply and to assure that they have a safe workplace . Congressman, thank you for your words and thank you for the question. Briefly, let me say, on the one hand, we have asked for additional funding for a program called vpp, which is, in essence, a compliance assistance program, a voluntary compliance program. And as a general matter where you have employers that are trying to do the right thing, you want to help them do the right thing. Let me say, that has to be balanced with a vigorous enforcement program. And so, where you have an employer that has engaged in repeated violations in willful violations, my view is you have to enforce and enforce vigorously. And as a former u. S. Attorney, if need be, you should even refer those where theres willful violations that result in death or serious harm, refer those for prosecution. And so, i think its important to have compliance assistance and a very fulsome compliance assistance for all those employers who are just trying to do the right thing, while we acknowledge, as with every situation, the congresswoman earlier asked me to say, you know, does every american not every employer is like that. And where the employer is repeated and willful, there needs to be vigorous enforcement. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Norcross, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair and secretary acosta. Good to see you again. Seems were hearing quite a bit about the Apprenticeship Program<\/a>, which has been around since the middle ages, so we are slow, usually not that bad. Theyve referred to it as the other fouryear degree. It is a system that works. Unfortunately, the United States<\/a>, primarily the Building Trades<\/a> who are doing such a great job, and when you were asked about the job centers, some of the issues that were taking place there, i was really happy to hear you talk about Graduation Rates<\/a> and does it lead to a job. A piece of paper on the wall Means Nothing<\/a> if you dont have a job. When we were in switzerland, they said the United States<\/a> has the besttrained Unemployed People<\/a> in the world, which goes to the point in the question that we want to talk about. White collar, commercial jobs is a nice area that we can go into, but we want to make sure, particularly with the trades, who have a proven history of doing this great im not throwing the baby out with the bath water. Their Graduation Rates<\/a> are between 80 and 90 . But what we had found over the course of the last decade, not everybodys following that. Everybody becomes a firstyear apprentice and stays there. A, they never graduate. And this is indicative of a program that isnt working. So, when youre looking at creating the next generation, are you going to keep the very issues that we talked about in mind, Graduation Rates<\/a>, and does it lead to a job . Congressman, absolutely. I think the outcome measurements are so critical, whether its a university, whether its an Apprenticeship Program<\/a>, whether it is a hybrid. How many graduate, and does it lead it a job is the goal, and thats what we should focus on. One of the issues that we found coming off the Great Recession<\/a> is we have all these openings. Training somebody for a job that doesnt exist is nothing short of cruel. The cycles in the construction ebbs and flows. So if we had the amount of people ready to go to work today, that means they were unemployed for many years. So the industry does react, but theres always a lag here. The system works remarkably well, remarkably well. And as you pointed out, with virtually no federal or state money. But there are standards, and we heard from others. Nobody wants to burden the employers. They have a great way of giving input. But everybody cant create their own standards, no core competency. So when we go to look at the new system, as susan davis talked about, we want to make sure that were in partnership. The joint programs are the ones that work best. And i yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, mr. Norcross. Mr. Ferguson, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chairman and mr. Secretary, thank you so much for being here today. A couple of questions. First of all, as i understand it, on july 6th of this year, the department of labor published a request for information examining the fiduciary rule, is that correct . I dont recall if thats the exact date, but thats generally correct. Okay, good. Now that the Comment Period<\/a> is closed, im assuming the department is reviewing and considering the next steps. Congressman, that is correct. We are. Okay. Have there been discussions with the s. E. C. On the next steps with the fiduciary regulation . Congressman, i in a wall street journal editorial, opinion editorial that i published, i very publicly, as a matter of fact, suggested that the s. E. C. Should be a partner in this effort. The s. E. C. Declined to be a full partner in the past administration, and i do believe that they have an Important Role<\/a> to play. They are part of the regulatory structure of this industry and should be a partner, and therefore, yes, we have had discussions. And that is good to hear, because weve heard a lot from our constituents that believe that the dol and the s. E. C. Should be collaborating on this to address the issues and solve the problems associated with it, so thank you for your commitment to continue going down that road. Also, i just want to make a comment about the approval of the georgia wesep application. I know some of your staff came down to the district to look at one of our programs. I want to thank you so much for that support and learning whats going on in our district. You know, being able to do this and work with states, and particularly, the Georgia Consortium<\/a> for advanced technical training, we see this as a great opportunity to begin to prepare our young people to go to work in a 21stcentury economy, and its a step in aligning our Education System<\/a> with, you know, with the direction that the economy is going. So i know that you and the administration are very much focused on closing the skills gaps. Thats something that we believe is vitally important to do. And we believe that innovative apprenti apprenticeships are a very valuable part of this. So again, i want to thank you for the work that yall are doing on that. I think that that is something that every person on this committee can agree with, that preparing our young people to take advantage of the jobs that are being created is vitally important. So, thank you. Madam chairman, i yield back. Thank you, congressman. Thank you very much. Ms. Adams, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman foxx and Ranking Member<\/a> scott, and thank you, mr. Secretary, for being here. I was interested in the response that you gave to congresswoman fudge, so i want to follow up for just a moment. Controlling family timing and size can be key to unlocking opportunities for economic success, education, and equality, and access to contraception can help women complete their education, join the workforce, planning, delaying and spacing births will also appear to help women achieve their education and career goals. And so, with all of the economic benefits that access to contraceptive brings, it seems a bit illogical to me for the department to issue interim final rules that erodes a womans right to access comprehensive, Preventive Health<\/a> care. My question is, have you done, the department, have you done a complete assessment of the number of women and dependence and risa plans that could lose access to contraceptive coverage . And if so, whats the number . Congresswoman, as i said previously, the rule recognizes that for some organizations, their religious freedoms should allow them to not offer that coverage. It provides the option for that organization. It was enacted pursuant to the administrative procedures act. Within the apa, there is a requirement that the apa process engage in a costbenefit analysis, and that would be contained within that costbenefit analysis. Thats something that we certainly could provide to you or to your staff. So you have done an assessment . You know how many, is that what youre saying . What im saying is that within any rule, there is a costbenefit analysis that takes place, and that assessment is required by the administrative procedures act. And so, that assessment can certify okay. Thank you very much, and i would like to receive that. So, you know, according to the National Womens<\/a> law center, when we think about the wage and someone raised the fact, raised questions about the minimum wage, that federal wage minimum wage now is 7. 25 an hour. The average cost of a full years worth of Birth Control<\/a> pills without insurance was the equivalent of 51 hours of work before the acas contraceptive benefit was imposed. And so, when its affected, women on average are paid less than men. I dont see how we justify i dont see how you justify forcing them to pay more than men for Preventive Health<\/a> coverage. And ill just submit my other questions to you. And thank you very much. And madam chair, i yield back. Thank you, ms. Adams. Ms. Handel, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chairman. Good morning. Thank you, secretary, for being here. Just a quick question on the workforce innovation and opportunity act, which as you know, in july of 2016 instituted a new Accountability Program<\/a> with measurable, defined performance indicators. Do you have a sense, a yearplus later, about how this is working, thats been effective, and if so, are there other programs within department of labor to which this type of approach could be applied . Congresswoman, thank you for the question. I believe that it was, as you mentioned, instituted a year ago, and that states were responsible for submitting the outcomes. I believe about two to three weeks ago, it was at some point in october i dont remember the exact date. Were in the process of reviewing that data. Once that data is reviewed, im happy to provide further thoughts on what that data shows. Id also like to say that while most states did submit the data, i believe that there are seven states that are still working on the submission of that information, and were providing hopefully, georgia is not one of them, and if so, if you would let me know so i can follow up. [ laughter ] i will. I believe theres seven. I dont remember all seven. Okay. But i will you know, we are working with them to provide compliance assistance so that they understand their responsibilities. Super. If you would be willing to, once youve sorted through all of the data, either you or someone from your team, perhaps, send something in writing to chairman foxx for the whole committee, i think we would all be very interested in how that Accountability Program<\/a> is playing out. That is a fair request. Super. Thank you so much. Madam chairman, i yield back. Thank you very much. Mr. Espaillat, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. Before accepting the nomination to be secretary of labor, you were the dean of, very successful, i may add, dean of the Florida International<\/a> law school. Floridas International University<\/a> has been at the forefront of standing with daca students. Do you stand by Florida International<\/a>s commitment to support and protect our daca students . Congressman, i appreciate your question. It is certainly my hope that congress resolves this issue and finds a legal solution to this daca issue. And i should add that the clock is ticking, and so, i Hope Congress<\/a> does so expeditiously. Thank you. Now, my district alone has 2,400 Daca Recipients<\/a> and a total of 5,800 total dacaeligible recipients. Removing these individuals from our workforce, experts have said, will decrease our gdp by an estimated 155 million. What in the world is going to happen what are we going to do to fill this labor gap and other labor gaps across the country if this is not resolve snead do you have a plan for this as the secretary of labor . Congressman, we have a skills gap. We have a substantial skills gap, and we need to find a solution for daca. It is my sincere hope that congress can take this up and that congress can find the solution. Thank you. I am encouraged by your positive response, and i may add that, unfortunately, we have not heard that positive response by other members of the administration, so i commend you, and by your positive response, it only encourages the support for these young people that are members of our military, theyre teachers, theyre workers, theyre students. I think theyre probably the best Economic Development<\/a> program we can have for the nation, with their aggressive innovativeness, their entrepreneurship, their immigrant hunger to succeed and make america move forward. My final question is, according to the news reports from earlier this year, as a result of the administrations antiimmigrant rhetoric under the department of homeland securitys overaggressive enforcement efforts, the department of labor officials have noted a marked uptick in workers reluctance to file complaints against employer, take part in labor investigation, and even accept back wages collected by the department on the workers behalf. What is the department of labor doing to monitor and respond to this situation and reaffirm its commitment to protecting individual information during the course of labor investigation . Will you commit to continuing to ensure that the department of labor enforces labor laws, regardless of a persons immigration status . Congressman, that has been a longstanding practice that has been an issue that has gone all the way up to the supreme court, and it is my intent to continue that practice. Thank you so much. Thank you, madam chair. I yield back. Thank you. Mr. Allen, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman, and thank you, mr. Secretary, for being here with us today. I was in the Construction Industry<\/a> for 35 years before being elected to congress. And just a point of clarification, if i understood you correctly, on this silica rule. Has the rule been finalized, or is it still being negotiated, and is it being now implemented, or is it going to be different . Ive got people that dont know what i mean, theyre out pricing and getting quotes, and this is very expensive to deal with. And so, where are we with this . I mean, are they to comply by this exact rule now . And then what happens if it changes, and like i said, its very expensive to comply with this thing. Where are we with this . Congressman, i appreciate the question, and i was smiling because the rule is complicated and has multiple dates, which might be the basis for some of this confusion. Parts of the rule are in effect. Parts do not go into effect for some amount of time. You know, the parties of the litigation, and all sides are represented in this litigation, were im told close to settlement. Each side has their own set of concerns, and my view is if theres some common ground, we should look for that common ground. We provided a further 30day extension that has since expired in order to give the parties little more time. I was disheartened to that rather than use that time, the parties, as often happens, didnt come to the table until right up to the deadline. And so, it is my hope that the parties come to the table and come to the table quickly so that we can get this issue resolved. There is an awful lot of confusion. And like i said, there are people that are being faced with huge cost disadvantages on work that theyve already estimated, on contracts theyve already signed, and now this rule. They had no way to know what to anticipate. The rule might say obviously, it is very complicated. Is there any way we can, that osha can somehow clarify whats going on and then say, all right, heres where we are, and give the industry some time to adapt to whatever rule we finally come up with . Because again, its very costly. These people are on fixed costs. I mean, they dont put, you know, these compliance things in their estimates to complete the work. So all of a sudden, like you said, predictability is critical in the Business World<\/a> out there, and it is critical that these people know where we stand with this. I understand, congressman, and we are engaged in efforts to clarify, and we will redouble those efforts, because it is important that individuals know what is expected of them. I appreciate it. Thank you so much, mr. Secretary. I yield back. Thank you, mr. Allen. Mr. Desaulnier, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, madam chair, and thank you for having this hearing. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your testimony and your tenor here today. Its encouraging. I dont know if youve ever attended a funeral of an American Worker<\/a> whos ever lost their life in a workplace incident. I have. Ive represented for 30 years an area of the bay area that has amongst the geographic and per capita greatest density of Hazardous Material<\/a> facilities refineries, chemical plants. Almost 20 years ago, a constituent of mine, michael glanzman, lost his life because a fortune 500 company, toskco, at that time was appealing over 100 citations issued by cal osha just the week before. Two of them the most concerning that ill always remember that were at the root cause of this incident was that the backup indicators for temperature variations were outside the control room on the unit. Mr. Glanzman this day was, unfortunately, the junior member. He was sent out to verify that they should shut the unit down, even though it turned out later under inspection that the written policies that instructed them to do that were being overwritten by oral instructions. Mr. Glanzman went out, and a second citation that was being appealed was that they should replace the walkietalkie he was using because it didnt work. We think the last thing he said was shut it down, shut it down, but well never know, because he was eviscerated. That explosion not only cost his life but raised the price of gasoline and diesel on the west coast by more than 10 cents. A year later, another four employees at that facility lost their lives in a gruesome explosion and burned to death. We shut that refinery down, the local government, for a year and did a full facilities audit. And the result of that audit was very succinct Corporate Culture<\/a> caused those deaths. So, in that context, forgive me for being suspicious when i see a department thats being cut by 21 million over its last funding of last year, osha, 11 million more than the administration asked for, and that youre staffed at a level thats consistent with the 90s, and it would take 159 years for your inspectors to inspect every facility in the United States<\/a>. So, forgive me for being cynical. But you can help me with my skepticism. Last year, may 12th of 2016, the Previous Administration<\/a> had a rulemaking that would instruct employers of over 20 employees in heavy Industries Like<\/a> this to electronically notify them when theres illness or workforce injury. Seems like thats what youre after is efficiency and better results. You have postponed that rulemaking. The website is up and capable of running as of august. We anticipate that over 300,000 reports will be in. Well be able to track these incidents better, so mr. Glanzmans of the future will not have what happened to him. So, i would like to know if you plan on setting this up and making it work effective december 1st, and if not, why . Congressman, thank you for the question. Let me just briefly respond. I understand the point that youre making, and i understand that because we had a similar incident in miami, and that incident was prosecuted criminally. People died. A boiler blew up. There was a flash steam blew up and people died. It was prosecuted criminally. And so, i am very much aware of the importance of vigorous prosecution, particularly as i said earlier when addressing one of your colleagues, when violations are repeated and when violations are willful. And so, cynical or not, this is something that we take very seriously. With respect to the particular rule that youre addressing, were looking at that rule. We are balancing the issues of privacy, because it was asking for some information that was very detailed and that identified individuals with the needs to get information so that we can engage in appropriate and targeted enforcement. We are moving forward on that, but that does not lessen the seriousness with which we will take instances in tlparticular that are repeated and that are willful and im perfectly fine referring them to criminal prosecution. As a matter of fact, in other contexts, ive already made clear to my staff that, where appropriate, they should refer things to the u. S. Attorneys office, that i am more than happy to encourage u. S. Attorneys offices to take our cases, because in addition to civil fines where you have a culture that is noncompliant and that disregards safety matters, that can be a criminal violation. Thank you. I appreciate the time the secretary took to answer the question and did not call time, because i thought it was a very serious matter, and i wanted to allow the time for that answer, and i appreciate it. Mr. Thompson, youre recognized for three minutes. Madam chair, thank you. Secretary acosta, good to see you. Thank you for your leadership. Weve heard the words skills gap. You used that. It certainly exists. We know that projections are by the year 2020, 6 million jobs will go unfilled because of a lack of individuals who are qualified and trained. The tax reform bill that will be on the floor here within the next 24 hours, thats been estimated to create conditions where a million additional jobs will grow. That will all be for nothing, though, if we dont have individuals who are qualified and trained to fill those positions. So i just wanted to get your reflections on it. Ive worked with many colleagues in this committee, and specifically with representative moorthy, we introduce d legislation for the 21st century that passed out of the house unanimously and now sits in the senate. Ive really appreciated your support that youve and the administration generally have said about skillsbased education and wanted to just get your you know, given you know, thats a you know, that many jobs that we need to fill, and its so important, theres so much opportunity there. Any reflections . Is the legislation we put forward to the senate, waiting seen senate, will that be helpful to creating onramps to opportunity for americans and American Families<\/a> . Congressman, thank you for the question. And let me you know, i dont have the detail of the legislation in front of me, so let me answer the question generally. I opened by saying ive been traveling to different parts of the country, and i visited the carpenters facility and pipefitters graduation, but ive also visited a Community College<\/a> in los angeles. I have visited a Community College<\/a> in reno. I have visited several Community College<\/a>s, and to an institution, what i have seen is amazing. Whether its teaching, teaching nursing skills in pittsburgh, teaching hvac in reno, teaching welding in los angeles, what Community College<\/a>s and Vocational Education<\/a> centers are doing is creating not just creating jobs, but changing lives. Ive had an experience where i met with some young men and women, and the folks that ran the institution were there, but i wanted to really hear from them, so i asked everyone else to leave, and i just talked to the students. And i wanted to do that because they were kids that came from the street that hadnt finished high school and were coming at this late in life. And what they said was that it was transformative, because they now had apartments. One was about to get their first car. And so, i think taking a step back and recognizing that there is no right path for everyone and that the question is what is the right option for an individual, and does it lead to a good job, is critical. And so, any measure that does that, subject to all the fiscal issues that we always face as a government, i think is something that should be supported. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Krishnamoorthi, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairman foxx and thank you representative scott for calling this hearing and thank you, secretary acosta, for coming. Im going piggyback off my colleague, mr. Thompson, g. T. Thompsons questions, because i think this is really important. The bill, its called strengthening career and Technical Education<\/a> for the 21st century act, is one that congressman thompson and i championed. And it passed out of the house unanimously. And so, that, unfortunately, doesnt happen enough with regard to significance pieces of legislation. Its extremely bipartisan. And so, i wanted to just get your thoughts about this legislation, whether you and your staff could come back to us with your thoughts about it, because we could definitely enlist your support to get it through the senate. This is something that employers are clamoring for right now. Its hr2353, just in case youre wondering what the bill number is. And basically, employers, as well as workers, people in my district are clamoring for this bill to be passed. It basically increases transparency, it moves authority for spending a lot of the money from washington to local Community College<\/a>s and high school districts, increases some resources over time for cashstrapped, local school districts, and it also requires that if any federal job training dollars are spent, employers have to be at the table so that people arent trained on skills that are not in demand. So, can we get your commitment to take a look at this bill and help us to usher it through the u. S. Senate . Congressman, you certainly can. And let me just pick up on something that you said that was very important, because in every Community College<\/a> that i have seen, and all of them have been successful, there is an employer partner that is assisting with informing the Community College<\/a> of what the skills are that need to be taught, and that is also very anxious to hire the graduates. And so, i think that is critical. Let me also say that that one issue of confusion is that there is an office of Vocational Education<\/a> at the department of education. And we talked about overlaps of workforce education earlier, and at one of the large overlaps is we have at the department of labor labor force education, and at the department of education, Vocational Education<\/a>. And i think the overlap between those two is quite substantial. So, let me say, im more than happy to return and speak with your staffs. I also think its important to engage the department of education, because i am told that ultimately, this is within their jurisdiction. I understand. The more allies that we can have on this critical piece of legislation that will help our workers and employers, the better. Absolutely. So, i definitely could use your help. And thank you for committing to us youre going to help us. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Rooney, youre recognized for three minutes. First, mr. Secretary, thank you for changing back the administrators interpretations on joint employer and the definition of an independent contractor, et cetera, bringing some kind of sanity back to the Labor Department<\/a> and the workforce. It sure needs it. Id like to talk about work centers today. Only 6 of workers are represented by unions last year, but the National Unions<\/a> still bring in hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue per year. The comment was made a while ago about Corporate Culture<\/a>, something i know about. Lets talk about union culture. Maybe duespaying Union Members<\/a> would like to know where their money thats funding these work centers is going. There is yet another union boondoggle has been able to operate in a legal free zone there wl theres no tracking of their spending, they can have unlimited spending. Theyre independent organizations, but the black hand of the unions is behind them and theyre not subject to union disclosure. So what id like to know is, now that weve get you in there, what can we do to work to define these things under the lmrast, labor organization, and to rein them in and show the people that theyre just a front for labor unions . Congressman, thank you for the question. That question was raised previously at another meeting that i was at, and ill provide the same answer, which is, its something that were looking at, and im happy to follow up with your office and your staff, probably in a few weeks. Well, i hope youll move aggressively, because people have been waiting a long time to return some balance to the equilibrium and equilibrium to labor versus corporate entities in this country that provide the jobs. So, thank you very much. I yield. Thank you very much, mr. Rooney. Mr. Scott. Are you i believe. You want us to go ahead . Okay. Mr. Grothman, youre recognized for three minutes. Sure. Thank you very much. How Many Employers<\/a> do you have at the department of labor . Congressman, i believe we have about 15,000, give or take. And how many do you get to hire . As you try to get a handle of this . Very few, congressman. I dont have an exact number. Less than 20 . Less than 30 . More than 30, but less than 100, i would say. Okay. Next question i have. With regard to osha, right now there have been some complaints in my district of people who come in, write citations for what we have to say relatively minor things, sometimes sending out public press releases as far as things, maybe mine are easily correctible. Do you have any plans to rein in osha . Are you aware of that problem . Congressman, as i said earlier, my perspective on osha enforcement, and enforcement in general, is where you have individuals that are trying to do the right thing, that are trying to comply. There is a value to compliance assistance, to saying, look, this is how it needs to be done. On the flip side, if you have an employer that is engaged in repeatnd willful violations, violations that have resulted in serious harm, we need to be very aggressive in the enforcement. And so, i think compliance assistance goes hand in hand with aggressive enforcement. We talked about the lack of, i think maybe the number one problem for employers in my district is they cant find people to work. And i can think of a couple things we could do about that. For one thing, of course, we still have a large government bureaucracy. Do you feel that you need all the people who are working for you right now . Are you looking at areas of efficiencies, at least in your little bally wick, you can maybe decrease the employment and open up some of your folks for work in the private sector . Well, congressman, certainly, theres always room to improve efficiencies. What were looking at right now, and where were focused is particularly on the programmatic dollars, because thats by far where most of our spending is, and in how we can spend those dollars wisely to focus on outcomes. As i said earlier, its not simply, and particularly in the labor education, the workforce education side, not just how many folks are receiving services, but what is the outcome . How many graduates and how many jobs . Okay. Next question. To a degree, your Organization Deals<\/a> with something, ill refer to welfare, help for people. And right now we have a lot of perverse incentives in our society. Could you comment on if you feel you have any role in dealing with our kind of income transfer payments, as President Trump<\/a> has said he wants to take this up next year . Could you give us any role that you might play in this . Congressman, obviously, we will be playing a significant role, particularly when it comes to workforce issues. This is an important factor. And you know, as the president has said, this will be an issue for next year. Thank you, mr. Grothman. Mr. Wilson, youre recognized for three minutes. Thank you, chairwoman Virginia Foxx<\/a> for your leadership and the bipartisan efforts today with Ranking Member<\/a> bobby scott. Secretary acosta, we appreciate you and the administrations strong focus on creating jobs by expanding industrydriven apprenticeships and workbased learning. In South Carolina<\/a>, we have consistently found that the most successful programs are those which are industrydriven, and its for that reason that apprenticeship South Carolina<\/a> is considered a gold standard. We can make strides by starting with High School Students<\/a> having opportunities for training, for fulfilling lives. In South Carolina<\/a>, boeing with over 9,000 jobs now in the charleston area, and with the apprenticeship carolina, it has recently kicked off a paid youth Apprenticeship Program<\/a>. Students attend high school, take career courses at trident Technical College<\/a>. They complete five hours per week of job training at boeing South Carolina<\/a>, which produces the worlds most advanced widebody airliner, the 78710 dreamliner. Boeing has also partnered with Charleston County<\/a> district schools workbased learning Internship Program<\/a> to bring on High School Students<\/a> as paid interns. These students are working on a special fastener Reclamation Project<\/a> and have already reclaimed over 1 million in what would have been wasted over the first three months of the program. What is your view of the department of labors plans to focus on encouraging such industrydriven youth apprenticeships and workbased learning programs in the forthcoming pilot Apprenticeship Program<\/a> . Congressman, thank you for the question and the remarks. And you know, i would observe, this is perhaps a second or third set of questions around apprenticeships that raise apprenticeships that are not registered apprenticeships, which goes to my opening comment about how important it is to have a broad view of apprenticeships to recognize the advantages of registered, but also recognize that there is room for other models, such as the model that you raise. My perspective is, you know, were a large nation and a diverse nation, and there is room for a variety of programs. And we as a department should encourage workforce education in various forms, so long as there is high quality, so long as there is standards, so long as there is some degree of portability so that the skills learned in one venue can be ported to different venues. And so, so long as there is some credential that is earned. And so, as we look forward to this Apprenticeship Task<\/a> force and how to grow Apprenticeship Program<\/a>s, my hope is that we take a broad view of the concept of apprenticeship so we can empower more individuals to have familysustaining jobs. And another extraordinary sample was mtu of graniteville, South Carolina<\/a>, with the Engine Development<\/a> working with akin Technical College<\/a> in the district i represent. So, thank you for your efforts. Thank you, mr. Wilson. I now recognize the Ranking Member<\/a> for three minutes and for his closing comments. Thank you, madam chair, and thank you, secretary acosta, for being with us today. Thank you. Thank you for being with us today. As you can tell theres a lot of interest in the issues under your jurisdiction. First i want to theres by partisan support for Apprenticeship Program<\/a>s so far is so long as we can make sure the federal dollars are going to quality programs. And that will take work to get that straight. I think youre aware of the Apprentice Program<\/a> at the shipyard which is one of the best in the country. I invite you to visit or at least familiarize yourself. Because its one of the best in the nation. Let me ask you a couple questions the minimum wage hasnt been raised in a long time. Do you have a position on increasing the minimum wage . Congressman, that is an issue that is quin congresss purview. The minimum hasnt been raised in a number of years and its set by congress. You would support an increase in the minimum wage . I think if that is to happen, congress should have a discussion. Were happy to be part of that. Thank you. On the role you have indicated that the best interest standard is now in effect however other parts not in effect. What would happen with a retiree has vested interest violated is essentially ripped off. What are the remedies . So congressman, so long as companies are proceeding in good faith to implement the best interest standard, we are in a compliance assistance mode. We still have Enforcement Authority<\/a>. If there are willful violations we have Enforcement Authority<\/a> does the individual have any individual remedy . Congressman, the Enforcement Authority<\/a> within arisa is federal Enforcement Authority<\/a>. Not individual Enforcement Authority<\/a>. The rule is as i understand it you have accepted the lower threshold for exposure. But according to osha, 70 of the value of the rule was the services and protection. Is that your understanding . Congressman, i couldnt speak to the 70 figure. I have not seen that figure and i believe there might be a disagreement as to whether the ins lair services contribute or do not contribute to the protection. Will provide you what we have. I think thats the accepted from the osha department. We have heard a lot about associated health plans. I agree they always work for consumers. The costs are always cheaper. For those that can get into an association plan. Everybody else, however, when you take the healthy young people out of the pool, everybody elses costs go up. Is that your understanding about the effect of association plans . Congressman, what is called in essence, cherry picking or anticherry picking provisions are an important part of Association Health<\/a> plans. That is an issue were aware of. And our proposals will be considering that issue. And have preventive measures for that issue. The fact of the matter is if you get a group, even a random group, the cost to lower the association, everybody will join. The cost are higher everybody will bail and get back into the pool. So they always they always work for those in the pool. And so i think we have to look at effect on everyone else. And if thats ignored then you have missed most of the impact. My time on questions is expired. But i would want to add, pose two questions if you could provide us with answers. We have heard about the joint employer. There are situations that we have been made aware of where a person can be found to have their over time benefits violated. Overtime when they look up, none of the employers qualify as an employer responsible under the fair standard labor act. What happens when no one qualifies under that restricted definition of the legislation . You could provide that for the record. And also your testimony suggests that jobs will be created by tax reform. If you could give us a research on the job creation impact on upper income tax cuts, tax cuts to low and moderate income individuals, and the comparable spending of the same amount on infrastructure like roads and brenlgs, bridges, or spending on education and job training, jobs created to provide education. But the economic of the better educated better trained work force. If you could give us the research you have on that to justify the idea the tax bill will create jobs, that will be helpful. Appreciate the information you provided the committee. I forgot to mention, we have jurisdiction over the department of agriculture for a few programs. Youre the first. We look forward to other cabinet secretaries appearing before us. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Scott. I appreciate all my colleagues today for being so cooperative. And it looks as though mr. Secretary will be able to honor your request to be out of here by noon. I have a couple closing comments. I want to say thank you again. I think you have provided very valuable information to both sides of the aisle here. I particularly appreciate the emphasis you have given on outcomes and accountability. I believe the members appreciate that also. I appreciate the fact that you have talked about skills and education and the fact that there is no right path that leads to a good job or career. And i particularly appreciate the fact that you talk about careers. I think were hearing more and more about that in the conversation about helping people make the right kinds of decisions and helping them understand that their first job is not going to be their last job, and that we want people to have a Broader Vision<\/a> of where they are going. Again, im very encouraged by your talk about performance measures. And i think everybody appreciates your commitment to safety. And to creating positive workplaces for workers. Nobody wants any worker to be in an unsafe condition. And i think you are you have said the right things in that respect. And i believe that you and the department will do the right things. And lastly, i would say that we want to encourage people to think about all education being career education. And the fact that you have pointed out the overlap between the department of education and the department of labor indicates that we need to be focussed more on that, those issues. That all education people go to a baccalaureate degree institution, their aim is to get a job. People are participating in a apprenticeships because they want to get a good job. Theyre participating in Community College<\/a> because they want to get a job. And so were all about, at all levels, were focusing on the same thing. And i think its useful that we talk about that in the same way and that we dont set up distinctions among the various ways to get the skills to be able to have a successful career. So i appreciate your comments today and your excellent answers and all my colleagues who are gone, but mr. Scott for playing their roles today. Madame chair. An article on Delaware Company<\/a> finding value in the workers and memorandum to the American People<\/a> from the department of labor from the past administration. Without objection. There being no further business, this committee stands adjourned. Today housing and urban secretary ben carson and David Shulkin<\/a> hold a conferenceton homelessness. Online cspan. Org and free cspan radio app. Tonight on the communicators, the newest member of the federal communications commission, brendan carr, joins us to discuss net neutrality, Justice Department<\/a> suing at t over ownership and media ownership rules. Mr. Carr interviewed by Technology Reporter<\/a> john hendel. Do you have faith in the independence of doj authorities and how you see that overall. It is a pretty big situation to be unfolding right now. My general view is fcc, again, has a pretty limited role to play in mergers, which is to say when a transaction comes before us, we take a look and we first say, is there a transaction specific harm. If there is, we try to find a narrowly tailored remedy for that harm. If that addresses the harm we identified, then we can move forward with Public Interest<\/a> determination. One thing you saw fcc deal with over the past few years was deal merger over christmas tree, hang regulatory agenda. Thats not my approach and not the approach i think lawfully under the Communications Act<\/a> fcc should take. Watch the communicators tonight at 8 00 eastern on cspan2","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia800402.us.archive.org\/34\/items\/CSPAN3_20171127_130000_Labor_Secretary_on_Department_Policies_and_Priorities\/CSPAN3_20171127_130000_Labor_Secretary_on_Department_Policies_and_Priorities.thumbs\/CSPAN3_20171127_130000_Labor_Secretary_on_Department_Policies_and_Priorities_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240630T12:35:10+00:00"}