October 9, 2025 • 32 mins
Newt talks with Vincent Vernuccio, President of the Institute for the American Worker about the Employee Rights Act of 2025, a legislative proposal aimed at enhancing and safeguarding the rights of American workers while promoting fairness and accountability in the workplace. Introduced by Senator Tim Scott and Congressman Rick Allen, the bill represents a Republican vision for the workforce, focusing on empowering workers, improving unions, and fostering innovation and growth. Vernuccio highlights the outdated nature of current labor laws, which were designed for a 1930s economy, and the need for reform. The Act seeks to modernize labor laws by ensuring secret ballots, protecting workers' privacy, and allowing workers to opt out of union representation. Despite broad public support for its provisions, the bill faces opposition from Democrats and some Republicans who favor the PRO Act. Their discussion also touches on the decline of union membership, particularly in the private sector, and the need for unions to adapt to modern workforce demands.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
In this episode of Newtsworld. The Employee Rights Act of
twenty twenty five is legislation that seeks to strengthen and
protect the rights of American workers while ensuring fairness and
accountability in the workplace. This bill represents the Republican vision
for the American workforce, promoting opportunity, protecting workers' rights and privacy,
(00:24):
and creating a strong foundation for innovation and growth. The
bill is introduced on Wednesday in the Senate by Senator
Tim Scott of South Carolina, with companion legislation introduced in
the House by Congressman Rick Allen of Georgia. Here to
discuss the Employee Rights Act, I am really pleased to
welcome my guest, Vincent Bernuccio, President of the Institute for
(00:45):
the American Worker. Benny, you've said the Employee Rights Act
is about empowering workers and improving unions. What's wrong with
the current system and what has changed that makes reforms
(01:08):
so necessary today?
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Well, labor law across the country is incredibly outdated. You
were talking about laws that were written in the Industrial
Revolution that is essentially created for that nineteen thirties economy.
The last time labor law was amended was really in
the fifties and the sixties. So the Employee Rights Act
(01:32):
is the most comprehensive labor legislation that is pro worker.
Is there, like you said, mister speaker, and once again
thank you for having me on to empower both workers.
Allow them to work how they want, with who they want,
and choose how to support their family. And there's also
things that will help improve unions by making them more
(01:54):
accountable of those workers.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
What actually is wrong with the current system.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Are multiple things. So right now unions can organize workers
without a secret ballot election. You have the Labor Board,
the National Labor Relations Board that administers union elections and
enforces labor law for most private sector workers, that can
actually allow an election by secret ballot and then pull
(02:21):
the rug out from underworkers and say, well, the employer
may have done something wrong, so we're just going to
toss that election out the window and recognize the union anyway,
even if the employees voted against it. From administration to administration,
you see different definitions of people that could work for
themselves versus an employee. Same thing with small businesses, SEB contractors,
(02:48):
franchise businesses that work with other businesses, from administration and administration.
You see this ping pong of who is considered an
employer and who employees actually wan for. Happy to get
into all of those details, some of the worst things
we saw under the Biden administration, going back to standards
that let union organizers and people representing unions actually do
(03:13):
just vile harassment of workers and allow them to be
protected by labor law. So that's just a smattering of
the issues that the Employee Rights Ack protects and addresses,
as well as protecting the privacy and the political ideals
of individual workers. And happy to get into all this,
(03:33):
I know, it's kind of a schmorgasboard of good ideas.
Really excited to chat with you about it.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
It's fascinating because, as you know, union membership has declined
from twenty percent of workers in nineteen eighty three just
about nine point nine percent, about ten percent today. That's
a fifty percent reduction. Why do you think union membership
rates have declined and how does that affect the current workforce?
Speaker 2 (03:57):
Well, labor law is severely outdated and the union business
model is mirroring that. You know, if we went back
to the nineteen thirties, unions would be in great shape
because they have that one size fits all bargaining. They're
basically created to have that adversarial relationship with employers. I
think they're essentially selling this product that most modern workers
(04:20):
do not want. I've done studies on this very issue
that show that if unions adapted, they gave up the
government granted crutches, they acted like professional service organizations that
were completely voluntary that if employees wanted to join and
get the representation they could, If employers wanted to use them,
essentially as an HR arm, they could, and unions could
(04:43):
choose to work with who they want. If they did that,
if they embraced kind of a modern workforce professional service
association model, they could thrive. But unfortunately, with things like
the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, with things that
unfortunate people like Senator Hawley are advancing in the Senate,
(05:04):
like the Faster Labor Contracts Act and some of the
other things with his framework that I know will probably
chat about, they're unfortunately doubling down on the outdated, failed
models of the past, and it's preventing them from growing
and expanding and contributing to that decline.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
If you think back to the great era of union
representation and how many people belong to unions, And about
a fifth of the country was in the union at
the peak of the nineteen fifties. So the question I've
got is what happened? And yet it happened in the
private sector, not the public sector. And as I understand it,
(05:40):
union membership on public sector workers is about thirty two percent,
basically a third. Well, among private sector workers it's dropped
to about six percent, so you're about five times as
likely to have a union membership in a public sector job.
What happened and why is are that huge difference?
Speaker 2 (05:57):
You're right, it's about a third of the public sector
is around six percent five point nine in the private sector. Historically,
that is where unions really focus their energy on organizing. Also,
you see businesses that have to compete, they have to
compete overseas, they have to compete with other states, and
they cannot simply say, well, we're just gonna raise the
(06:19):
price of our products to pay for union agreements. That
is a lot different in the public sector. It's not
like the government of Chicago can just say, hey, we're
going to go down to Tennessee because it's a right
to work stake, So essentially they had taxpayers footing the bill.
There wasn't that competition. They had that monopoly, and that's
(06:39):
why you really saw some of these exorbitant union contracts
in the public sector, and you saw an increase. Now
that is not the case today it is about thirty
two percent, but that is down from the high and
as you see things like the Janis versus Appsme case
from several years ago that essentially brought right to work
(07:00):
to the entire public sector. And mister speakers, you know,
right to work simply means the union can't get a
worker fired for not paying them. You saw workers start
leaving those unions in droves well, whether because they didn't
think the union was doing a good job or because
you see a lot of public sector unions, especially like
the teachers' unions, just doubling down on far left politics
(07:22):
that some other membership just simply doesn't agree with.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
You have said, and it was an article that you
and Representive Rick Allen wrote called how to Empower Workers
and Improve Unions, And in that you wrote, Congress also
needs to modernize federal law to empower workers and improve
labor unions to deliver a twenty first century economy that
benefits the working class. Why do you think the Employee
(07:47):
Rights Act is the best step forward to accomplish this?
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Absolutely because it has many of those provisions that we
were just talking about. It protects worker's right to a
secret ballot. So there's a process called card check where
unions can go. It's an open petition process. It can
lead to intimidation, it can lead to coercion. At best,
there's just deception there because workers don't hear both sides
of what unionization would mean. So the first thing we
(08:14):
would do is protect the secret ballot for workers, let
them make an informed, private choice on if they want
a union to come in and represent them. It also
allows workers to fully opt out of union representation right now,
even in right to work states where unions can't force
workers to pay fees to them, even if they're not
(08:35):
a member, they're still stuck under the union contract whether
they want to be or not. Worker's choice would allow
workers to fully opt out not just of paying the union,
but of union representation and act like the almost ninety
percent of the rest of the economy that is not
represented by a union. It protects workers privacy right now, unfortunately,
(08:57):
if a union petitions an employer, the employer has to
give all sorts of personal information to the union. Workers'
home addresses, personal cell phones, personal email. What the Employee
Rights AFT would do is it would allow those workers
to say, you know, I just want them to have
my email. I don't want them to have my home address,
(09:19):
and it would prevent the employer from having to give
all of that personal information. Now, if an employee wanted
the union to have that information and be contacted, they're
more than welcome to. But it's not like the current
situation where even if the employee doesn't want it, the
union is forced to get it. Going to your question
(09:39):
on the modernization, it allows legal clarity for independent workers.
So right now, from administration administration to who's an employee
is amorphous. Biden administration wasn't exactly what California did, but
essentially they wanted to do what California did, making most
people entrepreneurs working for themselves. Defin migned as an employee.
(10:02):
The Employee Rights Act would take Representative Kevin Kylie's Modern
Worker Empowerment Act and make it much easier for people
to work for themselves. It would protect small business owner's
ability to own a franchise or be a subcontractor without
saying that their employees are jointly employed with others. It
(10:23):
would make sure that only workers legally authorized to work
in the United States are voting for union contracts and
for unions to come in. And it would also make
sure that unions which have this duty of fair representation
to all employees are fairly representing all employees and not
including DEI in collective bargaining agreements. We talked about the
(10:46):
protection from harassing language, which unfortunately, because of the Biden NLRB,
was allowed. It would also close a loophole that allows
unions to be exempt from RICO statutes. It would also
allow workers to have an opt in as opposed to
opt out and supporting union politics, and a few other
(11:07):
provisions as well. So I know that's a lot, but
once again, that is why the Employee Rights Act is
the most comprehensive bill labor, free market, pro worker labor
legislation of the Congress, and I applaud Representative Allen and
now Senator Tim Scott, who just introduced the bill the
companion of legislation on the Senate side this Wednesday.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
He notes the Cord of Open Secrets that from twenty
twenty three to twenty twenty four, public sector union packs
donated twelve point five million to Democrats and one point
six million to Republicans. Although my guess is that the
actual vote, which we're much more narrow than that, So
you have a lot of money going from Republicans to
(12:05):
subsidized Democrats. How does your act affect the compulsory use
of my money to support candidates I'm opposed to?
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Sure, So let's back up. So the Employee Rights Act
changes federal labor law, and federal labor law really only
affects workers in the private sector, So we're talking about
most private sector workers that aren't working for railroads and airlines.
That's the vast majority of the private sector, but that's
who the Employee Rights Act protects. Public sector employees are
(12:35):
governed by state labor law, and each state has different
labor law. But obviously the public sector labor law most
states base it off of the federal law, so we
may see copycat legislation at a state level for things
that do affect public employees. But going back to your question,
and let's just bring it back to the private sector.
(12:56):
What the Employee Rights Act does is it has a
annual opt in So for anything that is not collective bargaining,
and this is for right to work states non right
to work states, unions have to say, well, we want
to spend your money on ex politics, and you have
to opt into that. And workers get that opportunity on
(13:17):
a yearly basis to make the decision whether or not
they want to support their union's politics and if they
want that money, if they're given to the union, are
taken out of their paycheck. So that's one of the
great provisions that really puts workers in the driver's seat
when it comes to union politics in the Employee Rights Act.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
Well of these are surprised me, I think is that
your bill would provide for a secret ballot in union elections.
I mean, you sort of think that's kind of a
basic American right to have a secret ballot. To what
extent of the union leadership use having an open ballot
to control the choices of their members.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
So we've studies on this and Senator Scott and Representative
Allen's bill. Unfortunately, there are example after example of intimidation
and coercion. I've testified before Congress on this, as the
NLRB said, and over zealous union organizer coming to somebody's
house and saying, you know, I'll slash your tires or
(14:20):
you know, the union knows come to your house if
you don't sign this card. The cards themselves are problematic.
You could have a big font come to this pizza party,
sign up here, ors, enter this raffle or what have you,
and then a little six point font on the bottom,
I hereby authorize the union to represent me. So unions
can actually go to employers and if they get fifty
(14:41):
percent plus one of those cards, say you must recognize us.
And they can also bring all these sorts of intimidation
tactics and anti PR campaigns to pressure employers to give
in and recognize the union. So the Employee Rights Act
would simply say we're gonna do away with the card
check process. And the way that unions would come in
(15:02):
and organize is, you know, they would still get the cards,
they would petition the NRB, but then workers would be
guaranteed that secret ballot election and would have the time
first to make that decision. So it's not just signing
a card when somebody presents it in front of you,
and you don't have time to reflect on what you're doing.
But also, just like we vote for president, just like
(15:24):
we vote for governor, for congress, for state legislature, have
the ability to vote in a private voting booth without
anybody looking over your shoulders. So it is a great
step forward in protecting employees' right to choose who represents them.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
If unions can come in and basically insist on a
public vote, why have they not organized more of the country.
I mean, it seems to me it's very heavily rigged
in their favor.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
You could say it's not exactly a public vote, it's
simply a card signed, so there's never actually a vote.
And that comes back to that deception of oh, I
just want to sign up for more information or for
this pizza party, and they don't lo and behold. The
union says, well, we're going to use this card to
organize you. So you know, we've seen card check campaigns
where workers just they don't get enough cards signed. You know,
(16:11):
you have good employers that want to say we want
to protect our employees right to a secret ballot, and
this is something that the protecting the right to organize
Act several years ago, the Employee Free Choice Act, and
the NLRB is trying to do away with now they're
doing away with it in the pro act. And what
the Biden NLRB did not in the most obvious way.
(16:32):
They still say, hey, you can have an election, And
what I would say is are doing is actually worse
because then once again they can take the rugout from
under those workers and say, even if you have an election,
the employer did something wrong. So what we're going to
do is we're going to toss out that election and
we're going to recognize the union via cards. So it
really is insidious. But the Employee Rights Act, that's one
(16:55):
of the first key provisions is stopping that and making
sure that employees right to it, that private vote is protected.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
When you look at your bill, employee right sacked. There
was a survey done and something like an overwhelming majority
I think sixty seven percent supported the right to a
supervised secret ballot on deciding whether to join the union. Interestingly,
seventy two percent even more among union households. And when
you ask whether employee's been right to work, states who
(17:27):
opt out of union representation should be free to negotiate contracts, wages,
and working conditions directly with their employee. Sixty eight percent supported,
including sixty eight percent in the union householding. Seems to
say that your bill has pretty solid national support.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
It really does. And the individual provisions in the bill,
whether it's the employee rights ACKed individual provisions or the
standalone legislation that was used to create this great omnibus legislation,
it has vast support. And you just talked about the
Worker's Choice polling where about sixty eight percent of total
households and union households support it. This is actually something
(18:06):
that the union rank and file have been consistently told
is an issue with right to work and why they
can't have right to work. So essentially, unions claim what
they call the free rider issue. I like to call
it the force writer issue, but essentially, oh, with right
to work, we can't force workers to pay us, but
they still get the same benefits of the contract. What
worker's choice does. It says, oh, you don't want to
(18:28):
represent workers that are not paying you. Unions in right
to work states where they're not forced to pay, then
you don't have to and workers can represent themselves. So
for all the times that they go and they rail
against these right to work laws. This is giving unions
actually exactly what they're asking for now. At the end
of the day, they would much rather have the monopoly,
(18:49):
and they would rather force workers to pay than give
up that monopoly. But it's essentially addressing that main issue.
And then same thing with the secret ballot. You're seeing
seventy two percent support a union households and the rights
of privacy and having their private information shared. You see
eighty percent of union households agree. That's even greater than
(19:09):
the seventy six percent of households. And when you talk
about those independent contractor provisions, those joint employer provisions and others,
all of those are in the high seventies, some in
the high sixties or even pushing over eighty percent. All
the provisions of the Employee Rights Act pull extraordinarily well,
(19:31):
not just with households but also with union households.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
How much do you think in that sense that the
union household of today is significantly different, say, from a
union household in nineteen fifty five.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
We are seeing differences. Obviously, as you said, there are
fewer union households because there are fewer union members. And
once again, I think a big reason for that is
because unions have that thirties, forties, fifties business model that
does not translate into the flexibility that modern workers want.
(20:23):
You are seeing, you know, similar industries, except for, as
you pointed out, the growth of the public sector, and
there really wasn't public sector bargaining in the forties. It
really wasn't until you know, the fifties sixties that first
there were federal executive orders and Wisconsin allowing public employees
to bargain, and then it really expanded out. So if
(20:43):
you're talking about the atypical union household, you know, used
to think an auto worker or a truck driver. Now
really it's a government bureaucrat.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Does this bill apply to the federal employee unions or
should there be a parallel bill to apply to the
federal employee unions?
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Definitely should, it does not. Once again, this is for
workers in the private sector. If you want to get
really deep in the weeds, it's under the National Labor
Relations Act. Employees the NLRA that is basically everybody but
railroad and airline workers. There's other provisions that touch on
like the Fair Labor Standards Act, and some other legislation,
(21:20):
but for the most part we are talking about workers
in the private sector that are not railroad or airline employees.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
I'm trying to remember, is the NLRA in nineteen thirties
will originally it is.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
It was amended in nineteen forty seven by taped partly
that allowed states to opt into write to work and
several other provisions, and then a couple decades later it
was the Labor Management Relation and Disclosure Act the LAMORDA
that brought more transparency to unions.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
But in many ways we're so operating under a system
whose structure reflections the industrial behavior of the late nineteen thirties.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
You are absolutely correct, not just the law, but also
what the law enables and the union business model. And
once again going back to the issues with why private
sector unions and Franklin unions in general are declining, it's
because their business model is corresponding with that law and
is based in the Industrial Revolution the nineteen thirties, workers
(22:20):
working in factories, less skilled, more interchangeable than the modern
dynamic workforce of today that wants the flexibility, that wants
to be rewarded for how hard they work, and wants
to be treated as individuals instead of these one size
fits all bargaining arrangements.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
When you take the individual components of the bill, support
goes as high as eighty one percent in union households.
For some of the provisions. What's the opposition, Why is
it going to be hard to move this bill? What's
the opposition? Oh?
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Well, you see most Democrats just say, well, hey, you know,
we'd rather see the Proact that is essentially the opposite
of most of the provisions of this bill. They have
those attacks on the secret ballot where it's not exactly
card check, but essentially they can toss out secret ballot elections.
It's the making employees across the country, similar to what
(23:17):
we saw in California with the attacks on independent contracting.
They have a different definition of who is an employer
and attacks on subcontractors, small business franchise owners saying that
their employees are actually the employees of a distant corporation.
There are other provisions within the Proact essentially the opposite
(23:40):
of what we're seeing here in the Employee Rights Act
and what you see with Democrats and unfortunately with one
or two Republican senators like Josh Hawley that's what they
are embracing.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Why do you think people like Hally, who otherwise will
be a pretty normal Republican but on a couple of diseases,
is he sort of ends up on the other team.
Why do you think that is?
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Just on Wednesday there was a hearing where he invited
Teaches President Sean O'Brien to speak and then back and forth.
He has his Faster Labor Contracts Act that would allow
government bureaucrats to appoint an arbitration panel that would literally
write the first contract between a union and an employer
(24:29):
if they didn't come to an agreement in a vastly
truncated time period. And this would cut out worker voice
that would not have the ability to vote on these contracts,
and it could essentially write for the foreseeable future, because
subsequent contracts would be based off this first contract over
every aspect of the worker's job site and how they
(24:53):
would work. So it is incredibly troubling, and unfortunately, I
think Center Hawley is guided on that.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Somebody told me on tom that there's some amazing percent
of workers who work under contracts the date back so
far that they never had a chance to vote yes
or no. It was just part of the job environment
that they sign up for. Is that a significant problem?
Speaker 2 (25:18):
So we actually had another study on this. Once again,
all of this is on our website. I the number
four AW dot org, IFAW dot org, and yeah, we
crunched those numbers of union elections and it turns out that,
once again we're talking to the private sector here, almost
ninety five percent of unionized employees never had the chance
(25:39):
to vote on their union, whether the union was voted
generations ago and they were simply handed a union card
when they took the job, or whether the union's organized
via car check. But putting those two issues together, almost
ninety five percent of workers in the private sector that
or unionized never had the ability to vote on the
(26:03):
union at the workplace. And it's also very similar provisions
in the public sector as well. In fact, when I
was doing work with the Mackinaws Center in Michigan, we
crunched these numbers and we found minuscule amounts in some cases,
zero percentage of employees had the ability to vote. And
let's say it's a teachers' union in the top ten
(26:24):
school districts in Michigan. I didn't want to just say zero.
So then I said, statistically speaking, this was several years ago.
How many teachers were even alive when the union organized,
and was less than a third or even alive when
the union organized. So you're not even talking about your parents' union,
You're talking about your grandparents union. So workers should have
(26:47):
this ability on a periodic basis to vote for the
union at the workplace or at a very minimum. Representative
Bob Ander has another bill that's not including the employee
Right sech but that were at least a quorum of
workers to vote for a union in a secret ballot
election before they can be organized.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Amazing though, if the Employee Right Back passes, how do
you think it'll change the relationship between workers, employers, and
unions over the next decade.
Speaker 2 (27:17):
I think it would improve it once again. It would
have unions representing workers that voted for them, that weren't
either pressured in via car check or allowed to be
organized after a no vote and the unions came in.
It would make unions more responsive to the workers' political
leanings as opposed to just taking them for granted and
(27:40):
really not giving workers a say in how an union
spend money on politics. It would make unions represent all
workers as opposed to including DEI provisions in collective bargaining agreements.
It would increase the quorum in work sites by making
sure unions aren't able to exploit a loophole that allows
(28:01):
them to have just really vile harassment racial sexual harassment
of their colleagues, but as long as it's in further
inance of a union objective, The National Labor Relations Board
says it's okay. It would also make sure unions aren't
exploring the other loophole to the Rico Statute and allowing
(28:22):
union violence in the furtherance of those union objectives. So
it would increase the quorum, it would increase worker voice,
it would increase worker safety as well as making sure
that unions are representing all workers equally.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Those will be enormous changes. But I'm curious, because I
know how busy you are and how wide ranging you are.
What other things are you beginning to work on in
terms of reforms that you think are needed.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
Oh, it just talked about Representative Anders Bill, that is
the Worker Enfranchisement Act that would require a quorum of
workers to vote before a union could organize. Representative Owens
has the Salt Act. One way is that union organize
is by having union organizers literally lie to employers saying
(29:05):
they want to work for them, but they're really just
taking a job to organize the workers. In some cases
not even tell their coworkers that they're a union organizer.
As we've seen some Starbucks workers say they feel like
they were duped into the union because they didn't realize
this was actually a union organizer. Making sure they're disclosed.
So if a company hires someone to talk to employees
(29:28):
for against unionization, that has to be disclosed to the
Department of Labor. So should a union hiring someone to
get a job and talk to employees. It's simply parody
and that's Representative Owen's sl TEC. The Trump administration on
the regulatory Agenda says that they will be addressing the
independent contractor isshoe. You know, we hope we see something
(29:50):
very similar to the first Trumpet administration's definition of who
is an employee in allowing workers that to work for
themselves if they satisfy what was deemed the entrepreneur real
opportunity test, similar to the provisions of the Employee Rights Act.
We're seeing there's join employer regulations on the long term
agenda that hopefully will come down either from the Department
(30:11):
of Labor or when the National Labor Relations Board has
a quorum when the Senate votes to confirm President Trump's nominees.
So those are just a few examples of what we're
looking at for the private sector, and then that's not
even getting into some of the federal employee issues that
we're looking at, both in Congress and through the administration.
Speaker 1 (30:28):
I have to say that the Institute for the American
Worker is doing very important work and that we're very
grateful for your leadership and your willingness to do all this.
So I want you to know that we're going to
continue to pay attention and hopefully you'll come back and
brief us as things developed. I really appreciate you taking
the time to be with us and the fact that
(30:50):
we have a chance to stay in truction. Our listeners
can find out more about what you do at the
Institute for the American Worker by visiting your website at
i AW dot org, which we'll also have on our
show page. So thank you, Benny very much for being
with us.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
Speaker, Thank you as always for having me on. Look
forward to Bean again.
Speaker 1 (31:14):
Thank you to my guest Vincent for Nuccio. You can
learn more about the Institute for the American Worker on
our show page at newsworld dot com. Newsworld is produced
by Ginglishtree sixty and iHeartMedia. Our executive producer is Guarnsey Sloan.
Our researcher is Rachel Peterson. The artwork for the show
What's created by Steve Penley. Special thanks to the team
(31:35):
at Ginglishtree sixty. If you've been enjoying Newtsworld, I hope
you'll go to Apple Podcast and both rate us with
five stars and give us a review so all this
can learn what it's all about. Right now, listeners of
newts World can sign up for my three free weekly
columns at Gingrishtree sixty dot com slash newsletter. I'm new Gingrich.
This is Newtsworld.
In this episode of Newtsworld. The Employee Rights Act of
twenty twenty five is legislation that seeks to strengthen and
protect the rights of American workers while ensuring fairness and
accountability in the workplace. This bill represents the Republican vision
for the American workforce, promoting opportunity, protecting workers' rights and privacy,
(00:24):
and creating a strong foundation for innovation and growth. The
bill is introduced on Wednesday in the Senate by Senator
Tim Scott of South Carolina, with companion legislation introduced in
the House by Congressman Rick Allen of Georgia. Here to
discuss the Employee Rights Act, I am really pleased to
welcome my guest, Vincent Bernuccio, President of the Institute for
(00:45):
the American Worker. Benny, you've said the Employee Rights Act
is about empowering workers and improving unions. What's wrong with
the current system and what has changed that makes reforms
(01:08):
so necessary today?
Speaker 2 (01:10):
Well, labor law across the country is incredibly outdated. You
were talking about laws that were written in the Industrial
Revolution that is essentially created for that nineteen thirties economy.
The last time labor law was amended was really in
the fifties and the sixties. So the Employee Rights Act
(01:32):
is the most comprehensive labor legislation that is pro worker.
Is there, like you said, mister speaker, and once again
thank you for having me on to empower both workers.
Allow them to work how they want, with who they want,
and choose how to support their family. And there's also
things that will help improve unions by making them more
(01:54):
accountable of those workers.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
What actually is wrong with the current system.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Are multiple things. So right now unions can organize workers
without a secret ballot election. You have the Labor Board,
the National Labor Relations Board that administers union elections and
enforces labor law for most private sector workers, that can
actually allow an election by secret ballot and then pull
(02:21):
the rug out from underworkers and say, well, the employer
may have done something wrong, so we're just going to
toss that election out the window and recognize the union anyway,
even if the employees voted against it. From administration to administration,
you see different definitions of people that could work for
themselves versus an employee. Same thing with small businesses, SEB contractors,
(02:48):
franchise businesses that work with other businesses, from administration and administration.
You see this ping pong of who is considered an
employer and who employees actually wan for. Happy to get
into all of those details, some of the worst things
we saw under the Biden administration, going back to standards
that let union organizers and people representing unions actually do
(03:13):
just vile harassment of workers and allow them to be
protected by labor law. So that's just a smattering of
the issues that the Employee Rights Ack protects and addresses,
as well as protecting the privacy and the political ideals
of individual workers. And happy to get into all this,
(03:33):
I know, it's kind of a schmorgasboard of good ideas.
Really excited to chat with you about it.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
It's fascinating because, as you know, union membership has declined
from twenty percent of workers in nineteen eighty three just
about nine point nine percent, about ten percent today. That's
a fifty percent reduction. Why do you think union membership
rates have declined and how does that affect the current workforce?
Speaker 2 (03:57):
Well, labor law is severely outdated and the union business
model is mirroring that. You know, if we went back
to the nineteen thirties, unions would be in great shape
because they have that one size fits all bargaining. They're
basically created to have that adversarial relationship with employers. I
think they're essentially selling this product that most modern workers
(04:20):
do not want. I've done studies on this very issue
that show that if unions adapted, they gave up the
government granted crutches, they acted like professional service organizations that
were completely voluntary that if employees wanted to join and
get the representation they could, If employers wanted to use them,
essentially as an HR arm, they could, and unions could
(04:43):
choose to work with who they want. If they did that,
if they embraced kind of a modern workforce professional service
association model, they could thrive. But unfortunately, with things like
the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, with things that
unfortunate people like Senator Hawley are advancing in the Senate,
(05:04):
like the Faster Labor Contracts Act and some of the
other things with his framework that I know will probably
chat about, they're unfortunately doubling down on the outdated, failed
models of the past, and it's preventing them from growing
and expanding and contributing to that decline.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
If you think back to the great era of union
representation and how many people belong to unions, And about
a fifth of the country was in the union at
the peak of the nineteen fifties. So the question I've
got is what happened? And yet it happened in the
private sector, not the public sector. And as I understand it,
(05:40):
union membership on public sector workers is about thirty two percent,
basically a third. Well, among private sector workers it's dropped
to about six percent, so you're about five times as
likely to have a union membership in a public sector job.
What happened and why is are that huge difference?
Speaker 2 (05:57):
You're right, it's about a third of the public sector
is around six percent five point nine in the private sector. Historically,
that is where unions really focus their energy on organizing. Also,
you see businesses that have to compete, they have to
compete overseas, they have to compete with other states, and
they cannot simply say, well, we're just gonna raise the
(06:19):
price of our products to pay for union agreements. That
is a lot different in the public sector. It's not
like the government of Chicago can just say, hey, we're
going to go down to Tennessee because it's a right
to work stake, So essentially they had taxpayers footing the bill.
There wasn't that competition. They had that monopoly, and that's
(06:39):
why you really saw some of these exorbitant union contracts
in the public sector, and you saw an increase. Now
that is not the case today it is about thirty
two percent, but that is down from the high and
as you see things like the Janis versus Appsme case
from several years ago that essentially brought right to work
(07:00):
to the entire public sector. And mister speakers, you know,
right to work simply means the union can't get a
worker fired for not paying them. You saw workers start
leaving those unions in droves well, whether because they didn't
think the union was doing a good job or because
you see a lot of public sector unions, especially like
the teachers' unions, just doubling down on far left politics
(07:22):
that some other membership just simply doesn't agree with.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
You have said, and it was an article that you
and Representive Rick Allen wrote called how to Empower Workers
and Improve Unions, And in that you wrote, Congress also
needs to modernize federal law to empower workers and improve
labor unions to deliver a twenty first century economy that
benefits the working class. Why do you think the Employee
(07:47):
Rights Act is the best step forward to accomplish this?
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Absolutely because it has many of those provisions that we
were just talking about. It protects worker's right to a
secret ballot. So there's a process called card check where
unions can go. It's an open petition process. It can
lead to intimidation, it can lead to coercion. At best,
there's just deception there because workers don't hear both sides
of what unionization would mean. So the first thing we
(08:14):
would do is protect the secret ballot for workers, let
them make an informed, private choice on if they want
a union to come in and represent them. It also
allows workers to fully opt out of union representation right now,
even in right to work states where unions can't force
workers to pay fees to them, even if they're not
(08:35):
a member, they're still stuck under the union contract whether
they want to be or not. Worker's choice would allow
workers to fully opt out not just of paying the union,
but of union representation and act like the almost ninety
percent of the rest of the economy that is not
represented by a union. It protects workers privacy right now, unfortunately,
(08:57):
if a union petitions an employer, the employer has to
give all sorts of personal information to the union. Workers'
home addresses, personal cell phones, personal email. What the Employee
Rights AFT would do is it would allow those workers
to say, you know, I just want them to have
my email. I don't want them to have my home address,
(09:19):
and it would prevent the employer from having to give
all of that personal information. Now, if an employee wanted
the union to have that information and be contacted, they're
more than welcome to. But it's not like the current
situation where even if the employee doesn't want it, the
union is forced to get it. Going to your question
(09:39):
on the modernization, it allows legal clarity for independent workers.
So right now, from administration administration to who's an employee
is amorphous. Biden administration wasn't exactly what California did, but
essentially they wanted to do what California did, making most
people entrepreneurs working for themselves. Defin migned as an employee.
(10:02):
The Employee Rights Act would take Representative Kevin Kylie's Modern
Worker Empowerment Act and make it much easier for people
to work for themselves. It would protect small business owner's
ability to own a franchise or be a subcontractor without
saying that their employees are jointly employed with others. It
(10:23):
would make sure that only workers legally authorized to work
in the United States are voting for union contracts and
for unions to come in. And it would also make
sure that unions which have this duty of fair representation
to all employees are fairly representing all employees and not
including DEI in collective bargaining agreements. We talked about the
(10:46):
protection from harassing language, which unfortunately, because of the Biden NLRB,
was allowed. It would also close a loophole that allows
unions to be exempt from RICO statutes. It would also
allow workers to have an opt in as opposed to
opt out and supporting union politics, and a few other
(11:07):
provisions as well. So I know that's a lot, but
once again, that is why the Employee Rights Act is
the most comprehensive bill labor, free market, pro worker labor
legislation of the Congress, and I applaud Representative Allen and
now Senator Tim Scott, who just introduced the bill the
companion of legislation on the Senate side this Wednesday.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
He notes the Cord of Open Secrets that from twenty
twenty three to twenty twenty four, public sector union packs
donated twelve point five million to Democrats and one point
six million to Republicans. Although my guess is that the
actual vote, which we're much more narrow than that, So
you have a lot of money going from Republicans to
(12:05):
subsidized Democrats. How does your act affect the compulsory use
of my money to support candidates I'm opposed to?
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Sure, So let's back up. So the Employee Rights Act
changes federal labor law, and federal labor law really only
affects workers in the private sector, So we're talking about
most private sector workers that aren't working for railroads and airlines.
That's the vast majority of the private sector, but that's
who the Employee Rights Act protects. Public sector employees are
(12:35):
governed by state labor law, and each state has different
labor law. But obviously the public sector labor law most
states base it off of the federal law, so we
may see copycat legislation at a state level for things
that do affect public employees. But going back to your question,
and let's just bring it back to the private sector.
(12:56):
What the Employee Rights Act does is it has a
annual opt in So for anything that is not collective bargaining,
and this is for right to work states non right
to work states, unions have to say, well, we want
to spend your money on ex politics, and you have
to opt into that. And workers get that opportunity on
(13:17):
a yearly basis to make the decision whether or not
they want to support their union's politics and if they
want that money, if they're given to the union, are
taken out of their paycheck. So that's one of the
great provisions that really puts workers in the driver's seat
when it comes to union politics in the Employee Rights Act.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
Well of these are surprised me, I think is that
your bill would provide for a secret ballot in union elections.
I mean, you sort of think that's kind of a
basic American right to have a secret ballot. To what
extent of the union leadership use having an open ballot
to control the choices of their members.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
So we've studies on this and Senator Scott and Representative
Allen's bill. Unfortunately, there are example after example of intimidation
and coercion. I've testified before Congress on this, as the
NLRB said, and over zealous union organizer coming to somebody's
house and saying, you know, I'll slash your tires or
(14:20):
you know, the union knows come to your house if
you don't sign this card. The cards themselves are problematic.
You could have a big font come to this pizza party,
sign up here, ors, enter this raffle or what have you,
and then a little six point font on the bottom,
I hereby authorize the union to represent me. So unions
can actually go to employers and if they get fifty
(14:41):
percent plus one of those cards, say you must recognize us.
And they can also bring all these sorts of intimidation
tactics and anti PR campaigns to pressure employers to give
in and recognize the union. So the Employee Rights Act
would simply say we're gonna do away with the card
check process. And the way that unions would come in
(15:02):
and organize is, you know, they would still get the cards,
they would petition the NRB, but then workers would be
guaranteed that secret ballot election and would have the time
first to make that decision. So it's not just signing
a card when somebody presents it in front of you,
and you don't have time to reflect on what you're doing.
But also, just like we vote for president, just like
(15:24):
we vote for governor, for congress, for state legislature, have
the ability to vote in a private voting booth without
anybody looking over your shoulders. So it is a great
step forward in protecting employees' right to choose who represents them.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
If unions can come in and basically insist on a
public vote, why have they not organized more of the country.
I mean, it seems to me it's very heavily rigged
in their favor.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
You could say it's not exactly a public vote, it's
simply a card signed, so there's never actually a vote.
And that comes back to that deception of oh, I
just want to sign up for more information or for
this pizza party, and they don't lo and behold. The
union says, well, we're going to use this card to
organize you. So you know, we've seen card check campaigns
where workers just they don't get enough cards signed. You know,
(16:11):
you have good employers that want to say we want
to protect our employees right to a secret ballot, and
this is something that the protecting the right to organize
Act several years ago, the Employee Free Choice Act, and
the NLRB is trying to do away with now they're
doing away with it in the pro act. And what
the Biden NLRB did not in the most obvious way.
(16:32):
They still say, hey, you can have an election, And
what I would say is are doing is actually worse
because then once again they can take the rugout from
under those workers and say, even if you have an election,
the employer did something wrong. So what we're going to
do is we're going to toss out that election and
we're going to recognize the union via cards. So it
really is insidious. But the Employee Rights Act, that's one
(16:55):
of the first key provisions is stopping that and making
sure that employees right to it, that private vote is protected.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
When you look at your bill, employee right sacked. There
was a survey done and something like an overwhelming majority
I think sixty seven percent supported the right to a
supervised secret ballot on deciding whether to join the union. Interestingly,
seventy two percent even more among union households. And when
you ask whether employee's been right to work, states who
(17:27):
opt out of union representation should be free to negotiate contracts, wages,
and working conditions directly with their employee. Sixty eight percent supported,
including sixty eight percent in the union householding. Seems to
say that your bill has pretty solid national support.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
It really does. And the individual provisions in the bill,
whether it's the employee rights ACKed individual provisions or the
standalone legislation that was used to create this great omnibus legislation,
it has vast support. And you just talked about the
Worker's Choice polling where about sixty eight percent of total
households and union households support it. This is actually something
(18:06):
that the union rank and file have been consistently told
is an issue with right to work and why they
can't have right to work. So essentially, unions claim what
they call the free rider issue. I like to call
it the force writer issue, but essentially, oh, with right
to work, we can't force workers to pay us, but
they still get the same benefits of the contract. What
worker's choice does. It says, oh, you don't want to
(18:28):
represent workers that are not paying you. Unions in right
to work states where they're not forced to pay, then
you don't have to and workers can represent themselves. So
for all the times that they go and they rail
against these right to work laws. This is giving unions
actually exactly what they're asking for now. At the end
of the day, they would much rather have the monopoly,
(18:49):
and they would rather force workers to pay than give
up that monopoly. But it's essentially addressing that main issue.
And then same thing with the secret ballot. You're seeing
seventy two percent support a union households and the rights
of privacy and having their private information shared. You see
eighty percent of union households agree. That's even greater than
(19:09):
the seventy six percent of households. And when you talk
about those independent contractor provisions, those joint employer provisions and others,
all of those are in the high seventies, some in
the high sixties or even pushing over eighty percent. All
the provisions of the Employee Rights Act pull extraordinarily well,
(19:31):
not just with households but also with union households.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
How much do you think in that sense that the
union household of today is significantly different, say, from a
union household in nineteen fifty five.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
We are seeing differences. Obviously, as you said, there are
fewer union households because there are fewer union members. And
once again, I think a big reason for that is
because unions have that thirties, forties, fifties business model that
does not translate into the flexibility that modern workers want.
(20:23):
You are seeing, you know, similar industries, except for, as
you pointed out, the growth of the public sector, and
there really wasn't public sector bargaining in the forties. It
really wasn't until you know, the fifties sixties that first
there were federal executive orders and Wisconsin allowing public employees
to bargain, and then it really expanded out. So if
(20:43):
you're talking about the atypical union household, you know, used
to think an auto worker or a truck driver. Now
really it's a government bureaucrat.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Does this bill apply to the federal employee unions or
should there be a parallel bill to apply to the
federal employee unions?
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Definitely should, it does not. Once again, this is for
workers in the private sector. If you want to get
really deep in the weeds, it's under the National Labor
Relations Act. Employees the NLRA that is basically everybody but
railroad and airline workers. There's other provisions that touch on
like the Fair Labor Standards Act, and some other legislation,
(21:20):
but for the most part we are talking about workers
in the private sector that are not railroad or airline employees.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
I'm trying to remember, is the NLRA in nineteen thirties
will originally it is.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
It was amended in nineteen forty seven by taped partly
that allowed states to opt into write to work and
several other provisions, and then a couple decades later it
was the Labor Management Relation and Disclosure Act the LAMORDA
that brought more transparency to unions.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
But in many ways we're so operating under a system
whose structure reflections the industrial behavior of the late nineteen thirties.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
You are absolutely correct, not just the law, but also
what the law enables and the union business model. And
once again going back to the issues with why private
sector unions and Franklin unions in general are declining, it's
because their business model is corresponding with that law and
is based in the Industrial Revolution the nineteen thirties, workers
(22:20):
working in factories, less skilled, more interchangeable than the modern
dynamic workforce of today that wants the flexibility, that wants
to be rewarded for how hard they work, and wants
to be treated as individuals instead of these one size
fits all bargaining arrangements.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
When you take the individual components of the bill, support
goes as high as eighty one percent in union households.
For some of the provisions. What's the opposition, Why is
it going to be hard to move this bill? What's
the opposition? Oh?
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Well, you see most Democrats just say, well, hey, you know,
we'd rather see the Proact that is essentially the opposite
of most of the provisions of this bill. They have
those attacks on the secret ballot where it's not exactly
card check, but essentially they can toss out secret ballot elections.
It's the making employees across the country, similar to what
(23:17):
we saw in California with the attacks on independent contracting.
They have a different definition of who is an employer
and attacks on subcontractors, small business franchise owners saying that
their employees are actually the employees of a distant corporation.
There are other provisions within the Proact essentially the opposite
(23:40):
of what we're seeing here in the Employee Rights Act
and what you see with Democrats and unfortunately with one
or two Republican senators like Josh Hawley that's what they
are embracing.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Why do you think people like Hally, who otherwise will
be a pretty normal Republican but on a couple of diseases,
is he sort of ends up on the other team.
Why do you think that is?
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Just on Wednesday there was a hearing where he invited
Teaches President Sean O'Brien to speak and then back and forth.
He has his Faster Labor Contracts Act that would allow
government bureaucrats to appoint an arbitration panel that would literally
write the first contract between a union and an employer
(24:29):
if they didn't come to an agreement in a vastly
truncated time period. And this would cut out worker voice
that would not have the ability to vote on these contracts,
and it could essentially write for the foreseeable future, because
subsequent contracts would be based off this first contract over
every aspect of the worker's job site and how they
(24:53):
would work. So it is incredibly troubling, and unfortunately, I
think Center Hawley is guided on that.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Somebody told me on tom that there's some amazing percent
of workers who work under contracts the date back so
far that they never had a chance to vote yes
or no. It was just part of the job environment
that they sign up for. Is that a significant problem?
Speaker 2 (25:18):
So we actually had another study on this. Once again,
all of this is on our website. I the number
four AW dot org, IFAW dot org, and yeah, we
crunched those numbers of union elections and it turns out that,
once again we're talking to the private sector here, almost
ninety five percent of unionized employees never had the chance
(25:39):
to vote on their union, whether the union was voted
generations ago and they were simply handed a union card
when they took the job, or whether the union's organized
via car check. But putting those two issues together, almost
ninety five percent of workers in the private sector that
or unionized never had the ability to vote on the
(26:03):
union at the workplace. And it's also very similar provisions
in the public sector as well. In fact, when I
was doing work with the Mackinaws Center in Michigan, we
crunched these numbers and we found minuscule amounts in some cases,
zero percentage of employees had the ability to vote. And
let's say it's a teachers' union in the top ten
(26:24):
school districts in Michigan. I didn't want to just say zero.
So then I said, statistically speaking, this was several years ago.
How many teachers were even alive when the union organized,
and was less than a third or even alive when
the union organized. So you're not even talking about your parents' union,
You're talking about your grandparents union. So workers should have
(26:47):
this ability on a periodic basis to vote for the
union at the workplace or at a very minimum. Representative
Bob Ander has another bill that's not including the employee
Right sech but that were at least a quorum of
workers to vote for a union in a secret ballot
election before they can be organized.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Amazing though, if the Employee Right Back passes, how do
you think it'll change the relationship between workers, employers, and
unions over the next decade.
Speaker 2 (27:17):
I think it would improve it once again. It would
have unions representing workers that voted for them, that weren't
either pressured in via car check or allowed to be
organized after a no vote and the unions came in.
It would make unions more responsive to the workers' political
leanings as opposed to just taking them for granted and
(27:40):
really not giving workers a say in how an union
spend money on politics. It would make unions represent all
workers as opposed to including DEI provisions in collective bargaining agreements.
It would increase the quorum in work sites by making
sure unions aren't able to exploit a loophole that allows
(28:01):
them to have just really vile harassment racial sexual harassment
of their colleagues, but as long as it's in further
inance of a union objective, The National Labor Relations Board
says it's okay. It would also make sure unions aren't
exploring the other loophole to the Rico Statute and allowing
(28:22):
union violence in the furtherance of those union objectives. So
it would increase the quorum, it would increase worker voice,
it would increase worker safety as well as making sure
that unions are representing all workers equally.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Those will be enormous changes. But I'm curious, because I
know how busy you are and how wide ranging you are.
What other things are you beginning to work on in
terms of reforms that you think are needed.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
Oh, it just talked about Representative Anders Bill, that is
the Worker Enfranchisement Act that would require a quorum of
workers to vote before a union could organize. Representative Owens
has the Salt Act. One way is that union organize
is by having union organizers literally lie to employers saying
(29:05):
they want to work for them, but they're really just
taking a job to organize the workers. In some cases
not even tell their coworkers that they're a union organizer.
As we've seen some Starbucks workers say they feel like
they were duped into the union because they didn't realize
this was actually a union organizer. Making sure they're disclosed.
So if a company hires someone to talk to employees
(29:28):
for against unionization, that has to be disclosed to the
Department of Labor. So should a union hiring someone to
get a job and talk to employees. It's simply parody
and that's Representative Owen's sl TEC. The Trump administration on
the regulatory Agenda says that they will be addressing the
independent contractor isshoe. You know, we hope we see something
(29:50):
very similar to the first Trumpet administration's definition of who
is an employee in allowing workers that to work for
themselves if they satisfy what was deemed the entrepreneur real
opportunity test, similar to the provisions of the Employee Rights Act.
We're seeing there's join employer regulations on the long term
agenda that hopefully will come down either from the Department
(30:11):
of Labor or when the National Labor Relations Board has
a quorum when the Senate votes to confirm President Trump's nominees.
So those are just a few examples of what we're
looking at for the private sector, and then that's not
even getting into some of the federal employee issues that
we're looking at, both in Congress and through the administration.
Speaker 1 (30:28):
I have to say that the Institute for the American
Worker is doing very important work and that we're very
grateful for your leadership and your willingness to do all this.
So I want you to know that we're going to
continue to pay attention and hopefully you'll come back and
brief us as things developed. I really appreciate you taking
the time to be with us and the fact that
(30:50):
we have a chance to stay in truction. Our listeners
can find out more about what you do at the
Institute for the American Worker by visiting your website at
i AW dot org, which we'll also have on our
show page. So thank you, Benny very much for being
with us.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
Speaker, Thank you as always for having me on. Look
forward to Bean again.
Speaker 1 (31:14):
Thank you to my guest Vincent for Nuccio. You can
learn more about the Institute for the American Worker on
our show page at newsworld dot com. Newsworld is produced
by Ginglishtree sixty and iHeartMedia. Our executive producer is Guarnsey Sloan.
Our researcher is Rachel Peterson. The artwork for the show
What's created by Steve Penley. Special thanks to the team
(31:35):
at Ginglishtree sixty. If you've been enjoying Newtsworld, I hope
you'll go to Apple Podcast and both rate us with
five stars and give us a review so all this
can learn what it's all about. Right now, listeners of
newts World can sign up for my three free weekly
columns at Gingrishtree sixty dot com slash newsletter. I'm new Gingrich.
This is Newtsworld.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!