 Democratic Senator Mark Warner is one of just a handful of Democrats currently blocking the passage of the proact in the Senate And he tried to explain his opposition to the proact while not sounding too anti-labor In fact, he kind of wraps his opposition in this package. That's ostensibly pro-labor when in actuality He's just a corporate show and he's advocating for his donor's interests nonetheless. Let's watch what he has to say This is embarrassing because you can see him in real time try to twist himself into a pretzel to justify His refusal to support something that would be the most pro-worker policy in decades. Nonetheless Let's enjoy this because he's gonna score him and it's almost cringe-worthy You almost feel bad for him But at the same time you don't because he kind of deserves the scrutiny the proact is a combination of you know a dozen plus pieces of legislation the vast majority of which I support I support the right of workers to organize I believe that the Balance between workers and management till it's way too much to management right now And that was exacerbated under four years of Donald Trump where the National Labor Relations Board was totally I think biased against worker rights so there's a lot to like in the proact and You know, but what I what I want to get to is you know, how can we make? Some of the areas where I'd like to see some corrections so that you know this very expansive piece of legislation Could be supported on the floor and one area that I you know, I've sent you Megan all my background I this is a an area that I've been focused on literally for the last six years And that's the changing nature of work You know, we had an economy in the 20th century where people would go to work Oftentimes for a long time my dad worked for the same company for 36 years Never made a lot of money, but with that work came a whole series of benefits health care retirement unemployment disability That notion of long-term permanent work with a single firm is fundamentally changing We think about our guy think about my kids. So we're in their 20s and early 30s You know, they're all gonna have a variety of job many of them want a variety of jobs and and variety of gigs They want the flexibility of whether it's driving uber part-time running out their apartment air BNB You know being a part-time IT consultant, you know, maybe you know, maybe working in a restaurant as well having a series of revenue sources all at the same time what I have promoted is a What I think is a fairly dramatic change in our social safety net that says no matter what kind of work you do Starting with that first hour of work There ought to be benefits attached and my fear is that Parts of the pro act tries to fit all work into kind of a 20th century classic W2 employment status. I think there ought to be a way where we can provide benefits Provide flexibility. I still think there is a role for labor organizations to help manage these benefits particularly for somebody who's got a variety of revenue sources coming in that Meets workers where they're at in 2021 doesn't think we're gonna return to a 1980s kind of economy and The interesting thing even within the labor movement Their organizations like the freelancers union Like the National Domestic Workers Alliance that I've been working with very closely that believe that this portable benefit approach ought to be part of the new social contract and I look forward to working with them and members of Traditional organized labor to get to a spot that will allow me to support all the other good things that are in the pro act But also has a forward-leaning view in terms of what work looks like in the 20th the 21st century I do not think we're gonna go back to the world where everyone works, you know in a classic 40-hour a week full-time job Long-term employment. I just think that the nature of the world the nature of technology the nature of globalization has changed things And we need to have a social contract and a set of benefits that meets workers where they are today Not where they were in the 1980s So notice how he states that he has some issues and some disagreements with the pro act as it stands But he doesn't really specify which provisions in particular. He doesn't like Because he is more comfortable operating, you know with these vague generalities. Well, some of these provisions They might not necessarily be helpful to workers. They might go too far yada yada yada I'm paraphrasing obviously, but he doesn't want to speak with any specificity because if he did he would reveal That he's not actually pro-labor. He's a shill for large multinational corporations who bankroll his political campaigns and He's being incredibly disingenuous and I think that part of what he said is based on him Just being ignorant and out of touch with American workers But he said that you know basically there's this changing nature of work and of course He's referring to the gig economy where people aren't just working at Walmart They're working at Walmart and then they're doing some part-time gigs for Uber Maybe they work at you know a different job and then on the weekends they deliver for a Company where they pick up the food. I'm blinking on the name. What is it Uber eats? Is that it? Yeah? There's a couple of them door-dash So he's trying to make it seem like you know, there's this changing American workforce You know these traditional jobs that were previously standard are no longer there So, you know, we don't want to make sure that we take that away with their pro acts people love having this opportunity To do different things they just have so many interests that they want to work a little bit at Walmart and McDonald's and then Drive for Uber and lift on the weekends. Nobody wants to do all of this dummy That's the thing that he didn't point out. It's not like people are working at Walmart and Then on the weekend they drive for Uber because they just love working in different fields They're working for multiple jobs and doing different gigs because they don't have a choice Because that's the only way they can put food on the table because the one job that they have Doesn't actually pay a living wage So they have no choice Imagine being that out of touch Where you think that people are working multiple jobs because they want to because they love the experience in different sectors Who says things like this? I'll tell you who a shill Isn't looking out for labor Now there's this implication that if the pro act were to pass then the gig economy Which a lot of people rely on to make additional revenue that would go away It's another way that he tries to code his anti pro act rhetoric in this pro labor package But that's not actually the case and a more perfect union actually explained how this isn't going to strip away the Flexibility of workers if you actually want to work at uber and McDonald's simultaneously, this isn't gonna stop that It's not gonna force them into permanent positions But what it will do is give them the option to unionize and a more perfect union fact checked his statement And said the pro act lets independent contractors join a union It doesn't force them into any employment status and for the more this idea that the pro act or greater Unionization it would destroy the gig economy and force people who don't want to be in permanent positions into permanent positions This is nothing more than baseless fear-mongering because a more perfect union shared an article from the Economic Policy Institute that explains That the pro act doesn't actually do that a the pro act is about giving workers a voice not taking away freedom B the pro act is about making it harder for employers to misclassify workers as independent contractors Not ending the contractor designation and see the pro act does not change a workers employment status that impacts state benefits Like workers compensation or unemployment. These are the facts about the pro act So everything that he's saying it's all based on nothing It's baseless fear-mongering at the behest of this corporate donors who desperately want to defeat the pro act because they Don't want their workers to unionize Period end of story and just a little side note here You know, they say that capitalism breeds innovation and they may be right because capitalism Found a way an innovative new way to exploit workers more so than the employer employee relationship already does and that is the gig economy Because as badly as employees are treated by employers employers can now treat workers somehow worse than employees It's honestly just it really is innovative I don't know how else to describe it, but certainly this exploitative relationship wouldn't go away with the pro act But it would at least embolden workers To have collective bargaining rights now he says that he supports collective bargaining rights But he doesn't mention that the bill that he opposes actually addresses the things that stop Employees from getting collective bargaining rights It stops the disgusting practices that employers use to intimidate and defeat attempts to unionize Now I've been overly charitable to even entertain Mark Warner's vapid arguments against the pro act because let's cut to the chase He doesn't support it because he's corrupt. He took thousands of dollars from large multinational corporations Impact money and even from amazon who is vehemently anti-union and that's why he's against the pro act So if you're tired of all of his excuses, then you should let him know His DC office number is two zero two two two four two zero two three And of course, I will be giving him a call on the show with a simple message support the pro act Thank you for calling the office of senator mark Warner if you'd like to leave an opinion for the senator Please press one. Oh, I would Thank you for calling with your opinion for senator mark Warner your opinion is quite important to him Is it Hi, I just want to call to encourage senator warner to stop being a coward and to support the pro act I noted that he took thousands of dollars in corporate pack money from amazon who's vehemently anti-union But I just want to remind him that The people elected him not amazon. So if he actually has a spine do the right thing and support the pro act And I'm not sure if I am able to speak with a staff member But I want to make sure that I can Although it's probably late in DC. We'll try. We'll see. I think it was option number two We'll give it a try. Okay. So, you know I left a message you can leave a message as well. Let him know that he needs to support the pro act We're not asking. We're demanding Because it's about time that workers in america Actually have the right to unionize. I mean, they already should have the right But what the pro act does is it emboldens workers? It's one of the most pro labor pieces of legislation in decades So at the bare minimum, this is the least That corporate shills like mark warner should be doing if they even want to Have any credibility when they speak using this rhetoric that's seemingly pro labor So, yeah, I'll leave that there. He needs to support the pro labor Pro act And if he doesn't then he needs to be primaried and he needs to lose his seat period