Latest news with #BethDoglio
Yahoo
13-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
WA House OKs unemployment benefits for striking workers, but adds four-week limit
A strike sign is seen on display as Boeing workers gather on a picket line near the entrance to a Boeing facility during an ongoing strike on October 24, 2024 in Seattle, Washington. (Photo by) Organized labor secured a major win Saturday as Democrats in the state House pushed through legislation to provide striking workers in Washington with unemployment benefits. But union leaders were not all smiles afterward. The bill was amended on the floor to impose a four-week limit on receiving benefits, eight weeks less than the version approved in the Senate. Senate Bill 5041 passed the House on a 52-43 vote with seven Democrats joining Republicans in voting against the measure. The Senate must now decide if it will agree with the revisions or insist on its position. When the bill came up for a vote last month, Senate Democrats narrowly defeated an amendment for a four-week limit before passing the bill 28-21. New Jersey and New York are the only states with such provisions for striking workers. Oregon lawmakers are debating legislation this year that would offer unemployment benefits to striking workers there. On Saturday, Democratic lawmakers said the bill ensures workers who choose to walk off the job will be less stressed about going without pay and seeing their finances erode in a lengthy dispute. With the threat of economic hardship eased, workers will be in a better position to endure lengthy negotiations. 'Fundamentally, this takes a step to level the playing field for striking workers,' said Rep. Beth Doglio, D-Olympia. Republicans argued that providing benefits would be an incentive for union workers to strike. They tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill to exclude public school teachers and hospital workers. 'If you are paying people to strike, you will have more strikes,' said Rep. Jeremie Dufault, R-Selah. The policy only assures a level of benefits is available 'for workers when they do go on strike,' said Rep. April Berg, D-Mill Creek. 'The state is not paying workers to strike.' Rep. Jim Walsh, R-Aberdeen, said the bill is unfair because taxpayers and businesses with no involvement in a labor disagreement will have their contributions to the unemployment insurance fund go to striking workers. 'People who are not a party to the disagreement will pay for it,' he said. As written, a striking worker would become eligible for benefits on the second Sunday following the first day of a strike, provided that the strike is not found to be prohibited by federal or state law. Workers would be subject to a one-week waiting period after they become eligible for benefits. If a strike is determined to be prohibited by state or federal law, any benefits paid are liable for repayment. Employees would also qualify for unemployment insurance during employer-initiated labor lockouts. Lockouts are one way management can pressure a striking workforce during contract negotiations. Rep. Kristine Reeves, D-Federal Way, authored the amendment for the four-week limit on receiving benefits. It passed on a voice vote. Normally, unemployment insurance is available for up to 26 weeks in a one-year period. If the bill becomes law, the changes would take effect Jan. 1, 2026, and last through Dec. 31, 2035.
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Tesla only EV maker allowed to sell directly to consumers under Washington state law
Mar. 11—OLYMPIA — Tesla is the only electric vehicle manufacturer allowed to sell directly to consumers in Washington through an exemption to state law from 2014. According to Rep. Beth Doglio, D-Olympia, other car manufacturers are not allowed to offer test drives, discuss pricing and financing options or purchase vehicles from a showroom after the state banned manufacturer-owned dealerships that year. The legislature was worried about competition for local car dealers. Since Tesla had a dealer license in the state at the time the legislation was adopted, the company was essentially grandfathered in. Attempts to modify state law to allow other Tesla competitors to sell their vehicles in the state have failed to gain support in the Legislature in recent years over continuing concerns the proposal could hurt car dealerships in the state. During testimony before the House Consumer Protection Committee last month, Doglio criticized the Tesla exemption as creating an "uneven playing field." According to Doglio, Washington is the only state that allows Tesla to obtain an unlimited number of dealer licenses. Washington is also the only state on the West Coast that prohibits direct sales to consumers by all electric car manufacturers. "This not only gives Tesla an unfair market advantage, but it also sets a concerning precedent for regulatory favoritism that discourages American favoritism and investment," Doglio said of her proposal. Tesla was the only electric vehicle maker seeking to sell its vehicles in Washington when the grandfathering was granted in 2014. During a Feb. 14 hearing, representatives of Rivian, which also manufactures electric vehicles, testified that Tesla's exemption limits competition and hurts consumer choice. A collection of businesses and groups, including Rivian, formed the Washington Clean Car Coalition this year and called for lawmakers to allow consumers to buy directly from manufacturers. "Washingtonians should have the same opportunity as consumers in many other states on the West Coast: To make their own decisions about how they buy cars, and from whom," Hannah Steinweg, public policy director for Rivian, said in a statement last month. "A level playing field among zero emission vehicle-only manufacturers is good for competition and good for consumers." During testimony before the Senate Labor and Commerce committee, Tesla's Northwest Regional Sales Manager Ava Ames said removing the company's exemption would "limit consumer choice" and would hurt the state's "continued transition to sustainable transportation." "In order for prioritized, sustainable transport, we need to focus on inclusion, not exclusion," Ames testified. Ultimately, proposals that would have ended Tesla's exemption, and a second proposal that would have allowed other electric vehicle manufacturers to sell directly to consumers, died in committee without a vote.
