John Kline

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That's interesting math. I'm now pleased to yield 2 minutes to a friend and colleague, the gentlelady from North Carolina (Mrs. Ellmers).

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I need to inquire again as to the time remaining because as I listened to my colleagues come down for unanimous consent requests, it seems to me I heard the Speaker saying that the gentleman's time was going to be charged. How did that add up?

Mr. KLINE. I want to thank my colleagues on the other side. It was an excellent show. It expanded the lexicon in the thesaurus. I now yield 2 minutes to a member of the committee, a subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe).

Mr. KLINE. May I inquire as to the time remaining on our side.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Indiana, a member of the committee, Mrs. Brooks.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I now am pleased to yield 2 minutes to a member of the committee, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messer).

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I'm always interested to listen to the characterizations of a bill that simply aren't true. It's my pleasure right now to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington, the chair of the Republican Conference, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers.

Mr. KLINE. I yield the gentlewoman 1 additional minute.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I'm very, very pleased right now to yield 3 minutes to the author of this terrific piece of legislation, a member of the committee, the gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby).

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1406, the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013, and yield myself such time as I may consume. Today we have an opportunity to make life a little easier for working families across the country. This legislation doesn't create a new government program or bureaucracy. It doesn't spend taxpayer dollars or add to the national debt. The Working Families Flexibility Act simply removes an outdated Federal policy that denies private sector workers the flexibility they need to better balance family and work. For 75 years, the Fair Labor Standards Act has provided covered workers with basic wage and hour protections. Those covered by the law receive time-and-a-half in paid compensation for each overtime hour worked. The law plays a significant role in millions of workplaces; yet it does not reflect the realities of the modern workforce. For example, in 2011, 59 percent of families with children had two working parents, compared to 37 percent 40 years ago. Meanwhile, 8.5 million workers today are single parents, and one in three undergraduate students also works full-time. Behind each statistic, Mr. Speaker, are men and women trying to juggle family and work; a single, working mom that needs extra time to attend a parent-teacher conference, a dad hoping to leave work early to catch his son's Little League game, a married couple working two jobs while raising a family and caring for an aging relative. Supporting a family is about more than providing an income; it's about being there for one another. We know there are a lot of workers who would seize the opportunity to earn a few extra dollars, but others may welcome additional paid time off to spend with loved ones. Shouldn't workers choose what's best for their families? Shouldn't workers choose? Unfortunately, Federal law denies many private sector workers this fundamental choice. The law assumes everyone would choose more money in the bank over more time with family. To add insult to injury, public sector employees have enjoyed this benefit for decades; yet we continue to treat those in the private sector differently. That's not fair, Mr. Speaker. It's not fair to millions of hardworking Americans. The Working Families Flexibility Act will remove this unnecessary barrier and allow private sector employers to offer employees the choice to accrue paid time off, or comp time, for working overtime. The bill does not change the 40-hour work week, and comp time would accrue at the same time-and-a-half rate as cash wages. The legislation includes numerous protections to ensure the use of comp time is strictly, strictly, Mr. Speaker, voluntary, such as requiring a written agreement between the employer and employee, allowing workers to cash out their accrued comp time whenever they choose, retaining all enforcement remedies available under current law, and adding new protections to prevent coercion and intimidation. At the heart of the legislation is worker choice. Workers choose whether to accept comp time. Workers choose when to cash out their accrued comp time, and workers choose when to use their paid time off, so long as they follow the same standard public sector employees do. Same standard, Mr. Speaker. Americans sacrifice a lot to provide for their families. Let's get the Federal Government out of the way and give workers the flexibility they need to thrive at home and at work. I urge my colleagues to support the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 198, I call up the bill (H.R. 1406) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide compensatory time for employees in the private sector, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1406.

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Minnesotans I serve who tell me simply: it's about time. I rise today on behalf of a South St. Paul mom and dad who find it difficult to balance work and family and feel they are not spending enough time with their children. I rise today on behalf of the Minnesota National Guard and all our brave men and women in uniform who are deployed while their spouses single-handedly juggle work and household responsibilities. I rise today on behalf of a college student from Shakopee and millions like her working full-time while pursuing an undergraduate degree. And I rise today on behalf of an Eagan couple, who, like more than 50 million working Americans, spend at least 8 hours a week providing care for aging relatives, a challenge when balancing the demands of a job. Mr. Speaker, outdated Federal policy denies many workers the chance to spend more time with their children or care for an aging relative. Accordingly, the Education and Workforce Committee approved legislation last week that will fix this outdated policy and help more Americans balance family and work. Mr. Speaker, Americans sacrifice a great deal to provide for their families, and I agree with my Minnesotan constituents and most Americans: it is about time.

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to our next speaker, I would just note that the remarks made by my good friend and colleague, frankly, I believe, ignore the reality of the crisis that currently exists. No one, employer, worker, or union, can rely upon a Board decision today. A court of appeals has ruled that it's not constitutional, and it is that same court to which every appeal is made. Now I'm very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe).

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Preventing Greater Uncertainty in Labor-Management Relations Act, and yield myself such time as I may consume. America's workplaces are facing significant challenges. Consumer demand remains weak. Threats of new regulations and higher taxes continue. And a looming debt crisis threatens the growth and prosperity our Nation is working so hard to attain. Washington should not be in the business of making these challenges worse. That is why we are here today. Many Americans may not even know a Federal labor board exists, let alone the role it plays in their everyday lives. Despite its obscurity, the authority of the National Labor Relations Board governs virtually every private business across the country. Our Nation needs a labor board that will appropriately and responsibly administer the law, or else the rights of both workers and employers are diminished. Unfortunately, partisan politics have left the board in a state of dysfunction. A year ago, President Obama made three recess appointments to the board while Congress was not in recess. The President's action was unprecedented, and a Federal appeals court has ruled it was also unconstitutional. As a result, the work of the Board is tainted. Every decision it issues is ripe for appeal on the basis that the Board itself is not legitimate. In fact, employers and unions are now citing the recent court ruling as a reason why Board decisions should be overturned. A story in The Wall Street Journal helps illustrate the real-life consequence of the President's recess appointment scheme. Five years ago, a truck driver alleged that her union failed to follow the rules and assign her work. The NLRB agreed and ordered the union to pay the driver back wages and benefits. So far, the union has refused, and the current chaos offers a new opportunity to toss out the Board's decision. According to the union's attorney: I'll explore every opportunity to make sure my client doesn't have to pay anything. This is the reality we now face. Unions, employers, and workers are forced to spend more time and money defending themselves before the Board and in Federal court. Our Nation has relied upon the Board for more than 75 years. Never has it faced this level of confusion and uncertainty. The current crisis began with the President's power grab, and it is up to him to fix it. Just this week, the President announced he was submitting three Board nominees to the Senate for its approval. This is certainly welcome news and long overdue. However, it does nothing to mitigate the chaos surrounding the NLRB. Roughly 600 Board decisions are constitutionally suspect, and that number continues to grow. The legislation before us today simply tells the Board to stop exacerbating the problem that is already wreaking havoc across the country. H.R. 1120 prevents the Board from taking action that requires a quorum until one of three events occurs: the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of the appointments; a Board quorum is constitutionally confirmed; or the terms of the so-called ``appointees'' expire. The bill does not--I repeat--does not stop the NLRB from overseeing union elections or processing claims of wrongdoing. The narrow scope of the bill is directed at the Board and only the Board. The Preventing Greater Uncertainty in Labor-Management Relations Act is an appropriate congressional response to an unprecedented situation. I expect we will hear a lot of false accusations today from our friends on the other side of the aisle, but I doubt we'll hear any denial of the serious challenges facing the Board. The question then is this: Should we do nothing, or should we advance responsible legislation to help prevent further harm? I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1120.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 146, I call up the bill (H.R. 1120) to prohibit the National Labor Relations Board from taking any action that requires a quorum of the members of the Board until such time as Board constituting a quorum shall have been confirmed by the Senate, the Supreme Court issues a decision on the constitutionality of the appointments to the Board made in January 2012, or the adjournment sine die of the first session of the 113th Congress, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg), the chair of the Workforce Protection Subcommittee.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to another gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon), a member of the committee.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack), a real leader on this issue.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messer), another member of the committee.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, this is an interesting political stunt. My friends on the other side had ample opportunity, both in committee markup and before the Rules Committee, to offer an amendment of this nature. They did not. It does nothing to fix the problem that we're faced with today. Making an exception in statute that says a Board that has been ruled unconstitutional can act any way for some people and not for others, frankly, makes no sense. I'll stand behind no one in my desire to protect our men and women in uniform, those who are serving and those who have served, but that's not what this motion to recommit is really about. Our bill brings certainty and an impetus to our friends at the other side of the Capitol to move the President to fix a dysfunctional National Labor Relations Board that can address the very issues that my colleagues have brought up. I urge defeat of the motion to recommit and support the underlying bill. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.