Flexibility for Workers Education Act
Floor Speech
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2262, the so-called Flexibility for Workers Education Act.
We have heard about these roadblocks and obstacles. Mr. Speaker, the roadblocks and obstacles are a requirement that people get paid for their time.
Too many Americans still work too hard but can't afford the basics, such as groceries, rent, or utilities. Even more, they are struggling to afford the little extras that give you a slice of the American Dream, like owning a home, taking your family on vacation, or even occasionally going out to a restaurant.
Yet, simply put, the economy just isn't working for everybody. According to Moody's Analytics, the top 10 percent of earners account for nearly 50 percent of all of the United States' consumer spending, so obviously something is out of whack. Despite this reality, House Republicans are attempting to pass three bills this afternoon that would cut workers' wages.
This bill, H.R. 2262, would relieve employers of the obligation to pay employees for training outside of their regular working hours.
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, employees must be compensated for employer-mandated education and training outside the regular work hours. Essentially, the FLSA protects workers from being compelled to volunteer their time for job-related training without wage and hour protections.
However, this bill significantly weakens the protections because it would permit employers to provide job-related training after hours but off the clock so long as they do not state that it is technically required.
However, employers can still lead workers to believe that the training is needed. You can just imply that if you want a raise or promotion, it would be nice to get the training. That is not really required. The legislation is based on the flawed premise that if you provide workers with certain opportunities or benefits, employers must be able to pay them less. That doesn't make sense.
We should not let employers get away with failing to pay workers for their time while claiming that it is in the workers' best interests. These workers, if they are working on an employer-provided training, should not be required to work off the clock without any compensation.
For that reason, I recommend a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I was just looking over the internet and found a Reddit discussion board and found one entry that said: ``I am bothered by unpaid 2-day training, which is going to be 9 hours each day.'' This kind of crosses the line, and they just wanted to know if that was legal in New York.
In reference to the motion to recommit, I hope we would support the motion to recommit. It would give us an opportunity to vote on an increase in the minimum wage which hasn't been increased in over a decade.
A few years ago, it was noted that a full-time minimum wage worker could not afford a modest two-bedroom apartment in any county in the United States. Since then, housing costs have gone up, but the minimum wage has stayed the same.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, according to last week's Bureau of Labor statistics, 2025 was the worst year for job growth in this country since the last Trump administration. 2025 had 3 months of job losses. Meanwhile, President Biden had 48 consecutive months without a single loss. At this point in President Biden's term, he had already created millions of jobs. At the end of the first year, President Trump has only created a few hundred thousand.
Yet, despite this reality, the House Republicans are attempting to advance this bill which would allow employers to get away without paying workers for job-related training outside of regular hours so long as it is technically not required.
It will do nothing to lower the costs of living or give working families a leg up. For this reason, I hope we will defeat the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source