A slew of anti-freedom bills have been filed by New Hampshire lawmakers, and as you might have imagined, most of the sponsors are Democrats. If these seven bills pass into law, politicians will control how private businesses operate in more ways than they currently do.
1) A bill proposed by three Democratic Representatives would grant the government control over private employers’ decisions to hire, promote, and terminate employees. You might recognize this concept from your studies of governmental systems such as ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’. Alternately, in a free market society, employers and employees are free to do whatever they wish, as long as all parties provide consent on a voluntary basis. If an employer stops wanting to employ a person one day, he could fire his employee. Likewise, if an employee finds that he no longer wants to work for his employer, he can quit whenever he wants. The economy with the least government control is the best economy.
House Bill 1543 creates a new section in New Hampshire labor laws which states that:
“No employer shall use a failed drug test for cannabis use as grounds for terminating the employment of, or to deny promotion to, any employee.”
While some naive constituents might commend these politicians for seemingly loving cannabis enough to ‘protect’ its users from their employers, this bill offers people anything but protection. This legislation would grant politicians an entirely new power (well, not entirely new – politicians have long been meddling in the employer-employee relationship, but you get the point) to control whether private companies can hire or fire people. In this specific case, it would seemingly be a crime for employers to fire or neglect to promote an employee who fails a cannabis drug test. In the worst-case scenario, this exact same power could just as easily be wielded by politicians who wish to prevent employers from firing any person for any behavior. Again, in a free society, employers could fire employees who are ‘straight-edge’ and exclusively hire drug users. Free people could hire all-male or all-female staff. Remember: Regardless of how you feel about a given company’s employment situation, you must keep in mind that letting politicians control every private business is a recipe for an authoritarian fascist disaster. Shouldn’t employers have a choice when it comes to hiring, promoting, and firing people?
2) Proposed by two Democratic Representatives, House Bill 253 gives politicians more powers to control the hiring process of private businesses. The politicians who wrote the bill believe that it should be a crime for a person to:
“…include a question on any application for employment, as to whether the applicant has ever been arrested, charged with, or convicted of any crime or violation, or adjudicated as a juvenile delinquent…”
As usual, the bill exempts government agencies from the new restriction.
As with the previous bill, the new law would curtail the ability of employers to vet prospective employees however they see fit. Granting politicians more power to control private businesses is akin to trusting politicians to be competent, ethical, and omnipotent. If you believe that every facet of every private company should be controlled by politicians, support these two bills.
3) Introduced by three Democrats, House Bill 346 makes it a crime for an employer and a “Low-wage employee” to enter into a non-compete agreement, even if the employee consents to it. The bill reads:
“Amend RSA 275 by inserting after section 70 the following new section:
275:70-a Noncompete Agreements.
I. In this section:
(a) “Employer” shall have the same meaning as in RSA 279:1, XI.
(b) “Low-wage employee” means an employee who earns:
(1) $15.00 per hour or less; or
(2) The hourly rate equal to the minimum wage required by the applicable federal minimum wage law or less.
(c) “Noncompete agreement” means an agreement between an employer and an employee that restricts an employee from performing:
(1) Work for another employer for a specified period of time;
(2) Work in a specified geographical area; or
(3) Work for another employer that is similar to the employee’s work for the employer who is a party to the agreement.
II. No employer shall enter into a noncompete agreement with a low-wage employee. A noncompete agreement between an employer and a low-wage employee shall be void and unenforceable.”
Shouldn’t businesses be able to choose whether to hire employees who won’t also work for their competition? The Democratic politicians who proposed this bill don’t seem to think so.
4) Proposed by nine Democrats, House Bill 731 incrementally increases the minimum wage in New Hampshire each year until it is $15 per hour by 2024 and thereafter. New Hampshire currently has no minimum wage and the federal prevailing wage of $7.25 is the minimum that an employee could legally work for. Despite this, New Hampshire workers earn the most in the US. It seems that the free market determines wages based on value production, supply & demand, skill, and experience. No government required. This bill would cause businesses to fold due to the 100% increase in payroll costs. The only way that businesses could survive would be by offsetting the huge increase by either laying off workers, increasing prices, or cutting operational budgets to dangerous levels.
The Liberty Block has published numerous articles about the terrible effects of criminalizing labor. Governor Sununu vetoed the Senate version of this bill last session. This bill has been retained from the last session.
5) Proposed by 11 Democrats, House Bill 1144 forces all businesses with more than 100 employees to submit “data on wage differences between male and female employees to the department of labor” every two years. The bill reads:
“III. An employer with more than 100 employees located in the state of New Hampshire shall disclose the following information to the department of labor no later than June 30, 2021, and biennially thereafter.
(a) The difference between the mean wages of male exempt employees and female exempt employees located in New Hampshire, by each job classification or title.
(b) The difference between the median wages of male exempt employees and female exempt employees located in New Hampshire, by each job classification or title.
(c) The difference between the mean wages of male board members and female board members located in New Hampshire.
(d) The difference between the median wages of male board members and female board members located in New Hampshire.
(e) The number of employees on which the data in subparagraphs (a) and (b) is based.
IV. An employer shall disclose the information required in paragraph III in the following format:
(a) In one column, list in order the data required in paragraph III.
(b) For each instance in which a wage differential is the result of one of the exceptions listed in paragraph I, a space for explanation shall appear next to the data in question.
V. The department of labor shall publish the data it receives on the department of labor website pursuant to RSA 275:41-c.”
In a free world, employers would be allowed to hire whomever they want and pay them whatever they want. Employees would be free to work for whomever they wish. If one individual believed that an employer was a sexist, they could choose to work elsewhere. Again, the free market sorts this out. Government is not needed.
6) Two Democratic Senators proposed a bill that would give the government (read: politicians and bureaucrats) even more control over the economy, businesses, and the free market. Senate Bill 60 would force all employers with 15 or more employees to schedule every shift at least 14 days in advance. It is unclear whether employees would be able to legally pick up shifts on a ‘per diem’ basis.
7) Proposed by four Democrats and three Republicans, House Bill 532 grants the government the authority to force all employers to pay their employees the full amount of the value of their unused vacation and personal time, regardless of whether they quit or are terminated for any reason. The bill also mandates that if unused vacation or personal time expires at the end of each year or other amount of time, the employer must pay the amount to the employee. This is yet another power that politicians want to grant themselves. The more financial and logistical burdens politicians place on employers, the worse our economy will become.
If you believe in self determination, the free market, and the natural rights to work, hire, and fire people however one sees fit, please use our links to email the sponsors, committees, and your legislators and tell them to oppose these anti-freedom anti-market bills.