Ask the Scholar
Page 102 of 122
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
JUN-28-2000 15:08
OFC LEGIS. AFFAIRS&BUDGET
202 401 4562 P.07/13
High Performance Benus Comments
Page 2
I.
The Proposed Regulations Should Contain Specific Mechanisms for
Rewarding States that Develop Anti-Displacement Protections and
Procedures to Guard Against Abusive Working Conditions.
A. Condition Eligibility to Compete on the Job Entry Rate Measures on
Submission of Grievance Procedures by the States
As set forth in the preamble to the final TANF regulations,
States without adequate non-displacement procedures may have an unfair
advantage in obtaining job placements. Therefore,
we will consider State
grievance procedures or the record of a State with respect to displacement
complaints as potential factors in determining eligibility for, or the size of, a High
Performance Bonus. (64 Fed. Reg. 17748)
Despite this statement HHS did not propose a specific reward for anti-displacement protections
as part of the High Performance Bonus program. The Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) mandates that each state establish a displacement
grievance procedure, but, to date, most states simply have not complied.¹ Indeed, some states
have argued that no such procedure is required-that recourse to the courts is sufficient to
enforce displacement protections despite the obvious problems with this approach.
Meanwhile, there is abundant evidence that work experience and community service
programs are displacing regular employees. To take just one example, the American Federation
of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) District Council 37, the union
representing public employees in New York City, has recently filed several lawsuits on behalf of
hundreds of city workers who have been displaced by workfare participants.² If an effective
grievance procedure were in place, this lawsuit would not have been necessary. Since states that
do not have a displacement grievance procedure will be able to place TANF recipients more
easily than states that are in compliance with the law, these states will have an unfair advantage
in competing on the Job-Entry Rate measure and the Increase in the Job Entry Rate measure.
Recommendation: In order to be eligible to compete on both Job Entry Rate measures,
states should be required to submit their displacement grievance procedure to HHS and provide
evidence that welfare recipients and workers who are employed at their worksites are properly
notified of the procedure.
B. Create a Separate Non-Displacement & Working Conditions Measure,
Requiring States to Establish a Grievance Procedure that "Integrates"
the Procedures and Substantive Protections Now Available under TANF,
the Welfare to Work and the Workforce Investment Act of 1998
I
"A State with a program funded under this part shall establish and maintain a grievance procedure for resolving
complaints of alleged violations
:
PRWORA, Sec. 407(f)(3).
TO
"Union Again Files Lawsuit Seeking End to Workfare," New York Times (April 15, 1999); "DC37 Sues On
WEPs' Growth in Parks Dept." The Chief-Leader (February 12, 1999); "Court Allows Hospital Layoffs, But
Doesn't Sentle Workfare Issues," New York Times (April 28, 1998); "Giuliani Drops Workfare Jobs at the
Hospitals," New York Times (April 24, 1998).
Page data
- Page
- 102
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- 33ea5a30224461a0
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 565375618
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "565375618",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565375618",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "TANF [Temporary Assistance for Needy Families] - High Performance Bonus - Final Rule Part II [binder] [4]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565375618",
"collections": [
"Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
"Margy Waller's Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-001.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-001.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-001.jpg",
"imageCount": 122,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "565375618",
"label": "TANF [Temporary Assistance for Needy Families] - High Performance Bonus - Final Rule Part II [binder] [4]",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565375618"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "565375618",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565375618",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "TANF [Temporary Assistance for Needy Families] - High Performance Bonus - Final Rule Part II [binder] [4]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565375618",
"collections": [
"Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
"Margy Waller's Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-001.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-001.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-001.jpg",
"imageCount": 122,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565375618",
"naId": 565375618,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"otherTitles": [
"7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025"
],
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 102,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025/7367483-20200317S-024-004-2025-102.jpg",
"mediaId": "33ea5a30224461a0",
"ocrText": "JUN-28-2000 15:08\nOFC LEGIS. AFFAIRS&BUDGET\n202 401 4562 P.07/13\nHigh Performance Benus Comments\nPage 2\nI.\nThe Proposed Regulations Should Contain Specific Mechanisms for\nRewarding States that Develop Anti-Displacement Protections and\nProcedures to Guard Against Abusive Working Conditions.\nA. Condition Eligibility to Compete on the Job Entry Rate Measures on\nSubmission of Grievance Procedures by the States\nAs set forth in the preamble to the final TANF regulations,\nStates without adequate non-displacement procedures may have an unfair\nadvantage in obtaining job placements. Therefore,\nwe will consider State\ngrievance procedures or the record of a State with respect to displacement\ncomplaints as potential factors in determining eligibility for, or the size of, a High\nPerformance Bonus. (64 Fed. Reg. 17748)\nDespite this statement HHS did not propose a specific reward for anti-displacement protections\nas part of the High Performance Bonus program. The Personal Responsibility and Work\nOpportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) mandates that each state establish a displacement\ngrievance procedure, but, to date, most states simply have not complied.¹ Indeed, some states\nhave argued that no such procedure is required-that recourse to the courts is sufficient to\nenforce displacement protections despite the obvious problems with this approach.\nMeanwhile, there is abundant evidence that work experience and community service\nprograms are displacing regular employees. To take just one example, the American Federation\nof State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) District Council 37, the union\nrepresenting public employees in New York City, has recently filed several lawsuits on behalf of\nhundreds of city workers who have been displaced by workfare participants.² If an effective\ngrievance procedure were in place, this lawsuit would not have been necessary. Since states that\ndo not have a displacement grievance procedure will be able to place TANF recipients more\neasily than states that are in compliance with the law, these states will have an unfair advantage\nin competing on the Job-Entry Rate measure and the Increase in the Job Entry Rate measure.\nRecommendation: In order to be eligible to compete on both Job Entry Rate measures,\nstates should be required to submit their displacement grievance procedure to HHS and provide\nevidence that welfare recipients and workers who are employed at their worksites are properly\nnotified of the procedure.\nB. Create a Separate Non-Displacement & Working Conditions Measure,\nRequiring States to Establish a Grievance Procedure that \"Integrates\"\nthe Procedures and Substantive Protections Now Available under TANF,\nthe Welfare to Work and the Workforce Investment Act of 1998\nI\n\"A State with a program funded under this part shall establish and maintain a grievance procedure for resolving\ncomplaints of alleged violations\n:\nPRWORA, Sec. 407(f)(3).\nTO\n\"Union Again Files Lawsuit Seeking End to Workfare,\" New York Times (April 15, 1999); \"DC37 Sues On\nWEPs' Growth in Parks Dept.\" The Chief-Leader (February 12, 1999); \"Court Allows Hospital Layoffs, But\nDoesn't Sentle Workfare Issues,\" New York Times (April 28, 1998); \"Giuliani Drops Workfare Jobs at the\nHospitals,\" New York Times (April 24, 1998)."
}