PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 14, 2000
Day Laborer Fairness and Protection Act - Requires day labor service agencies to provide notice of the wage rate expected to be paid by each third party employer using their services. Requires the wage rate for such third party employers to equal the rate paid to their permanent employees who perform substantially equivalent work, with due consideration given to seniority, experience, skills and qualifications. Requires day laborers to be paid by third party employers at a wage rate not less than that stated in the agency notice for all work performed for such employers, including work contained in the detailed description issued under notification requirements of this Act. Prohibits employers from reducing the wage rate of any employee in order to comply with requirements of this Act.Sets forth requirements for: (1) agency payments to day laborers for excessive processing time; (2) civil damages and criminal penalties for certain employer violations; (3) itemized wage statements, annual earnings summaries, and optional payment schedules; (4) no charges for cashing wage payment checks or for overpayments; (5) nondiscrimination; (6) adequate seating, restrooms and water in waiting areas; (7) no restrictions on worker acceptance of permanent positions, but allowance placement fees paid to agencies by employers; (8) health care liability for injuries on the job or in transit; (9) agency notices, including employer lists and descriptions of jobs, wages, and other working conditions; (10) equitable expenses for day laborer meals, transportation, and equipment; (11) agency registration with the Secretary of Labor; and (12) Department of Labor enforcement of this Act.Amends the National Labor Relations Act to make it an unfair labor practice for employers to offer and grant: (1) permanent replacement employee status or other employment preferences to individuals for performing bargaining unit work for the employer during a labor dispute; or (2) any employment preference based on an individual's being employed, or having indicated a willingness to be employed, during a labor dispute, over any employee who was there at dispute commencement, has exercised rights through the labor organization involved in the dispute, and is working for the employer, or has unconditionally offered to return to such work.
People & committees
Rep. Gutierrez, Luis V. [D-IL-4] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1487)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.5182 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.5182 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.5182 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.5182 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.