Officials from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO have been meeting privately for the last two months to hash out a deal on one of the most controversial pieces of immigration reform — visas for low-skilled workers.
But recent talks have stalled, leaving the two influential groups far apart on the same issue that helped sink reform in 2007.
That’s bad news for a Senate working group that decided to outsource the negations in December, believing that if the polarized interests could find common ground, that would neutralize two of the most powerful potential opponents to a final bill.
But several sources predicted the group will not have a product to deliver to the Friday deadline given by Senate staff.
“It’s like we’re speaking different languages,” said one source familiar with the discussions between business and labor. “We’re very far apart. It’s hard to see us coming to any sort of agreement.”
A source affiliated with the unions agreed that it looks more likely than not the effort will fail.
This week alone the chamber’s Randy Johnson and the AFL-CIO’s Ana Avendano have met with a group of senior-level reps from the Essential Worker Committee and union officials in back-to-back hours-long sessions trying to find consensus on a variety of issues — to no avail. They have another meeting tentatively scheduled later this week.
A Chamber spokeswoman acknowledged that the groups are nowhere near a final deal.
“The negotiations are continuing and there are still many issues we have left resolve,” she wrote in an email.
Avanendo of the AFL-CIO said she is “still hopeful of reaching a good result.”
The guest worker issue has already been a visible split between Obama’s proposal for immigration reform and the Senate’s framework. Obama didn’t include any program in his guidelines released earlier this month, which received major criticism from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a key GOP negotiator.
Business and labor have long been divided over how to create a system for allowing future immigrant workers to legally enter the country. It is one of the few immigration issues that falls along the traditional disagreements between labor and business. Division over so-called “future flow” is largely credited with thwarting a comprehensive immigration overhaul in 2007.
Still, the two sides had been informally meeting for the past three years trying to find common ground. But the intensity of the talks, which rotate between the two group’s Washington headquarters has increased since Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) met with AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Chamber CEO Tom Donohue in December, tasking them with finding middle ground.
Despite both labor leaders and chamber officials signaling that they want to agree to a compromise, coming up with a proposal that would provide lawmakers with a framework for the number of immigrants that should be let in, how much they should be paid and what the process for attaining permanent residency would be has been elusive.
“Our goal is to hammer out an approach that responds to documented labor shortages backed up by real labor market data, rather than rely on the word of any employer claiming he or she cannot find an American worker,” Avanedo said. “Given persistent high unemployment, it is especially crucial to ensure that any new program ensures that American workers have a real first shot at new job opportunities.”
Immigration reform advocate Frank Sharry said the difficult in drafting a proposal comes because “they are trying to construct something that doesn’t exist.”
Both sides are trying to avoid current pitfalls in the low-skilled and high-skilled visa programs.
One of the thorniest issues between the two sides has been over the unemployment trigger. The business community wants a market-based approach while unions have been pushing for a commission to recommend the number of workers needed.
Despite the limited forward movement, Sharry of America’s Voice said he is still optimistic that a final package will include the issue — even if it means that Senate negotiators have to craft their own proposal.
Getting buy-in from key stakeholders happens during most any big legislative fight. But tasking two groups — without congressional staff present — to come to an agreement so that lawmakers can incorporate their work into a larger bill is unusual to say the least.
“I don’t think it’s unusual to engage the outside groups in a really serious way, including at the negotiation level,” said Alex Vogel, who was a leadership staffer for Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.). Vogel was involved in asbestos reform negotiations with the AFL-CIO and a few business interests. “The idea that it’s happening with no staff, it’s less that it’s ground breaking and more that I don’t think it’s that smart.
“Outside groups can agree on a lot. They still need someone to say, “Ok, great, this is what these guys are going to vote on,’” he added.
