As the hot summer months begin, Maryland workers will operate on new standards to protect them from extreme heat.

The heat standards took effect in September of last year. Employers are now required to give workers an extra break when the heat index rises above 90 or 100 degrees.

Sam Williamson, staff attorney at the Public Justice Center, said it is better to have standard protections than rely on the goodwill of employers in the state.

"We know that employers are not going to provide those protections on their own," Williamson asserted. "Many employers will prioritize profit over their workers. I've spoken with workers who, working outside all day, they're lucky if their employer gives them a small 8-ounce bottle of water that's been sitting out in the sun."

The new heat regulations come after Maryland saw a dramatic spike in heat-related death in 2024. More than 27 people died and 1,200 people went to the emergency room due to heat exposure, up from nine deaths in 2023.

The new regulations also allow for "acclimatization," meaning new and returning employees get up to two weeks to adjust to working outside in intense heat. More than 70% of heat-related deaths occur in a worker's first week on the job. Williamson emphasized enforcement of the new heat standards will be vital to its effectiveness.

"I'm hoping that now, with these heat standards, employers will start to actually be following these better practices," Williamson noted. "Really, what I'm hoping is to see good enforcement by the Maryland Department of Labor. Because without good enforcement, unfortunately I don't think we'll see employers make a good switch."

Williamson added if any worker is concerned their employer is not following heat standards, they should file a complaint with the Maryland Department of Labor.


get more stories like this via email

Women who recently graduated from college are earning significantly less than their male counterparts.

A new study revealed women from Pennsylvania and other states who earned bachelor's degrees within the past seven years earn an average of 18% less than similarly-educated men. Research from the National Association of Colleges and Employers found segregated work environments are the main reason for the disparity.

Mary Gatta, director of research and public policy for the association and co-author of the report, said the problem is so prevalent, job analysts gave it a formal title.

"Some of that, as we see in our survey, is attributed to men and women working in different industries and different types of work," Gatta explained. "We called it 'occupational sex segregation.'"

The Early Career Talent Survey interviewed 1,400 professionals who graduated between 2017 and 2023, including about 500 men and 900 women. It found the gap brings financial challenges for women, who are more likely to have student loans but are less confident of their ability to repay them.

Despite financial disparities, career satisfaction was similar between genders among early-career professionals. Both men and women share comparable views on the speed of their career progression, although they cited different factors affecting their advancement.

Gatta noted it can cause long-term problems.

"The pay gap continues as women continue in their careers, with less money they are paying into Social Security, it's less money they are putting into their retirement," Gatta emphasized. "It has immediate impacts around economic security but also economic security as we age."

Nearly three-quarters of men surveyed work for private-sector companies, while just over half of women do. It found 30% of women work for nonprofits, where compensation is typically lower than in private industries. Gatta argued women need to gain more opportunities to explore nontraditional roles.

"The importance of helping introduce women and men to atypical occupations is really important," Gatta stressed. "Introducing women to STEM at an early age, getting that career exploration, we know that is important in helping to break some of that."

Support for this reporting was provided by Lumina Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

Groups opposed to NorthWestern Energy's latest rate-hike proposal plan to rally on Monday in Helena.

In an unusual move, the utility giant used a legal loophole to increase electric rates for its Montana customers without approval, just weeks before it was scheduled to argue for approval. Montana's Public Service Commission regulates utilities, including NorthWestern, which serves two-thirds of the state.

After the Public Service Commission failed to act within nine months of a request, NorthWestern announced a 17% rate increase, or more than $200 a year per customer.

Dick Maney, a resident of Butte, said while Montanans elect Public Service Commission members, he worries the commission is not always acting on the consumers' behalf.

"That is the problem," Maney asserted. "I don't think it has a lot to do with NorthWestern Energy. I think it has a lot to do with the regulators on the outside, not on the inside of the company."

The move follows a 28% rate increase in 2023 and precedes arguments starting Monday for another 20% increase. The Monday rally to oppose the hikes is being hosted by a coalition of groups: Montana Conservation Voters, Families for a Livable Climate, Forward Montana, Big Sky 55+, Montana Health Professionals for a Healthy Climate, Montana Sierra Club and Helena Interfaith Climate Advocates.

Maney noted the rate increases are troublesome on top of the many other increasing costs of living in the state. For example, the median residential property in 2023 saw a 21% higher tax bill than the previous year, according to the Montana Free Press.

"We have to deal with property taxes, which have increased substantially over the last couple of years and that is really affecting everyone," Maney pointed out. "An increase in electricity affects us a lot."

In the final days of the legislative session, state lawmakers passed property tax relief measures for most Montanans by raising taxes on second homes.


get more stories like this via email

A new Northwestern University study examining the history of labor laws for women says men ultimately benefited from laws meant to protect women in the workplace.

The study looks at protective labor policies across the history of the United States.

For about 60 years, those laws imposed restrictions on women's work.

Northwestern University Professor of Economics Matthias Doepke said the study questions whether these laws were genuinely put in place to protect women from harm.

"The main reason these laws were successful, indeed was less a need to protect women at work and more a need to protect men from competition," said Doepke, "because this happened when men and women were starting to increasingly compete for the same jobs."

Many old protective labor laws were eliminated alongside the rise of the Equal Rights Movement.

Doepke said the rise in gender equality was partly due to the alignment of men's and women's interests, influenced by factors like the increase of married women in the labor force, and a shared concern for children.

Doepke claimed that gender equality has historically correlated with economic growth. He said the female workforce rose in the mid-20th century, fostering support for increased opportunities for women and anti-discrimination laws.

However, he thinks this support may be weakening, due to falling marriage rates and differing views between men and women.

"Young women increasingly turn to the left and become more liberal," said Doepke. "Young men also used to be liberal, but they have started to turn further to the right. It's been talked about a lot, for example, in the recent presidential election -- that Trump had a lot of success with young men. And you can see this on particular issues such as gender equality."

Doepke added that recent legal changes and Supreme Court decisions also indicate a shift away from gender equality.