Companies End On-Call Scheduling After NY Attorney General’s Letter
Gap Inc. is the latest retailer to end its practice of requiring workers to remain on-call for short-notice shifts following an inquiry from New York’s attorney general.
A spokeswoman for...
Gap Inc. is the latest retailer to end its practice of requiring workers to remain on-call for short-notice shifts following an inquiry from New York’s attorney general.
A spokeswoman for the San Francisco-based retailer says the decision also applies to Gap’s other brands, including Banana Republic, Old Navy and Athleta and was part of an effort to “improve scheduling stability and flexibility” for workers.
Spokeswoman Laura Wilkinson says the change will apply “across our global organization” and that the company is working to establish scheduling systems giving store employees at least 10 to 14 days’ notice.
Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s office sent letters to Gap and 12 other retailers earlier this year questioning them about on-call scheduling, which required hourly workers to stay on-call for shifts set the night before or the same day, giving them little time to arrange for child care or work other jobs.
“Workers deserve stable and reliable work schedules, and I commend Gap for taking an important step to make their employees’ schedules fairer and more predictable,” said Schneiderman, a Democrat.
Abercrombie & Fitch and Victoria’s Secret also ended the practice this summer.
Carrie Gleason, director of the Fair Workweek Initiative at the Center for Popular Democracy, said in a statement that Gap’s decision reflects not only Schneiderman’s concerns but also a new ordinance in San Francisco requiring chain retailers to set schedules in advance. Similar proposals are pending before other city governments.
“Working people in hourly jobs are starting to speak out about the impact that employers’ scheduling practices has on their lives,” Gleason said in a statement.
Source: CBS DC
Teachers Union Questions Charter School Relationships With For-Profit Company
Teachers Union Questions Charter School Relationships With For-Profit Company
Denver’s teachers union is demanding Denver Public Schools halt the expansion of charter schools until district leaders can ensure taxpayer money is not going to for-profit corporations.
...
Denver’s teachers union is demanding Denver Public Schools halt the expansion of charter schools until district leaders can ensure taxpayer money is not going to for-profit corporations.
The request comes on the heels of a study by an advocacy organization, the Center for Popular Democracy, based in New York. It alleges Denver’s largest charter school network – the Denver School of Science and Technology – paid between $20 million and $50 million to a for-profit company for employee and personnel services for DSST schools. During this time the company was owned by two of DSST’s founding directors.
The Center for Popular Democracy group says that relationship raises concerns about conflicts of interest.
DSST and Denver Public Schools deny any wrongdoing.
The district says that neither the district, DSST nor the company benefited financially and in fact there was a net loss to the company, which the district forgave when the company dissolved.
Money for independently run public charter schools is under great scrutiny now because of pending state legislation to shift more money to charter schools.
By Jenny Brundin
Source
Arizona Rep. Isela Blanc arrested during DACA protest on National Mall in D.C.
Arizona Rep. Isela Blanc arrested during DACA protest on National Mall in D.C.
A video of the incident posted by the immigrant-advocacy group Living United for Change in Arizona on Facebook shows Blanc and other demonstrators being arrested after they staged a sit-in,...
A video of the incident posted by the immigrant-advocacy group Living United for Change in Arizona on Facebook shows Blanc and other demonstrators being arrested after they staged a sit-in, blocking a street on the mall.
Read the full article here.
The Great Debate
A year ago the federal government and 49 states completed a $25 billion agreement with the...
A year ago the federal government and 49 states completed a $25 billion agreement with the nation’s largest mortgage servicers to settle claims of “robo-signing” and unlawful foreclosure practices. President Barack Obama announced the creation of the federal-state mortgage securities working group in his 2012 State of the Union address. The nation seemed on the verge of transforming the way banks treat struggling homeowners ‑ particularly those with “underwater” mortgages, in which a homeowner owes more than the house is worth.
These promises, however, have yet to be fulfilled. The latest interim report on the national mortgage settlement is due out this week, and banks will likely again declare that it offers proof that they are fulfilling their obligations. But the communities hit hardest by the foreclosure crisis have yet to see any meaningful relief.
Time is running out to ensure that these communities receive their fair share under the settlement. But it is not too late to provide meaningful assistance. The settlement monitors need to demand greater transparency from banks, and they need to see that banks comply with the fair-lending requirements set out in the agreement. They also need to aggressively police the servicing reforms to ensure that all homeowners get a fair opportunity to save their homes.
This settlement was designed to begin a new chapter in the resolution of the nation’s foreclosure crisis. It provided much-needed funding for legal aid, housing counselors and other foreclosure prevention services. It also committed the banks to billions of dollars in consumer relief to help keep struggling families in their homes. Critics recognized that the settlement size was far too small to solve the entire housing crisis, but they hoped it could change the way banks deal with foreclosures.
Unfortunately, there is little transparency about how the banks are using this money. They have not provided any loan-level data to show which borrowers are receiving assistance.
Moreover, mortgage servicers have complete discretion over who receives help. Advocates fear the banks have been cherry-picking expensive loans that are deeply underwater to meet their settlement obligations quickly. This provides an important service for the borrowers in that category but little systematic relief for low- and moderate-income communities suffering the most from the foreclosure crisis.
The lack of loan transparency and the discretion vested in the banks also make it hard to ensure that settlement relief is keeping families in their homes. The last monitor’s report showed that more than half the “relief” cited by the banks came through roughly $13 billion worth of short-sale agreements ‑ in which a borrower sells his or her home for less than the value of the mortgage.
Short sales help borrowers resolve a foreclosure. But they do not keep families in their homes. The lender also profits more from a short sale than a foreclosure – hardly the kind of penalty commensurate with the settling of billions of dollars in legal claims.
Worse, there are anecdotal reports that banks are writing off worthless second liens without helping homeowners out of foreclosure with their primary lenders. The banks are taking credit for writing down billions of dollars in worthless second mortgages. But these write-offs won’t save a family’s home ‑ unless the primary loan is modified at the same time.
We need to do a better job of ensuring that future settlements ‑ and there are plenty of continuing investigations into the mortgage mess ‑ direct relief to the hardest-hit communities. Bank regulators at the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency have announced billion-dollar settlements to replace the botched Independent Foreclosure Review. They must pledge to do more to ensure consumer relief before letting lenders off the hook for improper foreclosures. Homeowner advocacy organizations like the Campaign for a Fair Settlement are pressing for such solutions.
Obama must also provide leadership. Last year he told the Democratic National Convention, “When a family can no longer be tricked into signing a mortgage they can’t afford, that family is protected, but so is the value of other people’s homes ‑ and so is the entire economy.”
He was right. Ending predatory lending, and lifting the hardest-hit communities up out of the foreclosure crisis, will help the entire nation.
It is time to fulfill that promise.
Source:
Ciudanía en Nueva York – Importancia de las Cooperativas de Trabajo
Comunidad Y Trabajadores Unidos - July 15, 2014 - El debate sobre los derechos de migrantes parece estar tan polarizado y por eso no vimos mucho progreso en la reforma migratoria ni en asegurar...
Comunidad Y Trabajadores Unidos - July 15, 2014 - El debate sobre los derechos de migrantes parece estar tan polarizado y por eso no vimos mucho progreso en la reforma migratoria ni en asegurar los derechos de los trabajadores. En Nueva York podemos ver cambios que muestran algunas oportunidades para los migrantes a nivel estatal. En este programa vamos a enfocarnos en dos de los cambios: la legislación que ofrece ciudadanía en Nueva York y el avance de cooperativas de trabajo para trabajadores.
Ciudanía en Nueva York
Hasta ahora el debate sobre la reforma migratoria solo pasó a nivel federal pero la legislación que se desarrolló recientemente, trajo el debate a nivel estatal. La legislación que se desarrolló ofrece ciudanía para en Nueva York para los migrantes y Andrew Friedman habla sobre el significado de esta ley. Andrew Friedman es el co-director del centro de democracia popular y es parte del movimiento que empuja para esta legislación. Friedman habla sobre por qué Nueva York debería desarrollar una legislación que ayude a los migrantes y sobre el papel importante que juegan los migrantes en Nueva York.
Source
Activists from around the country to march, hold workshops in Pittsburgh
Activists from around the country to march, hold workshops in Pittsburgh
An estimated 1,500 demonstrators will hit the streets of Downtown Pittsburgh this afternoon — and both geographically and politically, they expect to cover a lot of ground.
The “Still We...
An estimated 1,500 demonstrators will hit the streets of Downtown Pittsburgh this afternoon — and both geographically and politically, they expect to cover a lot of ground.
The “Still We Rise” March, which kicks off a two-day gathering of activists from around the country, begins at 2:30 and will feature stops including the Pittsburgh branch of the Federal Reserve, the headquarters of UPMC and the Station Square office of Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey.
Ana Maria Archila, co-director of the Center for Popular Democracy, which is organizing the gathering, said the activists are turning out to put the spotlight on issues communities face such as economic inequality, racism and xenophobia.
“… We will win our rights,” she said, adding that the event “is really the launch of a national grassroots community.”
In fact, the “People’s Convention” at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center expects to attract over 40 progressive groups from 30 states, focusing on issues ranging from immigrant rights and racial equity to environmental concerns and public schools advocacy. A parallel program will involve policy discussions among progressive elected officials: Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto and City Councilor Daniel Lavelle are among those participating.
The event “reflects what we’re trying to do in Pittsburgh, on a national level,” said Erin Kramer, executive director of activist group One Pittsburgh.
Here as elsewhere, organizers have pressed fast-food employers to raise minimum wages to at least $15 an hour, and fought for a city ordinance requiring employers to grant paid sick leave to workers. Other cities are weighing “fair scheduling” ordinances that require giving workers earlier notice about, and input on, their work schedules.
Immigration issues, which have become a critical issue in this year’s presidential race, also will be a key topic. While Ms. Kramer said the convention is about more than electoral politics, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump “is really a threat for a lot of participants. He’s literally talking about building walls and sending people home. You may see a Trump puppet in the parade, more as a rodeo clown than anything else.”
The agenda may seem sprawling. “It is hard to weave these things together,” Ms. Archila admitted. One goal of the convention is for participants to craft a “statement of unity” outlining a vision to guide future activism.
But “all of our issues are interconnected,” said Pittsburgh education activist Pam Harbin, who will attend the convention to discuss tactics and lessons with organizers from elsewhere. “A $15 minimum wage is deeply connected to the fight for quality schools, because if you have parents working three jobs, you really can’t ask, ‘Why aren’t these parents more involved in their kids’ education?’”
Campaigns for higher wages or better worker protections often concentrate on the federal level. But with Washington in a partisan deadlock, activists are increasingly pressing for change locally.
“In some ways, people became more reliant on the federal government, and that took some of the wind out of the sails of local activism,” said Lisa Graves, executive director of the left-leaning Center for Media and Democracy. “But seeing the federal government crippled is an opportunity to reinvigorate local democracy.”
There are perils to the approach, as Pittsburgh has learned. Here as elsewhere, while progressives may control city hall, conservatives often rule state capitals.
State law has barred enforcing a Pittsburgh law to require the reporting of lost-and-stolen firearms, for example. And last December, an Allegheny County judge struck down ordinances requiring paid sick leave for employers, and special training for building security guards. A 2009 Supreme Court ruling barred municipalities for setting such rules for employers, Judge Joseph James ruled.
“It’s a growing trend to see these special interests using their access at the state level to preempt local democracy,” Ms. Graves said. This weekend will feature discussions of the challenge, but because states can limit local authority, “It’s extremely difficult to overcome.”
And a local ordinance may not help struggling families across the city line — at least not immediately.
Still, said Ms. Kramer, “If you lift the minimum wage in one place, people say, ‘Why not me?’ You have to start by painting an alternative picture.”
By Chris Potter
Source
Democracy for America Holds Solidarity Rallies Across the Nation
Democracy for America Holds Solidarity Rallies Across the Nation
Democracy for America (DFA) members joined Americans across the country to stand against white supremacy and against the deadly violence committed by Nazi groups in Charlottesville.
...
Democracy for America (DFA) members joined Americans across the country to stand against white supremacy and against the deadly violence committed by Nazi groups in Charlottesville.
Read the full article here.
Letter to the Editor: Proposed Legislation in Maryland Would Sacrifice Standards of Charter Schools
Washington Post - March 3, 2015, by Anne Kaiser - I share The Post’s interest in a healthy environment for charter schools in Maryland, as expressed in the Feb. 25 editorial “ Give charter schools a chance.” However, this goal cannot be achieved unless we maintain the high standards for accountability, equity and quality required by Maryland’s charter school law.Over the past decade, I have seen troubling results in states that lowered their standards. A 2014 Center for Popular Democracy report found $100 million in fraud, waste and abuse by charter schools in 14 states and the District. The National Education Policy Center found that charter school teachers face significantly lower compensation and poorer working conditions, leading to high turnover rates and the hiring of unqualified teachers. Michigan, Ohio, Delaware and Pennsylvania have seen wasted taxpayer dollars in their race to expand charter schools.Gov. Larry Hogan’s (R) legislation follows in these flawed footsteps by granting a disproportionate share of funding to charter schools at the expense of traditional public schools, permitting uncertified teachers, allowing union-busting by charter school operators and weakening safeguards for accountability. I will work hard through the legislative process to remove these harmful provisions so that we support charters without sacrificing standards.Anne Kaiser, Annapolis The writer, a Democrat, represents District 14 in the Maryland House, where she is majority leader.Source
Fed Up With Being Shut Out of Federal Reserve, Activists Descend on Summit
Specifically, the coalition is warning against the very real prospect of higher interest rates, saying a rate hike would slow the economy and harm those for whom the so-called "recovery" has been...
Specifically, the coalition is warning against the very real prospect of higher interest rates, saying a rate hike would slow the economy and harm those for whom the so-called "recovery" has been weakest, including poor people, women, and communities of color.Instead, the coalition is calling on the Fed to ditch those plans and give vulnerable communities, including "tens of millions of Black Americans who are still struggling," a say in economic policy.
Fed officials have for months signaled an intent to raise short-term interest rates—which were slashed to zero in 2008 in an effort to spur spending and investment—as soon as this fall or winter. As the Washington Post reported Thursday, reported wage growth "combined with the strong hiring and a rapidly falling unemployment rate, gave the Fed hope that the economy would be able to withstand the first rate hike in nearly a decade by the end of the year."
But recent volatility in stock markets in the U.S. and globally, as well as internal policy disagreements, are leading some economic observers to predict that the Fed may now beless likely to set a rate hike at its September meeting.
Regardless, the Fed Up campaign—anchored at the Center for Popular Democracy and supported by 25 groups including the Economic Policy Institute, Demos, and the AFL-CIO—says raising interest rates would be foolhardy.
And they're in Wyoming to make that view known. According to the Huffington Post, "Fed Up's member organizations brought over 100 primarily low-income grassroots activists from across the country for the gathering. It's a dramatic increase from its inaugural visit to Jackson Hole last year, when the campaign brought a group of 10 activists."
As Sam Ross-Brown wrote at the American Prospect this month, "Fed Up's goal is a more 'pro-worker' Federal Reserve, and their first step is stopping the Fed from hiking interest rates before wages and employment have a chance to catch up with the recovery. Building on a similar action last year, the coalition began circulating a petition this week demanding the Fed keep rates low until wages and employment rise."
"There is no data supporting the Fed's push for higher interest rates," said Ady Barkan, campaign director for Fed Up. "While they toy with halting the recovery, there is a crisis of stagnant wages and a lack of good jobs."
According to Whose Recovery? A National Convening on Inequality, Race, and the Federal Reserve—the Fed Up Coalition's policy agenda for three days of teach-ins and workshops in Jackson Hole—a rate hike would slow down the economy so that there are fewer new jobs and workers have less power to negotiate raises.
"By raising interest rates, the Federal Reserve will make it more expensive for us to pay our credit card, student loan, car, and mortgage payments," the Fed Up campaign says. "That means we will have less money in our pockets to buy the goods and services we need. And that will have a terrible ripple effect throughout the economy: businesses will earn less revenue, so they will lay off workers (or avoid hiring new workers) and they won’t be able or willing to give workers any raises. With bad job prospects and stagnant wages, working families won’t earn enough to buy the goods and services they need, which starts the whole cycle again."
"If this sounds like a terrible idea," the coalition continues, "that's because it is."
The Fed Up perspective is supported by economist Joseph Stiglitz, who spoke alongside the grassroots activists at an event on Thursday. The same day, Stiglitz wrote in an LA Timesop-ed:
It is hard to see why the Fed would choose slower job and wage growth for most Americans just to protect against the theoretical risk of moderately higher inflation. But, then again, it's often hard to understand the Fed's policy choices, which tend to contribute to widening inequality in the United States.
Too often, after the end of one recession, the Fed, fearing inflation, has used monetary policy to dampen the economic expansion. Its maneuvers keep inflation low but unemployment higher than it otherwise would be, negatively affecting all workers, not just those out of a job. Workers in jobs face greater stresses, downward pressure on wages and diminished opportunities for upward career mobility. The costs of higher unemployment are borne disproportionately by people in lower-income jobs, who also tend to be disproportionately people of color and women.
Beyond the particulars of interest rates and inflation, however, the Fed Up Coalition iscalling for the central bank to facilitate more robust public engagement and greater transparency, given its position as "arguably the nation's most powerful economic actor."
"For far too long, our communities have been isolated from the Federal Reserve’s policy choices," the coalition writes in Whose Recovery? "Monetary policy has been left up to the bankers and the economists, with the public largely shut out and confounded by its seeming complexity."
Unsurprisingly, the document continues, "[t]he consequences of this disengagement have been profound. For the past 45 years, with only a few exceptions, the Federal Reserve has set policy that benefits banks and harms borrowers, helps employers and hurts workers, and privileges the voices and needs of corporate elites rather than those of America's working families."
Source: CommonDreams
Supreme Court’s Review of Obama’s Executive Order Should Lead to Relief
Supreme Court’s Review of Obama’s Executive Order Should Lead to Relief
Today, the Supreme Court decided to review President Obama’s executive order from 2014 to expand Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and implement Deferred Action for Parents of...
Today, the Supreme Court decided to review President Obama’s executive order from 2014 to expand Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and implement Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA). Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) applauds this decision and CPD’s Co-Executive Director Ana Maria Archila made the following statement about the Supreme Court’s decision to review the case:
“This is an excellent opportunity for the Supreme Court to do right by millions of immigrants who live with the daily fear of being torn apart from their families. Obama’s executive order is not only crucial for immigrant communities, it also stands to unleash enormous economic benefits to the entire country. We are urging the Supreme Court to respect the lives and safety of millions of immigrant families and make the decision to finally implement DAPA and expand DACA.”
# # #
www.populardemocracy.org
The Center for Popular Democracy promotes equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with innovative base-building organizations, organizing networks and alliances, and progressive unions across the country. CPD builds the strength and capacity of democratic organizations to envision and advance a pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial justice agenda.
16 hours ago
16 hours ago