Hundreds of Activists Occupy the Capitol to Stop Trumpcare
Hundreds of Activists Occupy the Capitol to Stop Trumpcare
Hundreds of activists from around the country descended on Capitol Hill Wednesday to protest the GOP's latest assault on health care and the Affordable Care Act. As Donald Trump and Mitch...
Hundreds of activists from around the country descended on Capitol Hill Wednesday to protest the GOP's latest assault on health care and the Affordable Care Act. As Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell spent hours twisting senators' arms over lunch and secret meetings trying to whip up votes, nearly 300 Americans, including doctors, nurses, home health aides, and people with chronic conditions, occupied Republican senators' officers, demanding that their elected officials kill the Better Care Reconciliation Act and support a single-payer, Medicare-for-all health care system.
Read the full article here.
Lange, unregelmäßige Arbeitszeit: Starbucks weiter in der Kritik
Die Kritik vieler Mitarbeiter an den Arbeitsbedingungen bei der Kaffeehauskette Starbucks hat für einen neuen Begriff im Wortschatz vieler US-Amerikaner gesorgt: "Clopening". Für viele...
Die Kritik vieler Mitarbeiter an den Arbeitsbedingungen bei der Kaffeehauskette Starbucks hat für einen neuen Begriff im Wortschatz vieler US-Amerikaner gesorgt: "Clopening". Für viele Mitarbeiter ist das späte Schließen und das morgendliche Öffnen der Filialen durch ein und dieselbe Person eine hohe Belastung. Im vergangenen Jahr gelobte Starbucks Besserung, nachdem die "New York Times" ausführlich über Praktiken wie das "Clopening" berichtet hatte. Die Kritik richtete sich gegen die unregelmäßigen und zum Teil überlangen Arbeitszeiten, die den Mitarbeitern nur sehr kurzfristig mitgeteilt würden.
Hat sich seither etwas gebessert? Nein, schreibt die NGO Center for Popular Democracy in einer ausführlichen Analyse. Zuvor wurden Mitarbeiter befragt. Diese bemängeln nicht nur die weiterhin vorkommenden "Clopenings", sondern auch die Schwierigkeit, bei Krankheit Ersatz zu finden – ein Mitarbeiter bezeichnet es als anstrengender, selbst so lange durchzutelefonieren, bis er einen Springer gefunden hat, als einfach selbst krank zur Arbeit zu gehen. Problematisch sei auch die chronische Unterbesetzung der Filialen, die sich wiederum auf die Arbeitszeit auswirke.
Missstände auch in Europa
Starbucks ist nicht die einzige Kette, die ihren Mitarbeitern einiges abverlangt. Die Kritik findet in den USA deswegen so großes Echo, weil Starbucks seine Mitarbeiter als "Partner" bezeichnet und die Philosophie verfolgt, "den menschlichen Geist zu inspirieren und zu nähren". Es ist nicht das erste Mal, dass die sozial und umweltbewusst wirkende Unternehmensphilosophie (Fairtrade, Aktionen gegen Rassismus, bezahlte Ausbildung, Krankenversicherung) auf die Kaffeehauskette zurückfällt.
Beschwerden gab es in den vergangenen Jahren einige – auch außerhalb der USA. 2010 schleuste sich ein ZDF-Reporter in eine Starbucks-Filiale auf dem Frankfurter Flughafen ein und wurde Zeuge eines harten Arbeitsalltags: Abmahnungen gebe es teilweise wegen falscher Sockenfarbe, fiebrige Mitarbeiter durften nicht nach Hause gehen.
Dass sich bei Arbeitszeit und Dienstplänen nichts zum Positiven geändert hat, sieht man in der Führungsebene von Starbucks naturgemäß anders: "Wir sind die Ersten, die zugeben, dass wir viel Arbeit vor uns haben", sagte Unternehmenssprecherin Jaime Riley der "New York Times". Alle Angestellten würden ihre Dienstpläne mittlerweile mindestens zehn Tage im Voraus bekommen. In alle Filialen durchgedrungen sei diese Praxis aber noch nicht, heißt es in der Analyse des Center for Popular Democracy. (lhag, 25.9.2015)
Untersuchung des Center for Popular Democracy zu Dienstplänen
"New York Times"-Enthüllungen 2014
"New York Times"-Status-quo-Bericht 2015
Kooperation zwischen Starbucks und der Arizona State University
Source: derStandard.at
Kansas City Social Justice Group Says Too Many Are Left Behind in Today’s Economic Growth
Kansas City Star - March 5, 2015, by Diane Stafford - When Andrew Kling dug into an economic research project, he was shocked to find there were more payday loan shops in Missouri than there were...
Kansas City Star - March 5, 2015, by Diane Stafford - When Andrew Kling dug into an economic research project, he was shocked to find there were more payday loan shops in Missouri than there were Wal-Mart, McDonald’s and Starbucks locations combined.
“In a time when Wall Street is reporting record profits, many low-income people are feeling the pain,” said Kling, communication manager for Communities Creating Opportunity.
His social justice organization, better known as CCO, held a rally Thursday in front of a small strip center at 63rd Street and Troost Avenue that houses a payday loan company and a fast-food restaurant.
“It’s an appropriate site for releasing our report,” he said.
CCO is seeking support for a “covenant for a moral economy” that among other things asks the Federal Reserve to pay attention to those at the bottom of the economic ladder when it considers raising interest rates this year.
Kling said CCO is concerned that the unemployed and underemployed are being victimized by predatory lending practices, and they’re getting no help because of “political gridlock” and employers that have kept “wages dangerously low.”
The Rev. Stan Runnels, rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, 11 East 40th St. in Kansas City and a CCO participant, said a moral economy would include “wages that cover the costs of raising a family, where everyone has access to affordable credit in their communities.”
The rally also was planned to focus on racial inequality in the Kansas City area, where unemployment among blacks is 12.6 percent, compared with 5 percent for whites.
Kling said CCO research also found that from 2000 to 2014, the median wage for workers in Kansas was basically flat and the median wage in Missouri declined 2.5 percent.
Source
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/article12522674.html#storylink=cpy SourceWhy It's a Big Deal Hillary Clinton Plans to Shake Up the Fed
Why It's a Big Deal Hillary Clinton Plans to Shake Up the Fed
Hillary Clinton is taking on the United States Federal Reserve System, but in a wonky, bottom's-up way that shows her understanding of a complex and widely misunderstood organization. This is not...
Hillary Clinton is taking on the United States Federal Reserve System, but in a wonky, bottom's-up way that shows her understanding of a complex and widely misunderstood organization. This is not "End the Fed" or even "audit the Fed" — she wants to rebuild it from its fundamentals at the regional level.
To paraphrase Mitt Romney, the Federal Reserve is people, my friend. Hillary Clinton's recent proposal to change the roster of Fed officials who ultimately make monetary policy and regulatory decisions might be the most effective Fed-reform idea since the financial crisis. Generally, the public pays attention to little more than the face of the organization — the Fed's chairperson, currently Janet Yellen — who announces and explains the Fed's decisions. But beneath Yellen functions an intricate and influential bureaucracy that's dominated by interests from the financial sector, the vast majority of them white men, and may well be blind to the reality of a vast majority of Americans.
The Federal Reserve was set up in 1917, in the wake of a financial crisis, as a private national bank that could serve as lender of last resort to other banks. If a bank needed money to make good on deposits, it could go to the Fed for a short-term loan. It was, since its inception, a bankers' institution, run for banks, by banks. But its role has clearly evolved as credit markets have developed and as the Fed's mandate was changed to pursue price stability (low inflation) and full employment at the same time, while helping to regulate the sector for which it also serves as lender.
As the Fed's mission has expanded, its governance has not. The Fed is run by a seven-member board in Washington, D.C., and a dozen regional bank presidents based in financial centers throughout the country (New York, St. Louis, Kansas City and Cleveland, among others). While the crew in D.C. is selected by the president and vetted by Congress, the regional bank presidents are chosen by the financial industry and tend to be either bankers or career Fed employees. Of the 12 bank presidents, two are women and only one is not white.
New York's regional president is Willian C. Dudley, previously a Goldman Sachs managing director. Robert S. Kaplan of Dallas was a former vice chairman at Goldman. Neel Kashkari, a known financial reformer, is nonetheless a former employee of PIMCO, one of the world's largest asset managers and a subsidiary of German financial behemoth Allianz. Dennis P. Lockhart, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta is a former Citigroup executive.
Clinton's proposal would remove bankers from the regional boards of directors. Those boards choose the regional presidents and generate most of the information and perspective that the Federal Reserve governors use to set monetary policy. Clinton clearly understands how the Fed functions. Donald Trump has said he would not reappoint Janet Yellen as chair. Fine. But appointing the Fed chair is merely the most high-profile action a president can take in this regard. It doesn't change the system, and the Fed is known as the Federal Reserve System for a reason.
This is Clinton at her best – she knows how the government works. The region Federal Reserve boards do not get a lot of press. Most people do not know that they are staffed with chief executives from Morgan Stanley, Comerica, KeyCorp and private-equity firms like Silver Lake, and if they do know it, they do not understand its importance.
The Fed is generally a topic of political bluster. "I appointed him and he disappointed me," complained George H.W. Bush about Alan Greenspan, when the Fed chair refused to cut interest rates in the face of a recession that probably cost Bush his re-election in 1992. Before that, Ronald Reagan had to endure Chairman Paul Volcker raising interest rates so high in an effort to combat inflation that out-of-work construction workers were mailing bricks and wooden beams to the Fed in protest.
The idea that the Fed often acts contrary to the interests of working people is not new, but aside from requiring the Fed to pursue full employment in addition to price stability in 1977, presidents who are unhappy with the Fed have done little more than complain. Even after Greenspan disappointed Bush, Bill Clinton reappointed him to the post. When Greenspan retired, Ben Bernanke, an intellectual heir, took the helm. When he retired, Yellen, also an intellectual heir, took over. The power to appoint the Fed chair and governors is not, clearly, the power to change things.
Clinton is digging deeper. Changing the roster of the regional boards will hopefully help more accurate economic information trickle up to the chairperson and the federal governors. Perhaps, even, a labor representative or somebody with closer ties to the common American experience could become a regional bank president.
In her quiet way, tinkering with the inner workings of a near-century old quasi-government institution that is arcane to most, Clinton has a chance to achieve radical, lasting financial reform.
BY MICHAEL MAIELLO
Source
New York Now Largest City With Paid Sick Days
ThinkProgress - June 27, 2013, by Bryce Covert - In an early morning session on Thursday, the New York City Council voted to override a veto from Mayor Michael Bloomberg on paid sick days...
ThinkProgress - June 27, 2013, by Bryce Covert - In an early morning session on Thursday, the New York City Council voted to override a veto from Mayor Michael Bloomberg on paid sick days legislation. The bill, which now becomes law, requires any company with more than 15 employees to provide five days of paid leave a year and any company with fewer employees to offer five days of unpaid leave. This means that more than 1 million New York City workers will now have access to paid sick leave who didn’t have it before.
New York City joins four other cities — Seattle, Washington; San Francisco, California; Washington, DC; and Portland, Oregon — and the state of Connecticut in the group of places that have mandated paid sick days. However, New York’s legislation is not as strong as that in the other cities, which require companies with five or more employees to offer paid leave.
The city’s law will be implemented over a slow timeline, not taking effect until 2014 and only applying to companies with more than 20 employees for the first year and a half.
Despite initial concerns from City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and the objections raised by Mayor Bloomberg that the bill will put too large a cost burden on businesses, studies of laws in other places show either a neutral or positive effect. A recent audit of Washington, DC’s law found no negative impact on businesses, while a study of San Francisco found little negative impact and strong support among businesses and another of Connecticut found a small cost with big potential upsides. In fact, San Francisco’s law was found to have spurred job growth.
Even with these laws in place around the country, most workers don’t have access to paid leave. Forty percent of private workers and 80 percent of low-income workers can’t take a paid day off if they or their family members get sick.
Meanwhile, a rash of preemption bills, which bar cities and localities from enacting paid sick days legislation, have also been implemented across the country, the latest of which was signed into law by Florida Governor Rick Scott (R). They have also cropped up in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Mississippi. These bills have been sponsored by big businesses and local chambers of commerce and are part of a national effort backed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a right-wing group that coordinates conservative laws across states.
Source
Immigrants need sanctuary — and lawyers
Immigrants need sanctuary — and lawyers
Ali, a green card holder and father of three young daughters in Baltimore, was driving his friend home when they were pulled over by police in a routine traffic stop. Ali's friend, who was...
Ali, a green card holder and father of three young daughters in Baltimore, was driving his friend home when they were pulled over by police in a routine traffic stop. Ali's friend, who was undocumented, had a baggie of marijuana in his possession, and Ali, wanting to save his friend, took the blame. Ali believed his own immigration status would protect him even if convicted of possession. But a year later, he was threatened with deportation. He was arrested and, lacking a lawyer, detained for months, keeping him away from his family. Without a breadwinner, his wife, who was undocumented and unable to work, and children were evicted from their home.
Read the full article here.
Los trabajadores latinos quieren que la Fed les oiga
Lo cierto es que pese a la mejora económica la tasa de desempleo de latinos (6.8%) y negros (9.1%) es más elevada que la de los blancos (4.6%) y asiáticos (4%) y muchos de ellos trabajan por...
Lo cierto es que pese a la mejora económica la tasa de desempleo de latinos (6.8%) y negros (9.1%) es más elevada que la de los blancos (4.6%) y asiáticos (4%) y muchos de ellos trabajan por sueldos muy bajos. Muchos de ellos, como Rubio no sienten la recuperación. “Yo paso por los bares y los veo llenos incluso los lunes pero no todos podemos hacer eso, yo no”, explica.
Su inquietud por los más desfavorecidos le ha llevado a integrarse en la asociación comunitaria Make the Road para ayudar a los trabajadores, muchos de ellos latinos, de forma diferente a como lo hacía en su país. Desde hoy está en Jackson Hole, Wyoming, donde se reunen economistas de todo el mundo y representantes de bancos centrales para hablar de política monetaria. Rubio forma parte de un grupo de trabajadores y asociaciones de base de todo el país, en las que hay representación latina, que quieren convencer a la Reserva Federal de que no suba las tasas de interés. Su argumento es que si se quedan bajas como ahora “ayudarán a mejorar las condiciones laborales y crear más empleo”.
Rubio dice que la recuperación no ha llegado a los trabajadores como ella y que por eso no es momento de empezar a subir unas tasas que reconoce que están históricamente bajas(0%-0.25% desde diciembre de 2008) para estimular el crecimiento durante la reciente Gran Recesión.
“Lo que decide la Fed nos atañe a todos”, explica con convicción Rubio antes de hablar de la fuerte desigualdad laboral que hay y el hecho de que apenas hay inflación, motivo por el que no debería haber prisa por subir tasas o como dicen los economistas, normalizarlas. El programa de Jackson Hole y la lista de asistentes se hace público por el organizador de este encuentro anual, la Reserva Federal de Kansas City, hoy mismo pero ya se sabe que la presidenta de la Fed, Janet Yellen, no va a asistir. Rubio espera estar en algunas reuniones con parte de los asistentes.
“Uno piensa que no les van a ver pero ha veces que hay que pedir y abrir un caminito”, dice.
De hecho, Rubio, junto con otros trabajadores y activistas, ya se reunió este mismo mes con el presidente de la Reserva Federal de Nueva York, William Dudley. Según esta hondureña les dio la razón cuando se planteó la existencia de una desigualdad laboral y que no hay empleo para todos. Dudley dijo que dada la situación económica fuera de las fronteras la necesidad de subir las tasas es ahora “menos imperiosa”.
Ady Barkan, abogado del Centro de Democracia Popular que está impulsando la campaña “Fed Up” y estas peticiones ante la Reserva, explica que es necesario que las autoridades monetarias “presten atención a los trabajadores”.
“La economía no se ha recuperado, hay mucho desempleo entre negros y latinos, subempleo, baja participación en el mercado laboral y apenas hay subidas de salarios”, resume Barkan. Este abogado cree que la economía necesita tasas bajas para que las empresas sigan invirtiendo de forma barata y que haya préstamos asequibles que reactiven el consumo de todos.
Lo cierto es que las empresas tienen cash y algunos tipos de préstamos como los hipotecarios no han remontado lo esperado. “No obstante, si las tasas suben la situación será peor”, explica Barkan, “porque las empresas tendrán más motivos para quedarse sentadas en sus montañas de cash si tienen rendimiento de ellas y por que para invertir necesitan una inflación que no hay, ni habrá si suben tasas”.
“La economía tiene que calentarse un poco más”, dice. Barkan admite que las tasas bajas no son suficientes y que sería bueno que el Congreso hiciera algo además de subir el salario mínimo.
Representantes de la campaña de Fed Up ya se han reunido con Yellen y presidentes de otras reservas como la de Kansas, San Francisco y Atlanta entre otras, miembros de la Federal.
Dean Baker co director del Center for Economic and Policy Research de Washington publicaba recientemente que la subida “reducirá ingresos y oportunidades para quienes menos tienen”, una posición que también comparte el nobel de economía, Joseph Stiglitz.
¿Cuál es la misión de la Reserva Federal?
La Reserva Federal o Fed es uno de los reguladores de la banca y la autoridad que tiene en sus manos la política monetaria, es decir, regula la cantidad de dinero en circulación. ¿Su misión? Asegurarse de que se creen las condiciones de crédito y monetarias para conseguir el máximo empleo, precios estables (ni inflación ni deflación) y tasas de interés a largo plazo moderadas.
¿Cómo funcionan las tasas?
La Reserva Federal sube las tasas de interés a corto plazo, el dinero que se prestan los bancos entre sí, para retirar dinero del mercado y evitar las subidas de precios o inflación. Cuando las baja es porque los precios están bajos y falla el consumo. Al bajarlas se pone más dinero en circulación lo que, en teoría, animando la economía. Estas tasas a corto terminan reflejándose en las de largo plazo que son las que se usan en hipotecas y otros préstamos que se usan para comprar e invertir. Cuanto más se invierte y más crece la economía más y mejor trabajo se crea.
Source: La Raza
Wal-Mart Pay Raises Still Don’t Amount to Living Wage
02.19.2016
NEW YORK CITY — Wal-Mart’s wage hike to a minimum $10 per hour kicks in tomorrow, February 20, but the higher wages fall well short of a...
02.19.2016
NEW YORK CITY — Wal-Mart’s wage hike to a minimum $10 per hour kicks in tomorrow, February 20, but the higher wages fall well short of a living wage. Last year, Wal-Mart earned more than $16 billion in net income and announced plans to spend $10.3 billion on a stock buyback to increase value for wealthy shareholders. Center for Popular Democracy, a national pro-worker coalition, estimates that paying $15 an hour to its 1.2 million full-time employees would cost the company an extra $3.4 billion per year, a third of what it will spend under its share repurchase plan.
The Center for Popular Democracy has fought for a higher minimum wage for Wal-Mart workers along with the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW), Our Walmart, and a worker-led movement.
JoEllen Chernow, Director of CPD’s Minimum Wage campaign, released the following statement:
“Wal-Mart has announced pay raises in an attempt to reform its image as an employer that doesn’t pay workers enough to take care of their families. But it’s not raising them enough – and, the truth is, Wal-Mart can afford higher wages.
The company has a $10 billion stock buyback program and earned more than $16 billion in net income last year. That will put an additional $5.6 billion directly into the pockets of the Walton family - a family that already controls more wealth than the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined. As the company’s fortunes continue to rise, they must let their workers share more of their success. Wal-Mart workers simply deserve better.”
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.
Contact:
Asya Pikovsky, apikovsky@populardemocracy.org, 207-522-2442
Anita Jain, ajain@populardemocracy.org, 347-636-9761
New York Immigrant Family Unity Project - The Report
The New York Immigrant Family Unity Project:
Good for Families, Good for Employers, and Good for All New Yorkers
Each year, thousands of New Yorkers — parents, siblings, employers,...
Each year, thousands of New Yorkers — parents, siblings, employers, workers and students — face detention and the possibility of deportation without the assistance of legal counsel. These New Yorkers are isolated from their loved ones and confront the possibility of long-term and, in some cases, permanent separation from their communities.
This analysis demonstrates that New York State can dramatically reduce the emotional and economic cost of the detention and deportation system by providing high-quality legal counsel for detained immigrants who are facing deportation through the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project (NYIFUP). For an annual investment of $7.4 million – or 78-cents per personal income taxpayer per year – NYIFUP would help ensure that deportation proceedings reflect our fundamental values, providing a measure of fairness for immigrant New Yorkers.
Download the report here.
Executive SummaryEach year, thousands of New Yorkers— parents, siblings, employers, workers and students — face detention and the possibility of deportation without the assistance of legal counsel. These New Yorkers are isolated from their loved ones and confront the possibility of long-term and, in some cases, permanent separation from their communities.
This system of detention and deportation calls our collective commitment to due process into question. Immigration proceedings share many of the same features as criminal proceedings, with immigrant New Yorkers risking their liberty and extended separation from their families and communities. Yet, unlike criminal proceedings, immigration proceedings lack basic safeguards to guarantee fairness. Most strikingly, because New Yorkers have no guaranteed access to counsel in immigration proceedings, thousands face trained government attorneys in these high-stakes proceedings every year without the benefit of legal assistance. This leads to detentions that continue for months or years longer than necessary and deportations of New Yorkers who have viable legal claims to remain in the communities they call home.
But these are not the only costs. Current policies and practices are also costly in economic terms, resulting in significant annual outlays. Needlessly long detentions and avoidable deportations burden Empire State employers, New York State government, immigrant families and, ultimately, New Yorkers as a whole.
This analysis demonstrates that New York State can dramatically reduce these costs by providing highquality legal counsel for detained immigrants who are facing deportation through the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project (NYIFUP). For an annual investment of $7.4 million – or 78-cents per personal income taxpayer per year – NYIFUP would help ensure that deportation proceedings reflect our fundamental values, providing a measure of fairness for immigrant New Yorkers.
The program would generate nearly $1.9 million in annual savings to New York State by reducing spending on public health insurance programs and foster care services and capturing tax revenues that would otherwise be lost. In addition, NYIFUP would produce $4 million in savings for Empire State employers each year, by preventing turnover-related costs stemming from detentions and deportations. Taken together, these savings offset the majority of the investment needed to establish the program.
-New York State employers pay an estimated $9.1 million in turnover-related costs annually as they are forced to replace detained or deported employees. NYIFUP would save employers $4 million in such costs each year.-The detention or deportation of a parent makes it difficult for some students to complete school, limiting their long-term earning potential, increasing reliance on public health insurance programs and decreasing tax revenues. Over 10 years of the NYIFUP program, this would translate into $3.1 million in annualized costs to the state each year. NYIFUP would save New York over $1.3 million in such costs each year.-Detentions and deportations cost New York’s State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) about $685,000 each year. NYIFUP would save the state over $310,000 per year in such costs.-The state pays over $562,000 a year to provide foster care for the children of detained or deported New Yorkers. NYIFUP would reduce these costs by over $263,000 each year.
Few investments have the potential to yield such far-reaching returns. We urge New York State to seize the opportunity to create a first-in-the-nation, statewide system of universal representation for individuals who are detained and facing deportation. Doing so will produce $5.9 million in savings each year to New York State and employers, ensure that the system lives up to our most closely-held ideals and help to keep Empire State families whole.
What working moms really need for Mother's Day this year
What working moms really need for Mother's Day this year
When Mother's Day became a national holiday in the U.S. more than a century ago, women were a relative rarity in the workforce. Today's mom, by contrast, is largely a working mom.
In half...
When Mother's Day became a national holiday in the U.S. more than a century ago, women were a relative rarity in the workforce. Today's mom, by contrast, is largely a working mom.
In half of American households, women are either the primary breadwinner or contribute more than 40 percent of the income. For most families, the added income from women going to work is the only thing that's kept family income steady, as individual worker wages have stagnated for the better part of four decades.
Read full article here.
4 days ago
4 days ago