Explosion of Gig Economy Means There’s an App for Juggling Jobs
One of the reasons Mustafa Muhammed finally broke down and bought a smartphone was because he needed to find a job.
The 57-year-old cook was tired of using a...
One of the reasons Mustafa Muhammed finally broke down and bought a smartphone was because he needed to find a job.
The 57-year-old cook was tired of using a library computer to look for work and watching friends get a jump on leads via alerts on their phones. After picking up his first phone about two years ago, he downloaded a mobile app called Snagajob. This summer he landed a gig at a new IHOP opening in Harlem after seeing it pop up in his inbox.
“This is job No. 2,” says Muhammed, who also works in the dining hall at Fordham University. “I wanted to pick up a little something extra for the summer. I don’t like to be lazy.”
Snagajob is one of a slew of apps that have sprung up in recent years to serve the so-called gig economy. This year alone human-resources startups have attracted $1.2 billion in venture capital, with much of the funding going to companies designed to profit from the fluid nature of temporary or contract work, according to research firm CB Insights. In an election year dominated by concerns over economic inequality, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are pledging to generate more full-time jobs. But Silicon Valley is betting the gig economy is here to stay.
“Two or three years ago, it was pretty rare to have more than one job” says Snagajob.com Inc. Chief Executive Officer Peter Harrison. “Now it’s really very common. What we are really building our business on is the blurring of the line between snagging a job and snagging a shift.”
Founded in 2000 as an online job board focused on “lightly skilled” hourly work, Snagajob says it has nearly doubled revenue derived from employers in the past three years. It claims 10 million unique monthly users and about 425 employees. In June, the Virginia company unveiled a mobile messaging app that lets employers assign shifts and lets workers trade them.
Snagajob charges employers for the number of clicks, applicants, interviews and hires it lines up. It also sells annual subscriptions for use of its hiring software. Harrison, 53, declines to specify revenue but says Snagajob is breaking even. In February, the startup raised $100 million to develop new features and fund acquisitions. The same month, Snagajob announced a partnership with LinkedIn, which has typically represented salaried professionals, to share research and data on hourly workers.
Similar apps are taking off in Europe, as well. Spain, with a large service sector and 20 percent unemployment, has become a testing ground for startups bringing the simplicity of swipes, geolocation and people-matching algorithms to hourly job recruitment. Three of them -- Job Today, Jobandtalent and CornerJob -- have raised some $87 million combined this year.
Job Today helps restaurants and retail mom-and-pops find and interview waiters, sales associates and drivers. Employers can post as many jobs as they like and have 24 hours to shortlist candidates, after which they use a chat feature to discuss the job and schedule face-to-face interviews. Posting a position on Job Today is gratis for now. Eventually, it plans to sell subscriptions that will let employers browse candidates and post jobs on an unlimited basis. The startup says it has about 100,000 business customers and has processed 15 million job applications since its founding a year ago.
Workforce trends are moving in favor of these apps as more people prefer to choose their own hours. In the U.S., even if they would rather work full-time, government policy has increased the incentive for companies to hire temps and contract workers, Snagajob’s Harrison says. To avoid providing health care as mandated by Obamacare, many businesses deliberately ensure workers toil less than 30 hours a week. They may also prefer temps to avoid paying overtime now that the Obama administration has expanded eligibility to millions more Americans.
According to research from Harvard and Princeton universities, “alternative work arrangements” -- including temp work, on-call work, contractors, and freelancers -- accounted for all the net employment growth in the U.S. from 2005 to 2015. That trend is widely expected to continue.
“These new labor platforms are helping people deal with the volatility of their income and the volatility of work,” says Louis Hyman, a professor of economic history at Cornell University’s ILR School and author of a forthcoming book on the rise of temp work in the U.S. “The tech reflects social reality.” Snagajob’s Harrison says companies are “essentially sharing workers” much the way consumers are sharing car rides and vacation rentals.
A handful of large deals, crowned by Microsoft’s $26 billion acquisition of LinkedIn, has fueled investor enthusiasm. In June, Monster Worldwide Inc. bought San Francisco-based Jobr, which applies Tinder-like matching algorithms to job hunters and employers. Last month, Tokyo’s Recruit Holdings, which controls top-ranked job search site Indeed Inc., bought Simply Hired, which operates a global network of job search engines.
Of course, not everyone is as enamored of the gig economy as the tech industry. “This glorification of flexibility is not in line with the reality of what most working people really want,” says Carrie Gleason, who runs the Fair Workweek Initiative, a network of activist groups that has pushed for laws to support predictable scheduling and guaranteed hours in low-wage industries. Shift-swapping is “a survival tool,” she says. “It is not the ideal.”
By Polly Mosendz
Source
Secrecy Surrounds Half Billion Handout to Charters
The U.S. Department of Education is poised to spend half a billion dollars to help create new charter schools, while the public is being kept in the dark about which states have applied for the...
The U.S. Department of Education is poised to spend half a billion dollars to help create new charter schools, while the public is being kept in the dark about which states have applied for the lucrative grants, and what their actual track records are when it comes to preventing fraud and misuse.
Already the federal government has spent $3.3 billion in American tax dollars under the Charter Schools Program (CSP), as tallied by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD).
But the government has done so without requiring any accountability from the states and schools that receive the money, as CMD revealed earlier this year.
Throwing good money after bad, Education Secretary Arne Duncan called for a 48 percent increase in federal charter funding earlier this year, and the House and Senate budget proposals also call for an increase—albeit a more modest one—while at the same time slashing education programs for immigrants and language learners.
The clamor for charter expansion comes despite the fact that there are federal probes underway into suspected waste and mismanagement within the program, not to mention ongoing and recently completed state audits of fraud perpetrated by charter school operators.
Earlier this year, the Center for Popular Democracy documented more than $200 million in fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the charter school industry in 15 states alone, a number that is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg.
Is now really the right time to plow more tax money into charters?
Insiders Deliberate Far from the Public Eye
The Department of Education is currently deciding what states to award $116 million this year, and more than half a billion during the five-year grant cycle.
So who is in the running and what are their track records?
Which states have applied for a grant designed to eviscerate the public school system in the name of “flexibility?” (CMD's review of state applications and reviewers' comments from the previous grant cycle exposed “flexibility” as a term of art used by the industry for state laws that allow charter schools to: operate independently from locally elected school boards, employ people to teach without adequate training or certification, and avoid collective bargaining that helps ensure that teacher-student ratios are good so that each kid gets the attention he or she deserves.)
There is no way of knowing.
The U.S Department of Education has repeatedly refused to honor a CMD request under the Freedom of Information Act for the grant applications, even though public information about which states have applied would not chill deliberation and might even help better assess which applicants should receive federal money.
The agency has even declined to provide a list with states that have applied:
“We cannot release a list of states that have applied while it is in the midst of competition."
The upshot of this reticence is that states will land grants—possibly to the tune of a hundred million dollars or more in some cases—all at the discretion of charter school interests contracted to evaluate the applications, but without any input from ordinary citizens and advocates concerned about public schools and troubled by charter school secrecy and fraud.
But, if people in a state know that a state is applying they can weigh in so that the agency is not just hearing from an applicant who wants the money, regardless of the history of fraud and waste in that state.
Charter Millions by Hook or by Crook: The Case of Ohio
Despite ED’s unwillingness to put all the cards on the table, state reports tell us that Ohio has once again applied for a grant under the program.
The state, whose lax-to-non-existing charter school laws are an embarrassment even to the industry, has previously been awarded at least $49 million in CSP money—money that went to schools overseen by a rightwing think-tank, and, more worryingly, to schools overseen by an authorizer that had its performance rating boosted this year by top education officials who removed the failing virtual schools from the statistics so as not to stop the flow of state and federal funds.
As The Plain Dealer put it in an exposé: “It turns out that Ohio’s grand plan to stop the national ridicule of its charter school system is giving overseers of many of the lowest-performing schools a pass from taking heat for some of their worst problems.”
Another component of this plan, it turns out, was to apply for more federal millions to the failing schools that—by a miraculous sleight of hand—are no longer failing.
The director of Ohio’s Office of Quality School Choice, David Hansen, fell on the sword and announced his resignation in June. But Democratic lawmakers suspect that this goes higher up in the chain of command, and have called on State Superintendent Richard Ross to resign.
Did the scrubbed statistics touting the success of Ohio’s charters find its way into the state application for federal millions, signed by Superintendent Ross?
What about other states, such as Indiana, with a similar history of doctoring data to turn failing charter schools into resounding success stories?
After Abysmal Results, States Re-apply for More Money
While the known unknowns are troubling, the known knowns—to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld—are also equally disturbing.
For example, Colorado applied for grant renewal this year.
But, the last time around, in 2010, the state landed a $46 million CSP grant thanks in no small part to the lax “hiring and firing” rules and the lack of certification requirements for charter school teachers--a reviewer contracted by the U.S. Department of Education to score the application noted.
Look at California.
Through meeting minutes from the California State Board of Education we also know that the Golden State submitted an application this year. In 2010, California was awarded $254 million over five years in CSP money, but as the Inspector General discovered in a 2012 audit, the state department of education did not adequately monitor any of the schools that received sub-grants. Some schools even received federal money “without ever opening to students.” A review by CMD revealed that a staggering 9 out of the 41 schools that shuttered in the 2014-'15 school year were created by federal money under CSP.
How about Wisconsin?
Wisconsin received $69.6 million between 2010 and 2015, but out of the charter schools awarded sub-grants during the first two years of the cycle, one-fifth (16 out of 85) have closed since, as CMD discovered.
Then there’s Indiana.
Indiana was awarded $31.3 million over the same period, partly because of the fact that charter schools in the state are exempt from democratic oversight by elected school boards. “[C]harter schools are accountable solely to authorizers under Indiana law,” one reviewer enthused, awarding the application 30/30 under the rubric “flexibility offered by state law.”
This “flexibility” has been a recipe for disaster in the Hoosier state with countless examples of schools pocketing the grant money and then converting to private schools, as CMD discovered by taking a closer look at grantees under the previous cycle:
The Indiana Cyber Charter School opened in 2012 with $420,000 in seed money from the federal program. Dogged by financial scandals and plummeting student results the charter was revoked in 2015 and the school last month leaving 1,100 students in the lurch.
Padua Academy lost its charter in 2014 and converted to a private religious school, but not before receiving $702,000 in federal seed money.
Have They Learned Anything?
Secretary Duncan has previously called for “absolute transparency” when it comes to school performance, but that’s just a talking point unless he releases the applications, or even a list of the states that are in the running, before they are given the final stamp of approval.
As it stands, there is no way of knowing if the state departments of education seeking millions in tax dollars:
Have supplied actual performance data that reflect the reality for students enrolled in charter schools rather than “scrubbed” or doctored numbers;
Try to outbid each other in “flexibility” by explaining, say, how charter schools in X can hire teachers without a license and fire them without cause. In its 2010 application, the Colorado Department of Education, for example, boasted of how charter school teachers are “employed at will by the school”;
Have corrective action plans so as to avoid repeating the costly waste and mistakes from the previous grant cycle (such as schools created by federal seed money closing within a few years or never even opening).
Because the federal charter schools program is designed to foster charter school growth, which in turn means that money will be diverted from traditional public schools to an industry that resists government enforcement of basic standards for financial controls, accountability, and democratic oversight, the public has a big stake in this and a right to know more, before their money disappears down black holes.
Source: PR Watch
Americans for Democratic Action Hosts Philly Charter School Forum: Who’s Minding the Store?
Weekly Press - December 17, 2014, by Nicole Contosta - Charter Schools have become a divisive issue in Philadelphia. Supporters swear to their...
Weekly Press - December 17, 2014, by Nicole Contosta - Charter Schools have become a divisive issue in Philadelphia. Supporters swear to their effectiveness. Critics argue that they lack accountability.
Both sides of the charter school debate were heard last Tuesday, December 9th. That’s when the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), hosted the Philly Charter School Forum: Who’s Minding the Store?
Panelists included Feather Houstoun from the Philadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC); Jurate Krokys, founding principal of the Independence Charter School, Kyle Serette of the Center for Popular Democracy and author of Fraud and Financial Mismanagement in PA’s Charter Schools; and Barbara Dowdall, retired public school teacher and former ADA board member.
Solomon Leach, Philadelphia Daily News Education Reporter, moderated. Leach began the evening’s discourse by asking Houstoun to comment on the evolution of charter schools in Philadelphia.
Houstoun, who spent most of her career in managing care, transit and welfare problems, cited her experience with "good oversight." But when Houstoun joined the SRC three and half years ago, "I was really surprised […] about the incredibly precarious situation the school district was in. Now," Houstoun continued, "we’re living within our means, but we’re horrifically under-resourced."
And with regard to charter schools, Houstoun said, "I was really dumbfounded by how badly over the course of time the [Philadelphia School] District had organized itself to assure that we were getting good value for children in charter schools."
To Houstoun, getting good value for the city’s children proves relevant given the fact that "40 percent of our children are being educated at charter schools that are separate from the district apparatus."
But, Houstoun continued, "We must accept responsibility for these things." And in Houstoun’s opinion, part of the problem resulted from the fact that "the District did not set up standards for academic performances. There were no systematic annual check-ups about what they were doing in terms of finance, corporate or academic measures."
Houstoun cited the fact that the SRC only renews charter schools on a five-year basis as contributing to the lack of oversight. However, at the same time, Houstoun expressed optimism when it comes to moving forward with the city’s charter schools. Over the past year, the SRC performed an overhaul of the charter school office, placing Julian Thompson at the helm. "We’re operating within charter school law that gives us the obligation to monitor and review charter schools," Houstoun emphasized.
From the charter school perspective, Krokys said that she hasn’t always had the best experience working with the SRC.
"I’ve been in the charter world for about 14 years," Krokys said, "In the past and sometimes the not so recent past—what it was—the relationship and the process of authorization and renewal were secret, haphazard, and hostile. And I’m not exaggerating. It was always up for grabs."
In answering Leach’s question about what she’s learned from really effective charter schools, Krokys said, "Community partners and stakeholders are one of the things that can be done with all schools—but it’s especially important for charter schools. Site admission selection for parents and staff—there’s nothing like feeling that you have chosen something and were not defaulted to it," Krokys stressed. "That makes a big difference in partnership.
The same thing," Krokys continued, "goes for staff. The staff is not assigned; they’re not grazing until they get their retirement. Staff is selected to work in a specific school."
Serette discussed the history and evolution of charter schools. That began on March 31, 1988. "That’s when our chamber got in front of the press club in DC and announced a new type of school, something that would help figure out the most complicated problems in our education system. And it was the charter school."
As Serette explained it, the charter school concept was designed as a "calculated risk to figure out if we could figure out something that could then be exported into the public system. And," Serette continued, "This makes sense because you don’t want to take a calculated risk and export it into the whole system. I think we forgot that lesson as we were expanding throughout the nation.
We have a situation where we have the largest charter school system in the country-K12 Inc.," Serette continued, "It’s fully funded by public dollars but it’s traded on the stock exchange. The goal of being on the exchange is to make money. So we have slightly diverged from the original mission of charters."
With regard to the effectiveness of charter schools, "they have had a meaningful impact," Serette said, adding, "They have taught us some really smart things to figure out and export to our system. The first charter school started in 1992. And now we have 43 states with charter school laws."
But, Serette noted, citing an investigation of 15 states, his office found, "about 136 million in charter school funding that was abused, that was used for fraud. To us, that was an alarming number."
In PA, Serette explained that he didn’t think the state government "did a great job of regulating the system. So we have here, two auditors looking after a system that has revenue of 700 million, auditing 86 charter schools.
Dowdall, in answering Leach’s question about academic accountability for charter schools said, "Rather than start with the charter school in the quest of academic accountability, we might journey back to the government entities that established, regulates and monitors them namely the PA State Legislature the Governor of PA, the State Department of Education and the SRC.
While the public schools whose assumed inadequacies sparked the takeover," Dowdall continued, "they were more or less placed in a giant petri dish; we more or less organized a dizzying away of name changes, administrative changes, etc. Test prep came to rule and push out libraries, librarians, music, art and other extra curricular activities. Funding cuts led to the disappearance of nurses, counselors, teaching assistants, custodial help and the financial oversight provided by operations personnel.
Twenty three neighborhood schools," Dowdall continued, "were shuttered. And 40 new charters are supposed to open. Since the SRC has the authority to approve schools," Dowdall said, "maybe they should do so based on the actual needs of the district rather than the whims and desires in some highly funded charters."
As the discussion continued, Leach asked Houstoun "how has the introduction [of reversing] no-charter re-imbursement in PA influence the SRC assessment when it comes to renewing charters?"
Leach’s question references the fact that Government Corbett eliminated the $100 million for charter school re-imbursement to the Philadelphia School District in 2011.
Houston cited the cancellation of the re-imbursement as painful. "For every child that’s added to charter school system, we can’t take off $10,000 for expenses. If," Houstoun explained, "we can restore the charter re-imbursement that was in place, it would alleviate the first level of pain that we’re suffering in the district right now."
Leach asked Krokys to comment on how to rectify the public perception of charter schools when taking into account those that are underperforming or fraudulent.
Krokys began her answering by stressing, "There are thousands and thousands of children who would not have had one chance in their neighborhood school. And a lot of them came through my doors and are now graduating from college."
When it comes to addressing inadequacies in Philadelphia charter schools, Krokys said, "It took a while for the charter school community to finally say, ‘yes. There are some charters that need be closed.’ Yes," Krokys said, "we are weary of the few bad apples because that’s what ends up in the papers. And that’s what ends up tainting everything else."
With regard to K12 Inc., "Who the hell gave permission for a for-profit to run a charter school?" Krokys asked. "Whose fault was that?"
To Serette, Leach asked, "One of the original aims of charter schools was to be a model for public schools. But that got lost in the shuffle over time. How do you think we can go back so that public schools can benefit from the successful roles of charters?"
According to Serette, "The narrative in the US is that the public school system is broken, right? And you can’t just get a good education so you have to be saved by a lot of other systems. But the truth is," Serette continued. "We have a good public school system in upper class and upper middle class neighborhoods. Those tend to be wonderful. And then you have the struggling sectors where people can’t make ends meet and we’re trying to figure that out."
Leach then asked Dowdall how charter and public schools could reach a middle ground.
To Dowdall, "It’s about equity. It’s about resources. Whether it’s traditional or charter, it can be defined. It’s about small classes with libraries where the students can be guided."
And in Dowdall’s opinion, "There needs to be an agreement between those on the board that authorization renewal for charter schools should be set at three years as opposed to five."
For more information on the ADA, visit Youth http://www.phillyada.org.
Source
New Orleans experience a warning to Texas
Behind Frenemy Lines - May 10, 2014, by Jason Stanford - This is a typical day for Greg Abbott’s gubernatorial bid: He goes into the office, screws up his own campaign and goes home. If it weren’t...
Behind Frenemy Lines - May 10, 2014, by Jason Stanford - This is a typical day for Greg Abbott’s gubernatorial bid: He goes into the office, screws up his own campaign and goes home. If it weren’t for his mistakes—Ted Nugent, thanking a supporter who called Wendy Davis “retard Barbie”, calling South Texas a “Third-World Country”, and his bungled opposition to equal pay come to mind—Abbott would seem to have no campaign at all. But it’s when you separate the wheat from the gaffe on education that Abbott’s campaign looks like a disaster waiting to happen.
The negative coverage of Abbott’s education plan—and boy howdy has there been a lot—is focused on Abbott’s mistakes. His education plan cites Charles Murray, whose retrograde views on race and gender got him called a “White Nationalist” by the Southern Poverty Law Center. On page 20, his plan calls for “standardized tests” in pre-K. As a dodge, his campaign spokesmanclaimed that was in the plan “for informational purposes only.” And then he cancels campaign events at public schools when the Davis campaign points out that the schools are suing him over funding cuts.
But behind this façade of denials, backpedaling, and obliviousness sits the luckiest man in American politics, because almost no one has bothered to discuss his idea to create “takeover districts” for low-performing schools. He has reportedly modeled his plan on the privatization reforms in New Orleans.
That last bit should scare you. Education reformers—that is, those who think private charters would do better than public schools at educating poor children—call the Recovery School District in New Orleans a success. If the RSD is a success, I’m the third baseman for the Baltimore Orioles. No matter how much I wish that to be true, the facts say otherwise. Here’s why:
No one argues that schools in New Orleans were turning out Harvard scholars by the boatload, so the legislature created the RSD, a takeover district as Abbott has conceived. Davis also supports recovery districts, but Abbott likes the New Orleans model in which “failing” schools would be run by private charters that promised to get the schools shipshape and back into the public school system within five years.
Before taking a look at the results, we must first figure out what “failure” means, because they keep moving that target. RSD used to takeover any school that failed to get a passing score of 60 on the state performance index. After Katrina, the legislature changed that to allow RSD to scoop up any school that fell short of the state’s 87.4 average. The New Orleans private charter district took over 94 schools, 26 of which met the old passing standard. The state redefined failure to mean below average so more schools could get privatized.
Almost a decade later, the takeover district in New Orleans has failed to turn around even one school, so “improvement” became the new goal. Not one school has received an “A” or even a “B” grade. In fact, RSD stopped disclosing the grades their schools received, preferring to publicize percentages of improvement without disclosing the underlying data or that they were cherry-picking the data every year, making it impossible to honestly chart progress. By their original standards, though, all the RSD schools are still failing.
Remember, Louisiana was throwing millions of tax dollars at what were essentially startup small businesses. Fraud and bankruptcy are commonplace, and if you think that’s confined to New Orleans, think again.
Integrity in Education and the Center for Popular Democracy looked at 15 states that have charter schools, one of which was Texas and found “rampant fraud, waste and abuse,” according to a report released last week. The two groups found numerous cases of embezzlement, misuse of tax dollars, child endangerment, bilking taxpayers for services not rendered, inflated enrollment numbers, and general mismanagement. Private charters are running schools like a business. Unfortunately, that business is Wall Street.
It’s never the schools in the wealthy neighborhoods that get taken over. On average, poor children score worse than their wealthier peers. We have always known that, but we cannot get poor children to achieve in school simply by insisting they act like wealthy children.
Now Abbott is using the false dogma of education reform as cover to give up on public schools. Giving up on public schools will not fix public schools, but if Abbott becomes governor, he’ll go into the office every morning, screw up public schools, and go home.
Don’t say you weren’t warned.
Source
Climate Justice activists to EPA: make Clean Power Plan work for fossil fuel afflicted communities!
While the fossil fuel industry and Republican states and senators step up legal and political challenges to Obama's Clean Power Plan, protests have also been flooding in to the EPA's ten regional...
While the fossil fuel industry and Republican states and senators step up legal and political challenges to Obama's Clean Power Plan, protests have also been flooding in to the EPA's ten regional offices from climate activists - demanding that it cut out dirty biofuels and 'carbon trading' loopholes, and protect vulnerable communities from fossil fuel pollution.
Last week, activists at each of the Environmental Protection Agency's ten regional offices issued their own corrective on the Obama administration'sClean Power Plan.
Days before the end of the federal comment period, theClimate Justice Alliance's Our Power Campaign - comprised of 41 climate and environmental justice organizations - presented its Our Power Plan.
The document identifies "clear and specific strategies for implementing the Clean Power Plan, or CPP, in a way that will truly benefit our families' health and our country's economy."
Introduced last summer, the CPP looks to bring down power plants' carbon emissions by 32% from 2005 levels within 15 years. The plan was made possible by Massachusetts vs. EPA, a 2007 Supreme Court ruling which mandates that the agency regulate greenhouse gases as it has other toxins and pollutants under the Clean Air Act of 1963.
Under the CPP, states are each required to draft their own implementation plans by September of this year, or by 2018 if granted an extension. If they fail to do so, state governments will be placed by default into an interstate carbon trading, or 'Cap and Trade', system to bring down emissions.
After COP21, OPP is the next logical step
Michael Leon Guerrero, the Climate Justice Alliance's interim coordinator, was in Paris for the most recent round of UN climate talks as part of the It Takes Roots Delegation, which brought together over 100 organizers from North American communities on the frontlines of both climate change and fossil fuel extraction.
He sees the Our Power Plan (see goals, below) as a logical next step for the group coming out of COP21, especially as the onus for implementing and improving the Paris agreement now falls to individual nations:
"Fundamentally we need to transform our economy and rebuild our communities. We can't address the climate crisis in a cave without addressing issues of equity."
The Our Power Plan, or OPP, is intended as a blueprint for governments and EPA administrators to address the needs of frontline communities as they draft their state-level plans over the next several months. (People living within three miles of a coal plant have incomes averaging 15% lower than average, and are 8% more likely to be communities of color.)
Included in the OPP are calls to bolster what CJA sees as the CPP's more promising aspects, like renewable energy provisions, while eliminating proposed programs they see as more harmful. The CPP's carbon trading scheme, CJA argues, allows polluters to buy 'permissions to pollute', or carbon credits, rather than actually stemming emissions.
The OPP further outlines ways that the EPA can ensure a "just transition" away from fossil fuels, encouraging states to invest in job creation, conduct equity analyses and "work with frontlines communities to develop definitions, indicators, and tracking and response systems that really account for impacts like health, energy use, cost of energy, climate vulnerability [and] cumulative risk."
The all-too predictable fightback
Lacking support from Congress, the Obama administration has relied on executive action to push through everything from environmental action to comprehensive immigration reform. The Clean Power Plan was central to the package Obama brought to Paris. Also central to COP21 was US negotiators' insistence on keeping its results non-binding, citing Republican lawmakers' unwillingness to pass legislation.
Predictably, the CPP has faced legal challenges from the same forces, who decry the president for having overstepped the bounds of his authority. Republican state governments, utility companies, and fossil fuel industry groups have all filed suit against the CPP, with many asking for expedited hearings.
Leading up the anti-CPP charge in Congress has been Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has called the plan a "regulatory assault", pitting fossil fuel industry workers against the EPA. "Here's what is lost in this administration's crusade for ideological purity", he wrote in a November statement, "the livelihoods of our coal miners and their families."
Organizers of last Tuesday's actions, however, were quick to point out that the Our Power Plan is aimed at strengthening - not defeating - the CPP as it stands. Denise Abdul-Rahman, of NAACP Indiana, helped organize an OPP delivery at the EPA's Region 5 headquarters in Chicago, bringing out representatives from Black Lives Matter Minneapolis, National People's Action and National Nurses United.
"We appreciate the integrity of the Clean Power Plan", she said. "However, we believe it needs to be improved - from eliminating carbon trading to ensuring that there's equity. We want to improve CPP by adding our voices and our plan, and we encourage the EPA to make it better." Four of the six states in that region - which includes Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin - are suing the EPA.
Endorsed by the National Domestic Workers' Alliance, Greenpeace and the Center for Popular Democracy, among other organizations, the national day of action on the EPA came as new details emerged in Flint, Michigan's ongoing water crisis - along with calls for Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder's resignation and arrest.
The EPA has also admitted fault for its slow response to Flint residents' complaints, writing in a statement this week that "necessary [EPA] actions were not taken as quickly as they should have been." Abdul-Rahman connected the water crisis with the need for a justly-implemented CPP:
"The Flint government let their community down by not protecting our most precious asset, which is water. The same is true of air: we need the highest standard of protecting human beings' air, water, land."
Source: The Ecologist
Advocacy group calls for more oversight of California charter school spending
Advocacy group calls for more oversight of California charter school spending
A lack of transparency and inadequate oversight can set up the potential for waste, fraud, and abuse. A 2015 report from the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools and the Center for Popular Democracy...
A lack of transparency and inadequate oversight can set up the potential for waste, fraud, and abuse. A 2015 report from the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools and the Center for Popular Democracy, entitled “The Tip of the Iceberg,” reported over $200 million lost to fraud, corruption and mismanagement in charter schools.
Read the full article here.
Supreme Court deadlocks on immigration case
Karla Cano faces uncertainty. She had expected to qualify for deferred action under the Obama administration’s executive orders on immigration. But a tied decision by the U.S. Supreme Court...
Karla Cano faces uncertainty. She had expected to qualify for deferred action under the Obama administration’s executive orders on immigration. But a tied decision by the U.S. Supreme Court creates uncertainty for Cano and her family.
“All that is unjust about my situation will continue,” said Cano, 21, a senior at Mount Mary University and the mother of a 2-year-old son.
“I am in college so I can have a career helping others, but I cannot start a career like that without work authorization,” she said. “We just want to help this country and support our families like anyone else.”
The court on June 23 deadlocked on President Barack Obama’s executive actions taken to shield millions living in the United States from deportation.
The 4–4 tie means the next president and a new Congress will determine any change in U.S. immigration policy. The president said the court’s deadlock “takes us further from the country we aspire to be.”
Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee for president, called the court ruling unacceptable and pledged to “do everything possible under the law to go further to protect families.”
The dispute before the eight justices — the case was heard in April, after the death of Antonin Scalia — was over the legality of the administration’s orders creating “deferred action for parents of Americans and lawful permanent residents” or DAPA and expanding “deferred action for childhood arrivals” or DACA.
Basically the actions would have provided protection from deportation and three-year work permits to about 5 million undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, as well as undocumented people who came to the United States before the age of 16.
The president announced the orders in 2014 and, soon after, they were challenged by 26 states led by Republican governors, including Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.
Federal district and appeals courts sided with the states and said the executive office lacked the authority to issue orders shielding immigrants from deportation.
The high court tie means the appeals court ruling stands. But the ruling in United States v. Texas did not set any landmark standards in the dispute over immigration.
The U.S. Justice Department brought the case to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the appeals court decision.
The American Civil Liberties Union was among the many groups to file a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.
Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said, the “4–4 tie has a profound impact on millions of American families whose lives will remain in limbo and who will now continue the fight. In setting the DAPA guidelines, President Obama exercised the same prosecutorial discretion his predecessors have wielded without controversy and ultimately the courts should hold that the action was lawful.”
Reaction from the U.S. progressive community was swift and compassionate.
“This split decision deals a severe blow to millions of immigrant families who have already been waiting more than 18 months for the DAPA and DACA programs to be implemented,” said Alianza Americas’ executive director Oscar Chacón. “The cold fact is that millions of parents and children will go to bed tonight knowing once again that their families could be torn apart at any moment.”
At the Center for Popular Democracy, co-executive director Ana Maria Archila said, “If the highest court in the land cannot find a majority for justice and compassion, there is something truly broken in our system of laws, checks and balances.”
In Wisconsin, Voces de la Frontera held news conferences in Green Bay, Madison and in Milwaukee. LULAC, Centro Hispano and the Southside Organizing Committee also were involved.
“This is very sad for me,” said Jose Flores, a factory worker, father of four and also the president of Voces de la Frontera. “I have been waiting and fighting for reform like DAPA for years. But we are not giving up. I refuse ... to shrink back into the shadows.”
Cano, a member of Voces de la Frontera, said, “I am not giving up on the struggle. We need more people to get involved in the upcoming elections, because this decision shows the importance of both the presidential and U.S. congressional elections and whom the next president will nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
BY LISA NEFF
Source
Jobs Numbers Offer No Evidence for Rate Increase in September; All Data Points to Persistent Labor Slack, No Signs of Inflation
“Today’s jobs numbers offer even more proof that the Fed officials insisting on raising interest rates at the next Federal Open Market Committee meeting are refusing to look at reality. The latest...
“Today’s jobs numbers offer even more proof that the Fed officials insisting on raising interest rates at the next Federal Open Market Committee meeting are refusing to look at reality. The latest numbers confirm what we have already known: labor slack persists, inflation is not a threat, and an interest rate hike would be premature, with devastating effects on working people, particularly communities of color.
“Wage growth has been flat for the last 5 years and the latest numbers do not show signs of significant acceleration. Furthermore, the employment to population ratio remains well below its pre-recession levels. These indicators of labor slack are – yet again – coupled with no evidence pointing to a threat of inflation. The data just does not support a rate increase. The data just does not support a rate increase. If the Fed wants to maintain credibility as a data-driven institution, it cannot not increase rates.
“Many Fed members have hinted at an imminent interest rate liftoff in September, but these numbers show that a rate increase should – at the very least – be off the table for the remainder of 2015. A premature interest rate hike would sacrifice potentially millions of jobs and hundreds of millions in wages – disproportionately lost by people of color. The latest jobs numbers show just how inadvisable – and damaging – a September rate hike would be.”
Rod Adams, a member of the community-based organization Minnesota Neighborhoods Organizing for Change (MNNOC), and a member of the Fed Up Campaign added:
“I worked my way through college, sometimes working the closing shift at Chipotle until 2 am and coming back to open at 6 am. I worked hard, studied hard, and gave up sleep so I could get a better job. This spring, I graduated with my associate's in business management, but I’ve been looking for a job since April. I still can’t find anything to match my skills.
“It’s not only me. My friends with four-year degrees can only find jobs at McDonald’s or Taco Bell. I didn’t go to college so I could make $10.10 working fast food. I have a daughter. I can't support myself and my daughter working at one of these places. I’m worth more than $10.10. The Fed needs to listen to what real people have to say. We are not just data on spreadsheets. We are real people with real bills. If the Fed raises the interest rates, what’s going to happen to my wages?”
To schedule interviews with Connie Razza, send an email topress@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.
Protesters backing undocumented immigrants locked out of Bank of America HQ
Protesters backing undocumented immigrants locked out of Bank of America HQ
The south doors of Bank America’s corporate headquarters were locked at 10:30 a.m. Monday, to keep out a immigrant advocates who tried to enter the building to advocate for undocumented immigrants...
The south doors of Bank America’s corporate headquarters were locked at 10:30 a.m. Monday, to keep out a immigrant advocates who tried to enter the building to advocate for undocumented immigrants.
A dozen protesters sought to enter a branch on the building’s first floor, to present staff with a letter asking that Bank of America distance itself from elected officials who support the immigration policies of President Donald Trump.
Read full article here.
Room for Debate: The Public Pension Problem
Bring Financial Managers in House
The New York Times - December 5, 2013, by Connie Razza - This past year, investment management fees on New York City...
The New York Times - December 5, 2013, by Connie Razza - This past year, investment management fees on New York City pensions increased 28 percent. Over the past seven years, they have more than doubled to $472.5 million annually. The city pays very high fees even in years when the funds lose value.
Internal control of pension fund assets for public workers will help rebalance a city's relationship with Wall Street.
These fees unduly burden the funds and add to the uncertainty with which our city's retired and current employees face the future. The rapid rise in pension fund fees is just one of many symptoms of our badly broken financial system, which fails to serve the broader economy and promote general prosperity. Instead, it promotes and exacerbates inequality. As part of the New Day New York Coalition, the Center for Popular Democracy has proposed a sweeping solution. New York should create a highly skilled in-house financial management team for pension fund assets. Even with salaries high enough to attract top quality managers, the city would not pay the typical "2 percent of assets under management, plus 20 percent of profits" that hedge funds, private-equity firms and real-estate firms typically charge. The profit motive of in-house managers will be fully aligned with city employees and they will be better situated to ensure that investments are financially responsible, contributing to our broader economy and to the funds' bottom line. The creation of the in-house financial team would save the pension funds hundreds of millions of dollars a year. As significant a change as this would be, it is an idea that the city's former chief investment officer has advocated, and that incoming city comptroller Scott Stringer has expressed interest in. Also, pension funds in Alaska, California, Wisconsin and Ontario, Canada, already do this, to varying degrees. All of these funds also rely on outside managers for some of their investments, but insourcing much of the pension investment management would give the city funds meaningful leverage when working with outside management firms. Building an internal capacity to manage the pension fund assets of city workers is an important step toward rebalancing the city's relationship with Wall Street.
Source
2 days ago
2 days ago