Restaurant group preps for fight against Ariz. minimum wage boost
Restaurant group preps for fight against Ariz. minimum wage boost
PHOENIX -- The head of the state's restaurant industry is gearing up to convince voters to quash an initiative that would boost the state's minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020.
Steve Chucri...
PHOENIX -- The head of the state's restaurant industry is gearing up to convince voters to quash an initiative that would boost the state's minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020.
Steve Chucri, president of the Arizona Restaurant and Hospitality Association, said Wednesday the campaign against the measure will be based on showing them how much wages in Arizona have gone up since voters enacted the first minimum wage law in 2006.
Prior to that, Arizona employers had to pay only what was mandated in federal law, which was $5.15 an hour. The ballot measure pushed that to $6.75, with a requirement for annual adjustments based on inflation.
That has pushed the current state minimum to $8.05.
"The public will say, 'Enough's enough,'" Chucri said. And he said polls done for the industry in the spring show people believe that $12 is "too much."
The comments come as Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families is planning to submit its petitions for the $12 wage plus required paid leave today to the secretary of state's office.
Spokeswoman Suzanne Wilson said organizers have collected more than 250,000 signatures. That is 100,000 more than are needed to qualify for the ballot.
But Chucri said he's not convinced his organization will even have to fight the battle in November. He questioned whether petition circulators, both volunteer and paid, were careful to ensure that those who signed are qualified to vote in the state.
Arizona has become the latest battleground over what can be considered a living wage.
Several states have enacted their own laws, often through legislation. Most recently, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a measure that will take that state's minimum, now $10 an hour, up to $15 by 2022 for large employers; small companies will get another year to comply.
Chucri said part of the campaign against the ballot measure will be to remind voters here that Arizona already has a minimum wage that's higher than what federal law requires.
And that same law requires annual revision. Chucri pointed out that has meant a boost every year except for two when the rate of inflation was too small for even a nickel more, the bare minimum adjustment.
The difference, though, is not great: That $8.05 an hour is just 80 cents more than the federal minimum.
What Chucri also faces is that $8.05, assuming it's a family's sole source of income, translates out to $16,744 a year.
For a single person, the federal government considers anything below $11,880 a year to be living in poverty. That figure is $16,020 for a family of two and $20,160 for a family of three.
That's part of what has driven similar living wage efforts elsewhere in the country. But Chucri said the idea of a $12 minimum won't sell here.
"That is too high of a wage for a place like Arizona,'' he said.
Chucri said part of the campaign against the ballot measure will be the argument that higher wages mean fewer jobs.
"Restaurateurs are going to survive,'' he said. But what they will do, Chucri said, is simply hire fewer people.
He pointed out the push toward automation already is underway.
At Panera Bread, customers place their orders through computer screens and then can pick up what they want. And even at more traditional sit-down place like Applebee's, orders can be placed through tablets at each table.
Chucri conceded, though, that is happening even in places where the minimum wage is not going up. What approval of this measure would do, he said, is hasten the day.
"I don't think it's a matter of 'if,' '' Chucri said. "It's a matter of 'when.' ''
He would not say how much his group and other business organizations intend to spend to kill the measure.
The most recent campaign finance reports show campaign organizers have raised more than $342,000. Virtually all of that comes from Living United for Change in Arizona. But Tomas Robles, former executive director of LUCHA, said much of that is from a grant to the organization from The Center for Popular Democracy, an organization involved in efforts to establish a $15 minimum wage nationally.
Another $25,000 came from The Fairness Project which has its own efforts to push higher minimum wages on a state-by-state basis.
By Howard Fischer
Source
Groups demand 'responsible' contractors at Brooklyn Bridge Park
Brooklyn Daily Eagle - April 23, 2014, by Mary Frost - City officials and workers' advocates kicked off three weeks of action at Brooklyn Borough Hall on Tuesday, demanding safer working...
Brooklyn Daily Eagle - April 23, 2014, by Mary Frost - City officials and workers' advocates kicked off three weeks of action at Brooklyn Borough Hall on Tuesday, demanding safer working conditions and better training at real estate development sites.
Two construction workers have died in the past month and several were injured at construction sites in New York City lacking state-approved training and apprenticeship programs, according to a coalition made up of Build Up NYC, the Center for Popular Democracy, the New York Committee on Occupational Safety and Health, and Public Citizen.
Build Up NYC President Gary LaBarbera and NYC Public Advocate Letitia James singled out Starwood Capital Group, developing condos and a hotel in Brooklyn Bridge Park, for allegedly using irresponsible sub-contractors.
They also targeted the Kushner Companies, developing the Watchtower properties in DUMBO, for refusing to come to terms with advocates' demands.
“Responsible development begins with jobs," said LaBarbera. "Starwood has not used responsible contractors or subcontractors on its Pier 1 development in Brooklyn Bridge Park. The Kushner Companies, the developer of the Watchtower properties have not made a commitment to use responsible contractors for all of the construction, operations, maintenance or security work for their big project.”
At a Starwood construction project in Manhattan, Stella Tower going up at 435 W. 50 St., two workers were injured in the past two months, La Barbera said.
Kushner plans to redevelop the Watchtower properties into a mixed-use high-tech campus, with at least 50 percent office space. Build Up NYC says, however, that Kushner "has refused to commit to hiring only responsible construction, operations and maintenance contractors who provide industry standard wages, benefits and training for all phases of this project including the $100 million renovation."
"The developers have not made any committment to create good jobs for Brooklyn residents with these projects," Public Advocate James said. "Brooklyn needs good jobs, real affordable housing, and a strong midddle class. Starwood and Kushner have benefited -- it's now time that Brooklyn residents benefit as well."
At the rally, the Center for Popular Democracy handed out copies of a report, “Developing Progress: Ensuring that public resources contribute to New York equity, resilience and dynamic democracy.”
The report focuses on the development projects at Brooklyn Bridge Park, where organizers want investors to review Starwood Capital Group’s performance in light of accusations that Starwood has partnered on the project with a general contractor that has "a history of dangerous practices, illegal behavior and faulty construction."
While the city and state pension funds, which have invested in the project, have Responsible Contractor Policies that require fair wages and benefits, Starwood has hired subcontractor Hudson Meridian, with a long history of noncompliance and a trail of lawsuits, according to the study.
The Center wants the city to institute safety and pay policies into its upcoming Request for Proposals for Pier 6, and recommends that penalties for violations be raised.
The group plans several events, including a vigil for workers on Thursday, April 24, at 6 p.m, at Walker Tower, 212 West 18 Street in Manhattan.
Requests for comments from Starwood and Kushner were not answered by press time.
Source
Pro-Yellen Ad Hits the Air
The Wall Street Journal’s Michael Derby reports. “The Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign broadcast a 30-second TV spot urging Mr. Trump to offer Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen a second...
The Wall Street Journal’s Michael Derby reports. “The Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign broadcast a 30-second TV spot urging Mr. Trump to offer Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen a second term. The ad ran during 'Fox & Friends,' a morning show the president watches and often reacts to on Twitter.” The group is behind Twitter ads bashing Kevin Warsh, another candidate for the chairmanship, that have popped up in my feed over the past couple of weeks, too.
Read the full article here.
Yellen to Trump: don't expect a flip-flop on financial reforms
JACKSON HOLE, Wyo. (Reuters) - Janet Yellen delivered a message to President Donald Trump on Friday, making it clear that if he re-nominates her as Federal Reserve chair she will not turn her back...
JACKSON HOLE, Wyo. (Reuters) - Janet Yellen delivered a message to President Donald Trump on Friday, making it clear that if he re-nominates her as Federal Reserve chair she will not turn her back on the raft of U.S. financial reforms that Republicans want to roll back.
Her speech to the world’s top central bankers in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, comes at a time when the chaos at the White House may make it more likely that she would be appointed to serve another four years to head the U.S. central bank.
Read the full article here.
Hillary Clinton Embraces Progressive Federal Reserve Reforms
Hillary Clinton Embraces Progressive Federal Reserve Reforms
Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton came out in favor of changes to the Federal Reserve that would reduce the number of bankers in key central bank positions on Thursday, marking a major coup for...
Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton came out in favor of changes to the Federal Reserve that would reduce the number of bankers in key central bank positions on Thursday, marking a major coup for national progressive groups championing reform.
“The Federal Reserve is a vital institution for our economy and the wellbeing of our middle class, and the American people should have no doubt that the Fed is serving the public interest,” Jesse Ferguson, a Clinton campaign spokesman, said in a statement. “That’s why Secretary Clinton believes that the Fed needs to be more representative of America as a whole as well as that commonsense reforms — like getting bankers off the boards of regional Federal Reserve banks — are long overdue.”
The campaign also provided insight into the type of Federal Reserve governors that Clinton would appoint.
“Secretary Clinton will also defend the Fed’s so-called dual mandate — the legal requirement that it focus on full employment as well as inflation — and will appoint Fed governors who share this commitment and who will carry out unwavering oversight of the financial industry,” Ferguson said.
The announcement brings the Democratic presidential front-runner closer to the position of her rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Sanders proposed barring financial executives from sitting on the boards of the 12 regional Federal Reserve banks in an op-ed in The New York Times in December.
The Clinton campaign statement came in response to a letter to Fed chair Janet Yellen from 11 Democratic senators and 116 House Democrats. The letter, spearheaded by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), urged the Fed to appoint more women and people of different racial and ethnic backgrounds while expanding the representation of consumer and labor groups on regional Fed bank boards.
Currently, the vast majority of Fed bank board directors are white men. People representing either the financial industry or other major business sectors also occupy most of the seats.
It appears there is now widespread agreement among top Democrats that the Fed has to redouble its commitment to full employment and to be more attentive to how its policies affect African Americans, Hispanics, and other minorities.
Dean Baker, Center for Economic and Policy Research
The Fed’s control over monetary policy allows it to raise borrowing costs to head off inflation and reduce them to maximize employment. The members of Congress who wrote to Yellen argue that the disproportionate influence of financial officials and the lack of diversity at the Fed hamper its sensitivity to groups with a more precarious position in the job market.
Clinton had said virtually nothing about her agenda for the powerful central bank until now.
The Fed Up campaign, a coalition of progressive groups headed by the Center for Popular Democracy that has been at the forefront of recent efforts to make Federal Reserve reform a key part of the liberal agenda, confirmed that it has been in talks with the Clinton campaign for months.
“Secretary Clinton did the right thing today by coming out in favor of reforming the Federal Reserve,” said Ady Barkan, director of Fed Up. “We’re very excited that she listened to the voices of community leaders from around the country who have said that we need a Federal Reserve that reflects and represents the American people and that creates a strong economy for all.”
Some liberal economists previously noted that Clinton’s reticence about the Fed was inconsistent with her stated plans to return the country to the prosperity of the late 1990s, which enabled widespread wage growth. They argue that the era’s well-distributed economic gains were due in no small part to the permissive monetary policies of the Federal Reserve.
Dean Baker, one such economist and a co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, was elated to hear about Clinton’s remarks.
“Holy shit — that’s great news,” Baker said in an email upon receiving the news.
“While Senators Sanders, Warren, and others on the left side of the party took the lead, it appears there is now widespread agreement among top Democrats that the Fed has to redouble its commitment to full employment and to be more attentive to how its policies affect African Americans, Hispanics, and other minorities,” Baker continued. “There is also agreement that the Fed’s current archaic structure needs to be changed.”
By Daniel Marans
Source
Donald Trump pledge to target "sanctuary" cities could cost Denver, Aurora
Donald Trump pledge to target "sanctuary" cities could cost Denver, Aurora
DENVER - President-Elect Donald Trump has threatened to pull federal funding from cities that don’t tow-the-line on immigration.
“We will end sanctuary cities that have resulted in so many...
DENVER - President-Elect Donald Trump has threatened to pull federal funding from cities that don’t tow-the-line on immigration.
“We will end sanctuary cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths,” he said on August 31. “Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayers’ dollars.”
That threat has raised concerns in cities like Denver and Aurora, where police departments have said they won’t enforce federal immigration law, because they don’t have the resources and because that's the federal government’s job.
Denver Mayor Michael Hancock says that doesn’t mean the cities don’t cooperate.
“We follow the law,” he told Denver7. “We still cooperate with agencies and ICE (Immigration and Custom’s Enforcement) but we won’t do anything unlawful or unconstitutional.”
That means Denver won’t detain someone for ICE officials once their adjudicated sentence has been served.
When federal courts began to rule in 2014 that cities lack the authority to hold inmates in local jails beyond the term of their sentence, Denver modified its policies in regard to detainers, to conform to constitutional standards, as did numerous state and local agencies throughout the United States.
When asked if Denver is a sanctuary city, the mayor replied, “Denver never adopted a formal policy to be a sanctuary city. What we are is a very welcoming and inclusive city.”
The inclusive city of Denver received $175-million from the federal government in 2015. Much of it was spent on transportation, affordable housing and other forms of public assistance.
Hancock said he doesn’t think the federal government will withhold money from Denver and other big cities, but Denver City Councilwoman Robin Kniech, who chairs the Finance Committee, said, “We accept the possibility of that risk.”
Kniech said federal funds are important but not more important than people.
“We, as a city council, discussed that yesterday, how strongly we support our residents and our obligations to those residents. If that’s the risk, we will face that risk.”
Kniech said Denver has seen the federal government turn its back on financial obligations for many reasons.
“Whether it’s due to government shutdowns or other political shenanigans in Congress, we have to have contingency plans in place,” she said. “We work to mitigate the impact on our residents.”
Kniech said if they have to face that challenge, “I’m confident we would use all the tools in our toolbox to help protect our residents.”
The councilwoman said she is interested in collaborating with other cities and towns.
Kniech is a member of the Board of Local Progress, which includes people who serve on city councils and county commissioners, who are committed to the values of inclusiveness and a stronger economy for their most vulnerable constituents.
“I have been working with colleagues in Austin, Texas, New York City, Los Angeles and other cities all across the country who are standing up to these threats just as Denver is,” she said. “I’m confident we have a national movement.”
The mayor’s staff pointed out that between 2006 and 2013, the State of Colorado adopted and enforced a law (SB 06-90) which required the state to withhold certain grants from any city that had adopted “sanctuary” policies, and defined the term to mean: “Local government ordinances or policies that prohibit local officials, including peace officers, from communicating or cooperating with federal officials with regard to the immigration status of any person within the state.”
During that time, no state grants were ever withheld from the city, because Denver was not deemed to have adopted a “sanctuary” policy within the meaning of that statute.
Other Colorado cities concerned
Aurora received $11-million from the feds last year.
When asked if they’re concerned about a loss of federal funds, Lori MacKenzie, a spokeswoman for the city, said, “We don’t want to speculate because it’s simply too early to know what will take shape at the federal level.”
Trump’s threats are also a concern to the city of Boulder.
In an emailed statement, Boulder Communications Director Patrick von Keyserling told Denver7 that Boulder’s City Council asked staff to conduct research into the impacts of declaring Boulder a sanctuary city.
He said no decision has been made, but acknowledged that the issue of declaring sanctuary is one that has legal and financial implications.
“The city’s research will take into account the potential loss of federal dollars, impact on existing city services and programs and staff’s ability to serve Boulder residents, as well as our community’s strong commitment to social justice,” he said.
By Lance Hernandez
Source
Clinton Wants Bankers Off Regional Fed Boards
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton joined the fray Thursday in the debate over how the nation’s central bank operates, saying banking industry insiders need to be removed from the...
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton joined the fray Thursday in the debate over how the nation’s central bank operates, saying banking industry insiders need to be removed from the Federal Reserve System.
Mrs. Clinton’s campaign said, if elected, she would appoint officials who will carry out “unwavering oversight” of the financial sector and “defend” both sides of the central bank’s inflation and employment mandates. The campaign also said “commonsense reforms—like getting bankers off the boards of regional Federal Reserve banks—are long overdue.”
Mrs. Clinton’s comments on central bank changes appeared to be her first on the topic in a campaign season where the Fed has intermittently been an issue, albeit mostly on the Republican side. Mrs. Clinton’s views emerged on a day in which dozens of Democratic congressional members, led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, criticized the central bank for a leadership largely made up of white males with business and finance backgrounds.
While the Fed is led by its first-ever woman chief, all of its governors are white and three of the five are men. Of the 12 regional bank presidents, none are black and 10 are men. The last African-American to serve in a key leadership role left in 2006.
The letter to Ms. Yellen, referencing a recent study by the left-leaning Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up Coalition, also flagged a lack of diversity among the boards of directors that oversee the regional Fed banks. The letter said a Fed that doesn’t look like the nation it works for will struggle to make policy that benefits an increasingly diverse nation. Regional Fed board members are drawn from the private sector to watch over institutions that are quasi-private. By law, the boards are supposed to represent their broader communities with three classes of directors reserved for differing interests, including the financial sector, in a process set out by a complicated set of rules. These boards oversee regional Fed bank operations, provide local economic insights and help select new bank presidents.
But the presence of bankers on the boards, representing firms regulated by the Fed, has been a sore spot for Fed critics. Over the years, the New York Fed faced notable controversies on this front.
Recent legal changes have removed financial-market participants from the process of selecting new bank presidents. Also, the Fed’s regulatory operations are managed in Washington even as they operate out of regional banks, and are insulated from the influence of the regional boards. Most regional Fed boards are spoken of in glowing terms by their respective bank presidents.
Financial-market professionals are well represented among Fed leaders. Most top central bankers are either economists by training or former bankers. The leaders of the New York, Minneapolis, Dallas and Philadelphia Fed banks all have worked in some capacity for investment bank Goldman Sachs. Current Fed Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer was vice chairman of Citigroup from 2002 to 2005.
Mrs. Clinton’s desire to remove financial-sector leaders from the regional Fed boards would mark a historic change for a central bank that was founded on the mission of promoting financial stability, and whose monetary policy actions work through private financial-market channels to affect the performance of the broader economy.
In response to the congressional letter, the Fed said in a statement that when it comes to the members of the regional boards, “by law, we consider the interests of agriculture, commerce, industry, services, labor, and consumers. We also are aiming to increase ethnic and gender diversity.“ It also said there has been a rise in both racial and gender diversity on the regional Fed boards, with 46% of all directors now meeting the label of “diverse.”
A recent overhaul proposal by former top Fed staffer Andrew Levin, now a professor at Dartmouth College, called for the regional Fed banks to be made fully public, ending their private ownership structure operating within the Fed board, which is explicitly part of the government. Mr. Levin also called for directors representing firms regulated by the central bank to be removed.
By MICHAEL S. DERBY
Source
NYC Council Progressive Caucus Backs Keith Ellison for DNC Chair
NYC Council Progressive Caucus Backs Keith Ellison for DNC Chair
The City Council’s dominant Progressive Caucus—led by Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito—announced their endorsement today of Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison for chairman of the Democratic National...
The City Council’s dominant Progressive Caucus—led by Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito—announced their endorsement today of Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison for chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
As Democrats look to recover from a devastating Election Day, Ellison is vying to lead the party against former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and South Carolina chairman Jaime Harrison. Ellison, the first Muslim-American ever elected to the House of Representatives, has attracted the support of Sen. Charles Schumer and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, whom the congressman backed for the presidency in defiance of most party leaders.
Now the Progressive Caucus, whose 19 members mostly though not unanimously favored Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary, has added its backing to the Midwestern lawmaker’s bid.
“The members of the Progressive Caucus Alliance are proud to add our voices to those in support of Keith Ellison for Chair of the Democratic National Committee,” the group said in a press release today. “Congressman Ellison has been a true progressive champion in Congress, and has demonstrated the grit and tenacity that we’ll need for the tough fights ahead.”
Dean, who headed the DNC from 2005 to 2009, has asserted that the organization needs a chair who can attend to party business full-time. The Democrats have suffered severe setbacks over the past eight years under chairs who held elected office, most recently the controversial Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
The former Green Mountain State governor and 2004 presidential candidate has highlighted the success of his “50-state strategy” in yielding the first Democratic majority in Congress in 22 years in 2006.
More important for the Council’s Progressive Caucus, however, are Ellison’s two turns as keynote speaker at “Local Progress” gatherings of low-level left-leaning officials. This, the caucus asserted, showed an emphasis on building a party bench at the most basic levels of government.
“As municipal legislators, we are especially enthusiastic about his emphasis on progressive politics at the local level,” their statement said. “Congressman Ellison recognizes that progressive politics matter at the most local of levels: to families seeking a job that pays the bills, to kids from low-income families hoping to go to college, and to parents worried about whether their kids of color will be treated fairly by the criminal justice system. He knows the difference it makes to unite action at the local, state and federal levels, and why it is important to build strength among City Council members and other local elected officials.”
Ellison’s bid also comes as many Democrats, including Schumer, have argued the party needs to increase outreach to blue collar white voters in depressed industrial areas. But the Progressive Caucus insisted the “incredibly divisive national atmosphere” President-elect Donald Trump’s incendiary anti-immigrant rhetoric has created demands party leadership that will stick up for minorities.
“We need a leader who will stand firm against hatred, bias, discrimination, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia,” the Council members’ release said. “The members of the Progressive Caucus Alliance know that Congressman Ellison will be that type of leader, and we enthusiastically support his bid for Chair of the DNC.”
“We are enthusiastic that he will be [the] first Muslim-American DNC Chair,” it added.
Disclosure: Donald Trump is the father-in-law of Jared Kushner, the publisher of Observer Media.
By Will Bredderman
Source
Maryland has improved voter access
The Baltimore Sun - May 4, 2013, by Margaret Williams - This past November, I went to Florida to help...
The Baltimore Sun - May 4, 2013, by Margaret Williams - This past November, I went to Florida to help mobilize voters to increase participation in communities of color and raise the voice of those often unheard. While there, I witnessed firsthand what we all have seen on TV — terrible voting lines that forced community members to wait hours to cast their ballots. However, these perpetual voting challenges are not isolated to Florida. Even here in Maryland, we have a long, long way to go to ensure that the right to vote for Marylanders is easy and accessible for all. Like in Florida, my friends and family here in Baltimore City also waited hours to vote. I know of many in our communities who have been so discouraged by the process that they don't vote at all.
We must fix our broken democracy so that the electoral process is not fraught with obstacles for voters but encourages and supports the right to vote. Gov. Martin O'Malley's voting rights bill, which he signed into law on Thursday, is a great first step to engage and support Maryland's electorate. As a leader of the grassroots organization, Communities United, I commend Governor O'Malley for his leadership on this issue and am so grateful to the broad coalition of organizations that worked diligently for it's passage.
The bill, which will expand early voting and allow for same-day registration during the early voting period, is a real sign of progress toward improving voter access. The changes in this bill will make it easier for working-class people, who cannot afford to lose paid work time and wait hours to vote, to participate in the democratic process. We support this legislation as it was signed into law because it will provide tremendous benefits to residents throughout the state.
However, Mr. O'Malley's voting rights bill is merely a first step. We have yet to cross the finish line on voting rights, and there is much more work to be done.
In the last mayoral election in Baltimore, a mere 12 percent of voters went to the polls. If we are going to address the social and economic challenges that our city and state face, we must engage more citizens in voting. If we are to engage more citizens in voting, we must actively work for an electoral process that truly supports the engagement of all Marylanders.
Nationwide, voting rights are under attack by special interest groups and some elected officials. Every day we read in the press new proposals for voter identification bills and other methods of voter suppression throughout the country. It is critical that Maryland step forward as a real leader in progressive voting rights policies and electoral reform. While other states move to restrict voting rights, Maryland should serve as a model of voter empowerment for the rest of the country.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington. As we look back to see how far we have come, it can only inspire us to see how far we can go. This voting bill is an important first step, but there's still a long road to walk until we achieve the freedom that all Marylanders deserve.
Source:
I Love Working at Starbucks—But Conditions Have to Change
Caitlin O’Reilly-Green is a member of Rise Up Georgia, a partner of Center for Popular Democracy.
Too many employees have to deal with inconsistent work schedules
...Caitlin O’Reilly-Green is a member of Rise Up Georgia, a partner of Center for Popular Democracy.
Too many employees have to deal with inconsistent work schedulesOver the past 18 months, I have been working as a barista at Starbucks–and I love it here. I love making coffee, and I love chatting with customers. Despite the love I have for my work, I have to speak up on behalf of my co-workers: Something has to change in the way Starbucks is treating us.
This became clear to me when I met other Starbucks workers through Rise Up Georgia, a racial and economic justice organization based in Atlanta that is a partner of Center for Popular Democracy, the union-supported group that released a report Wednesday criticizing Starbuck’s labor practices. Through talking with my co-workers, I realized that I wasn’t the only one having a hard time planning my life around my work.
I have seen many co-workers quit on short notice because they couldn’t earn enough to make ends meet or their work schedule was too erratic to plan important things like child care. Though I faced some of the same issues, the hardest part of the job for me was without a doubt the so-called “skeleton-shifts”–severely understaffed shifts that left me stressed, exhausted, and, as a result, sick.
Earlier this year, I worked four days in a row with only my shift supervisor in the back to support me. A co-worker called in sick each day, so I was alone serving the entire store. My store has a drive-through, two registers in the front and a coffee bar–and I was the only one tending all of them.
The work was so grueling that I eventually developed a muscle spasm in my back and was forced to stop working for three months in order to recover from my injury.
When I took my struggles to Starbucks, the company listened and showed me that it cared about my problems. I was offered the opportunity to transfer to a store closer to my home so that I could have a shorter commute, and I now know how to indicate my preferred availability for shifts, so that I have a better chance of planning my life outside of work.
I’m so happy that Starbucks heard me, but I’m just one person. Unfortunately many Starbucks workers don’t speak up and voice their struggles.
My co-workers silently work “clopen” shifts, where they shut down the store at night and come back the next morning to open it. They silently deal with inconsistent work schedules. They silently cope with not knowing how much work they’re going to get each week, making it impossible for them to budget—and budgeting is already hard on $8.25 an hour.
The solution should be obvious for Starbucks. Instead of relying on every worker to bravely speak up about their struggles, Starbucks should change a system that is fundamentally broken.
I’m grateful for the improvements in my schedule, but I strongly believe that all of us deserve hours we can count on. I am speaking up and writing this op-ed in the hope that Howard Schultz, the CEO, will listen to the workers of his company and see that store-level problems don’t happen because of individual managers. It’s the company-wide structure that is failing us.
I think Starbucks is a great company, and I still believe that it wants its employees to be happy. But to get there Starbucks workers need a seat at the table.
Source: Time
4 days ago
4 days ago