The elevator moment: when to speak up, when to stay quiet, and the power of both
The elevator moment: when to speak up, when to stay quiet, and the power of both
Anger, pain, and courage.
That was what the moment was about.
Two women and their pain.
A U.S. Senator in an elevator, literally trapped and torn.
Frozen by their...
Anger, pain, and courage.
That was what the moment was about.
Two women and their pain.
A U.S. Senator in an elevator, literally trapped and torn.
Frozen by their escalating anger and anguish over what he had just announced.
A yes vote for Brett Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court.
Read the article and watch the video here.
N.J. company named among worst for wage theft fined $3.2 million
NEW YORK-- The New York City Comptroller levied a huge fine on a Parsippany company that cheated dozens of workers, mostly immigrant laborers, out of millions of dollars in wages for work on city...
NEW YORK-- The New York City Comptroller levied a huge fine on a Parsippany company that cheated dozens of workers, mostly immigrant laborers, out of millions of dollars in wages for work on city projects.
K.S. Contracting, owned by Paresh Shah, was ordered to pay $3.2 million and will also be barred from receiving state contracts for five years.
In its statement the comptroller's office did not identify the headquarters of Shah's company, but an Internet search turned up multiple Parsippany addresses for the business. State records tie Shah to at least one of those addresses, The Daily Record reported.
The company, named in 2015 as one of the worst wage theft violators in the city by the Center for Popular Democracy, was awarded more than $21 million in contracts between 2007 and 2010.
K.S. Contracting came under investigation in May 2010, when an employee filed a complaint. An investigation over the next several years uncovered a kickback scheme targeting immigrant employees, Comptroller Scott M. Stringer said.
Following a four-day administrative trial in May 2016, Stringer's office learned that checks were regularly issued to just half the workforce, which was ordered to cash them and return the money to supervisors. The cash was then given to all the workers at a rate significantly below the prevailing wage.
At least 36 workers were cheated out of $1.7 million in wages between 2008 and 2011, with some workers who were to be paid a combined wage and benefits package of $50 an hour receiving just $90 a day in cash. Most of the victims were workers of Latino, West Indian or South Asian descent, Stringer said.
"With President Trump taking clear aim at immigrants across the country, we need to stand up and protect the foreign-born New Yorkers who keep our City running. Every New Yorker has rights, and my office won't back down in defending them," New York Stringer said in a statement.
"Contractors might think they can take advantage of immigrants, but today we're sending a strong message: my office will fight for every worker in New York City. This is about basic fairness and accountability."
By Paul Milo
Source
Zara Latest ‘Cool’ Retailer in Hot Water for Alleged Discrimination
Spanish fashion chain Zara is among several “hip” retailers making headlines recently for alleged discrimination against employees.
Ian Miller, a former attorney for the mega-...
Spanish fashion chain Zara is among several “hip” retailers making headlines recently for alleged discrimination against employees.
Ian Miller, a former attorney for the mega-retailer, claims he was harassed and discriminated against for being Jewish and gay. In his $40 million lawsuit against the company, which is owned by Inditex SA, Miller alleges that he was excluded from meetings, given smaller raises than other employees and subjected to discriminatory remarks.
In addition, the Center for Popular Democracy released a survey of New York–based Zara employees, titled “Stitched with Prejudice: Zara USA’s Corporate Culture of Favoritism.” The report found that black employees are more dissatisfied with their hours than white employees, are reviewed more harshly by management and are least likely to be promoted.
When it comes to people who shop at Zara, black customers are seven times more likely to be targeted as potential thieves than white customers, the report found.
A spokesperson for Inditex refuted the claims in the Center for Popular Democracy report in a statement to FOXBusiness.com.
“It fails to follow an acceptable methodology for the conduct of a credible objective survey on workplace practices, and instead appears to have taken an approach to achieve a pre-determined result which was to discredit Zara. Zara USA believes that the claims made in the report are completely inconsistent with the company’s true culture and the experiences of the over 1,100 Zara employees in New York City and over 3,500 in all the US,” said the spokesperson.
Perhaps even more high profile is a discrimination case involving Abercrombie & Fitch (ANF), which made its way to the Supreme Court. The preppy retailer known for its presence in American malls was sued by Samantha Elauf, a young Muslim woman who wore a headscarf to a job interview at the company seven years ago.
“Ms. Elauf never informed Abercrombie before its hiring decision that she wore her head scarf, or ‘hijab,’ for religious reasons,” the ruling stated.
The Supreme Court recently overturned that decision.
A spokesperson for Abercrombie & Fitch told FOXBusiness.com in a statement that although the Tenth Circuit decision was overturned by the Supreme Court, it was not determined that the company discriminated against Elauf.
“We will determine our next steps in the litigation, which the Supreme Court remanded for further consideration. A&F remains focused on ensuring the company has an open-minded and tolerant workplace environment for all current and future store associates. We have made significant enhancements to our store associate policies, including the replacement of the 'look policy' with a new dress code that allows associates to be more individualistic; changed our hiring practices to not consider attractiveness; and changed store associates' titles from 'Model' to 'Brand Representative' to align with their new customer focus. This case relates to events occurring in 2008. A&F has a longstanding commitment to diversity and inclusion, and consistent with the law, has granted numerous religious accommodations when requested, including hijabs,” the spokesperson said.
Nasty Gal, a self-described “global online destination for fashion-forward, free-thinking girls,” is being sued for illegally firing Aimee Concepcion and several other employees either before taking or during maternity/paternity leave.
The lawyer for the former employee that filed the suit, who will represent three other female ex-employees in arbitration hearings, said “they were the only pregnant females who provided notice of maternity leave before being terminated, and …their jobs were taken over by other employees.”
"The accusations made in the lawsuits are false, defamatory and taken completely out of context,” a Nasty Gal spokesperson told FOXBusiness.com. “The layoffs in question were part of a larger restructuring of departments we completed over nine months ago. The lawsuits are frivolous and without merit."
When it comes to the likelihood of this case succeeding in court, it is worth looking to similar prior verdicts for perspective.
“Shortly before they filed the Nasty Gal lawsuit, a $7.7 million verdict in favor of a pregnant (at the pertinent time) Price is Right model was affirmed by a California appellate court,” said Jeff Trexler, associate director at Fordham’s Fashion Law Institute.
On the flip side, “If Nasty Gal can show that it actually provided the requisite notices, offered reasonable accommodation to her (Concepcion’s) pregnancy, wasn't motivated to fire her because of her pregnancy, and did not treat pregnant women differently from other employees in similar positions, there's a substantial possibility that the company will prevail,” said Trexler.
Retail stores have also received flack in recent months for selling discriminatory merchandise. Urban Outfitters (URBN) was condemned by organizations including the Human Rights Campaign and the Anti-Defamation League for a gray- and white-striped tapestry imprinted with a pink triangle that was sold at a store in Boulder, Colorado. The groups said the item projected Holocaust imagery, specifically of the uniforms gay men were forced to wear in Nazi concentration camps. Calls for comment to Urban Outfitters were not returned by the time of publication.
Despite the extent of public outcry over the merchandise, Urban Outfitters is technically allowed to sell whatever it wants.
“Designs evocative of Nazi imagery may be offensive, but they're no more illegal than the Confederate flag; ultimately, the decision to stop selling designs with either image comes down to ethical and reputation management concerns,” said Trexler.
In recent weeks, several retailers including Wal-Mart (WMT), Sears (SHLD) and Amazon (AMZN) announced they would stop selling Confederate battle flag merchandise following the mass shooting in June at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina.
No stranger to controversy, Zara was also accused of selling discriminatory merchandise. A 2014 white-and-blue striped shirt, which featured a six-pointed star, came under fire for its resemblance to uniforms worn by Jewish prisoners at Nazi concentration camp. The “sheriff shirt” was pulled from the retailer’s site after it issued an apology.
So, is outcry over discrimination becoming more common in the retail industry, or is it simply that intense media scrutiny is making it seem like it is?
“Allegations of discrimination are nothing new in fashion, as with any business, but what's particularly noteworthy now is their potential to have a substantial negative impact on a brand,” said Trexler. “One could say that the way people characterize discrimination is shifting from incident to identity, and in this fashion reflects a broader cultural trend that has emerged alongside advances in communications technology.”
When asked if changes in the law are making discrimination lawsuits easier to file, Trexler said that enforcement has shifted “in ways that arguably encourage people to take legal action.”
Most notably, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has worked to make pregnancy discrimination an enforcement priority, and a Supreme Court decision also raised awareness on the issue.
“Acts that might have gone unchallenged in years past now might be more likely to spark a lawsuit,” said Trexler.
Source: Fox Business
Bill de Blasio: From Education to Poverty, Leadership by Example
Huffington Post - October 9, 2014, by Richard Eskow - Progressives who are elected to executive office have a unique opportunity to highlight neglected issues and stimulate much-needed debate, by...
Huffington Post - October 9, 2014, by Richard Eskow - Progressives who are elected to executive office have a unique opportunity to highlight neglected issues and stimulate much-needed debate, by taking actions which challenge the "conventional wisdom." They can change the political landscape by employing a principle that might be called "leadership by example."
The mayor of New York City is uniquely positioned to play this role, thanks to that city's prominence, and so far Bill de Blasio has done exceptionally well at it. Two of his actions -- on education and assistance to the poor -- deserve particular commendation, because they challenge the "bipartisan" consensus that has too often strangled open debate and left the public's interests unrepresented.
Action for the Impoverished
1. "Welfare Reform's" Record of Failure
"Centrist" Democrats like Bill Clinton, together with Republicans like Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg, have long sung the praises of "welfare reform" -- a set of policies that promised to turn welfare recipients into "productive citizens" through a combination of educational programs, work requirements, and "tough love" that denied benefits to some of them.
Clinton signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act" on August 22, 1996, saying it would "end welfare as we know it and transform our broken welfare system by promoting the fundamental values of work, responsibility, and families." That bill quickly became a symbol of "bipartisan consensus" and a much-touted piece of model legislation for the neoliberal economic agenda.
Unfortunately, we now know that it didn't work. In fact, it backfired. A report from the University of Michigan's National Poverty Center showed that extreme poverty increased in the United States by 130 percent between 1996 and 2013 -- and pinpointed "welfare reform" as the cause.
Despite its documented failure, the myth persists that "welfare reform" succeeded. This belief has so far proved resistant to the mounting evidence against it, perhaps because it serves the personal interests of wealthy individuals and corporations who don't care to be taxed for antipoverty programs.
This "reform" myth also serves to assuage their consciences. Politicians like Cuomo and Clinton are all too happy to help in that effort by assuring wealthy Americans that this policy is smart, even liberal, and that it only coincidentally happens to benefit them personally.
2. The End of Welfare As They Know It
The mayor of New York City cannot supersede a federal law, but a recent executive action will hopefully serve to re-open the debate on welfare "reform." De Blasio ended the policies of his GOP predecessors and eased requirements for welfare eligibility in New York City. New rules will give young people more time to complete their educations, and native speakers of foreign languages time to learn English. He also cut back on some "workfare" requirements (which in some cases amount to little more than ritual humiliation.)
For the first time, allowances will be made for parental duties, travel time, and other obstacles which are faced every day by the poor -- but which are little-understood by prosperous "bipartisans" from either party.
As a de Blasio official explained, "we have the data to show that toughness for the sake of toughness hasn't been effective."
3. Data Driven
Data. That word is anathema to "centrist" politicians and commentators who claim to be technocrats, but who are actually driven by ideology, donor cash, or both. When de Blasio issued his orders the hyperventilation was, predictably, all but instantaneous. "We don't need to guess how de Blasio's welfare philosophy will pan out," wrote Heather McDonald, who is "Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute."
Reihan Salam fulminated in Slate that welfare programs must "rest on a solid moral foundation. And that, ultimately, is what work requirements are all about."
But when the work isn't available, or people have no practical way of obtaining it, it's immoral to make them -- or their children -- suffer. By ending the inhumane but "bipartisan" policies of his predecessors, Bill de Blasio has potentially re-opened the debate on the draconian and failed "welfare reform" concept.
Action on Education
1. Charter Schools Are "Special Interests"
De Blasio's much-publicized struggle with charter school CEO Eva Moskowitz began when he overturned Bloomberg's decision to give her "Success Academy" free space in city buildings. That led her to make a series of false claims about her organization's accomplishments -- claims that were effectively debunked by Diane Ravitch and Avi Blaustein. Success Academy students aren't the best in the state, they aren't the most difficult students in the city -- and the program is so cost-inefficient that it spends over $2,000 per year more per student than other schools serving similar populations.
Bloomberg was generous to Moskowitz because her program suited his predilection for Wall Street-friendly, corporate-cozy ideas -- ideas which appeared on the surface to promote innovation or "reform," but which on further study reveal themselves as a wealth transfer from the many to the few, often at the expense of the public good.
That's exactly what the charter-school movement represents. Sure, it sounds like a good idea: Schools will "compete" for students, and those which offer the best "products" will succeed. As writer and education activist Jeff Bryant says: Everybody loves "choice," right?
But the concept is flawed at its core. Schools aren't failing because students and their parents don't have "choices" in schools. They're failing -- to the extent they are, because even that concept is overhyped -- because they don't have choices in jobs or housing. Schools are struggling because we don't pay teachers well enough, because we underfund our school districts, and because social factors (especially poverty) inhibit the learning process.
2. Rockets to Nowhere
For all the hype and all the money, there's still no evidence that charter schools work. Advocates love to claim that "school choice" offers lower-income children a way out of poverty. But Milwaukee, which the conservative American Enterprise Institute calls "one of the most 'choice-rich' environments in America," remains one of America's 10 most impoverished big cities.
And kids aren't any more educated in Milwaukee than they were before they were given all this "choice." Educator Diane Ravitch reviewed the data and found that, 22 years after the program was implemented, there was no evidence of improvement in students' test scores.
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) reviewed the "Rocketship" program, which has bid to take over Milwaukee's underperforming schools, and found that it isn't working. They observed that "in 2012-2013, all seven of the Rocketship schools failed to make adequate yearly progress according to federal standards."
Call it "failure to launch."
3. Follow the Money
The EPI also noted that "Blended-learning schools such as Rocketship are supported by investment banks, hedge funds, and venture capital firms that, in turn, aim to profit from both the construction and, especially, the digital software assigned to students."
That might help explain why wealthy Wall Street investors paid Moskowitz's $2,000-plus-per-student cost overruns out of their own pockets. The same hedge funders also happen to have donated at least $400,000 to Andrew Cuomo's reelection campaign. Perhaps coincidentally, Cuomo led the charge against de Blasio after he moved to end Moskowitz's taxpayer-funded privileges.
Charter schools are an ideological and investment opportunity, which explains why enormous sums of money have been expended promoting them. (The latest effort, funded by $12 million from the wealthiest families in the nation, is something called "The Education Post."
Not all charter schools are driven by the profit motive, and some may in fact do a good job. But there is no evidence to support their claims, their operating principles, or the broader "free market" ideology behind them -- an ideology that is founded on hostility to government itself.
4. Breeding Fraud
Ravitch also notes that Washington, D.C., whose "Opportunity Scholarship Program" launched at least one educational celebrity career, was equally unable to demonstrate results. Its final-year report notes that "There is no conclusive evidence that the OSP affected student achievement."
There is conclusive evidence, however, that the charter school movement has produced at least one fairly widespread outcome: fraud. A recent report from the Center for Popular Democracy, Integrity in Education, and ACTION United told the story. The report, titled "Fraud and Financial Mismanagement in Pennsylvania's Charter Schools," showed that the state had failed to properly audit or review its publicly-funded charter schools.
It also uncovered a pattern of abuses so disturbing it makes charter schools look like petri dishes for fraud. The director of one charter school diverted $2.6 million in school funds to rebuild his church. Another stole $8 million for "houses, a Florida condominium, and an airplane." Yet another used taxpayer funds to finance "a restaurant, a health food store, and a private school." A couple stole nearly $1 million for their personal use.
There are more revelations in the report -- and it only covers one state.
And yet, despite mounting evidence to the contrary, charter schools continue to be talked up by Bill Clinton, whose recent boosterism was described by Salon's Luke Brinker as "stunning" in its variance with the facts. (Jeff Bryant has more on the reality behind Clinton's disingenuous remarks.)
5. The Ongoing Battle
De Blasio acted wisely in moving to end Bloomberg's gift of scarce New York City school resources to Moskowitz. He was ultimately forced to back down, at least in the short term, after her big-dollar backers won a victory in Albany.
That was no surprise, given the money behind the so-called "reformers." But it's not the end of the story, either. De Blasio's position on charter schools triggered a fierce response -- but it also triggered a long-overdue conversation.
By challenging the conventional wisdom on charter schools, Bill de Blasio has started something their backers didn't want: a genuine debate on their merits. He may have lost a battle, but if the debate continues he's likely to win the war.
Leadership Through Action
By taking actions which challenge the orthodoxy of his own party's corporate wing -- an orthodoxy shared and taken to extremes by the entire GOP -- Bill de Blasio is changing the political landscape. Although he is reportedly close to the Clintons (he managed Hillary's 2000 senatorial campaign), his executive decisions are offering a new political vision for progressives who have felt starved for representation in the two-party system of recent decades.
De Blasio's deeds haven't been limited to education and welfare, of course. As we've discussed elsewhere, he's taken on issues that range from the minimum wage to the environment, and to housing as a human right.
He's made mistakes, and he's all but certain to make more as he navigates difficult political waters. De Blasio's trying to effect change from within the political process, which is always a risky endeavor. But he's made great strides in a short time. His is the sort of leadership which can change the national political landscape even as it improves the quality of life for his constituents.
Bill de Blasio is using his position as mayor of New York to lead -- with action as well as words. And for that he's owed a debt of gratitude.
Source
Accountability of Charter Schools in Illinois Raises Questions
WTAX News Radio - February 2, 2015 - Charter schools in Illinois are in the cross hairs of a new report alleging a lack of accountability leading to between $13 million and $27 million in fraud....
WTAX News Radio - February 2, 2015 - Charter schools in Illinois are in the cross hairs of a new report alleging a lack of accountability leading to between $13 million and $27 million in fraud.“At a time when (Chicago Public Schools are) crying broke, and public schools are grossly under-resourced, and there’s a public demand for transparency and accountability around every corner,” says Action Now executive director Katelyn Johnson, “it seems unconscionable that CPS and the state of Illinois would not invest in rigid financial oversight of charter schools.”Johnson’s group is supporting the Center for Popular Democracy in the report, “Risking Public Money.”Andrew Broy has a differing viewpoint. He’s the president of the Illinois Network of Charter Schools and dismisses the other two groups as union-funded and anti-charter to begin with.“The question” about accountability, he says, “is if there are challenges with an internal governing board, how do we uncover that and make sure it’s taken care of, and the current law equips districts with all the tools they need to make sure that happens.”Source
Fed Up Coalition Complains About Jackson Hole Room Cancellations
Fed Up Coalition Complains About Jackson Hole Room Cancellations
A group of activists planning to attend the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual economic symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo., has filed a complaint with the National Park Service, the...
A group of activists planning to attend the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual economic symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo., has filed a complaint with the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior’s Inspector General’s Office and the Justice Department after the conference hotel canceled the group’s room reservations.
The Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up Coalition said in an Aug. 9 letter that it booked 13 rooms in May at the Jackson Lake Lodge for its members for the nights of Aug. 24, 25 and 26. Last month, the lodge informed the group that their reservations had been canceled because of a “computer glitch,” according to the letter.
But the lodge didn’t cancel the reservations for other guests who booked after Fed Up did, said the letter written by Ady Barkan, campaign director of Fed Up, a left-leaning group that has lobbied for more diversity among Fed officials and more openness about the selection of regional Fed bank presidents.
“It is very hard for me to interpret the Company’s actions as anything other than a specific targeting of the Fed Up coalition,” he wrote in the letter.
Mr. Barkan said the group booked rooms at other hotels farther away from the conference, which will make it difficult for activists to attend events.
The Jackson Hole conference draws central-bank officials and economists from around the world who gather near the Grand Tetons to discuss monetary policy.
Fed Up members have been attending the conference for the past two years to urge Fed officials to hold off on raising interest rates, arguing that higher borrowing costs will slow economic growth and hurt low-income households. The group’s members often hold events and rallies near Fed events, wearing their signature green T-shirts.
A spokesperson for the Jackson Lake Lodge didn’t return a call for comment. Kathy Kupper, a spokeswoman for the National Parks Service said the lodges are run by independent contractors who are responsible for their day-to-day operations.
Mr. Barkan said he was writing the letter “to file a formal complaint regarding improper and potentially illegal behavior,” by the company.
By David Harrison
Source
‘Patriot’ Dimon dodges calls to disavow Trump policies
By Ben McLannahan
Jamie Dimon endured a rough ride at the annual meeting of America’s biggest bank on Tuesday morning, as shareholders repeatedly attacked the JPMorgan Chase chief over his...
By Ben McLannahan
Jamie Dimon endured a rough ride at the annual meeting of America’s biggest bank on Tuesday morning, as shareholders repeatedly attacked the JPMorgan Chase chief over his ties to the administration of Donald Trump.
In December Mr Dimon was named chairman of the Business Roundtable, a group of almost 200 CEOs which is among the most prominent lobbying groups in Washington. Mr Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan for the past 11 years and chairman for 10, is also a member of Mr Trump’s strategic and policy forum, which meets regularly to shape the economic agenda.
At the meeting in Wilmington, Delaware, a succession of shareholders challenged Mr Dimon to publicly disavow some of Mr Trump’s policies, such as his curbs on immigration from predominantly Muslim countries and his building a wall on the border with Mexico. One shareholder noted that users had sent more than 4000 messages to a website, backersofhate.org, urging Mr Dimon to “distance himself from hateful policies of human suffering”.
After staying silent throughout several speeches from the floor, Mr Dimon defended the bank’s record on Mexico, its support for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, and its funding of private prisons.
Finally, he said of Mr Trump: “He is the president of the United States, he is the pilot flying the aeroplane. I’d try to help any president of the US because I’m a patriot. That does not mean I agree with every policy he is trying to implement.”
Mr Dimon has long been the most outspoken of the big-bank chiefs in the US, often using his shareholder letter as a platform for taking positions on matters of public policy, and for challenging the regulatory framework put in place since the 2008 crisis.
In the weeks after the presidential election, the 61 year old was approached by members of Mr Trump’s transition team to serve as Treasury secretary but declined, saying he was unsuited to the role, according to people familiar with the discussions.
As hostile questioning resumed after his remarks at the Tuesday meeting, Mr Dimon tried to lighten the mood, saying “you’re starting to hurt my feelings”. The shareholder admonished him by saying that just by hearing him out, the chief executive would earn more than $100.
“I hope it’s worth it!” said Mr Dimon, who was paid $28m last year.
“This is not a laughing matter,” the shareholder replied.
The meeting stood in contrast to the peaceful gathering at the Goldman Sachs building in Jersey City at the end of last month, when chief executive Lloyd Blankfein faced just two questions from the floor, both of them friendly. Mr Blankfein, who is also chairman of the board, closed the meeting within just 24 minutes.
Mr Dimon wrapped up Tuesday’s proceedings by saying the entire board “takes this feedback seriously”.
Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, said after the meeting that until Mr Dimon takes a stronger stand her organisation would continue to associate JPMorgan Chase with Mr Trump’s “anti-immigration” agenda.
Ms Archila arrived in America 20 years ago to reunite with her father, who had fled political violence in Colombia.
“I don’t think we have a plan to really inflict economic damages on the bank just yet,” she said. “But what we do have a plan for, is to force them to clarify whose side they’re on.”
Pressures mount on Wells Fargo following fake-accounts scandal
Pressures mount on Wells Fargo following fake-accounts scandal
Pressure mounted on Wells Fargo & Co. Friday following its fake-accounts scandal, as the bank faced new calls to allow affected customers to file lawsuits and for the board of directors to...
Pressure mounted on Wells Fargo & Co. Friday following its fake-accounts scandal, as the bank faced new calls to allow affected customers to file lawsuits and for the board of directors to rescind the pay of a key senior executive.
The demands came just one day after Chief Executive John Stumpf resigned from a Federal Reserve advisory panel.
Senators had pushed for Stumpf not to be reappointed, saying it was inappropriate for someone who presided over improper sales tactics to be giving advice to an agency involved with bank regulation.
Stumpf has been under intense fire since the bank this month agreed to pay $185 million to settle investigations by Los Angeles City Atty. Mike Feuer, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency into an aggressive sales culture that led bank employees to open as many as 2 million accounts that customers didn’t authorize.
The Justice Department is investigating possible criminal charges, and some senators have called for a Labor Department investigation into whether the bank failed to pay employees overtime when they worked late nights and weekend to meet sales quotas.
A group of Senate Democrats continued to attack Wells Fargo on Friday, publicly calling on Stumpf to stop enforcing mandatory arbitration clauses in the agreements for customer accounts that were not authorized.
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) had pressed Stumpf on the matter at a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing Tuesday, arguing that it was unfair not to allow those customers the ability to file lawsuits against the bank.
Stumpf said at the time that he would have to “talk to my legal team.”
Brown said Friday that he and his colleagues want relief for bank customers and more answers from Wells Fargo.
“If Wells Fargo really does want to look out for the customers, if they really are in fact sorry, as the CEO said, for these unauthorized accounts, they ought to let the court system work if these people who were wronged want to bring suit,” he said.
Wells Fargo's collateral damage: customers' credit scores
Wells Fargo's collateral damage: customers' credit scores
The Democrats sent a letter to Stumpf on Friday, requesting more information about the arbitration clauses, including how many customer complaints about fake accounts were forced into arbitration proceedings.
Brown was among those writing to Stumpf, along with Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Richard Durbin of Illinois, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Al Franken of Minnesota and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.
A spokeswoman for Wells Fargo did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Also on Friday, an activist investment group that is part of the Change to Win union federation wrote to Wells Fargo’s board, asking it to rescind at least part of the compensation earned by the executive who oversaw the employees who opened unauthorized customer accounts.
The letter from CtW Investment Group, which is a Wells Fargo shareholder, adds to the pressure on the bank to claw back some of the approximately $100 million earned by Carrie Tolstedt, the company’s former head of community banking.
Wells Fargo’s stock has declined by about 8% since the settlement was announced on Sept. 8.
On Thursday, five senators called for Stumpf not to be reappointed to the Federal Advisory Council, a 12-member body that meets four times a year with the Fed’s Board of Governors to discuss banking and economic matters.
Stumpf had represented the Fed’s San Francisco district, where Wells Fargo is based, since 2015.
He “made a personal decision to resign” and notified the Fed on Thursday, Wells Fargo spokeswoman Jennifer Dunn said.
“His top priority is leading Wells Fargo,” she said.
Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine, organized the letter to the head of the board of directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco asking that Stump not be reappointed to the advisory council when his term expires on Dec. 31.
“It would be ironic if the Federal Reserve, a key federal banking regulator tasked in part with ensuring the fair and equitable treatment of consumers in financial transactions, continued to receive special insights and recommendations from senior management of a financial institution that just paid a record-breaking fine to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for ‘unfair’ and ‘abusive’ practices that placed consumers at financial risk,” they wrote.
The letter also was signed by Warren and Democratic Sens. Maria Cantwell of Washington and Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden, both of Oregon.
Their call was backed by Fed Up, a coalition of labor, community and liberal activist groups that has pushed to reduce the influence of bankers on Federal Reserve policies.
“Commercial banks already have too much influence within the Federal Reserve System,” the coalition said Thursday. The coalition also asked its members to sign a petition calling for Stump’s “immediate dismissal” from the advisory panel.
“Stumpf, as the CEO of a bank accused of ‘unfair’ and ‘abusive’ practices, should have no role advising the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors on policies affecting working families,” Fed Up said.
By Jim Puzzanghera
Source
Immigrants, Advocates Rally For New York State Citizenship
CBS New York - June 16, 2014 - They are not U.S. citizens, but a plan is in the works to allow undocumented New Yorkers to become citizens of the state.
Chanting “New York is my home” and...
CBS New York - June 16, 2014 - They are not U.S. citizens, but a plan is in the works to allow undocumented New Yorkers to become citizens of the state.
Chanting “New York is my home” and with the Statue of Liberty in the background, immigrants and their advocates rallied for New York state citizenship in Battery Park on Monday, WCBS 880′s Peter Haskell reported.
The bill’s sponsor, state Sen. Gustavo Rivera, D-Bronx, said the legislation would grant state citizenship if “someone can demonstrate proof of identity, live here for three consecutive years, pay taxes for three consecutive years.”
Assemblyman Karim Camara, D-Brooklyn, said state citizenship would allow 2.7 million immigrants to legally drive, vote in state and local elections and receive tuition aid.
“We have the opportunity now to step in where the federal government has not and make New York stronger by strengthening the rights of new immigrants,” Camara said.
The bill is not likely to pass, but is being called a conversation starter, Haskell reported.
“We deserve to receive the aid necessary for us to go to college,” said Antonio Alarcon, 19. “We deserve to vote. We deserve to drive.”
Source
Activist Group Presses for Diversity on Fed Boards
An activist group on Monday named a slate of candidates it would like to see placed on the boards overseeing the regional Federal Reserve banks, saying these people would promote diversity at the...
An activist group on Monday named a slate of candidates it would like to see placed on the boards overseeing the regional Federal Reserve banks, saying these people would promote diversity at the central bank and de-emphasize the influence bankers have on policy makers.
The slate of candidates is in large part aimed at addressing what the left-leaning Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign sees as a lack of minority and female representation in the leadership ranks of top central bank officialdom.
“Regional Banks’ boards are disproportionately white, male, and from the corporate and financial sectors,” the group said in a report. “Regional Banks have continually selected bank directors without transparency or public input, and most directors’ backgrounds suggest that they are likelier to be familiar with the interests of the wealthy than with the interests of low-income individuals and communities of color,” the group said.
The Federal Reserve’s Shifting Makeup
The group identified a slate of candidates drawn from academia, think tanks and unions who could serve as directors at the 12 regional bank districts. These prospective candidates are mainly women or people of color. None are bankers or financial market participants.
The group also said the continued role of bankers on boards continues to create conflicts of interest between the Fed and regulated financial institutions. “The potential for conflicts of interest will remain high as long as commercial banks and financial institutions continue to dominate Fed leadership,” Fed Up said in its report.
Fed Up’s Candidates
The boards overseeing the regional Fed banks have long been a flashpoint. While the Washington-based Board of Governors, now led by Chairwoman Janet Yellen, is explicitly part of the government, the 12 regional banks exist as quasi-private institutions overseen by boards composed of a legally mandated mix of bankers, community members and business representatives.
The most public responsibility of these boards is to guide the selection of new regional bank presidents and to reapprove these officials when their terms are up. Directors from institutions regulated by the Fed aren’t involved in this process, but they were until several years ago.
The regional Fed boards also help oversee regional Fed operations and provide intelligence on local economic conditions. Most Fed bank presidents have spoken very favorably of their boards and have pointed out these directors have no influence and have no special access to Fed monetary policy-making.
The Fed Up campaign has been pressing the central bank for some time on diversity issues, to some successes. In May many congressional Democrats signed a letter to Chairwoman Janet Yellen expressing concern about what they saw as a lack of diversity among the Fed’s top officials and boards of directors. Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton also expressed support for getting bankers off Fed boards.
The Fed countered then that it is done a lot to improve diversity and that it would work to do even better in the future.
And speaking in early June with reporters, Dallas Fed President Robert Kaplan acknowledged the problem, saying “diversity, racial diversity, ethnic diversity of all kinds leads to better decision making and greater performance. That’s something we should be striving for at the Fed.”
Earlier this year, former Minneapolis Fed leader Narayana Kocherlakota indicated in a blog post that a lack of African-American representation in policy-making positions may have caused officials to pay insufficient attention to the needs of this group during the financial crisis.
By MICHAEL S. DERBY
Source
15 hours ago
3 days ago