Activists ‘Fed Up’ With Rate Rise Talk Offer Plosser a City Tour
Bloomberg News - November 15, 2014, by Jeff Kearns & Christopher Condon -Labor and community organizers meeting with Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen challenged officials who are ready to...
Bloomberg News - November 15, 2014, by Jeff Kearns & Christopher Condon -Labor and community organizers meeting with Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen challenged officials who are ready to raise interest rates to first come visit the poorest neighborhoods with them before saying that the economy has recovered.
Kati Sipp, one of about two dozen activists meeting Yellen, said at a press conference yesterday in front of the central bank in Washington that she would show Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser “what life is like in this economy” for his city’s unemployed.
“Clearly Charles Plosser hasn’t been coming out the way that I work,” said Sipp, director of Pennsylvania Working Families. “I work on 60th Street in West Philadelphia in a storefront office, and every single day someone or a couple of people come in to my office because they are looking for work.”
A spokeswoman for the Philadelphia Fed declined to comment.
Members of the group met with Yellen and Fed governors Stanley Fischer, Jerome Powell and Lael Brainard. The coalition of 20 community groups, labor unions and religious leaders from around the U.S. wants the Fed to hear the concerns of ordinary Americans as it prepares to raise rates. It’s part of wider public pressure, including from lawmakers of both parties, who want more accountability and transparency from the central bank.
The Fed has been criticized by Democratic and Republican groups over its rescue of big Wall Street banks in the 2008-2009 financial crisis, and over subsequent steps to support the economy through zero interest rates and massive bond purchases.
Yellen Meeting
The group meeting with Yellen and her colleagues yesterday included individuals struggling to find work despite the improving economic picture in the U.S., Ady Barkan, senior staff attorney at the Brooklyn-based Center for Popular Democracy, one of the organizers of the meeting, said in an interview.
“They all listened very intently and asked questions,” Barkan said of Yellen and the three governors. “They were very interested in hearing about the personal stories of the folks we brought.”
Those included Reginald Rounds, a resident of Ferguson, Missouri, near St. Louis, where protests erupted after an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed by police in August. The predominantly black town became a symbol of racial inequality and militarized policing as armored trucks and tear-gas canisters rolled through the suburban community after the shooting.
‘Sky-High’
Barkan said Rounds told the Fed officials that “sky-high unemployment” in the St. Louis area had contributed to “desperation” in the town.
Another speaker was Shemethia Butler, an unemployed woman from Washington. She recounted for Yellen how she was laid off from a job that offered no paid sick days after becoming ill and missing time at work, Barkan said.
Barkan said he had agreed with Fed officials not to recount how Yellen and the governors responded.
Eric Kollig, a Fed spokesman, declined to comment on the meeting.
The jobless rate has fallen to 5.8 percent from a 26-year high of 10 percent in October 2009. Interest rates have been held near zero since December 2008, and most Fed officials project that they will raise borrowing costs sometime in 2015.
Still, millions of Americans can find only part-time work, and average hourly wages have risen at about a 2 percent pace for the last five years, barely outpacing inflation.
Big Banks
“The economy is not working for the vast majority of people,” Barkan told reporters before the meeting in front of the central bank headquarters facing the National Mall. “It’s too important of an institution to be controlled and dominated by big banks and corporations rather than the public.”
In addition to low rates to help the unemployed, the groups are pushing for a more open and transparent search process for regional bank presidents that includes more community input. Barkan said the group asked Yellen for support in arranging meetings with each regional Fed president.
While formal changes to the process of selecting regional Fed leaders would require legislation, Barkan said the Fed board of governors held significant informal influence over the process.
“I’m sure they could change the process if they wanted to,” he said.
Plosser, Fisher
Plosser and Richard Fisher of Dallas both plan to retire next year and the “Fed Up” coalition wants more public input in naming their successors. Both banks have said they have hired executive search firms to find candidates.
Regional bank chiefs are picked by their respective boards, which are typically composed mostly of banking and business executives. Philadelphia’s nine-member board includes Comcast Corp. Chief Financial Officer Michael Angelakis.
Both presidents have cast dissenting votes this year against the Fed’s policy, and have been among officials favoring raising rates sooner to prevent inflation and financial-instability pressures from building.
“It’s important that real people are also representing the public and Federal Reserve policy making,” Sipp said. “We want publication of the names that are under consideration so that we know who they are, that it’s not just a puff of white smoke and suddenly we have a new” president.
Search Firms
The Philadelphia Fed has hired executive search firm Korn/Ferry International and said yesterday that the Los Angeles-based company has set up an e-mail address -- PhiladelphiaFedPresident@KornFerry.com -- to receive inquiries.
The Dallas Fed announced two days ago that it hired Heidrick & Struggles International Inc. to seek a replacement for Fisher.
Economist Josh Bivens, research and policy director at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, told reporters yesterday that the Fed’s willingness to arrange the meeting was “incredibly encouraging” because the central bank “is one of the most important institutions in the world but few Americans know it.”
While the unemployment rate has declined to a six-year low, there remains “too large a gap between today and a healthy economy,” he said, adding that stakes are highest for disadvantaged groups, including African-Americans. Their unemployment rate tends to be twice as high as the broader U.S. level both “in good times and in bad,” Bivens said.
The rate was 10.9 percent in October, and rose to a 26-year high of 16.9 percent in March 2010, Labor Department data show. The rate for whites was 4.8 percent last month.
Wider Inequality
Yellen, a labor market economist for most of her three-decade career in government and academia, has shown concern for people who aren’t fully benefiting from a stronger economy. Last month, in a speech in Boston, she questioned whether widening inequality is “compatible with values rooted in our nation’s history.”
Since becoming chair in February, Yellen has focused attention on those who have been left behind after five years of economic expansion. In March, she told a community development conference in Chicago the Fed hadn’t done enough to combat unemployment and cited local residents who have struggled with joblessness.
In August, the Center for Popular Democracy brought low-wage workers to the Fed’s annual monetary policy symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, where they spoke briefly with Yellen on the sidelines of the event and met with Kansas City Fed President Esther George, who also wants to raise rates sooner.
The activists arrived at the Fed wearing the same shirts that they wore when they gathered in the lobby of the Jackson Lake Lodge during the symposium: bright green T-shirts emblazoned with the question “What Recovery?”
Source
Why Diversity Matters at the Federal Reserve
There’s no question that race and gender matter in determining people’s economic fortunes. African Americans’ unemployment rate is typically twice as high as that of whites. The racial wealth gap...
There’s no question that race and gender matter in determining people’s economic fortunes. African Americans’ unemployment rate is typically twice as high as that of whites. The racial wealth gap has widened since the financial crisis, when African Americans and Hispanics—who had a disproportionate share of their wealth tied up in their homes—disproportionately suffered from subprime loans and foreclosures. The Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances finds that the median wealth of a white family in 2013, the last year studied, was $134,008. For Hispanics, it was just $13,900. For African-Americans, $11,184. And as everyone knows, or should, women still make 79 cents for every dollar men make.
These deficiencies are more likely to be ignored when our most important economic policymakers don’t reflect the faces of all Americans. Yesterday, 127 Democratic members of Congress wrote to Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen about the lack of diversity at the central bank. “The leadership across the Federal Reserve System remains overwhelmingly and disproportionately white and male,” the letter notes. Led by Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, this high-level challenge also castigates the Fed for being dominated by former and current executives of financial institutions and large corporations, rather than people with backgrounds in academia, labor, or consumer organizations.
The voices of those left behind most egregiously in the economic recovery are simply not present in Fed deliberations.
Momentum to fix the Fed’s diversity problem grew on Thursday when Hillary Clinton endorsed the viewpoints expressed in the letter. Her spokesperson Jesse Ferguson told The Washington Post, “Secretary Clinton believes that the Fed needs to be more representative of America as a whole and that commonsense reforms—like getting bankers off the boards of regional Federal Reserve banks—are long overdue.”
The Fed’s lack of diversity might actually violate the law. Under the Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, regional Federal Reserve bank directors are required to “represent the public, without discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, or national origin, and with due but not exclusive consideration to the interests of agriculture, commerce, industry, services, labor, and consumers.” The original Federal Reserve Act only mandated representation from agriculture, commerce, and industry.
It’s unclear what enforcement of that 1977 requirement would look like. But clearly the Fed isn’t living up to it. The members of Congress rely on a February report from the Center for Popular Democracy, organizers of the “Fed Up” coalition, which has pressured the central bank to adopt pro-worker policies. According to their figures, 83 percent of Federal Reserve board members are white, and 72 percent are male. Among the twelve regional Fed bank presidents, only Neel Kashkari of the Minneapolis Fed is non-white, and only Esther George (Kansas City) and Loretta Mester (Cleveland) are female. And among voting members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), which makes monetary policy decisions, it’s even worse: All ten currently serving members are white.
The lack of occupational diversity is also pretty stark. The Center for Popular Democracy studied the regional feds’ boards of directors, finding that 39 percent represent financial institutions. The Fed’s role as a key supervisor of major banks makes this highly suspect—especially considering there is no mandate for financial interests to be represented on the Fed board.
Another 29 percent of the Fed regional directors represent commerce and industry. Only 11 percent come from community, labor, consumer, or academic organizations. Even representation from the service sector, which has an overly non-white workforce and has expanded in recent years, has shrunk as a percentage of Fed bank-board members relative to 2010, the last time the boards’ makeup was studied.
It’s unusual for members of Congress to take such a public stand on the Federal Reserve, given their mindfulness of central bank independence. But they are recognizing that the lack of diversity has an important effect on economic policy. A more diverse Fed might pay more attention to how far communities of color are from full employment when deciding whether or not to raise interest rates, which they are now deliberating. A more diverse Fed might not be as consumed with the concerns of finance and industry, and their desire to keep inflation and wages low. It might consider how banks have traditionally preyed on communities of color, and target its supervision activities to reflect that.
The voices of those left behind most egregiously in the recovery are simply not present in Fed deliberations. The members of Congress cited a recent blog post by former Minneapolis Fed president Narayana Kocherlakota, who said that “there is one key source of economic difference in American life that is likely underemphasized in FOMC deliberations: race.” Kocherlakota searched transcripts of FOMC meetings from 2010 (the most recent ones released). That entire year, African American unemployment stood at 15.5 percent or above. But, writes Kocherlakota, “Based on that search, my conclusion is that there was no reference in the meetings to labor market conditions among African Americans.”
Traditionally, public pressure on the central bank has come from the right, from the likes of Ron Paul’s “End the Fed” movement. Progressives were largely absent from the conversation, despite the Fed’s central economic role. No more: Thursday’s letter to Yellen is the biggest success yet for the Fed Up campaign, launched two years ago to amplify the voices of communities that didn’t benefit from the recovery. The campaign has brought together labor and community groups to demand that the Fed take its mandate to maximize employment seriously—taking into account all communities, not just affluent ones. And now Fed Up’s views have become dominant in the Democratic Party.
In addition to the hefty names of Sanders and Warren, co-signers include 116 House Democrats, more than half of the caucus, as well as the ranking members of the Financial Services Committee (Maxine Waters) and the Monetary Policy Subcommittee (Gwen Moore), the committees with oversight of the Fed. And Clinton’s endorsement of Fed Up’s sentiment puts most of the ideological spectrum of the party on the side of reform.
But what does reform look like? The Center for Popular Democracy’s February report recommends that each regional board contain at least one member from a labor group, a community organization, academia, and a community bank or credit union. A separate reform proposal from former Yellen advisor Andrew Levin includes a number of ideas, including banning anyone affiliated with a financial institution from serving as a Fed director.
These ideas can be congressionally mandated. That will take time, of course, but the movement has begun to get Democrats off the sidelines to pressure the Fed. When Yellen testified before the House and Senate in February, giving her semi-annual Monetary Policy Report, she received questions about the lack of diversity from 15 different members of Congress. Yellen expressed concern that, among other things, no African American has ever led a regional Federal Reserve bank in U.S. history.
The fact that political pressure can make a difference was again signified by the quick response of a Fed spokesman to Thursday’s letter. The Fed statement said the central bank has “focused considerable attention in recent years on recruiting directors with diverse backgrounds and experience.” Those aspirations have not yet translated into results, however, even after the Fed established an internal diversity office in 2011.
It’s hard for the traditionally cloistered Fed to ignore concerns when they come from high-level Democrats. And just having ordinary workers in the public debate already diversifies the Fed, in a sense. No longer can they simply be responsive to Wall Street without further discussion.
BY DAVID DAYEN
Source
Janet Yellen, the first woman Fed chair, proved the skeptics wrong and got fired anyway
Janet Yellen, the first woman Fed chair, proved the skeptics wrong and got fired anyway
On February 3, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, the first woman to lead the central bank and likely the most qualified nominee ever for the post, will exit the Fed, leaving a legacy described...
On February 3, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, the first woman to lead the central bank and likely the most qualified nominee ever for the post, will exit the Fed, leaving a legacy described as “near perfection” and with an “A” grade from a majority of economists.
And yet in 2014, the US Senate confirmed Yellen by a vote of 56-26, the lowest number of “yes” votes a confirmed Fed chair has ever received.
Read the full article here.
Florence District One Candidate Questionnaire: Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr.
Florence District One Candidate Questionnaire: Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr.
The Morning News recently sent out a questionnaire to the candidates running for the Florence School District One Board of Trustees. Here are the answers from Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr. who is running...
The Morning News recently sent out a questionnaire to the candidates running for the Florence School District One Board of Trustees. Here are the answers from Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr. who is running for another term representing District 4; he faces one challenger.
1. What do you feel you have contributed during your current tenure on the board?
My background as a lifelong resident of the Florence Community, and working closely within the region has given me a clear sense of both the educational and economic issues and needs that we face. Over the past 15 years, as a member of the Florence School District 1 Board of Trustees, I have ensured that I have been knowledgeable of the issues, needs, and concerns of my constituents, and I have represented and I have been a voice even during turbulent of challenges. Further, I understand that leadership must be politically astute to represent the views and concerns of those you represent even though others may not agree, or do not care, and only want to advance their own agenda that is only best for “their community” and not all communities. I have attained the Level 6 on the SCSBA, which is the highest level for a school board member, and presently I serve as the President of the SC Caucus of Black School Board Members which provides dialogue on educational issues and concerns to address the full growth and development of Black and other minority children, and I am also affiliated with the National Local Progress Movement which focuses on progressive thought and insight for local officials
2. What are the issues that you think need to be addressed?
Student achievement, and recognizing the individuality and creativity of each student’s needs
Recognizing that the public schools are becoming more diverse
Equity in funding for all schools
Special Education
Technology infusion and integration for all students
Early Childhood
Career Clusters and Pathways- which is more opportunities for expansion of vocational and career center programs
Funding throughout the district
Special Education and meeting the diverse needs of students, to include the increase diagnosis of Autism
Impact of poverty, mental health, and other risk factors have on today’s learners
Lack of teachers
New and innovative approaches to teacher development and recruitment in order to develop and retain a diverse, qualified, and effective 21st Century pool of educators and staff
3. How have you sought to make changes in those areas?
By asking for items to be placed on the agenda, and engaging staff and others throughout the state and country on best practices and promising practices to ensure that we are utilizing the best program for all of our children. Also, researching the issues and knowing the national agenda. I have always committed myself to being engaged and welcoming to constituents and having a listening ear to see what the children are saying and feeling. As an educator and advocate for children and families, I always empathize and evaluate how I would feel when making decisions and question if policies or procedures that are guiding discussion or the direction of the Board are relevant today. I have demonstrated that my approach to knowing what the educational needs and issues are not based on perception or a one way train rail.
4. What specific program are you most proud of in FSD1 and why?
Small Learning Communities at our schools to decrease class sizes
Implementation of the Parents As Teachers Program to address 0-3, to provide parents with skills and supports to ensure that their children are ready to enter school
Montessori which provides learners the opportunity to be creative
Career and Technology which provides students the opportunity to enter the work place upon graduation
The work that was done by the previous Discipline Code Committees which has ensured the district recognized inequalities and unfair discipline practices and the underutilization and non-utilization of support services for students with complex needs and behaviors. This dialogue that I led was the foundation for the present Code of Conduct which will have to be assessed over the next few years to evaluate its effectiveness and impact on student learning and behavior.
Early College which provides students the opportunity to receive college credit and even an Associate Degree when they graduate from high school
Present dialogue on a Middle School Concept that has been talked about for years
5. How do you handle inquiries and complaints from the community?
I refer families to the Superintendent’s Office or to the appropriate office for support. I also follow-up with families and community that approach me to ensure that their complaints and inquires have been addressed. I also request items be placed on the agenda for discussion and action.
6. What do you think the role of the board is, in the district and in the community?
The board is responsible for establishing the Vision and Mission for the local school district, and ensuring that the Superintendent has the resources to implement the vision by having good policies and procedures, and good stewards of the district’s Operational Funds and Capital or Building Funds. This role must be student centered and family centered by recognizing the diverse needs of students within our community. Not all students learn in the same manner, thus the board must be aware of such and hold the administration accountable for creating programs and services which will help students achieve and be successful. It is the job of the board to be knowledgeable, and current on educational issues and trends, and not just be a “rubber stamping board” but ask questions, communicate with the public- and not just those who share your personal beliefs and positions.
7. What are your past/other areas of service? (church, civic organizations, etc.)
Professional:
I am an advocate, teacher, educator, trainer, and servant-leader. Presently, I am employed as the Executive Director of Lee County First Steps, and the Lee County Adult Education Family Literacy Coordinator.
Educational attainments include:
1990 graduate of the historic Wilson High School
Bachelor of Arts Degree in Political Science and a concentration in Secondary Education Graduate from Winthrop University
Master of Arts Degree in Management from Webster University
Education Specialist Degree Specialization in Leadership in Educational Administration from Capella University
Completion of the Non Profit Leadership Institute from Francis Marion University
Completion of the Francis Marion Rural Leadership Institute
Church:
My faith walk began at my home church, Snow Hill Baptist Church where I was active during my youth, and I was licensed to preach at Maxwell Baptist Church where I was Sunday School Teacher, Sunday School Superintendent, Minister of Christian Education and Membership Services, Boys Scout Troop Master. Presently I am a member and ordained Elder of the Gospel (2010) and serve as an Associate Minister and have served as a Youth Advisor at the Greater Gethsemane Apostolic Church in Florence, South Carolina.
Past and Present Civic:
Gate City Masonic Lodge 276
Florence 1 Local Education Association (SCEA) Treasurer, President
Weed and Seed Steering Committee
Queenie’s Helping Hands Ministry
Angel Tree Prison Ministry
The School Foundation Board
Pee Dee International Festival Planning Committee
PTA (North Vista Elementary, Williams Middle School)
PTSA (Wilson High School)
By Melissa Rollins
Source
A New Law Is Letting Uber Drivers Unionize
After ride-hailing companies descended on Seattle and began slashing drivers’ pay, the City Council stepped in with a novel solution.
As the gig economy grows, companies like Airbnb and...
After ride-hailing companies descended on Seattle and began slashing drivers’ pay, the City Council stepped in with a novel solution.
As the gig economy grows, companies like Airbnb and Uber are challenging cities by reshaping entire industries, often harming workers in the process. The challenge for progressive-minded legislators has been that existing regulations have often proven inadequate. Recently, however, local policymakers have begun proposing innovative ways to cope with the changes.
In Seattle, this battle has played out around ride-hailing services Uber and Lyft. When the companies were first legalized in the city in 2014, they presented themselves as a needed transport service that let drivers make money outside of the rigid regulations imposed on the taxi industry. Those claims lost credibility over the next year, however, as Uber drivers’ pay was slashed from $2 per mile to about $1.20 per mile. As cuts deepened, drivers found it increasingly hard to make an income—and many taxi firms found it almost impossible to compete.
We clearly needed a solution. Although collective bargaining had never been tried in the gig economy, a Seattle labor lawyer named Dmitri Iglitzin who’d been mulling the possibility for years approached me with a groundbreaking idea: Rather than tinkering around the edges with new regulations, why not let for-hire drivers unionize and set their own terms?
The premise was intriguing: If Uber and Lyft are going to claim that drivers are independent contractors, then let’s take them at their word and insist that drivers be allowed to negotiate the terms of their contract with these multibillion-dollar companies. While federal law preempts localities from encouraging unionization for private-sector employees, independent contractors are exempt. We believe this means that cities can allow drivers the right to collectively bargain to negotiate a better quality of life and a more reliable transportation service, in a way that regulations cannot.
The timing couldn’t have been better. In the year after Uber and Lyft first began operation, the narrative in Seattle had shifted: The companies, once seen as upstart innovators, came to be seen as major corporations intent on asserting power to the detriment of workers.
Uber and Lyft drivers had already set up an association of app-based drivers through the Teamsters, which represented taxi drivers in Seattle. United, they were starting to raise their voices. They organized rallies and protests highlighting their struggles and testified at City Hall about their limited pay, long hours, and arbitrary deactivation. Growing popular outrage turned up the heat.
Surprisingly, even as criticism rose, both Uber and Lyft did little to fight back. It wasn’t because the companies didn’t have the will or capacity. Only a year earlier, in 2014, they had put up a major fight after the Seattle City Council proposed placing a cap on for-hire vehicles.
This time though, it was clear that they could not win over public opinion. As driver earnings spiraled downward, it was hard for anybody to deny that there was a problem with the companies’ treatment of their workers—and that something needed to be done about it.
Rather than tinkering around the edges with new regulations, why not let for-hire drivers unionize and set their own terms?
In December 2015, the Seattle City Council unanimously passed a law letting Uber and Lyft drivers bargain collectively and establish a process for binding arbitration. In coming months, we will finalize the rules and determine which union or association can represent drivers, who can then vote on whether they want to be represented or not. The US Chamber of Commerce is already suing, hoping that the courts determine that federal law preempts the Seattle law.
Even though contract negotiations are months away, the idea has already caught on in other cities and states. New York and Cincinnati are considering regulations that would expand collective bargaining rights to some gig-economy workers. And in California a similar law was introduced in the State Assembly (although it’s been withdrawn for the moment).
The on-demand economy is delivering important new benefits to consumers. But if we are going to build a more equitable society, we’ll need rules of the road to ensure workers are treated with dignity. Cities have a powerful role in realizing that vision.
By MIKE O'BRIEN
Source
As the federal government fails the people of Puerto Rico, local governments and states must step up
As the federal government fails the people of Puerto Rico, local governments and states must step up
Given the likelihood that even more Puerto Ricans will resettle on the mainland the Center for Popular Democracy and Local Progress have published a policy guide, the first of its kind, offering a...
Given the likelihood that even more Puerto Ricans will resettle on the mainland the Center for Popular Democracy and Local Progress have published a policy guide, the first of its kind, offering a roadmap for cities and states to address the immediate needs of their new constituents.
Read the full article here.
It’s Not Just Low Pay Stressing Out Part-Time Workers
Bill Moyers - July 24, 2014, by Neha Tara Mehta - Besides struggling to make ends meet because of low wages, millions of part-time workers in America also face uncertainty over when they will be...
Bill Moyers - July 24, 2014, by Neha Tara Mehta - Besides struggling to make ends meet because of low wages, millions of part-time workers in America also face uncertainty over when they will be called in to work. Irregular schedules and last-minute notice make it hard for these workers to find other work, go to school and make arrangements for child care or caring for aging parents.
As The New York Times reported last week:
About 27.4 million Americans work part time. The number of those part-timers who would prefer to work full time has nearly doubled since 2007, to 7.5 million. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, 47 percent of part-time hourly workers ages 26 to 32 receive a week or less of advance notice for their schedule.
In a study of the data, two University of Chicago professors found that employers dictated the work schedules for about half of young adults, without their input. For part-time workers, schedules on average fluctuated from 17 to 28 hours a week.
“Frontline managers face pressure to keep costs down, but they really don’t have much control over wages or benefits,” said Susan J. Lambert, a University of Chicago professor who interpreted the data. “What they have control over is employee hours.”
According to the National Women’s Law Center, food service workers experience a 70 percent average variation of work hours every month. For retail workers, the variation is 50 percent and for janitors and housekeepers, it’s 40 percent.
Lawmakers across the country are beginning to notice how irregular schedules complicate the lives of part-time workers, and are taking measures to address the problem. Employees of federal agencies now have the right to request work schedule flexibilities. Workers in San Francisco and Vermont can ask for a more flexible or predictable work schedule. In a report released in June, New York City comptroller Scott M. Stringer made a case for a legislation that would give employees the chance to make such requests “without fear of reprisal.”
Congress is swinging into action on this issue as well. On Tuesday, Representatives George Miller and Rosa DeLauro introduced the Schedules That Work Act. Miller admits that the bill may meet with opposition, but thinks that it will highlight “often callous scheduling practices.”
The Guardian reports that another version of the bill is brewing in the Senate:
Senators Tom Harkin and Elizabeth Warren are co-sponsoring of the Senate’s version of the bill. Carrie Gleason, co-founder of Retail Action Project, said [that] Warren will introduce the Senate version in upcoming weeks.
A single mom working two jobs should know if her hours are being canceled before she arranges for daycare and drives halfway across town to show up at work,” said Warren. “This is about some basic fairness in work scheduling so that both employees and employers have more certainty and can get the job done.”
Although some businesses are saying the bills would represent government overreach, the clothing store Zara has already promised to start giving its part-time employees two weeks notice on their work schedules.
Source
Its Integrity Questioned, SUNY Institute Retreats From Politically Tinged Study
The Chronicle of Higher Education - April 28, 2014, by Paul Basken - The State University of New York’s Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government is backing away from a politically divisive...
The Chronicle of Higher Education - April 28, 2014, by Paul Basken - The State University of New York’s Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government is backing away from a politically divisive report critical of a worker’s-rights law, admitting that the industry-financed analysis has multiple major flaws that undermine its central finding.
The report, published in February, criticizes New York State’s so-called Scaffold Law, which holds contractors and property owners legally liable for on-site injuries and accidents. The analysis suffers from "really big weaknesses," said the institute’s director, Thomas L. Gais, who added that he considers the report as not officially a product of his institute. The key analytical section of the report "is just really awful," he said.
The Rockefeller Institute prides itself as a provider of unbiased and empirical policy analysis. Defenders of the Scaffold Law, however, have complained that the institute tainted itself by accepting an $82,000 payment from a business group with construction-industry supporters to produce the report.
The report is "junk" and "fundamentally biased," said the Center for Popular Democracy and the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, two groups representing unionized workers and immigrants.
The case has shined a spotlight on the question of whether universities and their research institutes, as declining public financing leaves them increasingly reliant on private-sector support, are able to provide policy makers with objective technical advice.
There are hundreds of such institutes at universities around the country, and it’s often possible to "predict the policy outcomes from where their support comes from," said Sheldon Krimsky, a professor of urban and environmental policy and planning at Tufts University who writes about bias in research.
A ‘Quality-Control Issue’
Mr. Gais, a social scientist who has led the Rockefeller Institute for four years, adamantly denied there was any bias in the report on behalf of the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York. The alliance has long opposed the Scaffold Law, but Mr. Gais said he never expected to get any repeat business from the industry-affiliated group. "We got the money no matter what we wrote," he said.
The report instead suffered from what Mr. Gais called a "quality-control issue," in which a relatively new institute researcher, Michael R. Hattery, delivered it to the Lawsuit Reform Alliance without its being thoroughly reviewed at the institute.
Another major problem with the 89-page report, Mr. Gais said, lies with a section that uses a flawed statistical analysis to make the "counterintuitive" argument that New York’s worker-safety law actually leaves workers less safe.
That section’s author, R. Richard Geddes, an associate professor of policy analysis and management at Cornell University, also has drawn criticism within his own institution. At least two members of the labor-studies department at Cornell wrote newspaper op-eds criticizing Mr. Geddes’s work.
One, Richard W. Hurd, a professor of industrial and labor relations, wrote that Mr. Geddes had "misused sophisticated statistical techniques and produced inaccurate results." Lee H. Adler, an instructor of labor and employment law at Cornell, wrote that the episode reflects more than a century of attempts by business leaders to deprive workers of the fundamental right to sue.
Mr. Geddes emotionally denounced the criticism in an interview with The Chronicle, saying he had absolutely not been influenced by the source of money and describing his work as a state-of-the-art analysis of who actually gets injured on construction sites in New York State.
"I find that offensive, I find that deeply offensive, that they said my work is biased, after we spent hours and hours collecting the best data we could find," Mr. Geddes said.
A Valid Concern
Among its arguments, the report compares worker-injury records in New York and Illinois, which repealed a similar worker-protection law in 1995. The study found that both accident rates and costs declined in Illinois after repeal.
The labor groups said the study’s shortfalls included a failure to take into account situations where higher union-membership rates would encourage workers to report accidents, and workplaces where greater percentages of immigrants might depress reporting statistics.
Mr. Geddes said the critics bore the responsibility of showing how such factors would substantially have affected the report’s conclusions. Mr. Hattery said he also stood by the report but recognized that the possible effect of those omissions was a valid concern that should be assessed in future studies.
Mr. Geddes said he recognized some drawbacks in a system where academic institutes rely more heavily on private supporters. "It has made it harder because people without any evidence at all, any support, are attacking, are saying you’re biased," he said. "I find that profoundly offensive."
Mr. Hattery, however, said he welcomed the process now unfolding. "I don’t at all resent or have a problem with these kinds of questions’ being asked," he said. "When you think you have integrity and are humble and a good conscience, you’re probably in trouble."
Source
National Poll Shows Overwhelming Support for Reigning in Charter Schools
02.29.2016
Washington, D.C.—As the number of charter schools continues to rise, few states are paying adequate attention to how to hold these schools accountable to...
02.29.2016
Washington, D.C.—As the number of charter schools continues to rise, few states are paying adequate attention to how to hold these schools accountable to parents, communities, and taxpayers. Now, new poll results released today by In the Public Interest and the Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) show that Americans embrace proposals to reform the way charter schools are authorized and managed.
The poll shows overwhelming national support for initiatives to strengthen charter school accountability and transparency, improve teacher training and qualifications, prevent fraud, serve high-need students, and ensure that neighborhood public schools are not adversely affected.
“A severe lack of public oversight and real accountability has created what are essentially two separate school districts in many places, each competing for students and funding,” said Donald Cohen, Executive Director of In the Public Interest. “This is increasing inequality in public education, and these results confirm that parents and communities want to fix that.”
The poll’s key findings include:
Overwhelming majorities, as high as 92%, back proposals to strengthen transparency and accountability, improve teacher training and qualifications, implement anti-fraud measures, ensure high-need students are served, and make sure neighborhood public schools are not adversely affected.
92% of voters support requiring companies and organizations that manage charter schools to open board meetings to parents and the public.
90% of voters support requiring companies and organizations that manage charter schools to release to parents and the public how they spend taxpayer money.
“School choice” ranks last in a list of the biggest concerns voters have for K-12 education, with only 8% listing it as a concern.
Far more popular than “school choice” or unaccountable charter schools is the concept of community schools, which serve as community hubs, ensuring that every student and their family gets the opportunity to succeed no matter what zip code they live in.
A statewide poll of Colorado voters showed that 69% rate the quality of education at public schools in their neighborhood excellent or good—an even higher percentage than those that feel that way nationally. Colorado voters also overwhelmingly support proposals to reform the way charter schools are authorized and managed.
The national poll of 1,000 registered voters was conducted by GBA Strategies January 5-11, 2016 on behalf of In the Public Interest and CPD. A memo detailing the poll can be found here. The statewide poll of 500 registered voters in Colorado was conducted January 10-13, 2016. A memo detailing the Colorado poll can be found here.
Kyle Serrette, Director of Education at CPD, said, “State lawmakers have created charter laws without meaningful oversight provisions. The result? Over $100 million in taxpayer dollars have been lost to fraud, waste, or mismanagement by charter officials and over 100 thousand children currently attend charter schools that are failing to meet the needs of children. It’s time for lawmakers to add stronger oversight provisions before more money is lost and more children are enrolled in failing charter schools.”
For more information on the poll results, please contact Jeremy Mohler at jmohler@inthepublicinterest.org or 202-429-5091, or Asya Pikovsky at apikovsky@populardemocracy.org or 207-522-2442.
In the Public Interest is a research and policy center committed to promoting the values, vision, and agenda for the common good and democratic control of public goods and services.
The Center for Popular Democracy (CPD) 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
###
Contacts:
Jeremy Mohler, jmohler@inthepublicinterest.org, 202-429-5091
Asya Pikovsky, apikovsky@populardemocracy.org, 207-522-2442
Report slams Louisiana charter school oversight
The Times-Picayune - 05-08-2015 - Louisiana understaffs its charter schools oversight offices and, instead of proactively investigating...
The Times-Picayune - 05-08-2015 - Louisiana understaffs its charter schools oversight offices and, instead of proactively investigating these schools, relies on charters' own reports and whistleblowers to uncover problems, according to a report released Tuesday (May 12) by the Center for Popular Democracy and the Coalition for Community Schools. That allows theft, cheating and mismanagement to happen, such as the $26,000 stolen from Lake Area New Tech High and the years of special education violations alleged at Lagniappe Academies.
The report also casts a skeptical eye on the veracity of the data that Louisiana uses to calculate the performance scores that keep charters open and determine their renewal terms. And it faults the state for closing struggling charters instead of intervening to improve them.
The Center for Popular Democracy's partners include the American Federation of Teachers, which has an uneasy relationship with charters, and the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, which studies charter school oversight. Kyle Serrette, the center's director of educational justice campaigns, said its parent members had children in charter and conventional public schools.
That said, one of the report's recommendations is to "impose a moratorium on new charter schools until the state oversight system is adequately reformed."
The Louisiana-based Coalition for Community Schools opposes charter schools outright and filed a civil rights complaint against the state Education Department in 2014. That complaint also included a demand to freeze chartering in New Orleans.
The two groups' report said Louisiana charters could suffer from "tens of millions of fraud in the 2013-14 school year alone," based on the methodology of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. In that time, employees of three New Orleans charter schools stole about $110,000, and two charter operators were accused of meddling with retirement payments.
Oversight agencies play almost no role in helping charter schools improve academic outcomes."
"The state has invested heavily in increasing the number of charter schools while failing to create a solid regulatory framework that truly protects students, families and taxpayers," the authors write. Furthermore, "oversight agencies play almost no role in helping charter schools improve academic outcomes. ... The state has no system in place to provide a path to high-quality academics for all struggling charter schools."
Charter schools are publicly funded but run by independent non-profit boards. They control their own curriculum and hiring but must meet academic and operational standards to stay open. The state Education Department oversees most of Louisiana's 130-plus charters; local school systems oversee the rest.
Read the report
However, as of December, the Education Department's charter audit team consisted of only three people, according to a critical December report from the Louisiana legislative auditor's office. Education Superintendent John White defended his team at the time, saying they reviewed charter schools' audits, among other activities.
Tuesday's paper says that isn't enough. Not only do charters hire their own accountants to conduct annual audits, but the audits are not designed to prevent or detect fraud. Indeed, reports typically contain a disclaimer saying they are not expressing an opinion on fraud controls. The legislative auditor's office might dig deeper but rarely does so, the report states.
"The only audits Louisiana charter schools routinely undergo are the ones they pay for themselves," the authors write.
The report faults the Education Department for not spending enough time on-site at charters. Charters receive regular visits and reviews from state inspectors, and Louisiana Recovery School District officials said their own findings of wrongdoing at Lagniappe Academies in New Orleans showed that their oversight procedures worked.
The authors of Tuesday's report disagreed. The state's 2013-14 review of Lagniappe Academies gave full points for special education, the two organizations said, and it was only later that state inspectors uncovered extensive reports of violations during that time period.
"The situation at Lagniappe shows exactly the problems with the state's oversight structure for charter schools," the report says. "The state relies on a largely self-reporting oversight structure that is easily manipulated by the schools themselves."
The authors doubt the accuracy of the test scores that are used to measure charters' academic performance, writing that the data "is vulnerable to manipulation."
Finally, the authors disagree with the state's readiness to close charters, including Lagniappe.
"Clearly there are times when problems are significant enough that a school must be closed. Yet, the current intervention (process) is designed to make school closure a normal and common part of the state's accountability system," the authors write. "The system needs to be updated to produce more stability for Louisiana children." In six years, more than 1,700 New Orleans students have seen their charter schools close, according to the report.
Louisiana's laws are "designed to set a high standard but not to help," Serrette said.
The state does at times intervene instead of closing schools, although this is not mentioned in the report. The Recovery School District has chosen successful charter operators to take over failing schools, for example, and White directed Lycée Français to find a new chief executive and assigned it a consultant team. Lycée has gone on to make a B grade, and its charter contract has been extended.
The report's recommendations include:
Require fraud audits every three years, to be conducted by the state legislative auditor's office
Train charter staff and boards on preventing fraud
Hire more staff for the legislative auditor's office and charter school oversight teams
Require "mandatory, hands-on, long-term, strategic support" for charters in trouble
Go beyond test scores when calculating school letter grades
Create local committees, including neighbors and parents, to design schools that serve the needs of a community
Coordinate social services at and around schools
Release raw testing data to the public.
Some of these issues are not unique to charters. Louisiana's conventional public schools also face pressure to keep test scores high: If they don't, they may be taken over by the state. There have been numerous examples of corruption and fraud in school boards and systems. Serrette said it was likely Louisiana's regular school systems needed stronger oversight as well.
Source: Nola.com
13 hours ago
2 days ago