Mayor, council declare paid sick leave 'do-over'
Crain's New York Business - January 17, 2014, by Andrew Hawkins - Acting on one of his main campaign promises just three weeks into his administration, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a bill to...
Crain's New York Business - January 17, 2014, by Andrew Hawkins - Acting on one of his main campaign promises just three weeks into his administration, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a bill to significantly expand the city's paid sick leave law to apply to businesses with as few as five employees.
Flanked by his new partner atop city government, Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, as well as a majority of the city's new elected leaders, the mayor effectively declared a "do-over" on paid sick days. They will re-introduce the original bill, which lacks many of the current law's concessions that had been included by former Council Speaker Christine Quinn at the behest of the business community.
"Paid sick leave legislation works for everyone," Mr. de Blasio said, standing outside an Ecuadorian restaurant in Bushwick, in response to a reporter's question about concerns from small businesses. "It improves productivity, it improves the retention of workers, and it creates a better environment for customers."
The new bill would apply to every business in the city with five or more employees. There will be no phase-in period (the current law to take effect April 1 would only apply to businesses with 20 or more employees, and drop to a 15-employee threshold after one year), nor will it have "economic trigger" language that would delay the legislation if the economy slumps; Ms. Quinn had insisted on such a provision in the law that passed last year.
An exemption for the manufacturing sector will be removed, and grandparents, aunts and uncles will be added to the definition of family members allowed to take days off to care for ill children. The Department of Consumer Affairs will still be the enforcing agency, even though it currently lacks the capacity of a regulatory body, not to mention a commissioner appointed by Mr. de Blasio.
"This is basically the original legislation that for three years had a supermajority [in the council]," Mr. de Blasio said, referring to a veto-proof majority.
Ms. Mark-Viverito, fresh off her win of the speaker's race, said there would be committee hearings, but seemed to imply that there had been enough debate already.
"There was no deal struck," she said bluntly. "This is a conversation that has been going on for many years."
There was some grumbling from Republicans in the City Council. Council Minority Leader Vincent Ignizio said the bill was "well-intentioned," but questioned the timing of the announcement.
"Ultimately we're putting an additional imposition on small business," he said. "And it's just going to force small businesses to reduce their workforce."
Mr. de Blasio said that with the passage of the new bill, paid sick leave benefits will be extended to an additional 355,000 workers in the city, mostly in the retail and food-service industries.
Business groups that for years fought the bill seemed resigned in their reactions that a new progressive era had descended on city government. The Manhattan and Brooklyn chambers of commerce both released statements applauding the mayor and City Council for addressing the needs of workers in New York.
"We do continue to be concerned with the costs of doing business in New York City and the burdens placed on the backs of the small business owners," said Nancy Ploeger, president of the Manhattan chamber.
Michael Weber, co-chair of the Hospitality Practice Group at Littler Mendelson, the nation's largest labor and employment law firm, echoed that sentiment.
"It makes it even more difficult for small businesses to be profitable and to be competitive," he said of the bill.
But James Copeland, director of the Manhattan Institute's Center for Legal Policy, said the measure would still ban employees from taking private legal action against their employers.
"In other words, you're going to require that there be an administrative action, not to get private lawyers suing businesses on this stuff," he said. "That's actually better than some other cities that have this type of legislation."
Mr. de Blasio argued that other cities with similar laws experienced no negative ramifications. "What we've seen in Seattle, San Francisco, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, more recently Philadelphia—all over the country you see this consistent movement where states and localities are moving in this direction because it's been proven to work," he said.
But in San Francisco, which has a universal paid sick leave law, studies suggest the impact has strained some businesses. According to a study conducted in 2011 by the Institute for Women's Policy Research, almost one third of businesses affected by the ordinance had some difficulty administering the changes and roughly 14% saw a marked decrease in their profitability after implementation.
Still, Mr. de Blasio boasted that New York's law would be "the strongest in the nation," and said that this and other policies signaled a new direction for City Hall.
"This City Hall is going to be on the side of working families," he said.
Source
Escuelas charter en Nueva York requieren mayor escrutinio
Las escuelas independientes (charter) han proliferado en las últimas dos décadas con repetidas promesas de mejorar la calidad de la educación. Su ascenso ha sido tan rápido que hoy en día, el...
Las escuelas independientes (charter) han proliferado en las últimas dos décadas con repetidas promesas de mejorar la calidad de la educación. Su ascenso ha sido tan rápido que hoy en día, el número de alumnos matriculados en muchas escuelas públicas está disminuyendo vertiginosamente, y se tiene previsto que en la próxima década algunos distritos pierdan hasta un tercio de sus estudiantes con relación a principios de siglo. Muchos distritos afectados por esta tendencia se están viendo forzados a despedir maestros, enfermeros y otro personal importante que apoya a los alumnos que quedan en las escuelas públicas.
La ley federal Every Student Succeeds, promulgada a fines del año pasado, no hará sino acelerar esta tendencia. Se proyecta que la ley aumentará al doble el gasto en escuelas charter durante la próxima década.
Sin embargo, a pesar de la explosión en ese sector, la supervisión se ha quedado atrás y, hoy en día, hay cada vez más motivos de preocupación. En un estado tras otro, las investigaciones han revelado mala administración, abusos y fraude descarado en las escuelas charter, incluso en aquellas elogiadas por sus buenos resultados. Una encuesta reciente de escuelas charter en todo el país realizada por el Center for Popular Democracy, descubrió que han despilfarrado la asombrosa cantidad de $216 millones desde 1994.
La ciudad de Nueva York no ha sido inmune al problema. En la extensa red de KIPP, por ejemplo, la escuela pagó casi $70,000 para llevar al personal en viajes de varios días al Caribe para fines presuntamente educativos, pero se detectaron pocas actividades de desarrollo profesional durante la estadía, según descubrió una auditoría en el año 2006.
En 2010, Joel Klein, secretario del Departamento de Educación, ordenó que la East New York Preparatory Charter School cerrara sus puertas después de que se reveló que la fundadora y directora de la escuela se había nombrado superintendente y se había dado un aumento de $60,000.
Muchas otras escuelas charter en toda la ciudad enfrentan preguntas sobre gastos cuestionables. El informe del CPD descubrió que muchas escuelas en la ciudad no documentaban sus gastos, no divulgaban casos de conflicto de intereses ni usaban licitaciones competitivas para asegurarse de comprar productos y servicios al mejor precio.
No se puede permitir que continúe esta situación, particularmente porque se tiene previsto que las escuelas charter aumenten exponencialmente en años próximos. El informe del CPD recomienda varias maneras de asegurar que los gastos de dichas escuelas se mantengan en regla, lo que incluye auditorías para detectar y evitar el fraude, y mecanismos para aumentar la transparencia de quienes operan escuelas charter.
Los encargados de dictar la política deben redoblar sus esfuerzos para promulgar medidas de supervisión incluso más estrictas y asegurar que todas las escuelas charter gasten su dinero sensatamente. A no ser que vigilemos este sector más estrechamente, en años próximos podrían desaparecer millones, perjudicando así a estudiantes y padres de familia en toda la ciudad.
By Kyle Serrette
Source
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
One of the women who confronted Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake in a Capitol elevator Friday said she hopes other Republican senators listen to the stories of women who have been sexually assaulted.
...One of the women who confronted Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake in a Capitol elevator Friday said she hopes other Republican senators listen to the stories of women who have been sexually assaulted.
Ana Maria Archila and Maria Gallagher stopped Flake on Friday morning and spent nearly five minutes shouting at the Arizona lawmaker after they learned he had decided to support the US Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Archila said Friday night she was looking for Flake to step up.
Read the article and watch the video here.
Ady Barkan launches new campaign asking everyone to “Be A Hero”
Activist Ady Barkan, who is fighting ALS, is starting a new fight - to get people to vote. He’s asking people to “Be A Hero” and vote for candidates who protect healthcare. Ady tells Ali Velshi...
Activist Ady Barkan, who is fighting ALS, is starting a new fight - to get people to vote. He’s asking people to “Be A Hero” and vote for candidates who protect healthcare. Ady tells Ali Velshi that with all the challenges he faces that if he can get out and vote, everyone can.
Watch the video here.
Poll Finds Voters Rank Lack Of Parental Involvement, Over-Testing As Top Education Problems
iSchoolGuide - April 8, 2015, by Sara Guaglione - According to...
iSchoolGuide - April 8, 2015, by Sara Guaglione - According to a new poll of registered voters, voters ranked lack of parental involvement and over-testing as top issues in U.S. education today.
Other education issues voters ranked included: cuts to funding for programs like art, music, and PE; too many students per class; recruiting first-rate teachers; and poverty and hunger's effect on student learning, according to the poll conducted by In the Public Interest and the Center for Popular Democracy. Interestingly, lack of choice was ranked last, despite the national attention surrounding charter schools.
Studies have shown over the years that parental involvement is crucial to a student's educational achievement. A report from Southwest Educational Development Laboratory titled A New Wave of Evidence concluded back in 2002 that "when schools, families, and community groups work together to support learning, children tend to do better in school, stay in school longer, and like school more."
Over-testing is an issue that has also taken the forefront in the nation's education debates, both in the classroom and in congressional buildings. As we previously reported, nearly every state in the country has an "opt out" movement from new Common Core standardized exams, according to Elizabeth Harris of The New York Times. Concerned parents taking to social media and school board meetings to protest have captured the attention of school officials.
According to the National Education Association's blog, the poll also found that 63 percent of voters rate the quality of education at public schools in their neighborhood as excellent or good and 68 percent hold a favorable view of public school teachers. Only 11 percent had an unfavorable view.
Voters are also more likely to say public schools in their neighborhood are getting better (31 percent) than getting worse (16 percent).
Overall, voters were supportive of charter schools but voted for proposals to make charters more effective, accountable, and transparent to taxpayers. Respondents wanted teacher training and qualifications, anti-fraud provisions, and measures to ensure high-need students are served.
More than 80 percent of voters supported regular audits of charter finances, public disclosure of how taxpayer money is spent, and requirements that charter operators open up their board meetings to parents and the public.
Source
New York's vote to curb stop-and-frisk is another win for civil rights
The Guardian - June 27, 2013, by Brittny Saunders - New York City Council passed two bills designed to guarantee safety and respect for all New Yorkers. The measures were championed by Communities...
The Guardian - June 27, 2013, by Brittny Saunders - New York City Council passed two bills designed to guarantee safety and respect for all New Yorkers. The measures were championed by Communities United for Police Reform, a broad coalition of city groups, and will strengthen the existing ban on police profiling and establish independent oversight of the city's police department.
Today is a new day for New York City. The move reflects a growing alarm over NYPD policies and practices that violate the rights of thousands of New Yorkers and undermine police-community relationships – practices such as the discriminatory use of stop-and-frisk that waste valuable public dollars, while producing no measurable impact on public safety.
Criticism is mounting, not only in the council, but also in federal court, where the legality of these practices is being questioned. Those same questions are echoed in the homes of regular New Yorkers – a majority of whom disapprove of stop-and-frisk and two-thirds of whom support independent oversight of the department. The message is clear: it's time for New York City to turn away from an approach to policing that results in countless rights violations each year, while doing little to reduce crime, according to an analysis by the Center for Constitutional Rights.
The bills passed by city council respond to increasing evidence that in too many cases the department has substituted stereotyping for real police work. A study by the New York Civil Liberties Union found that in 2011, for example, 41.6% of all New Yorkers stopped by the NYPD were black and Latino men between the ages of 14 and 24 years old, despite the fact that that these groups make up a mere 4.7% of the city's population. The department has continued to defend these discriminatory tactics, despite evidence that they do not even succeed on their own terms, failing to take guns off the street or to significantly reduce crime. In more than 99% of all 2011 stops, for example, no gun was retrieved. And in the first three months of 2013, crime dropped, even as stops also tapered, undermining the department's claim that stop-and-frisk is responsible for the city's lowered crime rate.
All of this suggests that the department's continued reliance on discriminatory tactics is not about what it takes to actually keep all New Yorkers (and those visiting the city) safe. Instead, it is about what it takes to convince some in New York City's whiter, wealthier communities that the administration and the department are serious about public safety.
For too long, too many city leaders have accepted discriminatory policing tactics on the assumption that the costs borne by the New Yorkers who are targeted are outweighed by the benefits enjoyed by communities that are not singled out for unlawful and abusive treatment. But the truth is the NYPD's discriminatory policies and practices have indirect negative impacts on all who live in the city, including its white residents. They allow the NYPD to substitute crude and ineffective strategies – like stopping New Yorkers on the basis of their race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or gender expression – for the sophisticated police work one might expect from the nation's largest local law enforcement agency. In the process, they position NYPD officers as adversaries instead of allies of many of the communities they are charged with protecting, reducing willingness to report crime and making all New Yorkers less safe.
It is becoming increasingly apparent, then, that the costs of massive spending on ineffective policing strategies extend beyond those borne by the individuals who are unlawfully targeted in the streets each day. But the most powerful argument for increased NYPD accountability has nothing to do with financial costs and benefits and everything to do with what we, as New Yorkers, allow to be done in our names. And it is about staying true to the city's own legacy of innovation and the conviction that here – if nowhere else – we can find a way to keep everyone safe without sacrificing anyone's rights.
City Council made an important choice today. They stopped endorsing a set of NYPD policies and practices that are discriminatory, ineffective and wasteful. They chose instead to guarantee safety and respect across the boroughs. The choices that they and other city leaders will make in the coming weeks, months and years as these bills are enacted and implemented will have a lasting impact on New York City and hopefully set a better example for cities across the country.
Source
Por qué la ciudad de Nueva York es una ciudad santuario modelo
Tras meses esperanza de que Donald Trump daría marcha atrás respecto a sus promesas de campaña contra los inmigrantes, lo opuesto ha sucedido. En las primeras semanas después de asumir el mando,...
Tras meses esperanza de que Donald Trump daría marcha atrás respecto a sus promesas de campaña contra los inmigrantes, lo opuesto ha sucedido. En las primeras semanas después de asumir el mando, Trump les ha declarado la guerra a los inmigrantes y ha prometido construir un muro en la frontera, aumentar las deportaciones y no dejar entrar a refugiados.
Su programa de gobierno va en contra de todo lo que este país valora y todo lo que la ciudad de New York siempre ha defendido. El compromiso de nuestra ciudad con los inmigrantes es el núcleo de nuestra identidad. Respetamos a los inmigrantes, apoyamos sus aspiraciones y trabajamos arduamente para que sean parte de la esencia de esta ciudad.
Como tal, la ciudad de Nueva York se considera desde hace mucho tiempo una “ciudad santuario”, donde las agencias locales de la ley se rehúsan a ser forzadas a cumplir políticas de inmigración del gobierno federal que perjudican a sus comunidades. Dichas políticas están en vigor desde hace varias décadas. Incluso Rudy Giuliani, cuando fue alcalde, defendió ardientemente las leyes que prohibían que los empleadores de la ciudad de Nueva York reportaran la situación inmigratoria de los neoyorquinos inmigrantes.
Cientos de ciudades, estados y condados siguen políticas similares. Entre ellos se encuentran algunas de las más grandes ciudades del país, como también pueblitos al interior de los estados donde ganó Trump. Las razones son las mismas: las políticas de santuario mantienen a las ciudades más seguras y prósperas al no forzar a los inmigrantes a la clandestinidad y permitirles aportar y llevar vidas plenas.
En años recientes, la ciudad de Nueva York ha ido incluso más lejos. Por medio del trabajo de muchas organizaciones de defensa, incluidas Make the Road New York y el Center for Popular Democracy, los líderes municipales han puesto en vigor una serie de programas que ayudan a los inmigrantes a tener una vida más segura y próspera, y que benefician a la ciudad de muchas maneras.
Por ejemplo, en el año 2014, el alcalde De Blasio dio inicio a IDNYC, el más extenso programa municipal de identificación en el país. Permite que los inmigrantes indocumentados abran cuentas de banco y tengan acceso a servicios sociales necesarios. Tiene un alcance de más de 850,000 personas y se ha hecho popular con una gran variedad de neoyorquinos, entre ellos muchos que no son inmigrantes (como yo).
La ciudad también ofrece excelente acceso lingüístico a los neoyorquinos que aún se encuentran en el proceso de aprender inglés, lo que incluye vitales servicios de interpretación y traducción en todas las agencias de la ciudad para los residentes que necesitan acceso a valiosos servicios municipales.
Para los residentes que enfrentan la traumática posibilidad de deportación y separación de sus familiares, la ciudad también ha creado un innovador programa a fin de proporcionar a los neoyorquinos en procesos migratorios acceso a abogados que tienen mucha experiencia en la defensa contra la deportación. Los clientes del programa tienen probabilidades aproximadamente 1,000 por ciento más altas de ganar sus casos de inmigración que quienes no tienen representación legal.
Con estas medidas, a la ciudad de Nueva York realmente ha elevado el estándar para otras ciudades en todo el país. Y ha sido beneficioso para toda la ciudad. Hoy en día, nuestra economía se encuentra en auge, la tasa de criminalidad es la más baja de la historia, y un nivel récord de turistas de todo el mundo vienen en masa. La protección de nuestros inmigrantes solo ha tenido consecuencias positivas para la ciudad de New York.
Seguiremos esforzándonos por lograr medidas de política que faciliten que los inmigrantes trabajen y vivan en la ciudad de Nueva York, y haremos todo lo posible para alentar a otras ciudades a que sigan nuestro ejemplo. A juzgar por el número de ciudades que se están pronunciando y declarándose santuarios tras los crueles e insensatos decretos ejecutivos de Trump, parece que el ejemplo de Nueva York ya está surtiendo efecto.
By Andrew Friedman
Source
Fixing the Shift
Hard on the heels of the Fight for $15 minimum wage campaign, a group that has won legislation or regulation changes involving work schedules in three states and seven cities is launching a drive...
Hard on the heels of the Fight for $15 minimum wage campaign, a group that has won legislation or regulation changes involving work schedules in three states and seven cities is launching a drive in Philadelphia. The Fair Workweek Initiative will kick off its campaign in Philadelphia on Tuesday, with a rally at 12th and Chestnut streets, followed by a march to City Hall, where organizers will demand that City Council pass legislation requiring fair and consistent schedules for hourly workers. Fair Workweek is an effort of the Brooklyn-based Center for Popular Democracy, which describes itself as an alliance of organizations promoting “an innovative pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial and economic justice agenda.
Read the full article here.
Newark Student Sit-in Lasted Through the Night at District Headquarters
NJ.com - February 18, 2015, by Naomi Nix - New Jersey Communities United organizer and NSU co-founder Thais Marques said the school district is preventing food from coming up to the students...
NJ.com - February 18, 2015, by Naomi Nix - New Jersey Communities United organizer and NSU co-founder Thais Marques said the school district is preventing food from coming up to the students during their sit-in; The students have not eaten for 12 hours, Marques said.
But Newark Public Schools spokeswoman Brittany Chord Parmley said the district is not withholding food and that it will be available for them when they come downstairs where there is a bus waiting to take them to school.
"We encourage the kids to go to school," she said.
The youths who staged a sit-in at Newark Public Schools' headquarters Tuesday night in protest of superintendent Cami Anderson's leadership stayed the night.
"We are staying until Cami comes in to her office and faces us or until her resignation," New Jersey Communities United organizer and NSU co-founder Thais Marques said in a phone interview this morning.
The sit-in, organized by the Newark Student Union, started around 8:30 p.m. on Tuesday during a Newark Public Schools Advisory Board business meeting when the students ascended to the 8th floor where Anderson's and other administrators' offices are located, said activists and board members.
The students received pizza for dinner and are awaiting donations of breakfast from area organizations, Marques said.
The students plan to hold a press conference later in the day.
Meanwhile, Newark Public Schools spokeswoman Brittany Chord Parmley said the district is trying to work with their parent to get them to attend school.
"We appreciate the passion shown by these students, but the district strongly believes that this passion would be better served in the classroom," she said in a statement.
"NPS has reached out to their parents in an effort to get this group of students to school this morning, and we remain open to engaging in a constructive dialogue that does not compromise valuable learning time."
But Marques said the students' parents support their sit- in, and even attended Tuesday's business meeting in a show of support.
"It's kind of like a futile effort on their part because they have parent support," she said.
The activists contend that Anderson has not engaged with students and parents about the district's controversial reforms.
The union is also opposed to the district's One Newark plan, which they argue is untested and hurts neighborhood schools.
"The One Newark plan is not what we want," Marques said in an interview Tuesday evening.
Source
A Broken Promise: Agency-Based Voter Registration in New York City
Executive Summary
Voter registration is the number one barrier to the vote. An estimated 51 million eligible citizens, more than 24 percent of the electorate, could not cast a ballot on...
Voter registration is the number one barrier to the vote. An estimated 51 million eligible citizens, more than 24 percent of the electorate, could not cast a ballot on Election Day in the 2012 presidential election solely because they had not been registered. Registration and voting rates are particularly low for families with annual incomes below $20,000, voters of color, naturalized citizens, and those with limited English proficiency. Civic engagement levels are even worse in New York State. Fewer New Yorkers registered to vote and cast a ballot in the November 2012 general election than the national average.
Download the report here.
One proven method of increasing voter participation, particularly among underrepresented citizens, is voter registration at public agencies (“agency-based registration”). Well-administered voter registration programs established at public assistance agencies pursuant to federal law have helped register 15 to 20 percent of agency applicants. In 2000, New York City sought to expand voter registration opportunities at municipal agencies by enacting Local Law 29 (“the Pro-Voter Law”), which required 18 city agencies and, under certain circumstances, their associated subcontractors, to offer voter registration forms to all persons submitting applications, renewals, or recertification for agency services, or notifying the agency of a change of address. The law included each of the City’s 59 community boards as well. The last and only evaluation of the Pro-Voter Law, undertaken by the New York City Council over a decade ago, found that agencies were failing to offer voter registration.
In 2014, the Center for Popular Democracy, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, Citizens Union of the City of New York, and the New York Public Interest Research Group formed the Pro-Voter Law Coalition and launched a new initiative to assess the agencies’ compliance with the law and opportunities to enhance the law’s impact. The Pro-Voter Law Coalition submitted Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests to each of the 18 city agencies; met with the Voter Assistance Advisory Committee at the New York City Campaign Finance Board; and, along with the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund and Make the Road New York, launched field investigations at 14 city offices subject to the Pro-Voter Law to measure their compliance with the law.
The FOIL responses and field investigations revealed widespread agency failure to implement the Pro-Voter Law. Specifically, they found:
Inconsistent adherence. Documents provided by the 12 agencies that responded to FOIL requests indicated scattered and inconsistent attention to the Pro-Voter Law; Noncompliance in a majority of interactions. In 84 percent of client interactions, agency officials failed to comply with the Pro-Voter Law’s requirement to offer voter registration application forms; Failure to provide language access. Agency failures extended to bilingual voter registration mandates. Specifically, only 40 percent, or 2 out of 5 agency clients whose primary language was not English were given translated voter registration applications; and No training of agency staff. All 11 of the agency employees who responded to training inquiries admitted that no agency staff receive regular training on voter registration procedures.These findings are particularly significant given that over 30 percent, or 18 of 59 citizen clients interviewed at the agencies required to comply with the Pro-Voter Law’s mandates reported they were not registered to vote.
Agency failure to comply with the Pro-Voter Law marks a lost opportunity to increase New York City voter registration rates and, by extension, voter participation in the city. Expanding opportunities for New Yorkers to register to vote at municipal agencies will require a concerted commitment by the Mayor, City Council, and municipal agency heads. The Pro-Voter Law Coalition is joined by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the League of Women Voters of the City of New York, Common Cause New York, and Make the Road New York in issuing the following 12 recommendations to help ensure that every eligible city resident is registered to vote when interacting with city agencies subject to the Pro-Voter Law.
Click here to download the report.
1 day ago
4 days ago