Campaign News

Over the past year, millions of workers have earned a raise as a result of the growing boldness of workers and organizers across the country. The success of the Fight for 15 and similar movements is no accident. Rather, it is the product of years of experimentation, perseverance, and creativity—and today, organizers may have finally hit on a powerful formula for helping workers take back some measure of power.

This success stems first and foremost from a basic reality: The economy in its current state is just not working for Americans. Nearly a decade after the 2008 recession, millions of families around the country have yet to be even touched by the recovery. Wages have stayed flat even as worker productivity has soared. Too many are stuck in jobs that don’t pay the bills, working hard and failing to even stay afloat.

Moreover, it has become increasingly clear that their suffering is by design, not a product of simple economics. The bad behavior of major corporations has been a driving force. Walmart and McDonald’s have come under fire for paying workers wages that force them onto public assistance to cover their basic needs. Pharmacy chains like Walgreens “promote” workers to salaried positions that require more hours without the chance at overtime pay. And countless businesses, from pizza chains to car washes, rob workers of an honest day’s pay through different forms of wage theft.

This atmosphere is ripe for the emergence of policies that give workers the pay they deserve. Getting these policies in place, however, requires a fight.

For years, community and labor organizations around the country supported workers by helping them organize themselves, going store by store, employer by employer. More recently, though, organizations such as Make the Road New York, Working Washington, New York Communities for Change, and others have begun to target entire industries—and, in turn, the economy as a whole. Pinning the blame on bad practices that are common to all companies—rather than one individual employer—allowed them to make the case that the problem demanded a widespread response.

Moreover, the demands have grown bigger, escalating from modest increases in the minimum wage to $8.75 to a more ambitious $10.10 and then all the way to $15. And while minimum-wage fights were traditionally separate from those for paid sick days, many organizers realized linking the two made for a far more powerful and galvanizing campaigns. The more ambitious our demands became, the more effective we have become, demonstrating the political salience of transformative demands.

Finally, more money for robust field campaigns was a critical part of the solution. Unions like the Service Employees International Union made a strategic decision to invest big in campaigns that would lift up the needs of all workers—including those who weren’t part of their union, a fundamentally new approach to organizing. As momentum grew, other unions and foundations have joined the cause, recognizing that helping working women and men to stand up for themselves and their families helps the whole economy. This funding has enabled organizations to launch bigger, more ambitious campaigns and to have the firepower needed to win them.

The results have been nothing short of extraordinary. Just a few years ago, when fast-food workers first went on strike in New York City, a $15 wage was unimaginable. This year, it became a reality in two of the largest states in the country—New York and California—affecting nearly nine million workers. Nearly 30 states have taken action to lift their minimum wage above the federal threshold of $7.25—and almost ten have done so for tipped workers. Ten states and more than a dozen cities have passed paid sick days for workers.

In the coming year, more than a dozen states and cities ranging from Wisconsin to Pennsylvania will be seeking a raise for their residents, reaching as high as $15 in many places. And, with half the country concentrated in America’s top 35 metro areas, the impact of these local laws has been disproportionate.

Today, organizers around the country are setting their sights on bigger goals, applying the lessons learned from the push for higher wages. We will be working to improve access to affordable housing, enact fair scheduling reforms that protect workers from unpredictable hours, and reduce the parasitic power and tax avoidance of hedge funds and other major corporations.

Yet individual victories are not enough. To truly convert this energy into lasting change, we will need a unified, nationwide movement that situates economic justice as just one part of a broader agenda of opportunity. And we will need this movement to be rooted in resilient, democratic people’s organizations on the front lines, all across the country.

This weekend, the Center for Popular Democracy is convening a People’s Convention that will bring together thousands of organizers from community groups across the country. The weekend will provide an opportunity to share lessons learned, to strategize together and to harness the energy of the past year into a powerful organized movement for progressive change through the next decade.

By providing the space for community leaders and organizers to begin working as one, we will begin to shift the balance of power back to working families and ensure the voices calling out for a future with dignity and justice will not fade out.

By Andrew Friedman

Source

It is always amusing to be the subject of a John McClaughry jeremiad. While I don’t mind being labeled as the “foremost defender” of public education, he insists on giving me full personal credit for what is a state school board position.

In the instant case, John appears to be affronted by the suggestion that private (independent) schools that take public money must actually be held accountable for that money. This principle is at the core of the state board’s review of the independent school rules. Now this seems like a straightforward and fundamentally democratic concept that is generally accepted, but it has been a long-standing problem for some.

The law (16 VSA 166) provides a list of reporting requirements for independent schools if they want to chow down at the public trough. Unfortunately, as far back as the 1914 Carnegie Commission, we find evidence of the refusal of some independent schools to provide private school data even though it was the law of the land. (At that time, the Cubs were still basking in the glory of their World Series victory.)

The second paramount principle is that we have to educate all the children — regardless of needs and handicaps. That’s a necessity in a democracy. Denying a child admission on the basis of a handicap is, in most cases, illegal. Furthermore, it’s wrong. Public schools serve every child. The false fear John peddles is that the private school can’t afford to serve these children. That’s incorrect. It’s really quite simple. While great eruptions of umbrage are displayed, this problem has been solved for years. The private school contracts with (or hires) a specialist who bills the costs back to the public school. Approval in a given area requires that one sheet of paper be filed with the state. As simple as the solution actually is, some independent schools refuse to adopt an equal opportunity policy.

Instead, John proposes that Vermont “clone” Florida’s McKay Scholarship program where parents can choose the school for their handicapped child. That hasn’t worked out too well. If you think a “business management class” that sends students onto the street to panhandle is an acceptable education, then the McKay program may be just your thing. The Florida Department of Education has uncovered “substantial fraud,” including schools that don’t exist, non-existent students, and classes held in condemned buildings and public parks. And the state of Florida does not have the staff to adequately monitor the program. This is a recipe for abuse. Last May, the Center for Popular Democracy estimated that $216 million in charter school money went out the back door.

Finally, John raises the cost question and says private school scholarships would be “less expensive.” Yet he also criticizes the cost of the state’s excess public school capacity. Now let’s look at Vermont’s private independent school numbers. In 1998, there were 68 independent schools, and by 2016, the number had exploded to 93. In the decade 2004-14, independent school enrollments went down from 4,361 to 3,392. A 37 percent increase in schools with a 29 percent drop in students suggests somebody needs to revisit their business plan.

Taking it all together, (1) all who profit from the public treasury must be accountable for that money, (2) children have the right to be admitted to private schools, free of discrimination, on an equal opportunity basis, (3) private schools are a part of our system, (4) the public purse must be protected from fraud and abuse, and (5) directly or indirectly building and operating a parallel school system would be inordinately expensive and wasteful. Do these principles sound reasonable?

William J. Mathis is managing director of the National Education Policy Center and a member of the Vermont state Board of Education. The views expressed here are his own and do not represent the views of any group with which he is associated.

Source

This paper reports the findings of our original survey aimed at understanding whether retail workers’ experiences of their opportunities at New York City Zara stores was different based on skin color or race. Zara, the world’s largest fashion retailer, has faced several complaints about racially insensitive designs over the years.This report finds that employees of color in Zara’s New York City stores face unequal conditions within the company:

Black employees are more than twice as dissatisfied with their hours as white employees. Darker-skinned employees report that they are least likely to be promoted. Employees of color state that they are reviewed with harsher scrutiny from management than white American and European employees. Of workers in the lower prestige back-of-store roles, 68 percent have darker skin.

While Zara employees report experiencing discrimination in the workplace, they have also witnesseddiscriminatory practices against Zara customers of color.

According to surveys across Zara’s New York City workforce, Black customers are 7 times more likely to be targeted as potential thieves than white customers.

In order to address problems of discrimination, this report recommends that Zara recommits itself to non-discrimination in employment, promotion, and service in New York City.

We recommend the following steps:

Institute a practice for workers to have access to a neutral, third-party arbiter to address their grievances, particularly relative to color and race discrimination. Recognize and respect workers’ basic labor rights, including regular and reliable schedules regardless of race, equal opportunity to be promoted, and a living wage. Allow New York City Zara employees to choose to represent themselves in grievances through real bargaining agents, such as labor unions, without interference.

Down the full report here:

The CEOs who made up two White House advisory councils have fled like rats on a sinking ship. Their exodus — a dramatic rebuke of Donald Trump — came within 48 hours of the incendiary August 15 press conference where the President praised some of the participants of last week’s white supremacist rampage in Charlottesville, Virginia.

But many of the CEOs on these councils had been under heavy pressure to disavow Trump’s agenda of hate and racism even before Charlottesville. That pressure came from grassroots activists.

The Center for Popular Democracy, Make The Road New York, New York Communities for Change, and several other immigrant and worker advocates had led that activist campaign, targeting the leaders of nine major corporations affiliated with the Trump administration. The campaign, working through a web site called Corporate Backers of Hate, detailed the connections between the nine companies and the Trump administration and encouraged people to send emails to both the CEOs involved and members of their corporate boards.

Read the full article here.