Jenkins says Trump coming to West Virginia’s Greenbrier
Jenkins says Trump coming to West Virginia’s Greenbrier
Protest organizers, including the Center for Popular Democracy, say they expect more than 500 people from several...
Protest organizers, including the Center for Popular Democracy, say they expect more than 500 people from several states to show up and demonstrate against cuts in social safety net programs.
Read the full article here.
Full-Time Hires Buck the Trend at Fast-Food, Retail Chains
Full-Time Hires Buck the Trend at Fast-Food, Retail Chains
EASTON, Pa.—The orders came in fast during a recent Friday lunchtime rush at a Sheetz Inc. convenience store here....
EASTON, Pa.—The orders came in fast during a recent Friday lunchtime rush at a Sheetz Inc. convenience store here. Behind the counter, Alexis Cooper layered tomatoes on two sandwiches, refilled a container of onions and swirled a peanut-butter milkshake.
Six weeks into her job at Sheetz, Ms. Cooper easily distinguishes the beep of the deep fryer from the boop of the convenience store’s order-taking system and knows to have a pepperoni roll ready for a regular who shows up around noon.
Ms. Cooper, 20 years old, is something of a rarity in the realm of fast-food and retail work: a full-time employee.
At a time when many chains are shifting workers to part-time, the Altoona, Pa.-based Sheetz is making a big bet on full-time hires, who now comprise 53% of the company’s 17,000-person workforce. Leaders at the convenience store-and-gas-station chain say having full-time workers behind the register results in better customer service, lower turnover and a more engaged workforce—all of which, executives say, will lead to higher sales and profits.
Nearly 5.7 million workers said they were working part-time last year because they couldn’t get more hours or find full-time work, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics survey data. About 65% of store employees in the retail sector work part-time, according to an analysis by search and consulting firm Korn Ferry Hay Group. Companies reason that keeping staff to 30 hours or fewer a week curbs labor costs and allows firms to act nimbly, adjusting staffing to match customer demand.
Sheetz, and others like beauty retailer Bluemercury Inc., acknowledge that full-timers might cost more at first, but say they are more reliable—27% of full-time hourly workers leave their jobs per year, versus 68.7% of part-timers, according to the Korn Ferry report. Lower employee turnover saves on training and hiring costs, those employers say, and some report their customers spend more when full-timers take orders and ring up purchases.
“This is a moment where some employers at least are taking stock of whether they’ve gone down the labor flexibility path a little too far,” says Susan Lambert, a University of Chicago professor who studies hourly work.
Full-time workers are the “glue” that holds businesses together, Ms. Lambert’s research has found. They help coordinate tasks and anticipate business needs, and are often more committed. These employees are more likely to go the extra mile on the job, such as tracking down an item online for a customer.
For customers, a full-time employee “gives them the same face every day. It builds a different feeling than the robot behind the counter,” says Sheetz Chief Executive Joe Sheetz.
On employee surveys, Sheetz’s full-time workers tend to report more commitment and willingness to put in extra effort than part-timers do. That engagement correlates with higher customer-service marks, says Stephanie Doliveira, Sheetz’s human-resources vice president.
Less than a quarter of Sheetz’s full-time staff leaves each year; for part-timers, 83% leave. Overall voluntary turnover at the company is down two percentage points from last year, saving $925,000 in recruiting and training, Ms. Doliveira says. Starting sales associates make $9 to $11 per hour and are eligible for paid time off; those working more than 30 hours per week get access to health insurance.
At Buffalo Wings & Rings, a restaurant with 50 locations in the U.S., full-timers ring up 6% higher sales per hour on average and have far lower rates of absenteeism than part-timers do, according to CEO Nader Masadeh. The eatery has doubled its share of full-time workers since 2013, with about 37% of employees working full-time. The company’s training costs have fallen 25% as a result, according to Mr. Masadeh.
Churn among part-time workers prompted &pizza, a 14-store chain in the Washington, D.C., area, to halt new restaurant openings for a while, says CEO Michael Lastoria. Managers noticed that customers gave low ratings to new stores where inexperienced, often part-time, workers comprised 95% of staff. Some 31% of &pizza staff now workfull-time, up from 15% in 2014, and the chain is set to open seven additional stores this year, Mr. Lastoria says.
Having more full-time workers requires managers to adjust. Sheetz’s store managers initially resisted adding more full-timers when the company launched the initiative in the summer of 2014, Ms. Doliveira says. Used to having a big bench of part-time workers to call upon, they worried about being caught short when employees called in sick. Managers are also figuring out how to plan shifts now that more workers have vacation time.
Moving to full-time has come with health insurance and an extra $50 or so each week for Tammy Shepard, a salesperson at a Sheetz in Statesville, N.C. “It gives you a sense of security, which is a huge thing,” she says.
Full-time private industry workers make $25.44 an hour in wages and salaries, as compared with $13.29 for part-time workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
“There’s a real penalty that workers pay for working part-time,” says Carrie Gleason, director of the Fair Workweek Initiative at left-leaning advocacy group Center for Popular Democracy.
The promise of a 40-hour work week was what spurred Ms. Cooper to apply to Sheetz, though she holds down another part-time job managing a nearby pub. Logging just 14 hours a week there has made it tricky to stay on top of everything, such as the new beers on the menu.
“It stinks when you don’t know certain things,” she says.
By RACHEL FEINTZEIG
Source
The Problem With Bernie Sanders’ Bold Plan To Aid Puerto Rico
The Problem With Bernie Sanders’ Bold Plan To Aid Puerto Rico
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., holds a town hall meeting at the Luis Muñoz Marin...
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., holds a town hall meeting at the Luis Muñoz Marin Foundation in Trujillo Alto, Puerto Rico, Monday, May 16, 2016. Sanders arrived in Puerto Rico on Monday to talk about the U.S. territory's worsening debt crisis ahead of the June 5 primary.
The race for the Democratic nomination is in its final throes, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Hillary Clinton are fighting it out for every last remaining delegate. Puerto Rico’s June 5 primary — in which 67 delegates are up for grabs — will carry more political weight than usual, and the campaigns are lavishing attention on the island.
As he campaigned in the territory’s capital on Monday, Sanders laid out a bold proposal to help Puerto Rico dig itself out from $72 billion dollars in debt, but economists and former government officials tell ThinkProgress the plan is legally impossible.
Both Sanders and Clinton have urged Congress to pass a bill giving Puerto Rico the ability to declare bankruptcy and restructure its debt. But Sanders went further this week, demanding that the Federal Reserve act unilaterally to help the island if Congress continues to drag its feet on a bill to restructure the massive debt the Puerto Rican government says it cannot pay.
Ironically, the reforms Congress passed to rein in Wall Street following the 2008 financial crisis — reforms Sanders supported — are part of why the Federal Reserve can’t do what Sanders is now demanding.
“If the Federal Reserve could bail out Wall Street, it can help the 3.5 million American citizens in Puerto Rico improve its economy and lift its children out of poverty,” he said. “Under current law, the Federal Reserve has the authority.”
Some progressive groups, like the Center for Popular Democracy, are voicing support for Sanders’ plan. In an e-mail to ThinkProgress, the director of the CPD’s “Fed Up” campaign said that if the U.S. government could find a way to prop up Wall Street during the 2008 crash, it can do the same for Puerto Rico.
“When the financial crisis hit Wall Street, they used all of their most creative legal minds and institutional power to design solutions that would protect the big banks from collapse; if they wanted to, Fed officials could similarly find appropriate solutions here.”
But other economic experts and former Federal Reserve board members told ThinkProgress that Sanders is mistaken. Ironically, the reforms Congress passed to rein in Wall Street following the 2008 financial crisis — reforms Sanders supported — are part of why the Federal Reserve can’t do what Sanders is now demanding.
“The type of assistance Senator Sanders is asking the Fed to provide would not be legally possible,” said Donald Kohn, who served on the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors from 2002 to 2010. “[It is] not what the Congress intended. Among other things, [the law] requires that any facility be broadly based and not intended for a particular troubled borrower.”
The reforms in the 2010 Dodd-Frank bill sharply curtailed the central bank’s ability to make emergency loans to struggling banks, partnerships, or corporations in order to keep them afloat. While questioning whether the Puerto Rican government counts as a bank, partnership, or corporation in the first place, Kohn also cited another section of the law saying the Federal Reserve must “prohibit borrowing from programs and facilities by borrowers that are insolvent,” as Puerto Rico will soon be, and that emergency lending powers are “not to aid a failing financial company.”
The Federal Reserve has given Congress the same message, and other fiscal policy experts agree. University of Pennsylvania professor Peter Conti-Brown, an expert on the Fed’s legal authority, told the Washington Examiner that Dodd-Frank “specifically forbids this kind of targeted bailout,” while Cato Institute director of financial regulation studies Mark Calabria added that “the intent and clear language forbids ‘one-off’ rescues to single entities.”
Warren Gunnels with the Sanders campaign argued in an e-mail to ThinkProgress that because only a fraction of Dodd-Frank’s reforms have been finalized and implemented, the Federal Reserve can still step in. “The Federal Reserve has the authority to facilitate an orderly restructuring of Puerto Rico’s debt through a reverse auction process that will lead to major haircuts for Wall Street vulture funds,” he said.
Still, most experts say it falls on Congress to act to rescue Puerto Rico. House Republicans introduced a bill this week that would allow Puerto Rico to restructure its debt, but would also implement an un-elected control board to oversee the island’s budget and cut the minimum wage from $7.25 to $4.25 an hour for workers under 25.
We don’t need more austerity for children in Puerto Rico who are going hungry.
Sanders blasted the proposal as undemocratic and a further burden on the poor. “We need austerity for billionaire Wall Street hedge fund managers who have exacerbated the financial crisis in Puerto Rico. We don’t need more austerity for children in Puerto Rico who are going hungry,” he said.
Regardless of the feasibility of Sanders’ Federal Reserve proposal, his pro-sovereignty and anti-austerity message resonated with Puerto Ricans on and off the island. Two prominent officials, including the mayor of the capital of San Juan, rescinded their endorsements for Hillary Clinton after Sanders’ visit, while other community leaders sang his praises.
“Bernie Sanders is the only candidate dedicated to the people of Puerto Rico,” said Jose Nicolas Medina, an attorney in San Juan. “Much of our problems are due the policies of Clinton. As first lady and as Senator, Hillary did nothing to help the situation of Puerto Rico. So we punish the Clintons with our votes.”
Others watching Sanders’ speeches told ThinkProgress they were inspired by his promise to allow Puerto Ricans to vote for either independence or statehood during his first year in the White House, and his characterization of the current U.S.-Puerto Rican relationship as “colonial-like treatment.”
“To have a candidate for president finally admit that Puerto Rico is a colony is historic,” said Phillip Arroyo, the former chair of the Young Democrats of America’s Hispanic Caucus and a Puerto Rican living in Florida. “He has planted a seed in the mind of the new generation. It will ultimately bear fruit regardless of whether he’s elected.”
BY ALICE OLLSTEIN
Source
Martin Luther King, institutions and power
Jared Bernstein, a former chief economist to Vice President Biden, is a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and...
Jared Bernstein, a former chief economist to Vice President Biden, is a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and author of the new book 'The Reconnection Agenda: Reuniting Growth and Prosperity.'
The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. gestures during a speech at a Chicago Freedom Movement rally at Soldier Field in Chicago on July 10, 1966. (Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images)
When the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in 1968, he was in Memphis, supporting striking sanitation workers. By that time in his crusade for racial justice, he had elevated full employment to a key plank in his platform. The full name of the March on Washington was the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. A common placard held up that day read, “Civil Rights Plus Full Employment Equals Freedom,” a powerful economic equation indeed.
In my experience, too few people remember this aspect of King’s movement, instead emphasizing his stirring spiritual commitment to racial inclusion. But King was of course thoroughly versed in the reality of the institutional barriers blocking blacks and his unique genius was to combine deep spiritual awareness with an equally deep understanding of the role of power in economic outcomes. That’s one reason he was in Memphis, supporting the union.
In 1967, King called for “a radical redistribution of economic and political power.” He particularly understood the power, for better or worse, of American institutions, most notably of course, the institution of racism, which so successfully blocked African Americans from decent homes, jobs, schools and opportunities.
But countervailing institutions existed within his vision as well, including the church and the union, and, if it could be forced to live up to its promise, the government. Even the institutions of the consumer economy and the job market could, with the right force and strategy, including boycotts that flexed black consumer muscle and equal opportunity laws, be nudged in the direction of racial justice.
To some readers, this “institutional” framework may be confusing. What do I mean by referencing the consumer or job markets or racism or unions, as “institutions”? This certainly doesn’t square with the classic economic explanation of how the economy works: profit-maximizing individuals achieving optimal social welfare by each individual pursuing their goals.
The institutional framework, with its emphasis on historical, legal and cultural practices (norms) embedded in economic systems, stands in stark contrast to the market forces framework. Surely no one could question whether the legal system or the housing market black people faced in King’s time, not to mention our own, promoted objective, blind justice. Discrimination in schools, the economy, and almost every other walk of life could not and cannot possibly be viewed as a fair or merit-based system.
Honoring King’s vision and legacy thus requires not simply remembering his most well-known dream: a racially inclusive society very different from the one that existed in his, or sadly, our own time. It requires recognizing the need to redistribute the power from the oppressive, exclusionary institutions, many of the same ones — housing, schools, criminal justice, the economy — he fought for until the day he was taken from us.
What does honoring that vision mean today?
Although I certainly don’t advocate giving up on President-elect Donald Trump’s administration before it has started, all signs suggest that it and the Republican-led Congress will hurt, not help, the economically less advantaged. Republican budgets threaten to undermine the safety net, Trump’s proposed tax policy squanders fiscal resources on tax cuts for the rich, undermining opportunities for those stuck in places without adequate educational or employment opportunities. There’s talk among Republicans of trying to get more states to pass “right to work” laws that undermine unions and cut workers’ pay. Listening to Ben Carson’s hearing for secretary of housing and urban development quickly disabuses one of hope that he’ll tackle the legacy of segregated housing that remains a serious problem. As far as reforming the institutionalized racism the remains embedded in our criminal justice and policing systems, again, it’s awfully hard to be hopeful.
There are, however, many levels of institutional norms, laws and practices. The Fight for Fifteen has been immensely successful in raising minimum wages at the state and sub-state levels. I can’t prove this, but I’d bet that without Black Lives Matter, there would be no “blistering report” from the Justice Department on the racial practices of the Chicago Police Department. The activist group “Fed Up” has had great success elevating the issue of economic justice as regards Federal Reserve policy, a policy area that even liberal presidents have avoided getting into.
As I recently wrote regarding “ban the box,” a policy designed to give job-seekers with criminal records a fairer shot at employment:
Nineteen states and over 100 cities and counties have already taken similar action for government employees, and seven states (Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon and Rhode Island) plus Washington, DC and 26 cities and counties have extended ban the box policies to cover private employers. Some private businesses, including Walmart, Koch Industries, Target, Starbucks, Home Depot, and Bed, Bath & Beyond, have also adopted these policies on their own.
This last part about the private businesses is instructive. The Selma bus boycott was, of course, in no small part an economic action: Black people would not pay for discrimination. Regarding full employment, King realized that at high levels of unemployment, it’s costless to discriminate against a significant swath of potential workers. But when the job market tightens up, discriminating against a needed worker means leaving profit on the table.
Especially in the age of Trump, when so many Americans feel as if representative democracy is seriously on the ropes, it seems a no-brainer to channel King and once again tap the power of boycotts and leaning on businesses to do the right thing. It makes no sense at all to cede this field to Trump as he nonsensically claims (and gets) credit for job creation that already was happening.
My intuition is that many businesses, as in the ban-the-box example, would be willing to help push back on the institutional injustices that persist. Higher and more equal pay scales, implementation of the updated, higher overtime threshold that was wrongly blocked by a Texas judge (in fact, many businesses, to their credit, have gone ahead with this change), not blocking collective bargaining if their workers want to exercise that right, flexible scheduling policies that help parents balance work and family — there’s no reason for progressives not to fight for these ideas at the sub-national level and the private sector.
Although these sub-national fights are more likely where the action is for the next few years, meaningful action is developing at the national level as well. King would have easily recognized the Trump phenomenon as the work of exclusive institutions once again grabbing the power and would have organized accordingly and effectively. As we speak, many of us are trying to block the repeal of health-care reform in this spirit. The Indivisible Movement and the Women’s March would also have been highly familiar to Dr. King.
But on whatever level or in whatever sector the fight takes place, as we celebrate King’s indelible contributions, let us recall his understanding of power, the institutions that power supported and his admonitions to us not to rest until much more of that power lies in the hands of those who still command far too little of it.
By Jared Bernstein
Source
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...
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
Has Starbucks Broken a Promise to Its Employees?
Baristas are among the ...
Baristas are among the 10 job titles that received the biggest pay hikes this year, but CBS MoneyWatch reports that some Starbucks baristas may be getting shortchanged in another way.
Last year, Starbucks promised to start posting employees’ work schedules at least 10 days in advance after a New York Times article titled “Working Anything but 9 to 5” detailed the burdens employees faced because they were receiving only a few days’ notice about their schedules.
But by some accounts, Starbucks’ promise has yet to become a reality.
One student tells CBS that “wild inconsistency” plagues his Starbucks work schedules and that lack of advance notice forced him to pay a co-worker to cover one shift so he could take an exam.
A report released this month by the nonprofit Center for Popular Democracy — “The Grind: Striving for Scheduling Fairness at Starbucks” — questions six facets of Starbucks’ scheduling practices:
Unpredictable workweeks.
Inconsistency in days, times and amounts of work.
Insufficient rest due to working “clopen” shifts (when employees are scheduled to close one night and to open the store early the next morning).
Obstacles to taking sick leave.
Understaffing and insufficient hours.
Failure to honor employees’ availability.
Carrie Gleason, director of the Fair Workweek Initiative at the Center for Popular Democracy and a co-author of the organization’s report, tells CBS that even though Starbucks “has the values and wants to do right by their employees,” many troubling issues persist.
CBS reports that Starbucks did not respond to its requests for comment. In an internal memo later published by Time, Starbucks executive Cliff Burrows wrote that the company couldn’t validate the survey, but noted that:
“The findings suggest, contrary to the expectations we have in place, that some partners are receiving their schedules less than one week in advance and that there is a continuing issue with some partners working a close and then an opening shift the following morning.”
Burrows also asked store managers “to go the extra mile to ensure partners have a consistent schedule.”
Source: MoneyTalks News
Listen to Death Cab for Cutie’s New Anti-Trump Song “Million Dollar Loan”
Listen to Death Cab for Cutie’s New Anti-Trump Song “Million Dollar Loan”
Last year, Death Cab for Cutie released the album Kintsugi. Today, the band have put out a new song called “Million...
Last year, Death Cab for Cutie released the album Kintsugi. Today, the band have put out a new song called “Million Dollar Loan,” along with its video, directed by Simian Design. The song targets Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who famously said his father gave him $1 million to start his business dealings. It’s part of a new program called 30 Days, 30 Songs, created by writer Dave Eggers. Starting today until Election Day (Tuesday, November 8), there will be new songs each day from artists including My Morning Jacket’s Jim James, Aimee Mann, Thao Nguyen (of Thao & the Get Down Stay Down), and clipping. In addition, 30 Days will include an unreleased R.E.M. live song.
Below, listen to “Million Dollar Loan,” read Ben Gibbard’s statement on the track, and see the 30 Days, 30 Songs single artwork (featuring an eagle with Trump’s hair). Read 30 Days, 30 Songs’ mission statement here. All of 30 Days’ proceeds will go to the Center for Popular Democracy and their efforts toward Universal Voter Registration for all Americans.
Lyrically, “Million Dollar Loan” deals with a particularly tone deaf moment in Donald Trump’s ascent to the Republican nomination. While campaigning in New Hampshire last year, he attempted to cast himself as a self-made man by claiming he built his fortune with just a “small loan of a million dollars” from his father. Not only has this statement been proven to be wildly untrue, he was so flippant about it. It truly disgusted me. Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he is unworthy of the honor and responsibility of being President of the United States of America, and in no way, shape or form represents what this country truly stands for. He is beneath us.
By Matthew Strauss
Source
Wall Street Stands to Make a Killing From Building Trump's Border Wall
Wall Street Stands to Make a Killing From Building Trump's Border Wall
The border wall with Mexico, Donald Trump's proposed monument to nativism and bigotry is, according to an October story...
The border wall with Mexico, Donald Trump's proposed monument to nativism and bigotry is, according to an October story from NBC News, at least 10 months away from "meaningful construction." It currently has no funding from Congress nor from Mexico, contrary to reports from Trump's fever dreams. This reality hasn't dimmed the visions of dollar signs in the eyes of America's largest corporations, which, according to a new report from Make the Road New York, the Center for Popular Democracy, New York Communities for Change, and the Partnership for Working Families, are behind a company making one of the wall prototypes and stand to benefit handsomely.
Read the full article here.
Yellen Says Debate Over When to Hike Now Center Stage
MarketWatch - August 22, 2014, by Greg Robb - With the economy mending, the Federal Reserve’s emphasis is “naturally...
MarketWatch - August 22, 2014, by Greg Robb - With the economy mending, the Federal Reserve’s emphasis is “naturally shifting” to the debate over when to raise interest rates, the head of the U.S. central bank said Friday.
“With the economy getting closer to our objectives, the FOMC’s emphasis is naturally shifting to questions about the degree of remaining slack, how quickly that slack is to be taken up, and thereby to the question of under what conditions we should begin dialing back our extraordinary accommodation,” Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen said in a speech opening the central bank’s summer policy conference in Jackson Hole.
Yellen said there was “no simple recipe” for the Fed to follow, but again warned that rate hikes could come sooner than expected if progress in the labor market continued to be more rapid than anticipated or if inflation moves up more rapidly.
Balancing this more hawkish tone, Yellen said 19 labor market indicators followed by the Fed suggest the decline in the unemployment rate overstates the improvement in overall labor-market conditions.
The initial reaction in the stock market was a muted one, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -0.18% trading in a narrow range. Read Market Snapshot
Her comments “skirted around the issue of future monetary policy by noting that whilst there were a number of factors that might mean the labor market was less of a threat to inflation than in previous business cycles, equally, there were factors that might make it more so,” said ING economist Rob Carnell in a note to clients.
Yellen’s remarks about a shift in the Fed debate toward when, and under what conditions to tighten, lend credence to comments earlier this month from Richard Fisher, the hawkish president of the Dallas Fed, who said that the discussion among policy makers at their last meeting had moved in his direction.
Minutes of that meeting released on Wednesday were also judged by Fed watchers to be hawkish.
Perhaps sensing the shift, protestors have arrived for the first time in Jackson Hole this year urging the Fed to delay any rate hike.
Yellen gave no sense a rate hike was imminent. She noted the Fed still thinks that labor-market slack is “significant” and that the central bank has repeated it intends to hold rates close to zero for a “considerable time” after the Fed ends its bond-buying program, expected in October.
But her remarks suggest the first rate hike since 2006 is now on the table for active discussion.
Yellen and her allies on the Fed have signaled the first rate hike won’t happen until after the middle of next year. Hawks on the committee are pressing for an earlier move, and they have been vocal in speaking to reporters at Jackson Hole.
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...
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.
2 months ago
2 months ago