Starbucks employees still face ‘clopening,’ understaffing, and irregular workweeks
Starbucks employees still face ‘clopening,’ understaffing, and irregular workweeks
Starbucks employees say their schedules aren’t nearly as sweet as those pumpkin spice lattes they’re serving up this...
Starbucks employees say their schedules aren’t nearly as sweet as those pumpkin spice lattes they’re serving up this fall.
In a new report from the Center for Popular Democracy, a nonprofit that works with community groups, Starbucks workers said the coffee company has failed over the past year to make good on a promise to improve employees’ schedules. Instead, employees said they still face unpredictable workweeks, obstacles to taking sick leave, insufficient rest and staffing, and a failure to honor their availability.
“Starbucks’ frontline employees bear the brunt of the management imperative to minimize store labor costs, which takes precedence over attempts to stabilize work hours, provide healthy schedules, and to ensure employees have real input into their working conditions,” the report states.
The issues detailed in the report are familiar to anyone to many who work on “non-standard” schedules common among low wage jobs.
Starbucks first came under fire after a New York Times article from August 2014 described the struggle of a Starbucks barista and single mother, whose irregular work schedule caused turbulence in her personal relationships, other jobs and parental routine. The source of such chaos was supposedly Starbucks’s sophisticated scheduling software that cuts labor costs by arranging workers’ weeks based on sales patterns.
While this technology can boost a business’s profits, it can also leave workers working back-to-back shifts (also known as ‘clopening’), or not receiving enough hours to make ends meet. Sometimes, as the Timesarticle pointed out, employees would commute to work just to find their schedule changed.
After the public backlash, Starbucks promised to revise its policies and end the irregular scheduling practices for its roughly 130,000 baristas in the U.S.
To achieve this, Starbucks said it would post all work hours 10 days in advance, and give any baristas with more than an hour long commute the option to transfer to a more convenient location. Starbucks also said it would revise the scheduling technology and kill the clopening shift.
But much has remained unchanged, according to the 200 workers across 37 states the Center for Popular Democracy interviewed.
Nearly half of the surveyed Starbucks employees said they received their schedule one week or less in advance, and one in four workers said they still had to work clopening shifts.
Employees also reported feeling as though managers disregarded their availability, and denied them more hours when they needed additional work. Finally, 40 percent of employees said they faced barriers to taking sick leave when they were ill.
None of this seems to fit with Starbucks’s reputation as a “fabulous company” to work for, as jobs and recruiting website Glassdoor described it in its annual ranking of the 50 best places to work in 2014. Starbucks came in at No. 39.
The Center for Popular Democracy’s report did have some suggestions for improvement, however, recommending that Starbucks guarantee minimum hours and full-time work for those who want it. It also said the company should mandate that managers provide predictable schedules so working families can have a more stable work-life balance, in addition to taking the pressure off sick employees to find a replacement for a shift.
Source: Boston.com
Some Question City’s Decision to Keep IDNYC Documents
Advocates who opposed a policy of keeping documents submitted by IDNYC applicants believe the doubts they raised in...
Advocates who opposed a policy of keeping documents submitted by IDNYC applicants believe the doubts they raised in 2014 have been validated by the legal fight over destroying those papers before Donald Trump becomes president.
“Now they’re saying, ‘If they come for the data, we’re going to burn it,'” says Abraham Paulos, executive director of Families for Freedom. “Well, then why did you keep in in the first place?”
The policy of keeping documents was not part of the original version of the IDNYC law but was added during intense negotiations involving City Hall, the NYPD and advocacy groups.
Some of those advocacy groups—like Families for Freedom and the New York Civil Liberties Union—ended their support for the IDNYC program over the retention policies because they feared the information could be used by federal authorities hunting for undocumented immigrants. Other organizations expressed concerns but continue to support the bill and promoted the ID program.
The fears about the documents have grown more widespread since Trump, who has pledged to deport millions of people, won election. A lawsuit by two Staten Island lawmakers has at least temporarily halted the city from a planned purge of the documents in its possession.
Mayor de Blasio recently said that IDNYC, one of his signature achievements, would no longer retain copies of passports, utility bills and other documents submitted by people applying for the card, which is held by more than 860,000 New Yorkers.
For advocates, that move—while welcome—casts a harsh light on the decision to collect the documents in the first place. Still, many immigration advocates think the ID was a positive step.
Obstacles to an idea
New Haven, Conn., was the first city to issue a municipal ID in 2007, and some local advocates had been pushing for New York City to follow suit in order to give a widely usable ID card to the undocumented as well as others who lacked official identification. De Blasio embraced the ID as a candidate and called for it in his first State of the City speech.
From the outset, the idea faced an obstacle: How do you create a tool that will be especially useful for undocumented people without making it a scarlet letter? Attaching museum discounts and other benefits to the card aimed to broaden its appeal so that even citizens would obtain it.
But while that broader usage meant the card itself didn’t necessarily indicate a holder’s immigration status, the documents associated with each application still could. To obtain an IDNYC, a person has to present documents that establish identity and residency. Among the accepted proofs of identity are foreign passports, consular ID, foreign military identification—all of which could indicate a lack of legal presence in the U.S.
The question that triggered tension during the negotiations over IDNYC was whether that material needed to be saved once IDNYC staff reviewed the documents and approved the card.
The first version of the City Council measure that created the program included the language, “The city shall not retain originals or copies of records provided by an applicant to prove identity or residency for a New York City identity card.”
But the language that became law described a very different approach. It permitted the city to, once a quarter, destroying any application documents that had been held for two years. It also created an opportunity to destroy all the documents in the program’s possession “on or before December 31, 2016” and end document retention then—an effort to ensure that the papers could be shredded before an anti-immigrant president took office.
The lawsuit by Assemblymembers Ron Castorina and Nicole Malliotakis, both Staten Island Republicans, argues the state’s freedom of information laws should prevent that destruction of documents. Malliotakis made her opposition to the destruction clause known as early as February 2015.
Behind-the-scenes debate
When IDNYC was being shaped in 2014, “retention to us was something that we absolutely did not want,” Betsy Plum, director of special projects at the New York Immigration Coalition, recalls.
However, “It was critical that the NYPD accept the ID,” she says, because one goal for the ID was for it to be a resource when someone is stopped by police. “For us and the community we work with the NYPD was a really critical partner for us to keep at the table for the ultimate success of IDNYC.”
And the NYPD said it needed the documents to investigate fraud, she says. Plum describes a back and forth between advocates and City Hall over the retention issue. “They came back saying to us: ‘This is the only way it’s going to happen.'”
A mayoral spokesperson says the retention clause was inserted “after consideration from many stakeholders, including NYPD.” In addition to the language permitting destruction after two years or at the end of 2016, the final bill did require a court order or warrant for the documents to be handed over to any third party.
Some advocates believed those safeguards were enough to justify going ahead with the ID. “Once we were able to see a clear path for the data to be protected, we saw the benefits far outweigh the risks,” Plum says.
Another advocate involved in the discussions recalls that the coalition of advocacy groups involved in the negotiations took a vote on whether to maintain or drop support for the measure; a clear majority favored pressing ahead with the ID.
But Families for Freedom did not. Paulos (who was a City Limits intern eight years ago) already harbored concerns about whether the cards themselves could be used to identify undocumented people. “The retention and the data was the deal breaker,” he recalls. “Once we heard that the NYPD was also in the discussion, we pulled out.”
The New York Civil Liberties Union also parted ways with other advocates. “In this bill, the city has not done enough to protect those documents from being used by law enforcement,” NYCLU advocacy director Johanna Miller testified as the bill was about to be signed in July 2014. “While the NYC ID will bring benefits to many people, we are disappointed that the city is inviting New Yorkers to gamble with the stakes as high as prosecution or even deportation.”
A July 2015 report by the Center for Popular Democracy (which supported the New York law) noted that “the vast majority of municipal ID card programs around the country have prohibited the copying or retention of documents presented to prove identity or residency. In New Haven, San Francisco, and Mercer County, NJ, municipal ID card programs have run smoothly for years without copying or retaining personal documents of applicants.”
“The only city-run municipal ID card program that stores applicants’ personal documents is IDNYC,” the report continued.”
No regrets from supporters
In the months after the law’s passage but before it took effect, the commissioner of the city’s Human Resources Administration—which oversees the ID program—issued executive orders clarifying the protections for IDNYC data and the handling of requests for program information by law enforcement.
But concerns persisted. When the first oversight hearing about the law was held in mid-2015, The Fortune Society testified that it was concerned that, despite the safeguards in the bill, “federal, state and local law-enforcement agencies may not have to meet a probable cause standard to obtain documents.”
Fortune Society director JoAnne Page now tells City Limits: “The more vulnerable people are, the most risk that damage will be done,” if personal information falls into the wrong hands. “I don’t think there is a more vulnerable group than undocumented immigrants who have criminal records.”
Plum says despite the Trump election and the lawsuit, NYIC has no regrets about its decision to support the bill despite the retention policy. “If we were all to live in a reality where we only acted as it if the worst possible things could happen and we allows ourselves to educate and serve communities from a lens of total paranoia, I think we’d have a far worse outcome for the communities we serve and protect,” she says. “I think still with the ID the benefits have and still do outweigh the risks. The alternative here would be to have had no IDNYC – to have parent who can’t get into their kids schools, to have families unable to open bank accounts, to have survivors of domestic violence afraid to call the police because they have no way to identify themselves. I don’t think anyone would want to sacrifice any of those benefits.”
The Castorina-Malliotakis lawsuit is next in court on January 18. NYCLU staff attorney Jordan Wells says he believes the city will ultimately be able to follow through on their plans to destroy the documents. “The lawsuit pending in Staten Island is without merit,” he says. “Eventually the city will be able to follow the procedure.”
But Paulos believes damage has already been done. The fact that the city will now destroy the documents, and will no longer keep those generated for new applications, makes it hard to credit the assertions that keeping that paperwork was necessary in the first place. “There’s a lot of mistrust.”
By Jarrett Murphy
Source
Wall Street, listo para lucrar con el muro de Trump
Wall Street, listo para lucrar con el muro de Trump
Buena parte de la discusión sobre el muro fronterizo del presidente Donald Trump se ha enfocado en su costo e...
Buena parte de la discusión sobre el muro fronterizo del presidente Donald Trump se ha enfocado en su costo e impracticabilidad, así como en la retórica antiinmigrante y racista que encarna. Sin embargo, se le ha prestado poca atención a quién específicamente podría beneficiarse de la construcción.
Lea el artículo completo aquí.
Zara accused of creating culture of customer discrimination in new report
Mahita Gajanan, The Guardian, 06.22.2015 Black customers at Spanish fashion retailer Zara...
Black customers at Spanish fashion retailer Zara’s New York stores have been disproportionately identified as potential thieves, a significant proportion of employees surveyed by the Center for Popular Democracy have claimed in a new report released on Monday.
A survey of 251 employees and a round of focus groups conducted by the union-allied workers’ rights campaign group claims there is a practice within Zara to label suspicious customers or potential thieves with the code words “special orders”. Once a “special order” was identified and his or her location radioed to employees’ headsets, an employee would follow that customer around, the report claims.
Forty-three percent of the respondents did not answer questions referring to “special orders” or said they did not know the term.
But out of the 57% that did respond to that question, 46% claimed black customers were called special orders “always” or “often”, compared with 14% who said the same about Latino customers and 7% about whites.
Employees quoted in the survey claimed special orders were identified by “dressing a certain way” and were “mostly African American”, according to the CPD. One employee told the group he felt “that black customers were targeted when it came to stealing”, the report said.
One black employee claimed that when he had come in to pick up a check one day wearing a hooded jacket he was identified as a special order and prevented from entering a back office.
Connie Razza, CPD’s director of strategic research, said the code words used at Zara had now changed from “special orders” to a request for “customer service” to go to the location of the suspicious customer.
The report also claims that employees of color face unequal conditions within the company’s eight New York City stores.
“I was expecting some level of discrimination, but the degree of disparity with workers getting raises and hours that vary so dramatically was surprising,” said Razza.
The report claims:
Black employees are more than twice as dissatisfied with their hours as white employees.
Darker-skinned employees were least likely to be promoted, and received harsher treatment from managers.
Lighter-skinned employees of color and white employees experienced better treatment within the company, with higher status assignments, more work hours and a stronger likelihood of being promoted.
Many of the employees interviewed felt there was favoritism within the company based on race.
Razza said that while the retail industry was known for unpredictable working schedules and low wages, the situation was “even worse for black employees”.
The report, compiled from surveys conducted between February and April, claimed employees said that managers showed favoritism, and “many of the employees interviewed felt that favoritism is based on race”.
Such favoritism, they said, can have an impact on promotions, the distribution of work hours and management evaluation and treatment, the report claimed.
Of the 251 employees surveyed, 130 identified as Hispanic, 59 as black, 34 as white, 12 as Asian and 11 as mixed race. Employees were also identified by their skin color on a scale of one to four, with one indicating very light skin and four indicating dark skin. There are approximately 1,500 Zara employees in New York, suggesting one-sixth were surveyed.
“We found darker skinned employees were least likely to be promoted, and received harsher treatment from managers,” Razza said.
In some instances, the report claims, managers told employees not to take the survey. On at least one occasion, managers called the police on one of the employees taking the survey, the CPD claims.
A spokesperson for Zara USA denied any of the claims were accurate.
“Zara USA vehemently refutes the findings of the Center for Popular Democracy report, which was published without any attempt to contact the company,” the spokesperson said in a statement to the Guardian.
“The baseless report was prepared with ulterior motives and not because of any actual discrimination or mistreatment,” the statement went on. “It makes assertions that cannot be supported and do not reflect Zara’s diverse workforce. Zara USA believes that the report is completely inconsistent with the company’s true culture and the experiences of the over 1,500 Zara employees in New York City.
“We are an equal opportunity employer, and if there are individuals who are not satisfied with any aspect of their employment, we have multiple avenues for them to raise issues that we would immediately investigate and address.”
Referring to the claims about black customers being disproportionately identified with the code words “special orders”, it said: “We are a global multicultural company serving valued customers across 88 countries, and do not tolerate discrimination of any form.”
In a later statement, a Zara USA spokesperson added: “The expression ‘special order’ is a term used to designate a common situation in which associates are requested to enforce customer service and zone coverage on the floor. It does not designate a person or group of people of any category.”
Referring to claims about discrimination in promotions, the spokesperson said: “In its most recent round of internal promotions at Zara USA, approximately half were Hispanic or African American employees. In addition, approximately half of all hours are regularly allocated to Hispanic or African American employees. These facts clearly demonstrate that diversity and equal opportunity are two of the company’s core values.”
According Zara, approximately half of all Zara USA’s employees are Hispanic or African American.
The report arrives on the heels of a $40m discrimination lawsuit filed earlier this month by Ian Miller, who was general counsel for Zara USA Inc from 2008 until this March. According to the lawsuit, Miller – who is Jewish, American and gay – said he was excluded from meetings, given smaller raises than co-workers and subjected to racist, homophobic and antisemitic remarks because he did not fit the company’s “preferred profile” of Christian, Spanish and straight.
Miller also claimed his harassers were protected from punishment by company founder Amancio Ortega Gaona. He sued Zara, his former supervisor Dilip Patel and former Zara USA CEO Moíses Costas Rodríguez, under various New York state and city laws prohibiting pay discrimination, wrongful discharge, retaliation and hostile work environments.
Razza claimed discrimination pervaded the whole company.
“It’s a corporate culture that’s very problematic,” she said. “The lawsuit brings to light the depth that discrimination pervades Zara USA. Given the revelations of the lawsuit, we felt it was very important to reflect that it happens across all levels.”
The lawsuit and report follow a number of occasions during which Zara was criticized for selling items with racially insensitive designs. A bag embroidered with swastikas was pulled from stores after customers complained in 2007. In 2013, Zara sold necklaces with figurines in blackface.
Last August, the retailer was the subject of a backlash from customers for two different shirt designs — one striped and emblazoned with a gold star that resembled uniforms worn by Jewish victims in Nazi concentration camps and the second a white T-shirt displaying the words “White is the New Black”.
There is a recent history of controversies over alleged racism in the New York retail sector. In 2013, Macy’s and Barneys, two of New York’s most famous department stores, faced investigation from the state attorney general after several customers accused the stores of racially based discrimination.
Macy’s and Barneys both came to settlements for $650,000 and $525,000, respectively, in August 2014.
Razza said the CPD focused on Zara because of the company’s concentration in New York City and recent organization efforts by workers for fair wages at Zara.
Source: The Guardian
Coalición defiende ley que protege a trabajadores de la construcción
El Diario - April 16, 2014, by Mariela Lombard - Más de una veintena de organizaciones comunitarias y sindicatos se han...
El Diario - April 16, 2014, by Mariela Lombard - Más de una veintena de organizaciones comunitarias y sindicatos se han unido en una coalición para presionar para que no se reforme una legislación que protege la seguridad de los 1.5 millones trabajadores de construcción del estado de Nueva York.
Este mismo lunes un obrero cuya identidad aún no ha sido divulgada murió después de caerse de un andamio situado en una zona de construcción cercana a Penn Station, en Manhattan. Es la segunda muerte de este tipo que sucede este mes en la ciudad, después de que otro trabajador falleciera el pasado 2 de abril por la misma causa mientras laboraba en unas obras en el New York Dream Hotel de la calle 55.
“Estos trágicos accidentes demuestran por qué se deben mantener los más altos estándares de seguridad para los trabajadores de construcción”, dijo Valeria Treves, directora de la organización pro inmigrante NICE, que funciona también como centro de jornaleros. “La seguridad es especialmente importante para los trabajadores inmigrantes, porque muchos de ellos nos reportan que les encargan las tareas que más riesgo conllevan”.
De acuerdo a la Oficina de Estadísticas Laborales, el 60% de los obreros del estado que murieron por caídas en el trabajo entre 2003 y 2011 eran hispanos y/o inmigrantes. En la ciudad de Nueva York la cifra fue aún mayor, llegando al 74%.
Peter Ward, presidente de HTC, sindicato que agrupa a los trabajadores de hoteles, criticó a contratistas y compañías de seguros “sin escrúpulos” por estar cabildeando en Albany para reformar la conocida como “Ley de Seguridad del Andamio” (Scaffold Safety Law), alegando que eleva demasiado los costes de construcción y va en perjuicio de la creación de puestos de trabajo.“
Quieren que sea la responsabilidad de los trabajadores el mantener un lugar de trabajo seguro. La actual ley pone la responsabilidad donde corresponde: en los contratistas, que deben asegurarse que todo trabajador tenga el equipo correspondiente”, enfatizó Ward.
La ley obliga a empleadores y compañías de construcción a proveer equipamiento y entrenamiento de seguridad a todos sus empleados. Eso pretende evitar casos como el del obrero Cresencio Pantoja, quién hace siete años salvó la vida de milagro cuando se precipitó al vacío desde una altura de 23 pies mientras renovaba la fachada de una escuela de El Bronx, por no contar con un arnés de seguridad.
“Mi jefe estaba más preocupado de que se hiciera rápido el trabajo que de la seguridad de sus empleados. Muchos otros trabajadores tampoco tenían arneses de seguridad”, dijo Pantoja, que estuvo cuatro días en coma después del accidente y aún no ha podido volver a trabajar por las heridas. Se mantiene desde entonces con la indemnización que recibió de la constructora, uno de los derechos que garantiza la actual ley.
Otro participante en la coalición es el sindicato SEIU 32BJ, que representa a 120,000 trabajadores de servicios.
“Decenas de miles de hombres y mujeres, muchos de ellos inmigrantes, arriesgan su vida construyendo y reparando nuestra ciudad. Limpiar ventanas o trabajar en un andamio es muy peligroso”, señaló el presidente de la unión, Héctor Figueroa. “No entendería que nuestros funcionarios convirtieran este trabajo en algo aún más peligroso quitando las protecciones de la Ley de Seguridad del Andamio”.
Gary LaBarbera, presidente del Concejo de Construcción de Nueva York, apoya otra legislación introducida en la Asamblea y el Senado Estatal, denominada Ley de Transparencia de Seguros para Construcciones de 2014, que también dice ayudaría a mejorar la seguridad de los obreros.
“Esta ley deja abiertos los datos de los asegurados que nos permitirá analizar de forma transparente esta situación y encontrar soluciones para reducir los costos sin dejar de mejorar la seguridad”, señaló.La coalición ha lanzado una página web para llamar la atención sobre su causa: www.scaffoldsafetylaw.com.
Qué es la Ley de Seguridad del Andamio y qué protecciones ofrece a los trabajadores de construcción
La ley tiene su origen en 1885, cuando se empezaron a construir los grandes rascacielos en la Ciudad de Nueva York. Especifica que los contratistas y los dueños de las propiedades deben asegurarse de que los andamios, montacargas y otros dispositivos utilizados en laconstrucción y reparación de edificios, sean montados y operados de manera que se proteja la integridad de las personas empleadas para la tarea.
Cuando se producen heridas y muertes por la violación de estos términos, la ley dice que los contratistas y dueños son los únicos responsables y deben indemnizar a los perjudicados.Aquellos que quieren reformarla reclaman que se incluya una enmienda para que un jurado o árbitro judicial decida en cada caso si el pago por daños tiene que ser menor si se determina que también ha habido negligencia por parte del trabajador a la hora de seguir los procedimientos de seguridad. Estos opositores denuncian que la formulación actual de la legislación dispara los costos de los seguros.
Denuncie la falta de seguridad
Si un trabajador de la construcción observa fallos en las medidas de seguridad, el primer paso que recomiendan las organizaciones laborales es hablar con otros compañeros y reportarlo en grupo al supervisor. Si el supervisor no hace nada por solucionarlo, el siguiente paso es presentar una queja a la Administración de Seguridad y Salud Ocupacional (OSHA) para que lleve a cabo una investigación.
La queja se puede presentar en español rellenando un formulario online (www.osha.gov) o llamando al 1-800-321-OSHA para localizar la oficina más cercana.
Todos los empleados de construcción, independientemente de su estatus migratorio, tienen derecho a la seguridad en el lugar de trabajo.
Source
Senator Flake's Journey to Defying Trump on Supreme Court Nominee
Senator Flake's Journey to Defying Trump on Supreme Court Nominee
Something happened to U.S. Republican Senator Jeff Flake between being cornered in a Capitol elevator on Friday as two...
Something happened to U.S. Republican Senator Jeff Flake between being cornered in a Capitol elevator on Friday as two women shouted at him about sexual assault and, hours later, cutting a momentous deal with Democrats to defy President Donald Trump.
Read the full article here.
Death and democracy: How a dying activist is spending his final days
Death and democracy: How a dying activist is spending his final days
Diagnosed with ALS in 2016, activist Ady Barkan is living on borrowed time. As his body deteriorates rapidly, he’s...
Diagnosed with ALS in 2016, activist Ady Barkan is living on borrowed time. As his body deteriorates rapidly, he’s spending his last moments fighting for the causes he believes in, hoping to leave the world a better place for his young son.
Watch the video here.
Death Cab for Cutie Kick Off Anti-Trump Campaign ’30 Days, 30 Songs’
Death Cab for Cutie Kick Off Anti-Trump Campaign ’30 Days, 30 Songs’
A group of musicians will be using their music to help convince voters not to support Donald Trump. Titled “30 Days, 30...
A group of musicians will be using their music to help convince voters not to support Donald Trump. Titled “30 Days, 30 Songs,” the project will release one track each day between now and the election in the hopes of creating a “Trump-Free America.”
Related: Roger Waters Trashes Donald Trump at Desert Trip Festival
Death Cab for Cutie begins the project today (Oct 10) with the original track “Million Dollar Loan.”
Ben Gibbard said of the song, “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.”
This week, Jim James, Aimee Mann, Thao Nguyen, clipping., and Bhi Bhiman will all share songs, and R.E.M. will premiere a never-before-heard track. New songs will be available every day at 9am PST on Spotify, and will appear 24 hours later on Apple Music.
Fans can also purchase individual songs with proceeds benefitting Center for Popular Democracy (CDP), which aims for Universal Voter Registration.
By Amanda Wicks
Source
118-Mile March to Confront White Supremacy Reclaims Farragut Square in D.C.
118-Mile March to Confront White Supremacy Reclaims Farragut Square in D.C.
On Wednesday afternoon, the 118-mile March to Confront White Supremacy culminated in Washington, D.C. near the Martin...
On Wednesday afternoon, the 118-mile March to Confront White Supremacy culminated in Washington, D.C. near the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial. Also referred to as the “Cville 2 DC March,” the nonviolent protest began in Charlottesville after one of the largest white supremacist events in recent U.S. history—staged in defense of a monument to Confederate General Robert E. Lee—left one dead and dozens injured.
Read the full article here.
Activists Rally in Front of Federal Reserve, Calling for End to ‘Economic Racism’
The St. Louis American - March 5, 2015, by Rebecca Rivas - African-American residents are sick and tired of hearing...
The St. Louis American - March 5, 2015, by Rebecca Rivas - African-American residents are sick and tired of hearing about an economic recovery that does not apply to them, said Derek Laney, an organizer for Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment.
In St. Louis, the unemployment rates for the black community remains triple the rate of white residents, 14.1 percent compared to 5.7 percent for whites, he said. However, some economists claim that the economy is rapidly approaching full employment.
“Is there only one set of the population that matters?” he said. “And if they are alright, we’re all alright? That’s something we can’t accept.”
Today (March 5,) activists attempted to ask James Bullard, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, those same questions. At noon, a coalition of community-based organizations, faith leaders, elected officials, labor unions, and service organizations gathered in front of the bank in downtown St. Louis City, as a part of the national Fed Up Campaign (whatrecovery.org). They pointed to a new report released this month that details the difficulties for African-American families to find living wage employment. The report is titled, “Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserve’s Full-Employment Mandate.”
In response to the protest, a St. Louis Fed spokewoman stated in an email to the St. Louis American: “We are aware of the protest at the St. Louis Fed and respect people’s right to protest peacefully.”
The coalition asked Bullard to prioritize full employment and rising wages for all communities. Laney said as the economy starts to recover, some are calling for the Fed to raise interest rates to prevent wages from rising – which would severely impact families still struggling to recover from the Great Recession. Tomorrow, the St. Louis Fed will release new numbers regarding unemployment, and in mid-March its leaders will meet to discuss its policies. Laney said they hoped the action today will help “shape those discussions.”
The report emphasizes that the Federal Reserve is responsible for keeping inflation stable, regulating the financial system and ensuring full employment.
“These mandates reflect the tension between the interests of Wall Street on the one hand and Main Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard on the other,” the report states. “As a general matter, corporate and finance executives want to limit wage growth— or, as they call it, ‘wage inflation’—and to maximize their future profits from lending money.”
The report argues that in past decades, the Federal Reserve resolved this tension in favor of banks and corporations, intentionally limiting wage growth and keeping unemployment excessively high.
“The Fed’s policy choices over the past 35 years have led to increased inequality, stagnant or falling wages, and an American Dream that is inaccessible to tens of millions of families—particularly Black families,” it states.
Since the Ferguson movement began, local and national leaders have emphasized the need to address the “structural racism” in the region.
“Economic racism cannot be delinked from racism by law enforcement and other governmental entities,” according to the coalition’s statement. “However, James Bullard has been silent on issues of economics and their impacts on communities of color in the region over the past seven months. Today, we are bringing these issues to his front door.”
Source
3 days ago
3 days ago