CPD IN THE NEWS

The Washington Post - December 5, 2013 - The American Civil Liberties Union has sued the Federal Housing Finance Agency, asking it to disclose efforts to stop municipalities from using eminent domain to bail out underwater homeowners and make its dealings with the financial industry more transparent.

The ACLU, Center for Popular Democracy and other nonprofits filed a freedom of information lawsuit against the agency Thursday in federal court in San Francisco.Richmond, Calif., was the first city to officially codify the divisive foreclosure fighting plan, which has drawn zealous opposition from Wall Street and Washington. Two lawsuits challenging the use of eminent domain have been thrown out, but will likely be refiled. The city has not yet used eminent domain to seize a mortgage.Irvington, N.J., is moving forward with the strategy, and the city council in Newark took its first steps toward moving forward with a plan Wednesday. Yonkers, N.Y., is considering it, but other places have scrapped the idea because of opposition from banks or legal hurdles.The agency said in August it may initiate legal challenges against municipalities that want to use eminent domain to fight foreclosures and could direct regulated entities to stop doing business in those places. The nonprofits said most of the cities exploring the use of eminent domain have been besieged by foreclosures and have predominantly low-income, minority populations.The nonprofits filed freedom of information requests with the agency in October, seeking communication between agency leadership and representatives of the banking, mortgage and financial industry, and records of meetings between the agency and financiers, among other requests.FHFA acknowledged, but did not complete, the requests, according to the lawsuit, so the groups sued. The nonprofits are asking for the documents to be procured on an expedited basis.“The FHFA has taken an aggressive stance on this issue in a way that has harmed minority communities. The public deserves to know why,” said Linda Lye, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, in a statement.A FHFA spokeswoman said the agency is not commenting on the lawsuit.By using eminent domain, municipalities can circumvent mortgage contracts, acquire loans from bondholders, write them down and give them back to the bondholders with reduced principals. According to Cornell University law professor Robert C. Hockett, who devised the plan, only government has the power to forcibly sidestep mortgage contracts.The tactic only works with so-called private label security mortgages, or ones that are not backed by the federal government.FHFA oversees government-backed loans owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. They cannot be seized by eminent domain.The lawsuit said one of the agency’s “statutory mandates is to help the housing market recover,” and threatening to sue municipalities that try to use eminent domain conflicts with that obligation.“By threatening legal action,” the suit said, the agency “effectively blocks the communities hit hardest by the foreclosure crisis from pursuing one potentially effective solution on behalf of their residents.”The suit also said the agency’s threats to deny credit to communities raises Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act concerns.Members of the financial industry have said they fear using eminent domain could be a slippery slope, and penalizes people who save and invest in mortgage-backed securities.In Washington, Texas Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling and Calif. Republican Rep. John Campbell proposed legislation that would bar the federal government from backing mortgages in places that use eminent domain to seize mortgages. SIFMA, a group that represents security firms, banks and asset managers and 11 other groups sent a letter to Congress opposing the use of eminent domain.Last month, 10 members of Congress sent a letter asking the head of FHFA to rescind its threat to sue places that use eminent domain.Source

"Following discussions with my office, L Brands' (LB) subsidiary Bath & Body Works has agreed to end on-call shifts for employees in all U.S. stores next month," New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said Wednesday in a statement.

The agreement comes after the Columbus, Ohio-based retailer made the same moves at youth-focused retailer Abercrombie & Fitch (ANF) and underwear purveyor Victoria's Secret.

L Brands, which operates nearly 1,600 Bath & Body Works stores in the United States, declined to comment. A company source, however, said the company is phasing out on-call scheduling.

The company's move drew limited praise from one group advocating for workers, which said the change, while positive, still leaves troublesome policies in place.

"Since July, they have been relying on shift extensions at Victoria's Secret, which are on-call shifts by another name," Erin Hurley, an organizer for Rise Up Georgia in Atlanta, a partner of the Fair Workweek Initiative at the Center for Popular Democracy. "While we celebrate the step forward, we call on L Brands to take a definitive step toward a fair workweek by giving workers shifts with definite start and end times, and enough hours to support their families," added Hurley, a former Bath & Body Works employee.

Schneiderman in August said Gap (GPS) would this month end its policy of requiring workers to remain on-call for short-notice shifts after his office launched an inquiry, requesting information about scheduling practices from 13 retailers, including Gap, Abercrombie & Fitch and Bath & Body Works.

At the time, the attorney general said his office had received reports of more employers setting shifts the night before or even just a few hours in advance. The practice left workers with little time to arrange for childcare or work other jobs.

In New York, if workers shows up for a shift that they end up not being needed for, they're legally entitled to four hours of pay. Schneiderman's investigation delved into possible violations of that law.

"Employees deserve stable and reliable work schedules to adequately plan for childcare, transportation and other basic needs," Schneiderman said, adding that his inquiry had yielded "positive results for tens of thousands of workers."

Roughly a dozen states and a few municipalities have passed legislation addressing on-call scheduling, and a bill, the Schedules That Work Act, was reintroduced on Capitol Hill in July, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, among the sponsors.

"You can't win what you don't fight for," Warren told a news conference in acknowledging that the bill stood little chance of being enacted by the Republican-led Congress.

Source: CBS News

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland President Loretta Mester said there’s a “compelling” case for gradually raising interest rates, with the U.S. economy approaching the central bank’s targets on employment and inflation.

“Policy has to be forward-looking,” Mester told reporters Thursday following a speech in Lexington, Kentucky. “If you have a forecast and inflation is moving up to your target and you’re at full employment, then it seems like a gradual increase from a very low interest rate is pretty compelling to me. Pre-emptiveness is important.”

She declined to say precisely when she believed rate increases would be necessary.

The policy-making Federal Open Market Committee will meet Sept. 20-21 to decide whether to lift the target range for its benchmark rate. Fed Chair Janet Yellen said last week the case for an increase had “strengthened in recent months.”

Investors see a roughly one-in-four probability that the Fed will act later this month, based on pricing in federal futures funds contracts.

Too Low for Too Long

Mester, who votes this year on the FOMC, said the Fed must take seriously the risk to financial stability caused by keeping rates low for too long, although she said she didn’t think the central bank was currently “behind the curve.” Nor did she see signs of financial instability already in the economy.

In her speech, Mester rejected the argument made to a number of Fed officials last week by a coalition of community activists that continued low interest rates are needed to extend the benefits of economic recovery to disadvantaged minorities.

“I do not believe that at this point in the business cycle, the current very low level of interest rates is an effective solution to these longer-run issues,” she said.

Eleven Fed governors and regional presidents, including Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer, met with organizers from the Center for Popular Democracy’s “Fed Up” campaign on the sidelines of the annual policy retreat in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, hosted by the Kansas City Fed.

The U.S. central bank has kept rates on hold through five meetings this year following a rate hike in December that was the first in nearly a decade.

By Christopher Condon

Source

LA Times - April 13, 2015, by Samantha Masunaga - he scheduling practices of 13 retailers, including Gap Inc., Target Corp. and Abercrombie & Fitch Co., are being scrutinized by New York Atty. Gen. Eric T. Schneiderman.

In a letter sent to the retailers, the attorney general's office said it had received reports that a growing number of employers, particularly in the retail industry, were requiring hourly employees to work on-call shifts. The office said it had “reason to believe” the 13 retailers might be using this kind of scheduling.

A New York state law requires that employees who are asked to come into work must be paid for at least four hours atminimum wage or the number of hours in the regularly scheduled shift, whichever is less, even if the employee is sent home.

California has a similar law that says employees must be paid for half of their usual time — two to four hours — if they are required to come in to work but are not needed or work less than their normal schedule.

The letter was also sent to J. Crew Group Inc.; L Brands, which owns Victoria's Secret and Bath and Body Works; Burlington Stores Inc.; TJX Cos.; Urban Outfitters Inc.; Sears Holdings Corp.; Williams-Sonoma Inc.; Crocs Inc.; Ann Inc., which owns Ann Taylor; and J.C. Penney Co.

The letters ask the retailers for more information about how they schedule employees for work, including whether they use on-call shifts and computerized scheduling programs.

Rachel Deutsch, an attorney at the Center for Popular Democracy, a New York worker advocacy group, said on-call scheduling can make it difficult for workers to arrange child care or pick up a second job.

“These are folks that want to work,” she said. “They’re ready and willing to work, and some weeks they might get no pay at all even though they set aside 100% of their time to work.”

Danielle Lang, a Skadden fellow at Bet Tzedek Legal Services in Los Angeles, said the attorney general’s action could have repercussions in other states.

“The New York attorney general is a powerful force,” she said. “It’s certainly an issue that’s facing so many of our low-wage workers in California, and anything that puts a highlight on this practice and really pressures employers to think about these practices is a good thing.”

Sears, Target and Ann Inc. said in separate statements that they do not have on-call shifts for their workers. J.C. Penney said it has a policy against on-call scheduling.

TJX spokeswoman Doreen Thompson said in a statement that company management teams “work to develop schedules that serve the needs of both our associates and our company.”

Gap said in a statement that the company has been working on a project with the Center for WorkLife Law at UC Hastings College of the Law to examine workplace scheduling and productivity and will see the first set of data results in the fall.

“Gap Inc. is committed to establishing sustainable scheduling practices that will improve stability for our employees, while helping toeffectively manage our business,” spokeswoman Laura Wilkinson said.

The remaining companies did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

Source