Black Lives Matter coalition issues first political agenda demanding slavery reparations
Black Lives Matter coalition issues first political agenda demanding slavery reparations
A coalition built on the Black Lives Matter movement has issued its first political agenda demanding reforms in the...
A coalition built on the Black Lives Matter movement has issued its first political agenda demanding reforms in the American justice system and reparations for slavery. Some 60 organisations in the Movement for Black Lives endorsed the platform calling for "black liberation" that had been forged over a year of discussions.
The agenda included six demands and 40 policy recommendations, including a reduction in military spending and a focus on protecting safe drinking water.
It also called for an end to the death penalty, decriminalisation of drug-related offences and prostitution, and the "demilitarisation" of police departments. It seeks reparations for lasting harms caused to African-Americans by slavery and investment in education, jobs and mental health programmes.
The agenda by the Movement for Black Lives came hard on the heel of the Republican and Democratic national conventions, which failed to satisfy members.
"On both sides of the aisle, the candidates have really failed to address the demands and the concerns of our people," said Marbre Stahly-Butts of the Movement for Black Lives Policy Table, which crafted the agenda.
He told the New York Times. "So this was less about this specific political moment and this election, and more about how do we actually start to plant and cultivate the seeds of transformation of this country that go beyond individual candidates."
The overarching mission of the group is to halt the "increasingly visible violence against black communities". Its agenda was issued just days before the second anniversary of the killing of unarmed black teen Michael Brown by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.
Brown's death and the killing of other unarmed black men by white officers was the birth of the Black Lives Matter movement.
"We seek radical transformation, not reactionary reform," said Michaela Brown, a spokeswoman for Baltimore Bloc, one of the organisations that worked on the platform.
"As the 2016 election continues, this platform provides us with a way to intervene with an agenda that resists state and corporate power, an opportunity to implement policies that truly value the safety and humanity of black lives, and an overall means to hold elected leaders accountable."
By MARY PAPENFUSS
Source
Tipirneni Gains Momentum In Last Week Of CD8 Special Elections, Outraises Lesko
Tipirneni Gains Momentum In Last Week Of CD8 Special Elections, Outraises Lesko
The democrat gained her financial advantage mostly through small donors, but also recently received support from...
The democrat gained her financial advantage mostly through small donors, but also recently received support from healthcare activist Ady Barkan, who launched a six-figure ad campaign supporting her bid for congress. Barkan’s group, Be A Hero plans on supporting Democratic candidates across the nation, starting with Tiperneni’s campaign in CD8.
Read the full article here.
The Minimum Wage Needs An Upgrade
The Minimum Wage Needs An Upgrade
Seventy-eight years ago today, the Fair Labor Standards Act made a groundbreaking promise to Americans: the promise of...
Seventy-eight years ago today, the Fair Labor Standards Act made a groundbreaking promise to Americans: the promise of a fair minimum wage for an honest day’s work.
That promise, however, has eroded badly over time. In recent decades, the federal benchmark has grown increasingly obsolete, guaranteeing a bare minimum that is nowhere near enough to keep up with the growing costs of rent, food, and other essentials.
As calls for higher wages grow louder nationwide, it is imperative that federal officials take action to raise the federal minimum wage and renew the promise to American workers made nearly a century ago.
If the federal rate had merely kept up with inflation since its peak in the late 1960s, it would be nearly $11, one-and-a-half times today’s rate of $7.25. That rate has stayed stagnant since Congress last raised it in 2009. It is a remarkable number of years to go without an increase in wages, and workers have suffered for it.
In the absence of Congressional movement, states and cities have increasingly moved to give workers the raises they need. Yet entrenched forces at the federal level continue to stonewall, putting forth arguments that grow increasingly irrelevant by the day.
Many, for example, raise the specter of job losses. Yet cities that have raised their minimum wage in the past two years, from Los Angeles to Seattle to Chicago, simply have not seen the kinds of cataclysm that many warned about.
In fact, in Seattle, dozens of new restaurants have opened since higher wages kicked in – including many run by one of the fiercest critics of the increase. By the end of 2015, new permits for restaurants, coffee shops, and other food service establishments were on track to keep pace with or even surpass those issued in years past.
Another myth: higher wages would lead to higher prices - a bigger bill for a Big Mac, a pricier trip to Target. Yet here too, the apocalyptic predictions that precede wage increases fail to come true. In Seattle, the costs of groceries, gas, and retail have stayed stable over the past year - even though businesses warned they would need to hike prices if wages were to rise.
In recent weeks, some fast-food chains have made headlines by declaring they would replace employees with automated kiosks. Looking at the bigger picture, though, the overall risks of automation are low. Research just last year found that, while minimum wage increases can reduce some routinized jobs like cashiers, they also swell the number of more complex jobs like food preparation, resulting in an overall zero-sum change.
The fact is, raising the minimum wage gives local economies a boost by putting more money in the pockets of consumers. Higher wages also let businesses hold on to workers and improve customer satisfaction, all of which improve employers’ bottom line.
That’s why the majority of businesses actually support a higher minimum wage, despite the noise coming from groups like the Chamber of Commerce and the National Restaurant Association. A leaked memo earlier this year showed that 80 percent of business executives around the country support higher wages and paid sick days - and that they are coached to oppose those policies in public.
While powerful interests keep trying to muddle the debate, it’s clear that even a growing economy is simply not reaching millions of hardworking Americans. And it’s not just fast-food workers. A variety of workers receive less than $15: teachers, paramedics, home health-care workers, and many others. A recent study showed that even many manufacturing jobs – the foundation of the middle-class – pay less than $15, forcing the government to cover the gap with public assistance programs like food stamps and Medicaid.
As minimum wages affect more and more workers, it is no wonder that more Americans are starting to get on board. This year, dozens of cities and states – including some that lean deeply Republican – are considering increases. Colorado, Maine, Arizona and Washington State are all running ballot measures that would raise wages for close to two million workers in those states alone.
Rather than focusing on a fantasy Armageddon that never comes, lawmakers in Congress would do well to embrace the need for better pay. In the meantime, states and cities will continue the fight to fulfill the pledge that the FLSA made so many years ago.
By JoEllen Chernow
Source
Austin Passed a Landmark Paid Leave Policy. Will Texas Republicans Undermine It?
Austin Passed a Landmark Paid Leave Policy. Will Texas Republicans Undermine It?
It can have a chilling impact on the introduction of policies that have the potential to be pre-empted,” said Sarah...
It can have a chilling impact on the introduction of policies that have the potential to be pre-empted,” said Sarah Johnson, director of Local Progress, which was involved in advocating for the legislation. But Austin decided to take a different approach. The city “realiz[ed] their power and [fought] back and [went] on offense despite that.
Read the full article here.
Amazon’s $15 an Hour Minimum Wage and the Federal Reserve Board
Amazon’s $15 an Hour Minimum Wage and the Federal Reserve Board
This is where Fed Up played an incredible role. They were a crucial voice on the other side, constantly reminding the...
This is where Fed Up played an incredible role. They were a crucial voice on the other side, constantly reminding the Fed of its legal mandate to promote full employment. Fed Up had important allies in this effort, most importantly former Fed chair Janet Yellen, but it is likely that Yellen and her allies on the FOMC would have been forced to raise rates sooner and faster if not for pressure from Fed Up.
Read the full article here.
Scaffold Law Debate Heats Up Over Dueling Reports on Safety and Costs
Legislative Gazetter - April 21, 2014, by Matthew Dondiego - A new report released last Thursday by a pro-labor, pro-...
Legislative Gazetter - April 21, 2014, by Matthew Dondiego - A new report released last Thursday by a pro-labor, pro-immigrant rights advocacy group criticizes the construction industry for using what they call misleading figures and cherry picking data to lobby against the state's controversial "scaffold law."
The scaffold law is a century-old law in place to protect worker's rights. Under the law, contractors and property owners serving as contractors are responsible for providing a safe work environment for their employees or become liable for any on-site injuries and accidents.
Opponents of the law point out that contractors are fully liable for workers' injuries even if it is determined the worker is at fault. Opponents say it is outdated and causes construction costs to rise due to the increased costs of insurance premiums. Supporters of the law say it provides common sense protection for workers performing a dangerous job and maintain that contractors are not held liable in court if proper safety precautions are in place.
The new report, titled Fatally Flawed and released by the Center for Popular Democracy, which is supported financially by the New York State Trial Lawyers Association and labor unions, is a scathing criticism of a Rockefeller Institute study — which is frequently referenced by the construction industry — that concluded the scaffold law resulted in an additional 667 work site injuries and adds about $3 billion in additional costs to construction projects in New York state each year.
According to last week's report, the oft-cited Rockefeller Institute study is "fundamentally biased" and calls the New York Civil Justice Institute, which paid $82,800 to commission the Rockefeller study, "a poorly-disguised front group" for the construction industry aligned Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York. According to the report, the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York and the New York Civil Justice Institute share the same address, 19 Dove St, Suite 201, Albany, N.Y., and the same telephone and fax numbers.
"This [Rockefeller Institute] study was bought and paid for by the construction industry," Josie Duffy, a staff attorney for the Center for Popular Democracy. "This is a direct result of people who do not like the scaffold law for business reasons, paying for this report to be released."
On the claim that the scaffold law contributed an additional 667 injuries, the report says the Rockefeller Institute "confuses correlation with causation."
This claim, according the Center for Popular Democracy, is based on worker injury rates in "sub-sectors and non-construction industries," such as warehouse work, transportation, roofing, residential building construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade and utilities industries, and are compared to the rest of the nation.
"The authors assert that these differences are greater in New York and attribute these greater differences entirely to the scaffold law," the new report reads. "There is simply no basis to conclude that the scaffold law is the cause of these differences. Indeed, the authors provide no justification for comparing injury rates in construction with injury rates in less hazardous industries, or using those differences as a proxy for the impact of the scaffold law."
Duffy bluntly says that the scaffold law does not cause an increase in workplace accidents. She says the Rockefeller Institute's study, which was released in February, lacks factual evidence that the law makes work sites more dangerous and "that number is coming from nowhere."
"To me, that is the most egregious part of this whole report," Duffy said.
Despite the strong words used in the report and by Duffy, Tom Stebbins, executive director of the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York, says that the Rockefeller report "conclusively" found the law made construction sites more dangerous for workers.
He said that absolute liability for contractors creates "perverse incentives" for workers.
"Workers are not incentivized because they are never held responsible and contractors are not incentivized because they are guilty in nearly every circumstance," Stebbins said. "Only by apportioning liability to fault, as is done in every other state and every other part of our civil justice system, can we maintain balance and improve safety."
According to Stebbins, the report released by the Center for Popular Democracy last week is a "political hit piece, with no statistical merit or actual research of any kind. They cannot get researchers to back up their opinions, because the facts do not support the scaffold law."
Stebbins argues that absolute liability causes the insurance markets to treat sites with sterling safety records the same as companies with less stringent safety precautions. Opponents of the scaffold law say that absolute liability holds the company liable for the worker injuries regardless of who is actually found to be at fault.
Duffy however, said that companies are not automatically found to be liable for injuries sustained by workers on construction sites and are typically safe from injury-related costs so long as they had the proper safety precautions in place.
"What absolute liability means is that you have to pay for the costs of the injuries … and that's only going to happen if you're breaking the law," she explained. "What this law says is there has to be some level of protection for workers."
According to Duffy, under the law companies still hold the right to argue their case in court and they are not automatically found responsible for every injury.
"It's important that employers get to have their voices heard in law, I support that this law allows people to get their voices heard on both sides and that's a very, very real protection," she said "Nothing happens automatically in this law and you can't even be taken to court unless your breaking the law in the first place."
The report also criticizes the Rockefeller Institute for failing to take into consideration certain conditions in New York that may affect the injury rates in the state. Such measures include New York generally has more high-level construction works which may drive up injury rates and New York construction workers are more likely to be union workers and therefore are more likely to report injuries. According to the report, Texas has one of the lowest construction injury rates yet is among the highest in construction fatality rates.
According to the report, "Such low-injury-rate states have artificially suppressed the US injury rate, which the paper nonetheless compares to the New York rate."
"This is a law that protects construction workers. Construction workers are doing a really difficult job and they're doing it every day and they are growing our economy," Duffy said. "Construction workers are literally the bread and butter of what makes New York City, New York City … and this is a state of construction."
Assemblyman Francisco Moya, a Democrat from Queens, said the Center for Popular Democracy's report "injected some truth into the politically-charged debate surrounding the scaffold law."
"Many untruths have been lobbed at the scaffold law in an attempt to dismantle it. This report makes clear that those untruths have unfortunately been crafted by parties who have a financial interest in watering down workplace protections," Moya, a staunch supporter of the law, said in an e-mail. "When it comes to life and death decisions about workplace safety, there's no room for politics. It has to be about facts. And the fact is that the Scaffold Law protects workers. That's the real bottom line."
Source
Overnight Finance: Obama huddles with Yellen; Puerto Rico bill markup Wednesday
Overnight Finance: Obama huddles with Yellen; Puerto Rico bill markup Wednesday
TRADING NOTES: President Obama met with Federal Reserve Board Chairwoman Janet Yellen, but interest rates were...
TRADING NOTES: President Obama met with Federal Reserve Board Chairwoman Janet Yellen, but interest rates were apparently not on the agenda.
Obama did not plan to discuss interest rates with Yellen, according to White House press secretary Josh Earnest. He argued such a conversation could undercut the chair's independence in setting monetary policy.
"I would not anticipate that, even in the confidential setting, that the president would have a conversation with the chair of the Fed that would undermine her ability to make these kinds of critical monetary policy decisions independently," Earnest told reporters ahead of the meeting.
The closed-door discussion is instead an opportunity to "trade notes" on broader economic trends in the U.S. and abroad, as well as on a new set of regulations on Wall Street financial firms.
Obama and Yellen talked about the growth outlook, "the state of the labor market, inequality and potential risks to the economy," the White House said after the meeting. The Hill's Jordan Fabian has more: http://bit.ly/25VuzIZ.
HOUSE TO MARKUP PUERTO RICO DEBT BILL: The House Natural Resources Committee will begin on Wednesday to mark up legislation aimed at saving Puerto Rico from a massive debt crisis.
Lawmakers have been working to make significant changes to the measure, which is expected to unveiled as early as Monday night, since the panel released a discussion draft on March 29.
The Puerto Rico measure, which put the island's finances under federal oversight and authorize a restructuring of some of its debt, will need to strike a balance and attract bipartisan support and the backing of the White House to move forward.
LEW MAKES CASE FOR GLOBAL ECONOMIC LEADERSHIP: Treasury Secretary Jack Lew on Monday made the case for the United States to continue its global economic leadership as the administration faces criticism from Donald Trump and other presidential candidates.
"We know that the global landscape of the next century will be very different than that of the post-war era," Lew said in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. "And if we want it to work for the American people, we need to embrace new players on the global economic stage and make sure they meet the standards of the system we created, and that we have a strong say in any new standards."
"The worst possible outcome would be to step away from our leadership role and let others fill in behind us," he added. The Hill's Naomi Jagoda fills us in: http://bit.ly/1qjTIwe.
GOLDMAN SACHS SETTLES MORTGAGE PROBE FOR $5 BILLION: Goldman Sachs will pay more than $5 billion to settle charges that it engaged in "serious misconduct" when selling risky mortgages leading up to the 2008 financial collapse.
The $5.06 billion civil settlement also saw the Wall Street giant admit it failed to properly inform investors of the risks in the subprime mortgage securities the bank was selling.
"This resolution holds Goldman Sachs accountable for its serious misconduct in falsely assuring investors that securities it sold were backed by sound mortgages, when it knew that they were full of mortgages that were likely to fail," acting associate attorney general Stuart Delery said in a statement.
One of the government charges, which Goldman has now acknowledged, was that the bank kept internal concerns about the strength of the mortgage market hidden from potential investors. Here's more from The Hill's Peter Schroeder: http://bit.ly/1qjTJQQ.
SANDERS SAYS GOLDMAN'S BUSINESS 'RIGGED': Bernie Sanders charged Monday that the settlement proves Goldman Sachs's business is "based on fraud."
The Justice Department announced Monday that the Wall Street giant would pay over $5 billion to settle charges it sold risky mortgage investments in the lead up to the financial crisis, and didn't tell investors enough about it.
Sanders, who has built his presidential campaign in large part on big bank bashing, said the settlement proves his point.
"What they have just acknowledged to the whole world is that their system ... is based on fraud," he told supporters in New York.
Sanders also complained that the civil settlement did not include any criminal charges, proving the "corruption of our criminal justice system." http://bit.ly/1TNk2Lm
HAPPY MONDAY and welcome to Overnight Finance, where we're wondering why Herbert Hoover gets to join the racing presidents. I'm Sylvan Lane, and here's your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line.
Tonight's highlights include securities fraud charges for Texas's attorney general, a trillion-dollar national pension gap and a Tax Day delay.
See something I missed? Let me know at slane@thehill.com or tweet me @SylvanLane. And if you like your newsletter, you can subscribe to it here: http://www.thehill.com/signup/48.
ON TAP TOMORROW:
Senate Finance Committee: Hearing on examining cybersecurity and protecting taxpayer information, 10 a.m
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services: Hearings to examine proposed budget estimates and justification for fiscal year 2017 for the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission., 10:30 a.m.
House Rules Committee: Business Meeting: H.R. 2666: No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act; H.R. 3340: Financial Stability Oversight Council Reform Act; H.R. 3791: To raise the consolidated assets threshold under the small bank holding company policy statement and for other purposes.
Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act expected to be released.
"Getting Her Money's Worth: What Will It Take to Achieve Equal Pay?" discussion featuring Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), 11:45 am.
BERNIE FANS LEFT'S FLAMES AGAINST FED: Liberal activists are putting a target on the Federal Reserve for the 2016 elections, much to the delight of the Bernie Sanders campaign.
Denouncing an agenda that they say tilts toward Wall Street, members of the "Fed Up" coalition on Monday unveiled a set of reforms that would alter how the central bank does business.
"No longer are we focused only on fixing the Fed's monetary policy and internal governance positions," said Ady Barkan, the group's campaign director. "We are now beginning an effort to reform the Federal Reserve itself. Peter Schroeder breaks down the fight: http://bit.ly/23yMSBH.
YOU HAVE THREE MORE DAYS TO PROCRASTINATE: For most people, tax returns are due one week from today.
This year's due date for filing federal individual income tax returns is April 18, not April 15. This is because the District of Columbia is observing Emancipation Day on April 15, which falls on a Friday, according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
People living in Massachusetts and Maine have until April 19 to file their tax returns because those states observe Patriots' Day on April 18.
Those who are serving in combat zones or contingency operations or become hospitalized due to injuries from their service can have additional time to pay their taxes. Those affected by federally declared disasters might also have more time, the IRS said: http://bit.ly/1Q3tzHk.
AG GROUPS PUSH FOR PACIFIC TRADE DEAL: The nation's farmers and ranchers are putting their weight behind efforts urging Congress to pass a sweeping Asia-Pacific deal this year.
In a letter to congressional leaders on Monday, 225 food and agricultural groups called on lawmakers to move forward on the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership before President Obama leaves office.
"The TPP presents a valuable opportunity for U.S. agriculture; one that we cannot afford to miss," the groups wrote. The Hill's Vicki Needham explains why: http://bit.ly/1S5QCFD.
SEC CHARGES TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL: The Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday charged Texas's top law enforcement official with civil securities fraud for allegedly deceiving investors in a computer company.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) received 100,000 shares of Servergy, a Nevada-based technology company, to pitch investors on a server it was selling between 2011 and 2013, according to the SEC complaint. Servergy officials allegedly marketed the server with incorrect information, and Paxton allegedly did not disclose to investors that he would be paid a commission: http://bit.ly/1RPHyG0.
US PUBLIC PENSIONS FACE $3 TRILLION HOLE: The nation's public pension system is facing a $3.4 trillion funding hole that may force cities and states to either cut spending or raise taxes to cover future shortfalls.
The deficit in pension funds is three times more than official figures and is growing, and without an overhaul could weigh on state and local budgets and lead to Detroit-like bankruptcies, according to research reported by the Financial Times.
Joshua Rauh, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution who put together the report, told the FT that "the pension problems are threatening to consume state and local budgets in the absence of some major changes."
"It is quite likely that over a 5- to 10-year horizon we are going to see more bankruptcies of cities where the unfunded pension liabilities will play a large role." Here's more from Vicki Needham: http://bit.ly/1Su85op.
CONSERVATIVES FIGHT ENERGY TAX BREAKS IN FAA BILL: Conservative groups that oppose a proposal to include energy tax breaks in the long-term reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration are vowing to take their fight to the House if the Senate moves ahead.
Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Partners said Monday that if the Senate ends up attaching energy tax provisions to the FAA bill, the organizations will ratchet up pressure on lawmakers across the Capitol to oppose the language or pass a clean-extension of FAA.
"If the Senate isn't going to do anything to stop this, we're going to put pressure on the House," Andy Koenig, senior policy advisor at Freedom Partners, said on a press call. "The House is under no obligation to take up a bunch of energy subsidies if they don't want to." The Hill's Melanie Zanona walks us through the battle: http://bit.ly/1RPHrKH.
DEMS CALL FOR GREATER NONBANK MORTGAGE OVERSIGHT: Two Democratic lawmakers are calling on the nation's top consumer protection agency to ramp up its oversight of nonbank mortgage servicers.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.) asked the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) on Monday to identify all of and collect more data on the growing number of financial institutions other than banks that service mortgages.
Warren and Cummings pointed to recommendations from a non-partisan government watchdog report published Monday. Warren, a long-time financial industry watchdog, and Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, requested the Government Accountability Office (GAO) study. I'll fill you in on the rest here: http://bit.ly/1Sc3ldc.
Did you know 67% of all job growth comes from small businesses? Read More
NIGHTCAP: Five Starbucks locations in DC will start serving alcohol and "small plates," which is millennial for paying more money for less food: https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/04/08/5-dc-starbucks-will-sell-beer-wine-small-plates-next-week/.
By Sylvan Lane
Source
New York charter school audits reveal $28 million in questionable expenses
New York State charter schools have made more than $28 million in questionable expenditures since 2002, according to a...
New York State charter schools have made more than $28 million in questionable expenditures since 2002, according to a new review of previous audits of the publicly funded, privately run schools.
The Center for Popular Democracy’s analysis charter school audits found investigators uncovered probable financial mismanagement in 95% of the schools they examined.
Kyle Serrette, education director for the progressive group, said the review of previously published audits showed the schools need greater oversight.
“We can’t afford to have a system that fails to cull the fraudulent charter operators from the honest ones,” said Serrette, whose group compiled the report with the non-profit Alliance for Quality Education. “Establishing a charter school oversight system that prevents fraud, waste and mismanagement will attack the root cause of the problem.”
The state controller’s office and state Education Department have audited 62 of New York’s 248 charter schools, according to Serrette’s report. All told, Serrette’s group estimates wasteful spending at charters could cost taxpayers more than $50 million per year.
Eighteen audits targeted charters in New York City, representing about 9% of the 197 charters in the five boroughs. Each audit found issues.
A 2012 audit found Brooklyn Excelsior Charter School was paying $800,000 in excess annual fees to the management company that holds its building’s lease. A 2012 audit of Williamsburg Charter High School revealed school officials overbilled the city for operations and paid contractors for $200,800 in services that should have been provided by the school’s network. A 2007 audit of the Carl C. Icahn Charter School determined the Bronx school spent more than $1,288 on alcohol for staff parties and failed to account for another $102,857 in expenses.The city spends more than $1.29 billion on charters annually.
State Education Department officials and a spokesman for the state controller’s office declined to comment on Serrette’s report.
Northeast Charter School Network CEO Kyle Rosenkrans said the schools already get plenty of oversight because they are subject to audits and must have their charters renewed at least every five years.
“Charter schools are the most accountable public schools there are,” the charter advocate said. “If we don’t perform or we mismanage our finances, we get shut down.
Source: New York Daily News
Fed Chair Candidate Kevin Warsh Draws Opposition From Left and Right
Fed Chair Candidate Kevin Warsh Draws Opposition From Left and Right
On a Wednesday in mid-September, a group of progressive activists concerned about the stewardship of the American...
On a Wednesday in mid-September, a group of progressive activists concerned about the stewardship of the American economy packed a meeting room on Capitol Hill with staff of Senate Democrats. Part strategy session and part pep talk, the gathering had a very specific aim.
“We’ll do whatever we can do to prevent Kevin Warsh from taking on the role of chair of the Federal Reserve,” Jennifer Epps-Addison, president of the Center for Popular Democracy, told the gathering.
Read the full article here.
Why it’s hard to legislate good corporate behavior
San Francisco, the country’s premier laboratory for new Internet services, is also used to innovating in municipal...
San Francisco, the country’s premier laboratory for new Internet services, is also used to innovating in municipal regulation.
But in its latest experiment, it’s starting to find that legislating good corporate behavior isn’t as easy as pressing a button on your smartphone.
In July, the city started implementing a first-in-the-nation law aimed at curtailing the trend towards “just-in-time” scheduling, where managers call in employees to work on short notice. The new measure requires large chain retailers— such as Safeway and Walgreen’s — to publish schedules at least two weeks in advance, and to compensate employees with “predictability pay” if they make changes less than a week ahead of time. It also mandates that additional hours be offered to existing employees first before new hires are made, and that part-time workers be paid at the same rate as people who work full-time.
So far, it’s been easier to publish schedules than live up to the spirit of the law.
"The two-week notice seemed to be instituted right away, but the other stuff is lagging,” says Gordon Mar, director of San Francisco Jobs With Justice, a labor-backed group that pushed for the “Retail Workers Bill of Rights” and has been monitoring its implementation.
The sluggish response may be because fines don’t kick in until Oct. 3; the city is still hashing out the rules. But the spotty compliance so far highlights the difficulty of attempts to mandate worker-friendly practices — especially the kind that touch the most fundamental aspects of business operations, rather than those that simply require higher pay and better benefits.
San Francisco employers fought the new ordinance, but couldn’t prevent its passage. Now, they complain it’s impacting service.
“We’re hearing from members in San Francisco that it really is not working well at all,” says Ronald Fong, president of the California Grocers Association. Stores can’t always predict surges in foot traffic, which might be brought on a sunny day, leaving managers without the option to bring in more staff. That was a problem during the heat wave that swept over San Francisco this summer.
"Supplies weren’t able to get out to the shelves,” Fong says. "It just kind of snowballed, and our customers have a bad experience, or the stores lose sales.”
Some businesses don’t mind the rules in principle, but object to the red tape. "Everybody pretty much operates on a predictive schedule,” says Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Association. “But the process of implementing this, with offering the employees hours in writing and waiting three days for a response, it’s a lot of government intrusion into very minute detail.”
Also, not all industries schedule their workers in the same way. Milton Moritz is president of the National Association of Theatre Owners’ California and Nevada chapter, and says the theater business is by nature unpredictable, making the new law particularly difficult to comply with.
“We might not know until the Monday before the Friday a film shows, and even then we’re hiring, firing, scheduling people based on the business that film’s going to do,” Moritz says. “This ordinance flies in the face of all that. It really complicates the issue tremendously.”
The San Francisco ordinance hasn’t just been irritating for big companies. Some workers grumble the law discourages employers from offering extra shifts on short notice, because they would have to pay the last-minute schedule change penalty — even if workers would be happy for the chance to pick up more hours.
Rachel Deutsch, a senior staff attorney with the Center for Popular Democracy who has been helping local jurisdictions across the country craft fair-scheduling legislation, says that’s something that might change in future iterations.
"I think that’s the thing with any policy where it’s the first attempt to solve a complicated economic problem,” Deutsch says. "It’s been a learning process.”
So far, fair scheduling laws aren’t spreading as quickly as minimum wage and paid sick leave laws. A statewide bill in California failed a couple weeks ago, and no other local ordinances have passed besides San Francisco’s, though there are active campaigns in several cities including Minneapolis and Washington D.C.
Meanwhile, several companies have acted on their own to curb some of the practices that workers have found most disruptive, like on-call shifts, where workers have to be available even if they aren’t ultimately asked to work. But in some cases — like that of Starbucks, which committed to eliminating many of those practices — those voluntary changes haven’t been any more effectivethan government mandates.
Erin Hurley worked at Bath & Body Works and campaigned for an end to on-call shifts. After she left the job, parent company L Brands said it would stop the practice at Bath & Body Works as well as another of its chains, Victoria’s Secret. But Hurley says she’s heard from current workers that managers are still doing effectively the same thing, by asking employees to stay a little longer.
“On-call shifts were replaced with shift extensions,” says Hurley. “Basically what L Brands did was change the name of the practice.” Keeping people on-call is very convenient for employers, and letting it go can be easier said than done. (L Brands did not respond to a request for comment.)
Still, advocates in San Francisco think the Retail Workers Bill of Rights has already done some good, and will be more effective when the city’s enforcement kicks into high gear — just like overtime rules did, when companies got used to obeying them.
Take Michelle Flores, 21, who has worked part time at Safeway for two years to support herself while in going to college. Unpredictable schedules made that difficult: She would only know her shifts a few days beforehand, which sometimes didn’t leave her enough time to hit the books.
"I would study from midnight until 5, 6 a.m., sleep for two or three hours, and then go to the exam,” says Flores, 21, who attends San Francisco State. This year, she expects that to change. "If I know that I have a shift scheduled, I’ll just study another day,” Flores says.
Also, the law came with some funding for community organizations to make employees aware of what workers are entitled to. That has ancillary effects — like getting people interested in joining a union, which can be better equipped to make sure companies are following the rules.
“It just creates an opportunity to talk to more workers about their rights under the law, and that leads to conversations about other issues in the workplace,” says Gordon Mar, of Jobs with Justice. “And that could lead to getting organized.”
Source: Washington Post
1 day ago
1 day ago