Sawant Effort to Bypass Voters on Hotel Workers Initiative Fails
Sawant Effort to Bypass Voters on Hotel Workers Initiative Fails
1. City council member Kshama Sawant tried to pass a last-minute motion at yesterday’s full council meeting to “release...
1. City council member Kshama Sawant tried to pass a last-minute motion at yesterday’s full council meeting to “release the clerk file” on the hotel workers’ union initiative I-124, an initiative that mandates protections against sexual harassment of hotel housekeepers, workers who are predominantly women. (The initiative also seeks to improve workers’ health care coverage and protect unionized workers when their hotel changes ownership.)
Unite HERE Local 8, the hotel workers’ union that collected signatures for the measure, turned in more than 32,000 signatures last week, giving them more than enough to qualify for the ballot.
The council has until early August to send the initiative to the November ballot, and they planned to vote on it on next Monday July 25. By law, the council has three options when considering an initiative: they can send it to the voters, they can send it to the voters with an alternative, or they can simply approve the law themselves. However, they only have the option of approving a citizens’ initiative as law themselves one week after its introduced. In other words, they don’t have that option on July 25 when the the measure will be formally introduced. They could, however, approve it in its own right at the following full council meeting on Monday, August 2.
Sawant’s procedural move would have created the one week window, allowing the council to simply adopt the measure as an ordinance in its own right at the July 25 vote—something that would have saved the union an expensive fight at the ballot box fight.
Sawant said the law “was straight forward” and since “hotel workers have a hard life in general…I don’t think they need to spend the next several months” on a ballot fight.
Council members clearly weren’t comfortable approving a ballot measure in its own right without a comprehensive vetting and public process, something they don’t believe they can do in one or two weeks, and so, are likely, next week, to simply send the measure to the ballot next Monday.
Sawant’s motion failed 6-2 (Sally Bagshaw, Tim Burgess, Bruce Harrell, Lisa Herbold, Rob Johnson, and Mike O’Brien voted no) and Debora Juarez voted with Sawant.
Juarez made it clear that she simply seconded Sawant’s resolution to make it possible to vote on the law itself on next week and not necessarily to indicate that she supported bypassing voters. Sawant said the law “was straight forward” and since “hotel workers have a hard life in general…I don’t think they need to spend the next several months” on a ballot fight.
2. A new study on unpredictable work schedules called “Scheduling Away our Health” found that:
Hourly workers who received one week or less notice of their schedules are more likely to report their health as poor or fair (rather than good or excellent) than workers with more advance notice. About 20 percent of those receiving one week or less of schedule notice reported poor or fair health, compared to about 12 percent-13 percent for workers with more notice.
The study was done by a health care group called Human Impact Partners in conjunction with lefty group The Center for Popular Democracy.
Local group Working Washington is pushing the city council to pass a “secured scheduling” ordinance that would make employers give workers two weeks notice on schedules.
By JOSH FEIT
Source
De Blasio Administration Rejects Two Council Voter Registration Bills
Gotham Gazette - October 23, 2014, by Kristen Meriwether -In 2000 the City Council passed Local Law 29 which aimed to...
Gotham Gazette - October 23, 2014, by Kristen Meriwether -In 2000 the City Council passed Local Law 29 which aimed to increase voter registration by requiring 19 city agencies to offer voter registration forms to its customers. It's fourteen years after the law's passage and compliance has been abysmal.
A report compiled by Center for Popular Democracy released this week shows during their walk-ins to 14 of those city agencies, 95 percent of people were never asked if they wanted to register to vote. Of those who self-identified as citizens, the report indicated 84 percent were not given a voter registration form.
On Thursday the City Council held an oversight hearing to discuss the poor compliance and introduce two bills aimed to increase voter registration at the city agency level. Intro 493, sponsored by Committee on Government Operations chair Ben Kallos, would require 15 additional agencies to be covered under the agency-based voter registration law. Intro 356, sponsored by Council Member Jumaane Williams, would assign a code to each agency that would be printed on the voter registration forms and allow the City to track how many forms are being utilized from each agency.
Both bills are being rejected by the de Blasio administration.
"We are committed to getting agency-based voter registration right," Mindy Tarlow, director of the Mayor's Office of Operations, said during her testimony. "But to get it done, we are going to need time and space to manage the agencies and correct long-standing behavior."
Tarlow pointed to Directive 1, issued by Mayor Bill de Blasio on July 11, 2014. In the directive—his first as mayor—he ordered each agency covered under Local Law 29 to prepare a plan showing how they would implement the requirements of the Charter and submit it within 60 days.
The directive also requires each agency submit a semi-annual report on how the plan is being implemented which will include the number of voter registration forms distributed, the number of registration forms completed, and the number of forms transmitted to the Board of Elections.
Tarlow said she agrees with the assessment that there is a problem, but she argued that with the administration already addressing the problem, it was too early for further legislation.
"It is hard. We are trying to bring a number of agencies along," Tarlow said, adding that before moving on new legislation, "we want a chance to feel like we have made some inroads."
Tarlow did not provide an exact timeline as to when the Council would see the results from Directive 1, but did promise to share preliminary reports with the Council some time at the end of November. Kallos jokingly said he looked forward to to reading it in between bites of his Thanksgiving dinner.
"We need the flexibility to watch this over time," Henry Berger, special counsel to the mayor, said during the hearing.
Intro 356The administration's rejection of the second bill, Intro 356, is based less on Directive 1 and more on privacy concerns. Tarlow argued that by putting a code which would identify what agency a voter was getting services from may deter voters from registering at agencies.
"This is to protect the privacy of the individuals who receive services from government that they don't wish to be disclosed," Tarlow said in her testimony.
The council members now face the prospect of attempting to negotiate the bills with the administration.
On Thursday, Council Member Williams went through a lengthy back-and-forth with members of the administration as well as representatives of the Board of Elections (who testified in a later panel) to dispute objections. Williams argued there was already a code (the number 9) on all voter registration forms coming from City agencies and a separate code for those coming from CUNY.
Both Williams and Kallos asked if it was a matter of that information being released to the public or simply being documented. Tarlow said it wasn't a matter of determining who the person was, but what services they were seeking or receiving. She said the administration believes the fear of that information getting out would deter people from signing up to register to vote.
Williams pointed out information such as social security numbers, fax numbers, and driver's license numbers are all exempt from public reporting, but records are still kept. He argued this code could be exempt as well.
Michael Ryan, executive director of the New York City Board of Elections (BOE), said during his testimony the BOE did not believe this code could be exempt based on current law, but he admitted they did not have a chance to dive in deeply on the issue because they were preparing for the upcoming election.
"I don't know that I have been persuaded," Williams said.
Source
Harvard's Endowment Is Profiting From Puerto Rico's Debt As The Island's Schools Face Crippling Cuts
Harvard's Endowment Is Profiting From Puerto Rico's Debt As The Island's Schools Face Crippling Cuts
Bearing a large banner reading “Harvard Divest from Baupost,” hundreds of activists marched at Harvard Yard on...
Bearing a large banner reading “Harvard Divest from Baupost,” hundreds of activists marched at Harvard Yard on Wednesday. Members of the Harvard Student Labor Action Movement participated in the protest, along with union groups, community organizers affiliated with the Center for Popular Democracy, and anti-hedge fund activists with the coalition Hedge Clippers.
Read the full article here.
La “Reforma” tributaria es un ataque disfrazado contra las comunidades de color
La “Reforma” tributaria es un ataque disfrazado contra las comunidades de color
Después de que miles de electores acudieron en masa a Washington DC para detener a los republicanos en su intento de...
Después de que miles de electores acudieron en masa a Washington DC para detener a los republicanos en su intento de derogar la ley de atención médica, pensamos que habíamos ganado cuando los republicanos del Congreso pusieron fin a la propuesta Cassidy-Graham.
Lea el artículo completo aquí.
The CEO of Starbucks won’t keep promises to his workers, but wants an end to “cynicism”
The CEO of Starbucks won’t keep promises to his workers, but wants an end to “cynicism”
Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who has somehow convinced himselfthere is public desire for him to be president, took a...
Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who has somehow convinced himselfthere is public desire for him to be president, took a moment at yesterday’s board meeting to deliver some pious criticism of America’s unusually rancorous political season.
“Dysfunction and polarization have worsened,” the coffee entrepreneur said. Deep in a bout of Bloombergitis, Schultz warned of the failure of the American dream: “Sadly, our reservoir is running dry, depleted by cynicism, despair, division, exclusion, fear and indifference.”
“What is the role and responsibility of all of us, as citizens?” Schultz asked.
His employees have one answer: They want him to keep Starbucks’ promise to set their schedules at least 10 days in advance, and stop making them work consecutive shifts closing a location and then returning to open it early the next morning. So-called “clopening” shifts can entail working until 11pm and then starting again at 4am.
The scheduling problems have been an issue since at least 2014, when a New York Times investigation exposed how scheduling practices can be as problematic for workers as low pay or abusive treatment. The problem is especially difficult for parents, who must find a way to care for their children without knowing their work responsibilities more than a few days in advance.
The problem seems especially galling because the company uses scheduling software to match employee availability with the predicted demand. Experts suggest that this software could be used to provide more predictability for workers. Starbucks has repeatedly said it will remedy these issues, but interviews with employees suggest they remain. The Center for Popular Democracy, a union-backed organization that runs advocacy campaigns for workers rights, published a survey of 200 workers (pdf) in September 2015 that found half received their schedules less than a week in advance and one in four worked the “clopening” shift.
Grant Medsker, who worked at a Starbucks in Seattle for about a year before quitting in January, told Quartz that managers often don’t follow dictates from headquarters. “Everyone runs their ship their own way, regardless of company policies,” he said.
Some franchise managers attribute the lack of follow-through on the company’s promise on schedules to pressure from higher-ups to keep labor costs down, which leads to chronic understaffing. Meanwhile, Starbucks earnings per share more than doubled between 2011 and 2015; in fiscal 2015 it had an operating income of $3.6 billion. Quartz reached out to Starbucks but has not received a response. In the past, the company has noted that many of its employees see a flexible schedule as a perk, rather than a hindrance. The company also provides its part-time employees with access to health insurance and educational benefits that it says are more generous than comparable companies. But given the company’s history of dubious social responsibility campaigns, it’s hard to see this failure to implement corporate policy as an accident. This is, after all, the executive who announced a personal boycott of political spending even as his company spent millions on lobbying.
“It’s not enough to talk about it, it’s not enough to say, ‘oh that’s really bad, I hope that changes,'” said Medsker, who volunteers with the labor-rights group Working Washington. “We have an obligation to change what is wrong with our society.”
“It’s not about the choice we make every four years,” Schultz said yesterday. “This is about the choices we make every day.”
Source
60 Years After Brown v. Board of Education
Legal Talk Network - June 3, 2014 - May 17th, 2014 marked the 60th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, the...
Legal Talk Network - June 3, 2014 - May 17th, 2014 marked the 60th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court Decision that held state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students as unconstitutional because they violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Today, some six decades later, many parents and teachers are still worried that America’s children are not receiving equal access to education envisioned in that case. On this episode of Lawyer 2 Lawyer, hosts Bob Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams shed light on this issue with guests Christian D’Andrea from the MacIver Institute and Kyle Serrette from The Center for Popular Democracy. Together they discuss private schools, charter schools, and homeschooling vs. the community school model. Tune in to learn more about funding concerns, oversight issues, and the proper role of teachers unions in the school choice debate.
Christian D’Andrea is an Education Policy Analyst with the John K. MacIver Institute for Public Policy in Madison, WI. He earned his Master’s of Public Policy degree at Vanderbilt University and has previously worked for the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice as a State Policy Director and Policy Analyst. He is the author of several studies that examine the fiscal and personal impacts of educational reform, and his work has been featured everywhere from the Huffington Post to EducationNext.
Kyle Serrette is the Director of Education Justice Campaigns at The Center for Popular Democracy and works with their partner organizations to strengthen their public education coalitions, develop strategy to help close the opportunity gaps, and coordinates national and regional campaigns that work to bolster our public education system. Prior to joining The Center for Popular Democracy, Kyle spent over 10 years working on corporate campaigns with groups such as Service Employees International Union, Change to Win, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. He was awarded the 2010 Joe Hill Organizing Achievement Award by the LA Fed and the Los Angeles Orange County Organize Committee.
Source
A New and Ugly form of Racial Bias
Take a moment and imagine that you are on a train — let’s say a train serving wine as you traverse through picturesque...
Take a moment and imagine that you are on a train — let’s say a train serving wine as you traverse through picturesque Napa Valley. You are with a group of your peers. You are adults and enjoying your time of fellowship. But because of a perceived notion that you are not fit for that environment you are unceremoniously removed from the train. Can you imagine the indignity of this encounter? Think about the anxiety this situation may cause. Think about the disrespect that you would feel.
Believe it or not, this is the reality for a large portion of the African American community. According to a 2015 Gallup poll, more African American adults feel discriminated against while shopping than doing anything. This sentiment includes encounters with the police.
A report released by the Center for Popular Democracy confirms these perceptions felt by African Americans. The report found that African American consumers are seven times more likely to be targeted as potential thieves as are white customers.
However, research on shoplifting trends in retail stores found no differences by race or ethnicity. Some research even suggests that African Americans are less likely to engage in shoplifting than are other groups. That means African Americans are being overly targeted by retailers while the real criminals get away.
This form of discrimination is not new. It is an adaptation of previous forms of discrimination transformed anew due to significant gains in civil rights protections. This form of discrimination has a name: consumer racial profiling.
Consumer racial profiling is particularly troublesome because it disproportionately affects African American women, a consumer group who engages in the retail sector at significantly higher rates than men.
The image that I asked you to conjure was not of my own making. It actually happened to a group of Black women. Notwithstanding the fact these train riders reached a final settlement just last month, California and other states can do a great deal more to end the consumer racial profiling that plagues retail environments.
Specifically in California, a piece of legislation I have authored (AB 2707—the Stop Consumer Racial Profiling Act of 2016) will amend our state’s civil rights statute to include the definition of this demeaning practice and require the state’s civil rights watchdog to investigate reported incidences of the practice. It is my hope that this legislation would pass a vote of my colleagues and be signed by the Governor. But more important than the passage of a bill is the transformation of behaviors by retailers that violate the civil and human rights of African American consumers.
Corporate loss prevention schemes must be reformed, executives, managers and rank-and-file employees must be awakened, and people of goodwill must demand that the targeting of consumers by racial characteristic is factually and morally wrong. It must end.
A new civil rights consciousness has gripped a great deal of the country. Maybe we can address some of the challenges that still occur on the basis of race by turning the tide against consumer racial profiling and letting it be a thing of the past.
By Sebastian Ridley-Thomas
Source
Last-Minute Schedule Changes? Some Cities Say Employers Must Pay
Last-Minute Schedule Changes? Some Cities Say Employers Must Pay
Dec. 1 — More than a dozen states and cities in the past year considered legislation to require retail stores and...
Dec. 1 — More than a dozen states and cities in the past year considered legislation to require retail stores and restaurants to provide extra pay to employees for last-minute work schedule changes. Thus far only a handful of cities have enacted such measures into law.
These predictive or predictable scheduling proposals, also called fair workweek measures, were “very popular” in 2016, John S. Hong, an employment law attorney with Littler Mendelson in San Francisco, recently told Bloomberg BNA.
“But they died on the vine in a lot of states,” Hong said.
In addition to providing “predictability” pay, these measures would require employers to notify workers about their schedules a certain number of weeks in advance under predictive scheduling proposals. They also include “access to hours” provisions that require employers to offer newly available hours to part-time staff before hiring new workers or using contractors or staffing agencies.
Worker advocacy groups praise these measures as providing secure, clear and stable scheduling for workers. But employers counter that these requirements remove the flexibility needed for retailers and restaurants to operate their businesses effectively.
Predictive Scheduling Is ‘The Next Fight.’
Predictive scheduling bills this year were withdrawn or never went to a vote in California, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, New York and Rhode Island.
Similar bills or provisions died in Connecticut, Illinois, Maine and Oregon in 2015.
Washington, D.C., also tabled a predictive scheduling proposal this year, while a court rejected a ballot initiative on the issue in Cleveland, Hong said.
Still, employee advocates said the number of jurisdictions that have considered scheduling laws is encouraging.
Introduction of the bills initiates public conversations among workers, employers and policy makers about the issue, they said.
“They begin the legislative process, which can take multiple years,” Elianne Farhat, deputy campaign director of the Center for Popular Democracy’s Fair Workweek Initiative.
Predictive scheduling is “the next fight,” following the success of the “Fight for $15" minimum wage initiative, Farhat told Bloomberg BNA Nov. 30.
“The issue will continue to pick up steam and move forward,” she said.
Two Cities Join San Francisco
Two cities this year enacted predictive scheduling laws. Seattle and Emeryville, Calif., followed in the footsteps of San Francisco, which passed the nation’s first ever predictive scheduling law in late 2014
Rules implementing San Francisco’s ordinance went into effect in March 2016. They apply to businesses that have 20 or more employees in the city and at least 40 retail sales establishments worldwide.
Seattle and Emeryville’s laws take effect in 2017.
Seattle’s law applies to retail and quick or limited food-service establishments with more than 500 employees worldwide and full-service restaurants with more than 500 employees and 40 full-service locations worldwide.
Emeryville’s law applies to businesses with more than 55 employees worldwide.
New Hampshire, San Jose Also Pass Laws
On the predictive scheduling periphery are San Jose, Calif., and New Hampshire, which passed narrower laws in the past year.
San Jose voters approved a ballot initiative in November that focused only on access to hour protections for part-time employees, meaning they would be given extra hours prior to hiring others.
New Hampshire in June didn’t quite enact a predictive scheduling law. Instead, it required employers to consider employee requests for flexible working arrangements and prohibited employers from retaliating against workers who made those requests.
The New Hampshire law is “minimal, but still important,” Liz Ben-Ishai, senior policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy in Washington, D.C., told Bloomberg BNA.
Farhat added that Washington, D.C. passed a law guaranteeing a 30-hour minimum workweek for building service workers, although it tabled its broader predictive scheduling law.
Depending on the needs of a particular locality, some cities or states will pass broader scheduling laws, while others pass narrower provisions.
“They’re all part of updating our work hour standards,” Farhat said.
Looking Ahead to 2017
Predictive scheduling bills are pending in New Jersey and Massachusetts, Hong said. But the latter “may die for lack of action” before the end of the year.
A measure also is pending in Minnesota, according to CLASP data, but it may share the same fate as the Massachusetts bill.
Asked if the issue of predictive scheduling will continue to crop up in 2017, Hong said more cities and states may consider such measures. But “ultimately they may die on the vine,” he said.
Ben-Ishai provided a more optimistic outlook for predictive scheduling.
“I think it’s a promising area moving forward,” she said.
State and local lawmakers in Oregon could consider predictive scheduling measures next year, she said. In 2015, a state predictive scheduling bill died in committee, but legislators preempted scheduling ordinances at the local level only until 2017.
Portland, Ore., already has passed a resolution to study and eventually establish workweek principles for city contractors, Farhat said.
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio in September announced that the city is developing legislation that would require predictable work schedules for about 65,000 hourly fast-food employees in the city.
Predictive scheduling is expected to come back in Washington, D.C. next year “in a very serious way,” Farhat said. And California may onceagain consider a statewide measure, she added.
Don’t Forget About State Preemption Laws
Hong observed that several states have preemption laws that prevent cities, towns and counties from passing workplace laws that conflict with state or federal law.
About 22 states so far have expressly preempted localities from adopting such laws, like those that would raise minimum wages, provide leave benefits or expand workplace anti-discrimination protections. Most of these state have enacted the laws within the last five years., Lawmakers in about 11 other states have introduced similar bills so far in 2016.
At least five states—Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas and Michigan—have laws that could preempt local predictive scheduling laws, Hong said.
Preemption laws don’t necessarily indicate that legislatures are against fair scheduling, he said. “They don’t want local governments doing something potentially inconsistent with state law,” Hong said.
But Ben-Ishai contended that preemption laws can be a strategy taken by lawmakers who “are not friendly to workers’ rights.”
Federal Predictive Scheduling Law?
A federal predictive scheduling bill known as the Schedules That Work Act ( H.R. 3071, S. 1772) was introduced in both houses of Congress in July 2015.
The identical bills were sponsored by democrats and have remained stalled in committee. They are unlikely to be considered for a vote before the year ends.
Ben-Ishai said she expects the bills’ sponsors, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), will reintroduce the legislation in the next Congress.
But given Republican control of both Congress and the White House, Ben-Ishai said, “I don’t think we’re super optimistic about it moving forward.”
Predictive scheduling will have a better chance at seeing “more movement” at the state and local levels, she said.
By: Jay-Anne B. Casuga
Source
Activists in Jackson Hole Pressure Fed on Inflation, Endorse Yellen
Activists in Jackson Hole Pressure Fed on Inflation, Endorse Yellen
JACKSON HOLE, Wyo.—The liberal Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign has criticized Janet Yellen’s Federal...
JACKSON HOLE, Wyo.—The liberal Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign has criticized Janet Yellen’s Federal Reserve in recent years for raising interest rates, lacking diversity in its senior ranks and retaining a quasi-private legal structure for its regional reserve banks.
Green-shirted Fed Up activists again have set up shop outside the central bank’s annual retreat in Grand Teton National Park. But this year, their critique of the Fed is paired with praise for Ms. Yellen and a demand that she remain the central bank’s chairwoman for another four-year term.
Read the full article here.
Bloomington Addiction Treatment Agenda Pushed by Group
“The vast majority of funding for Hoosier Action and its initiatives comes from its dues-paying membership,” Greene...
“The vast majority of funding for Hoosier Action and its initiatives comes from its dues-paying membership,” Greene said. “Although we are a local partner of the Center for Popular Democracy, a national network that offers support.”
Read the full article here.
2 days ago
2 days ago