These Activists Marched From Charlottesville To D.C. To Let Everyone Know That 'White Supremacy Is Real'
These Activists Marched From Charlottesville To D.C. To Let Everyone Know That 'White Supremacy Is Real'
We previously reported that a coalition of activists were planning a 10-day march from Charlottesville to D.C. called...
We previously reported that a coalition of activists were planning a 10-day march from Charlottesville to D.C. called The March to Confront White Supremacy.
Well, the march has been successfully completed!
Read the full article here.
Safety coalition: ‘Scaffold Law’ study is ‘flawed’
Safety & Health Magazine - April 18, 2014 - A recent study that questioned the usefulness of New York state’s “...
Safety & Health Magazine - April 18, 2014 - A recent study that questioned the usefulness of New York state’s “Scaffold Law” is flawed, according to a new report from a worker safety advocacy coalition.
In December, a study from State University of New York’s Rockefeller Institute of Government concluded that New York’s Labor Law 240 – which imposes a strict liability on employers for workplace injuries at height – drives up the cost of business without improving worker safety.
But an April 17 report from the Center for Popular Democracy and the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health called the Rockefeller study “biased,” noting that the study was paid for by the New York Civil Justice Institute, a group created by an alliance criticized as working on behalf of employer and industry interests.
The Rockefeller study confused correlation with causation, the two worker safety advocacy groups say, by claiming differences between worker injury rates in construction and non-construction industries in New York and elsewhere are entirely due to the Scaffold Law.
CPD and NYCOSH are partners in a newly launched Scaffold Safety Coalition, a group of workers, advocates and other organizations that have joined to defend the state’s Scaffold Law.
Source
“No hate in my holler” march is a window into West Virginia’s political divide
“No hate in my holler” march is a window into West Virginia’s political divide
When Jessica Shayan saw on Facebook that the national group CPD Action, a sister organization of the Center for Popular...
When Jessica Shayan saw on Facebook that the national group CPD Action, a sister organization of the Center for Popular Democracy, had planned a march to coincide with President Trump and House and Senate Republicans visiting the Greenbrier Resort for an annual policy retreat, she was alarmed.
Read the full article here.
Another Police Department Says ‘No’ To ICE’s Detainer Requests
Mint Press News – August 27, 2013, by Katie Rucke - Newark, N.J.’s refusal to detain undocumented immigrants for...
Mint Press News – August 27, 2013, by Katie Rucke -
Newark, N.J.’s refusal to detain undocumented immigrants for minor offenses could serve as an olive branch to the immigrant community.
As of last month, the Newark, New Jersey police department is no longer taking orders from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain undocumented immigrants who have been picked up for minor criminal offenses such as shoplifting or vandalism.
The policy was signed into law by Newark Police Director Samuel DeMaio on July 24.
Newark may be the first and only law enforcement agency in New Jersey no longer to honor detainer requests from ICE, but it’s far from the only police department in the country to have done so. Police departments in Los Angeles, the District of Columbia, Chicago, New York City and New Orleans have also implemented policies stating they won’t honor ICE detainer requests.
The policy change was applauded by civil rights and faith leaders, who say the detainers — which allow law enforcement to hold in custody for up to 48 hours, without a warrant, those whose immigration status is in question — discourage communities of immigrants and law enforcement officials from having a cooperative relationship.
Immigrant-rights advocates said they view the new police protocol as an olive branch to undocumented people living in the U.S., who may be hesitant to cooperate with police officers who are investigating crimes in the community for fear they may be deported. New Jersey reportedly has one of the largest immigrant populations in the nation.
“Law enforcement officials across the country have recognized that local police officers should not be in the business of federal immigration enforcement,” said Udi Ofer, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Jersey, which advocated for the policy shift.
“With this new policy in place, the Newark Police Department has made it clear that all residents, regardless of their immigration status, are safe to cooperate with the police,” Ofer continued in the release. “This policy ensures that if you’re a victim of a crime, or have witnessed a crime, you can contact the police without having to fear deportation. This will make all Newarkers safer.”
Emily Tucker is an attorney at the Center for Popular Democracy. She said the group was “thrilled that Newark is standing in solidarity with immigrant families by rejecting all future collaboration with the federal deportation apparatus.
“Spending local tax dollars to take parents away from their children and workers away from their jobs is both morally wrong and bad for the economy,” Tucker said. “We hope the Newark policy will serve as a model for the rest of New Jersey, and for cities around the country who don’t want local resources being spent to help ICE meet its arbitrary enforcement quotas.”
New Jersey to New Orleans to Los Angeles
The New York Times recently published an editorial applauding those cities that have announced they will no longer be cooperating with ICE’s detainer requests and encouraged other cities to follow suit.
“The federal dragnet that makes little distinction between tamale sellers and dangerous criminals — greatly expanded by the use of local law enforcement officials across the country — has been ensnaring record numbers of minor offenders,” the editorial board wrote. “This melding of local crime fighting and immigration enforcement has led to unjust imprisonment, policing abuses, racial profiling and paralyzing fear in immigrant communities.
“The damage to public safety is measurable; a recent study by researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago found that Latinos, both immigrants and native-born, often shun the police and are reluctant to cooperate with criminal investigations. Combating domestic violence, sexual abuse and gang-related crimes becomes far more difficult when local cops are de facto federal agents.”
Amy Gottlieb, director of the American Friends Service Committee, said she hoped other law enforcement agencies would implement similar policies, adding that “any detainer policy where people are aware that the police department is acting in support of the immigrant community is going to be helpful for police and immigrant relations.”
While Newark officers will no longer hold persons in an immigration detention center for committing a minor-level offense, the Newark Police Department will still report information to ICE after arresting an individual and also will continue to share fingerprint information with federal investigators.
“If we arrest somebody for a disorderly persons offense and we get a detainer request, we’re not going to hold them in our cell block,” DeMaio said. “I don’t know if we’ve ever gotten a detainer request on a guy with a misdemeanor,” adding that the department received a total of eight detainer requests in 2012.
Helpful or harmful to a city’s crime fighters?
While California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has said he would sign legislation limiting who state and local law enforcement officials can hold for deportation, and while Connecticut’s legislature unanimously passed similar legislation, not everyone thinks the policy is a good idea.
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Steve Lonegan, for example, called the policy “another in a long line of missteps” by his opponent, Newark Mayor Cory Booker (D), saying the new policy will only lead to an increase in crime.
“We’re sending a signal,” he said, that “you can come to the country illegally, you can shoplift, you can vandalize but it’s alright. We’re going to make sure you’re safe. It’s a great message to our kids.”
Kevin Griffs, a spokesman for the Booker campaign, said Lonegan’s understanding of the policy was inaccurate and explained that “all serious offenders obviously go to the county jail, and ultimately, the mayor’s thinking was that this was going to improve relations between the police department and the immigrant community and help the Newark Police Department catch more of the real bad guys.”
ICE officials have declined to comment on the policy change.
Source
Report: Starbucks Scheduling Problems Remain Despite 2014 Pledge
Starbucks officials asked store managers to ...
Starbucks officials asked store managers to "go the extra mile" to improve employee scheduling in the aftermath of a scathing report issued by an advocacy group this week.
The nonprofit Center for Popular Democracy alleged that the company largely failed to deliver on its promises to alter scheduling practices in 2014.
More than a year ago, a New York Times report chronicled the havoc wreaked on Starbucks' baristas by its sophisticated scheduling technology.
In response, the coffeehouse giant vowed to establish more consistent hours, provide more notice regarding schedules and prevent workers who close stores from having to reopen again just hours later.
According to the CPD report, however, nearly half of 200 employees surveyed reported receiving schedules with one week or less of notice.
Employees also said that although schedules generally followed the previous week's pattern, dramatic fluctuations could happen in any week.
One in four respondents, meanwhile, said that either they or their coworkers still were scheduled to "clopen" stores.
"Many Starbucks scheduling policies fail to reflect the company’s human-focused values, while other policies designed to promote sustainable schedules have been implemented inconsistently," the group wrote in the report.
Company spokeswoman Jamie Riley told the Times this week that the CPD report "doesn’t align with what we’re seeing," but that the company is "the first to admit we have work to do."
Meanwhile, Cliff Burrows, Starbucks’ U.S. chief, responded with a memo to store managers calling for a "consistent schedule — free of back-to-back close and open shifts that are less than 8 hours apart — that is posted 2 weeks in advance."
Source: Manufacturing.net
CFPB: Financial firms can no longer force consumers to use arbitration in group disputes
CFPB: Financial firms can no longer force consumers to use arbitration in group disputes
Consumers can now sue banks in class-action lawsuits. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said Monday financial...
Consumers can now sue banks in class-action lawsuits.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said Monday financial companies will no longer be allowed to force customers to use arbitration to settle group disputes, restricting the industry's favored legal tool after years of review.
Read the full article here.
No, 2016 Won't Be the Year of the $20 Minimum Wage
Bloomberg Businessweek - November 13, 2014, by Josh Eidelson - In the midterm elections, four red states—Alaska,...
Bloomberg Businessweek - November 13, 2014, by Josh Eidelson - In the midterm elections, four red states—Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota—passed minimum wage increases. Those votes mean that, starting next year, a majority of states will have minimum wages higher than the federal rate. The last time that happened, in 2007, Democrats newly in control of Congress used their power to pass the first national increase in a decade, from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour. It’s extremely unlikely the Republicans who took back the Senate in the midterm elections will do the same. “Waiting for Congress to act is frustrating and, at this point, pointless,” says Ed Flanagan, a former Alaska labor commissioner who spent a year campaigning for his state’s new increase, from $7.75 to $9.75.
Already, labor organizers in Oregon are considering a ballot initiative for 2016 that would raise the state minimum to $15 an hour, matching the leap taken this year by Seattle and San Francisco. In Los Angeles, where Mayor Eric Garcetti signed an ordinance mandating a $15.37 wage floor for some hotel workers in October, 6 of the 15 members of the city council have asked for a vote in early 2015 on a proposal to increase the city’s rate to $15.25 across the board by 2019.
Voters in most states shouldn’t expect to see pushes for higher rates than that anytime soon. Labor activists say they want to end the exclusion of tipped workers such as restaurant wait staff from minimum wage laws and add worker protections, like requiring employers to give workers advance notice of schedule changes or offer paid sick days. That approach worked this year in Oakland, where voters approved a referendum on Nov. 4 that lifts wages only to $12.25 but requires employers to offer paid leave above what the state requires. “When you combine them together, it’s actually more popular,” says Brian Kettenring, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, a union-backed community organizing group. “People appreciate that you are trying to actually solve the problem.”
Not all the coming fights will be put directly to voters. In California, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown signed a compromise bill last year increasing the statewide minimum from $8 to $10 by 2016. Some Democratic state lawmakers say that’s not enough to help workers make ends meet. “It will still allow the legal payment of a poverty wage,” says Mark Leno, the state senator who sponsored a bill that would have increased minimum pay to $13 by 2017 and then indexed future wage levels to inflation. That passed the state senate in May but failed by a single vote in an assembly committee. Leno plans to revive the issue in the next legislative session.
In some cities, Democrats are pitting themselves against the Republicans who control their state governments. Louisville has held hearings about raising wages to $10.10 after a statewide increase died in the Republican-controlled state senate. City officials in other states are hamstrung by laws prohibiting municipal governments from raising minimum wages above state levels. In June, business-friendly Democrats in Rhode Island’s statehouse killed efforts by the Providence city council to raise hotel pay to $15 an hour with a budget rider barring cities from setting their own minimum wages. In New York, where state law denies cities authority over pay rates, Governor Andrew Cuomo agreed to support changing that statute, along with a statewide increase to $10.10, to win the endorsement of the progressive Working Families Party in the November gubernatorial election. “He made a promise on this,” says Bill Lipton, the party’s New York director. “We expect him to fulfill it.”
Source
Why Recent Stock Volatility Shouldn’t Factor Into Interest-Rate Hikes
As a general principle, the Fed should not react to short-term movements in the financial markets. For one thing, the...
As a general principle, the Fed should not react to short-term movements in the financial markets. For one thing, the labor market is much more important to the lives of most Americans, and it is more relevant to the Fed’s mandate of securing maximum employment with inflation stability.
Then consider this: More than 80% of stock wealth in the U.S. is owned by the wealthiest 10% of Americans, and more than half of Americans own no stocks at all (either directly or through retirement or other accounts). In short, movements in the stock markets do not have much effect on the spending power of most U.S. households. That means that movements in the stock markets–especially short-term volatility that is likely to largely dissipate–provides little information about the overall state of economic health.
On the other hand, the labor market provides the vast majority of income to the vast majority of Americans. The middle fifth of households, for example, gets more than 80% of household income directly from the labor market (either cash wages or employer-provided benefits). Further, many additional sources of income such as pensions, Medicare, Social Security, unemployment insurance, or the Earned Income Tax Credit hinge on participation in the labor market. That’s why trends in the labor market are crucial to assessing the overall state of the economy–which is far from fully recovered from the Great Recession.
The clearest remaining weakness is wages. The current pace of hourly wage growth is roughly 2% to 2.5%. A healthy labor market that met the Fed’s overall price inflation target should be churning out wage increases of at least 3.5%. Further, a period of wage growth well above this is necessary for workers’ pay to reclaim some of the ground lost to corporate profits earlier in this recovery. Until wage growth starts moving durably toward the healthy 3.5% target, it’s too early for the Fed to begin raising rates.
This labor-market-based reasoning for keeping rates low should weigh much more heavily on Fed calculations about interest rates than recent stock activity. The only caveat: if one of the root causes of recent stock market declines–the slowdown in the Chinese economy–provides a new potential headwind to U.S. growth going forward.
But the case for keeping rates unchanged in September was dispositive last week, even before large declines in the stock markets. And any strong stock rally in the coming month shouldn’t make Fed officials feel fine about raising rates.
Source: Wall Street Journal
Immigration Advocates on SB 4: We’re Resisting in Texas
Immigration Advocates on SB 4: We’re Resisting in Texas
Grassroots leaders and local officials wasted little time organizing a coordinated campaign to fight SB 4, a new Texas...
Grassroots leaders and local officials wasted little time organizing a coordinated campaign to fight SB 4, a new Texas law that targets cities, towns and sheriffs that don’t cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.
Only nine days after Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed the legislation, formally known as Senate Bill 4, into law, grassroots advocates announced a “Summer of Resistance” campaign May 16. The statute allows police officers, sheriff deputies and Texas state troopers to ask about a person’s immigration status – whether they are here legally – during a routine stop.
Read the full article here.
Albany Must Keep the Charter Cap
Earlier this year, the New York City Council passed my resolution urging the state legislature to keep the cap on...
Earlier this year, the New York City Council passed my resolution urging the state legislature to keep the cap on charter schools. That was nothing new: Council Members have long showed their opposition to raising the cap. But, with recent efforts by powerful special interests, including more than $13 million spent in lobbying and campaign ads, we need to remind New York why raising the cap is not only unnecessary, but also harmful to our public school children.
First, there is the capacity question. Charter schools have 2,500 unfilled seats in New York City. In addition, current charter agreements could allow for more than 27,000 additional authorized seats. In other words, these charter schools already are not handling their assigned share of students, and that burdens crowded public schools, making it more difficult for those schools to provide quality education.
Second, charter schools are not required to serve students who transfer to or join schools mid-year because of disciplinary measures or because of a family's choice. They also do not serve nearly the same amount of students with special needs as public schools. This means that when the school year starts, charters receive funding for a certain number of students yet actually end up teaching fewer than they are budgeted for. They then pocket the remainder and can boast lower class sizes while public schools again shoulder the burden.
Finally, the Center for Popular Democracy reported that New York stood to lose over $54 million to charter school-related fraud in 2014 alone. Audits can help uncover instances of fraud, mishandling of funds, conflicts of interest within governing boards, and a number of other troubling findings, yet charter schools largely oppose efforts to increase transparency. The State Comptroller's attempt to audit charter schools has already been foiled at every turn, meaning New Yorkers are left in the dark about how exactly our public dollars are spent.
Meanwhile, more than $5 billion in state money is owed to our traditional public schools to provide every child access to a "sound basic education" per the Campaign for Fiscal Equity ruling. Forty-four percent of all schools in New York City are overcrowded. The City's Independent Budget Office reports that most schools are at 102 percent capacity or more, and 88 percent of the city's charter schools are co-located within a district school, adding to the space crunch.
Co-located charter schools, by the way, are an exercise in inequality: privately run schools, with access to both private and public funds, that are taking resources from underfunded district schools. What does this mean for the social climate in these schools? Many students feel, and rightfully so, that district schools and their students are not valued the way they should be.
It is sensible to provide the money and attention owed to our public schools to keep them strong. Charter schools already divert resources from the majority of students, who attend public schools. Charter schools do not serve our children, especially the most needy, with enough accountability to justify increasing their share of funding.
All children deserve an education system that celebrates their potential by giving them the space and funding necessary to achieve educational excellence. The raising of the charter cap would be damaging to our public school system in terms of morale, space, funding, and overall quality. Leaders in Albany should finish their legislative session without altering the cap. Instead, it is time to ensure a feasible means of success for public schools by giving them the focus they need and not investing in a private enterprise that has yet to fulfill its promise to New Yorkers.
***Daniel Dromm is the Education Committee Chair of the New York City Council.
Source: Gotham Gazette
17 hours ago
3 days ago