Blackstone and JPMorgan CEOs still under pressure over Trump
Trump's business advisory councils have been dissolved. But protestors aren't done yet with JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon...
Trump's business advisory councils have been dissolved. But protestors aren't done yet with JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon and Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman.
Read the full article here.
It’s Time to Reimagine Safety and Security in Our Communities
It’s Time to Reimagine Safety and Security in Our Communities
The over-policing and mass criminalization of Black and brown people is the moral crisis of our time. The United States...
The over-policing and mass criminalization of Black and brown people is the moral crisis of our time.
The United States has the world’s largest incarcerated population with approximately 2.2 million people currently behind prisons and jails (21 percent of the world’s prisoners) while several police departments across the country are under investigation for charges of police brutality, gross misconduct and civil rights violations.
Read the full article here.
Florence District One Candidate Questionnaire: Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr.
Florence District One Candidate Questionnaire: Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr.
The Morning News recently sent out a questionnaire to the candidates running for the Florence School District One Board...
The Morning News recently sent out a questionnaire to the candidates running for the Florence School District One Board of Trustees. Here are the answers from Alexis D. Pipkins, Sr. who is running for another term representing District 4; he faces one challenger.
1. What do you feel you have contributed during your current tenure on the board?
My background as a lifelong resident of the Florence Community, and working closely within the region has given me a clear sense of both the educational and economic issues and needs that we face. Over the past 15 years, as a member of the Florence School District 1 Board of Trustees, I have ensured that I have been knowledgeable of the issues, needs, and concerns of my constituents, and I have represented and I have been a voice even during turbulent of challenges. Further, I understand that leadership must be politically astute to represent the views and concerns of those you represent even though others may not agree, or do not care, and only want to advance their own agenda that is only best for “their community” and not all communities. I have attained the Level 6 on the SCSBA, which is the highest level for a school board member, and presently I serve as the President of the SC Caucus of Black School Board Members which provides dialogue on educational issues and concerns to address the full growth and development of Black and other minority children, and I am also affiliated with the National Local Progress Movement which focuses on progressive thought and insight for local officials
2. What are the issues that you think need to be addressed?
Student achievement, and recognizing the individuality and creativity of each student’s needs
Recognizing that the public schools are becoming more diverse
Equity in funding for all schools
Special Education
Technology infusion and integration for all students
Early Childhood
Career Clusters and Pathways- which is more opportunities for expansion of vocational and career center programs
Funding throughout the district
Special Education and meeting the diverse needs of students, to include the increase diagnosis of Autism
Impact of poverty, mental health, and other risk factors have on today’s learners
Lack of teachers
New and innovative approaches to teacher development and recruitment in order to develop and retain a diverse, qualified, and effective 21st Century pool of educators and staff
3. How have you sought to make changes in those areas?
By asking for items to be placed on the agenda, and engaging staff and others throughout the state and country on best practices and promising practices to ensure that we are utilizing the best program for all of our children. Also, researching the issues and knowing the national agenda. I have always committed myself to being engaged and welcoming to constituents and having a listening ear to see what the children are saying and feeling. As an educator and advocate for children and families, I always empathize and evaluate how I would feel when making decisions and question if policies or procedures that are guiding discussion or the direction of the Board are relevant today. I have demonstrated that my approach to knowing what the educational needs and issues are not based on perception or a one way train rail.
4. What specific program are you most proud of in FSD1 and why?
Small Learning Communities at our schools to decrease class sizes
Implementation of the Parents As Teachers Program to address 0-3, to provide parents with skills and supports to ensure that their children are ready to enter school
Montessori which provides learners the opportunity to be creative
Career and Technology which provides students the opportunity to enter the work place upon graduation
The work that was done by the previous Discipline Code Committees which has ensured the district recognized inequalities and unfair discipline practices and the underutilization and non-utilization of support services for students with complex needs and behaviors. This dialogue that I led was the foundation for the present Code of Conduct which will have to be assessed over the next few years to evaluate its effectiveness and impact on student learning and behavior.
Early College which provides students the opportunity to receive college credit and even an Associate Degree when they graduate from high school
Present dialogue on a Middle School Concept that has been talked about for years
5. How do you handle inquiries and complaints from the community?
I refer families to the Superintendent’s Office or to the appropriate office for support. I also follow-up with families and community that approach me to ensure that their complaints and inquires have been addressed. I also request items be placed on the agenda for discussion and action.
6. What do you think the role of the board is, in the district and in the community?
The board is responsible for establishing the Vision and Mission for the local school district, and ensuring that the Superintendent has the resources to implement the vision by having good policies and procedures, and good stewards of the district’s Operational Funds and Capital or Building Funds. This role must be student centered and family centered by recognizing the diverse needs of students within our community. Not all students learn in the same manner, thus the board must be aware of such and hold the administration accountable for creating programs and services which will help students achieve and be successful. It is the job of the board to be knowledgeable, and current on educational issues and trends, and not just be a “rubber stamping board” but ask questions, communicate with the public- and not just those who share your personal beliefs and positions.
7. What are your past/other areas of service? (church, civic organizations, etc.)
Professional:
I am an advocate, teacher, educator, trainer, and servant-leader. Presently, I am employed as the Executive Director of Lee County First Steps, and the Lee County Adult Education Family Literacy Coordinator.
Educational attainments include:
1990 graduate of the historic Wilson High School
Bachelor of Arts Degree in Political Science and a concentration in Secondary Education Graduate from Winthrop University
Master of Arts Degree in Management from Webster University
Education Specialist Degree Specialization in Leadership in Educational Administration from Capella University
Completion of the Non Profit Leadership Institute from Francis Marion University
Completion of the Francis Marion Rural Leadership Institute
Church:
My faith walk began at my home church, Snow Hill Baptist Church where I was active during my youth, and I was licensed to preach at Maxwell Baptist Church where I was Sunday School Teacher, Sunday School Superintendent, Minister of Christian Education and Membership Services, Boys Scout Troop Master. Presently I am a member and ordained Elder of the Gospel (2010) and serve as an Associate Minister and have served as a Youth Advisor at the Greater Gethsemane Apostolic Church in Florence, South Carolina.
Past and Present Civic:
Gate City Masonic Lodge 276
Florence 1 Local Education Association (SCEA) Treasurer, President
Weed and Seed Steering Committee
Queenie’s Helping Hands Ministry
Angel Tree Prison Ministry
The School Foundation Board
Pee Dee International Festival Planning Committee
PTA (North Vista Elementary, Williams Middle School)
PTSA (Wilson High School)
By Melissa Rollins
Source
A New Law Is Letting Uber Drivers Unionize
After ride-hailing companies descended on Seattle and began slashing drivers’ pay, the City Council stepped in with a...
After ride-hailing companies descended on Seattle and began slashing drivers’ pay, the City Council stepped in with a novel solution.
As the gig economy grows, companies like Airbnb and Uber are challenging cities by reshaping entire industries, often harming workers in the process. The challenge for progressive-minded legislators has been that existing regulations have often proven inadequate. Recently, however, local policymakers have begun proposing innovative ways to cope with the changes.
In Seattle, this battle has played out around ride-hailing services Uber and Lyft. When the companies were first legalized in the city in 2014, they presented themselves as a needed transport service that let drivers make money outside of the rigid regulations imposed on the taxi industry. Those claims lost credibility over the next year, however, as Uber drivers’ pay was slashed from $2 per mile to about $1.20 per mile. As cuts deepened, drivers found it increasingly hard to make an income—and many taxi firms found it almost impossible to compete.
We clearly needed a solution. Although collective bargaining had never been tried in the gig economy, a Seattle labor lawyer named Dmitri Iglitzin who’d been mulling the possibility for years approached me with a groundbreaking idea: Rather than tinkering around the edges with new regulations, why not let for-hire drivers unionize and set their own terms?
The premise was intriguing: If Uber and Lyft are going to claim that drivers are independent contractors, then let’s take them at their word and insist that drivers be allowed to negotiate the terms of their contract with these multibillion-dollar companies. While federal law preempts localities from encouraging unionization for private-sector employees, independent contractors are exempt. We believe this means that cities can allow drivers the right to collectively bargain to negotiate a better quality of life and a more reliable transportation service, in a way that regulations cannot.
The timing couldn’t have been better. In the year after Uber and Lyft first began operation, the narrative in Seattle had shifted: The companies, once seen as upstart innovators, came to be seen as major corporations intent on asserting power to the detriment of workers.
Uber and Lyft drivers had already set up an association of app-based drivers through the Teamsters, which represented taxi drivers in Seattle. United, they were starting to raise their voices. They organized rallies and protests highlighting their struggles and testified at City Hall about their limited pay, long hours, and arbitrary deactivation. Growing popular outrage turned up the heat.
Surprisingly, even as criticism rose, both Uber and Lyft did little to fight back. It wasn’t because the companies didn’t have the will or capacity. Only a year earlier, in 2014, they had put up a major fight after the Seattle City Council proposed placing a cap on for-hire vehicles.
This time though, it was clear that they could not win over public opinion. As driver earnings spiraled downward, it was hard for anybody to deny that there was a problem with the companies’ treatment of their workers—and that something needed to be done about it.
Rather than tinkering around the edges with new regulations, why not let for-hire drivers unionize and set their own terms?
In December 2015, the Seattle City Council unanimously passed a law letting Uber and Lyft drivers bargain collectively and establish a process for binding arbitration. In coming months, we will finalize the rules and determine which union or association can represent drivers, who can then vote on whether they want to be represented or not. The US Chamber of Commerce is already suing, hoping that the courts determine that federal law preempts the Seattle law.
Even though contract negotiations are months away, the idea has already caught on in other cities and states. New York and Cincinnati are considering regulations that would expand collective bargaining rights to some gig-economy workers. And in California a similar law was introduced in the State Assembly (although it’s been withdrawn for the moment).
The on-demand economy is delivering important new benefits to consumers. But if we are going to build a more equitable society, we’ll need rules of the road to ensure workers are treated with dignity. Cities have a powerful role in realizing that vision.
By MIKE O'BRIEN
Source
Franken scandal haunts Gillibrand’s 2020 chances
Today, nearly a year after Gillibrand led the charge in calling for Franken’s resignation, the anger is fresh on the...
Today, nearly a year after Gillibrand led the charge in calling for Franken’s resignation, the anger is fresh on the minds of major donors across the country...Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director for the Center for Popular Democracy, called Gillibrand’s response “important and courageous.” “It probably made her more enemies than friends,” said Archila, who famously confronted Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) in a congressional elevator this summer during the Kavanaugh hearings.
Read the full article here.
Is There Enough Anti-Trump Outrage To Spook These Nine Companies?
Activists are targeting corporations they claim support President Trump's agenda with new #BackersOfHate campaign......
Activists are targeting corporations they claim support President Trump's agenda with new #BackersOfHate campaign...
Read full article here.
Part-Time Schedules, Full-Time Headaches
New York Times - July 18, 2014, By Steven Greenhouse - A worker at an apparel store at Woodbury Common, an outlet mall...
New York Times - July 18, 2014, By Steven Greenhouse - A worker at an apparel store at Woodbury Common, an outlet mall north of New York City, said that even though some part-time employees clamored for more hours, the store had hired more part-timers and cut many workers’ hours to 10 a week from 20.
As soon as a nurse in Illinois arrived for her scheduled 3-to-11 p.m. shift one Christmas Day, hospital officials told her to go home because the patient “census” was low. They also ordered her to remain on call for the next four hours — all unpaid.
An employee at a specialty store in California said his 25-hour-a-week job with wildly fluctuating hours wasn’t enough to live on. But when he asked the store to schedule him between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. so he could find a second job, the store cut him to 12 hours a week.
These are among the experiences related by New York Times readers in more than 440 responses to an article published in Wednesday’s paper about a fledgling movement in which some states and cities are seeking to limit the harshest effects of increasingly unpredictable and on-call work schedules. Many readers voiced dismay with the volatility of Americans’ work schedules and the inability of many part-timers to cobble together enough hours to support their families.
In a comment that was the most highly recommended by others — 307 of them — a reader going by “pedigrees” wrote that workers were often reviled for not working hard enough or not being educated enough. “How can they work more jobs or commit to a degree program if they don’t know what their work schedule will be next week, much less next month?” the reader wrote. “It’s long past time for some certainty for workers. They drive the economy.”
Some readers were shocked by the story of Mary Coleman, who, after an hourlong bus commute, arrived for her scheduled shift at a Popeyes in Milwaukee only to be told to go home without clocking in because the store already had enough employees working. She wasn’t paid for the day.
“What happened to Ms. Coleman should be criminal,” wrote “JenD” of New Jersey in the second-most-recommended comment. “These types of stories sound like they were written by Charles Dickens in the mid-19th century.”
A reader from South Dakota, “JDT,” wrote that he was baffled as to why so many employers created turmoil for their workers by assigning them a different schedule every week, making it hard to juggle their jobs with child care or college.
“As a small-business owner for over 30 years, I have always been able to provide my part-time employees with a firm, steady and predictable schedule,” JDT wrote. “My employees are a vital and important asset. I treat them right, and they do their best for me. It’s so easy ... Why can’t big business run by M.B.A.s and highly compensated executives figure that out?”
JDT, whose name is Jim D. Taylor, runs a combined law and real estate firm in Mitchell, S.D. In a follow-up interview, he said: “In a small business, if you’ve scheduled someone to work, there should always be enough to do — you don’t send them home. I don’t know why big business is any different.”
“Why is it so hard to schedule someone for regular shifts?” Mr. Taylor asked.
A reader calling himself “Polish Ladies Cleaning Service” wrote that in the housecleaning business, it was “a particularly devilish problem” to maintain predictable schedules for employees. “If a client cancels and there’s no work, there’s no work,” he wrote. “We try to let everyone know ASAP, of course, but there are times when clients do cancel literally at the very last minute!”
In a follow-up interview, David Chou, the spokesman for Polish Ladies Cleaning Service, a company based in Brooklyn, told of a woman with a $19,000-a-month apartment who failed to confirm a housecleaning appointment scheduled for that day. So the company had to tell the scheduled housekeeper she was not needed that morning.
“We try to reschedule the ladies with other clients if that’s possible, but probably about half the times that’s not possible,” Mr. Chou said.
“Mary,” a reader from Atlanta, said it was understandable why so many employers relied on part-time workers. “We do still have issues with supply and demand that make it difficult for some businesses to hire full time (e.g., retail brick-and-mortar stores struggling with seasonal slowdowns and competition from Internet stores),” she wrote.
“How is it so many, and Obama, believe that workers have the right to tell their employer what hours they will work?” she added. “I’m thinking many here need to go to Europe or some other country. See how that works for you. Our government has no right to dictate, only to protect workers from abuse, and part-time is not abuse.”
One reader, a sales employee at an Apple store, complained in a letter that her work schedule varied every week, although she praised Apple’s medical, dental and vision benefits, even for part-timers. In a follow-up interview she said she was essentially required to be available anytime from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. six days a week — she has designated Wednesday as her day off.
“Having to give them that much availability, it means you’re at their mercy,” she said, noting that her husband works Monday through Friday. “You don’t know until the schedule comes out what your life will look like.”
Courtney Moore, a cashier at a Walmart in Cincinnati, said in an interview that she had been assigned about 40 hours a week until she told store management in June that she would begin taking college classes most mornings and some afternoons. She said she asked her manager to put her on the late shift, but to her dismay, the store reduced her to 15 hours a week.
“They said they need someone they could call whenever they need help — and they said I’m not that person,” Ms. Moore said. She said she would prefer being a dedicated full-time employee at Walmart but had to take a second job at McDonald’s instead.
A middle-aged New Yorker who lost his teaching job of two decades because of a budget squeeze in his school district said he had applied for retail jobs and was shocked by what he found.
“You had to be available every minute of every day, knowing you would be scheduled for no more than 29 hours per week and knowing there would be no normalcy to your schedule,” he wrote. “I told the person I would like to be scheduled for the same days every week so I could try to get another job to try to make ends meet. She immediately said, ‘Well, that will end our conversation right here. You have to be available every day for us.’
“I asked, ‘Even though I’m trying to get another job?’ ‘Yes.’ Then she just stared at me and asked me to leave. What kind of company does this? What kind of company will not even let you get another job?”
Source
The Federal Reserve's moral imperative
The Federal Reserve is usually understood as the bankers' bank. But what if it was the people's bank? At the Fed's...
The Federal Reserve is usually understood as the bankers' bank. But what if it was the people's bank?
At the Fed's annual Jackson Hole conference last week, an assortment of community organizers, activists, labor organizations, and economists showed up to push America's most important financial institution towards putting the concerns of working and nonwhite Americans at the center of monetary policy. The group, called Fed Up, has met with Federal Reserve officials before, but Thursday's meeting was nonetheless unprecedented and striking — both for being on the record, and for the detailed, impassioned, occasionally heated, and remarkably pointed conversation that resulted.
Fed Up's complaints are several. The Fed is too worried about inflation, the activists say, and not worried enough about pushing the boundaries of maximum employment when it sets interest rates. They also argue the population of Fed officials is not diverse enough along racial, gender or class lines, and that the Fed itself could do with some institutional reform.
To a large extent, Fed officials agreed: "I'd be surprised if anyone in the Federal Reserve thinks we've done well on [diversity]," said New York Fed President William Dudley. "We're going to run this economy hot. Get unemployment down lower," added San Francisco Fed President John Williams. "So I don't think we disagree about that basic view."
And in Fed official's defense, some of this balancing is a judgment call. The Fed's inflation target is 2 percent, but since that is neither a ceiling nor a floor, officials must decide how far to overshoot that target and for how long in the name of spurring job growth. There is also generally a lag time between a change in interest rates and when it's felt in the economy. So Fed officials have to make educated guesses about when to drop rates to firm up a stumbling economy or raise them to get ahead of inflation.
Finally, Fed officials themselves can disagree over the full extent of their powers. That point was illustrated in Thursday's meeting when Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren and Fed Vice Chair Stanley Fischer disagreed over just what tools the Fed has to deal with asset bubbles. (Rosengren argued there were lots of tools while Fischer insisted there were few.)
The first complication here is that, even from a technical perspective, it's hard to see why the Fed is even contemplating another interest rate hike in December. Rod Adams, a neighborhood organizer from Minneapolis, noted in a particularly impassioned moment that there's essentially no indication that inflation is on the rise. Fed officials' own projections show inflation will just barely touch 2 percent through 2018. Josh Bivens, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute who joined Fed Up at Jackson Hole, argued that fully healing the damage from the Great Recession will require a prolonged period of overshooting the Fed's inflation target.
And in truth, none of the Fed officials at the meeting really debated any of these points. What did come up was the threat of asset bubbles and financial instability. "One of the ways that you get maximum employment is that you don't allow excesses to build up to the point that you actually have another recession, which hurts everybody in the room," Rosengren said.
This is where the unspoken moral problem of Fed policy really becomes inescapable. In very broad terms, the effects of lower interest rates and higher inflation tend to fall harder on the more fortunate members of society: retirees with savings portfolios, people with financial assets, those who work in the financial industry, and so on. Meanwhile, the effects of raising interest rates and slowing down jobs and wage growth tend to fall hardest on the least fortunate: Racial minorities, people with only a high school education, or people with prior criminal records.
At any given moment, unemployment for African-Americans is roughly double the national unemployment rate. But that gap tends to close during boom times and widen during downturns. "The economy has recovered for much of white America, but for black and Latino workers it has not," said Adams. "If you decide that we're at maximum employment now and you intentionally slow down the economy, you'll be leaving us behind, pulling up the ladder right after you've climbed it."
The brutal truth is that when the Fed slows down the economy by raising rates, it is throwing people out of work. And the people most likely to be thrown out of work first are those forced to the fringes of the labor market already by discrimination and other circumstances. So raising interest rates to fight financial instability essentially means black, Latino, and other underprivileged workers are the first to be thrown on the sacrificial alter to save us all from Wall Street's irrational exuberance.
This is partly why Fed Up is pushing for more racial and gender diversity among Fed officials, and to remove the financial industry from its privileged position among those officials. The idea is that the voices of those people the Fed will help or harm should all be equally heard in its deliberations. Fed officials may agree on running the economy hot for a while, but the lack of those voices may be hiding just how hot we need to run it.
There are practical policy changes the Fed could make as well. Bivens has released work on alternative tools the Fed could develop to pop bubbles without causing all that collateral damage: Higher capital requirements for banks, more use of its research powers and public relations to alert the markets to bubbles, and other ideas that already lie in the scope of the Fed's powers. Rosengren said the Fed should use all tools at its disposal to fight financial instability. But if Fed officials are looking for practical ways to build Fed Up's concerns more fully into its ways of doing business, it could start by developing those tools and explicitly rejecting interest rate hikes as a way to combat bubbles.
Another would be to adopt a higher inflation rate target like 3 percent or even 4 percent. If the effects of maximum employment take longer to reach marginalized communities, then the 2 percent target is driving the Fed to cut off job growth before those communities can ever heal.
It should be noted, as Fed Up activists did, that within the scope of its tools, the Fed has actually done a far better job maximizing jobs for marginalized Americans than Congress or the state governments. To some extent, the Fed is catching heat because these it's actually willing to listen to reason.
But it's long been said that societies are judged by how they treat their weakest and most vulnerable citizens — that the powerless have a uniquely powerful claim on our responsibilities. And Thursday reminded us that truism applies to the Fed too.
By Jeff Spross
Source
Top Federal Reserve pick is controversial for Wells Fargo oversight and lack of diversity
Top Federal Reserve pick is controversial for Wells Fargo oversight and lack of diversity
Shawn Sebastian, field director of Fed Up, a campaign by labor, community and liberal activist groups that wants the...
Shawn Sebastian, field director of Fed Up, a campaign by labor, community and liberal activist groups that wants the Fed to enact pro-worker policies, said the choice of Williams damaged the Fed’s legitimacy and credibility.“Today, the Federal Reserve concluded another opaque and controversial Reserve Bank presidential selection process by ignoring the demands of the public and choosing yet another white man whose record on Wall Street regulation and full employment raises serious questions,” he said.
Read the full article here.
Critics of Fed on Left and Right Prepare to Head to Jackson Hole
At least two groups—one on the right and one from the left—are expected to show up in some fashion to press the Fed to...
At least two groups—one on the right and one from the left—are expected to show up in some fashion to press the Fed to change its policies.
The conference, Aug. 27-29, will draw Fed officials, foreign central bankers, academic economists, reporters and others to talk about inflation and monetary policy in view of Grand Teton mountain range.
Just a short-drive away from the conference, the conservative American Principles Project has scheduled another conference to discuss how the group believes the Fed has failed to defend the dollar and promote prosperity. This gathering is titled, “Central Banks: The Problem or the Solution?”
Liberal-leaning activists from the Fed Up Coalition–representing unions, community activists and policy advocates–are also expected to gather in Jackson Hole, much as they did last year, to urge the Fed to change its structure to become more open and democratic.
The group opposes raising short-term interest rates from near zero now. The members want the Fed to maintain its ultra-easy policy to spur the economy and lift more of the nation’s workers out of troubled economic conditions. Members of the group have been meeting with Fed officials lately to voice their concerns.
The Kansas City Fed conference in Jackson Hole gives central bank officials a chance to socialize, hike, debate major issues facing the global economy and occasionally make major policy speeches. Attendance is strictly by invitation-only.
APP monetary-policy director Steven Lonegan said the aim of his event is to refocus the Fed on defending the dollar. “We are really challenging the Fed toe to toe on their own turf” by coming to Jackson Hole, he said.
The broader mission of the conference, Mr. Lonegan said, was to engage the nation’s political candidates to speak about the Fed. He said all known candidates have been asked to appear at the event, although none have so far accepted.
The APP event includes representatives from the Heritage Foundation, economists, Fox Business Network personality John Stossel, and a member of the British Parliament, according to the conference program.
Source: Wall Street Journal
3 days ago
3 days ago