Thursday, July 12, 2012
STOP Anti-Union Cal Prop 32
NO on Anti-Union Cal Prop. 32
Stop Proposition 32 - Special Exemptions Act -
the GOP's attempt to silence California's workers
Proposition 32 was put on the California ballot by Orange County right-wing activists, anti-union billionaires like the Koch Brothers and corporate SuperPACs. Proposition 32 would silence the voices of working people in California on all state and local issues.
At its core, Proposition 32, the Special Exemptions Act, is about worker payroll deduction versus corporate profits.
Most unions get dues through payroll deduction. A portion of those funds are then dedicated to politics. Proposition 32 says that if money comes into the Union via payroll deduction, it cannot be used for any political purposes – no direct contributions, no independent expenditures, no political parties, no ballot measures and no communications by the unions with their own members.
So, if Proposition 32 passes, our labor movement will not have any money to repeal it. We will have no money to fight "Right-to-Work" initiatives. We will be unable to stop attempts to eliminate workers' rights and protections.
If Proposition 32 passes, it will virtually eliminate all political activity by labor in California.
We can't let this happen. Start educating your coworkers, family and friends now.
Please watch the video and share it widely!
To stay informed, go to the website STOP the Special Exemptions Act.
Like Stop Special Exemptions on Facebook.
Follow Stop Special Exemptions on Twitter.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
LIBOR SCANDAL
LIBOR: The Latest in Wall Street Tactics to Get Rich at all Costs
Scandals in the financial press do not die. They are replaced by new ones. The latest in the ever-growing list of ways the Wall Street elite has found to make sure they get rich at all costs is the so-called “LIBOR scandal.”
LIBOR stands for “London InterBank Offered Rate.” The British Bankers Association defines LIBOR as “the average interest rate at which leading banks borrow funds of a sizeable amount from other banks in the London market.
LIBOR impacts working people because it is one of the most commonly used references in setting the interest rates people pay on consumer loans such as mortgages, credit cards and student loans. This means that the interest rate banks charge on consumer loan products is often calculated as LIBOR plus an additional amount specified in the loan documents.
In fact, around $10 trillion in loans is indexed to LIBOR. When you add in all types of financial products including complex instruments like derivatives, LIBOR is the index for around
$800 Trillion in financial instruments.
Late last month, Barclays Bank and regulators in the U.S. and UK announced that they had reached a £290 million ($450 million) settlement to resolve claims that the bank had manipulated LIBOR. Barclays, one of the five largest banks in the world, regularly manipulated the rate in order to increase profits, minimize losses, and hide how weak it was during the financial crisis.
It appears that the Barclays settlement is just the beginning. According to press reports, other large banks including J.P. Morgan (Chase) and Citigroup are also involved in the investigation.
In other words, the daily prices of $800 trillion in financial products around the world were manipulated to increase the Bankers’ bottom lines. This is yet another item on the ever-growing list of ways the Bankers’ have rigged the deck in their favor.
The big banks have squandered the public trust. Our skepticism is constantly reinforced by new reports of scandal within the industry.
One way to start to restore public confidence in the financial sector is to put in place strong rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. There must be harsh penalties for people who break the rules. Also, Congress must give the regulators adequate funding, especially the Commodity Futures Trading Commission which took the lead in the U.S. on the LIBOR investigation.
This scandal also illustrates the power of the "too big to fail" banks and the dangers of allowing commercial banking and speculative trading to be conducted within the same financial institution. Strong rules implementing the Dodd-Frank provisions under the Volcker Rule, which prevents banks from engaging in excessively risky trading, and regulating derivatives are essential to prevent future scandals of this nature. And the too big to fail banks must be broken up once and for all by reinstituting the Glass-Steagall Act —the law that was in place from 1933 to 1999 which separated more stable commercial banking activities from riskier investment banking.
A final word on this as it relates to the upcoming presidential election. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is attempting to sell himself to the American people as a man who knows how to fix the economy because of his experience in the financial services industry. Time and again, however, we see that the financial services industry does not help real businesses grow and create jobs. It is a place where there is no distinction between money and values. Instead of wanting to change this culture, Romney has vowed to “get rid of Dodd-Frank”, the law put in place to rein in Wall Street excess and protect consumers after the 2008 financial crisis.
We need a President with true values. Not someone who comes from a culture of greed, where anything goes as long as the top one percent keeps getting richer.
by Heather Slavkin AFL-CIO
Scandals in the financial press do not die. They are replaced by new ones. The latest in the ever-growing list of ways the Wall Street elite has found to make sure they get rich at all costs is the so-called “LIBOR scandal.”
LIBOR stands for “London InterBank Offered Rate.” The British Bankers Association defines LIBOR as “the average interest rate at which leading banks borrow funds of a sizeable amount from other banks in the London market.
LIBOR impacts working people because it is one of the most commonly used references in setting the interest rates people pay on consumer loans such as mortgages, credit cards and student loans. This means that the interest rate banks charge on consumer loan products is often calculated as LIBOR plus an additional amount specified in the loan documents.
In fact, around $10 trillion in loans is indexed to LIBOR. When you add in all types of financial products including complex instruments like derivatives, LIBOR is the index for around
$800 Trillion in financial instruments.
Late last month, Barclays Bank and regulators in the U.S. and UK announced that they had reached a £290 million ($450 million) settlement to resolve claims that the bank had manipulated LIBOR. Barclays, one of the five largest banks in the world, regularly manipulated the rate in order to increase profits, minimize losses, and hide how weak it was during the financial crisis.
It appears that the Barclays settlement is just the beginning. According to press reports, other large banks including J.P. Morgan (Chase) and Citigroup are also involved in the investigation.
In other words, the daily prices of $800 trillion in financial products around the world were manipulated to increase the Bankers’ bottom lines. This is yet another item on the ever-growing list of ways the Bankers’ have rigged the deck in their favor.
The big banks have squandered the public trust. Our skepticism is constantly reinforced by new reports of scandal within the industry.
One way to start to restore public confidence in the financial sector is to put in place strong rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. There must be harsh penalties for people who break the rules. Also, Congress must give the regulators adequate funding, especially the Commodity Futures Trading Commission which took the lead in the U.S. on the LIBOR investigation.
This scandal also illustrates the power of the "too big to fail" banks and the dangers of allowing commercial banking and speculative trading to be conducted within the same financial institution. Strong rules implementing the Dodd-Frank provisions under the Volcker Rule, which prevents banks from engaging in excessively risky trading, and regulating derivatives are essential to prevent future scandals of this nature. And the too big to fail banks must be broken up once and for all by reinstituting the Glass-Steagall Act —the law that was in place from 1933 to 1999 which separated more stable commercial banking activities from riskier investment banking.
A final word on this as it relates to the upcoming presidential election. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is attempting to sell himself to the American people as a man who knows how to fix the economy because of his experience in the financial services industry. Time and again, however, we see that the financial services industry does not help real businesses grow and create jobs. It is a place where there is no distinction between money and values. Instead of wanting to change this culture, Romney has vowed to “get rid of Dodd-Frank”, the law put in place to rein in Wall Street excess and protect consumers after the 2008 financial crisis.
We need a President with true values. Not someone who comes from a culture of greed, where anything goes as long as the top one percent keeps getting richer.
by Heather Slavkin AFL-CIO
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Unions Fight Whirlpool Closure
Arkansas Whirlpool Factory Closes, Unions Say “Bring Jobs Home”
The factory had 4,600 workers as recently as 2006.
A group of 30 union members, elected officials and political candidates met at the United Steelworkers hall in Fort Smith, Arkansas, to voice support for the Bring Jobs Home Act, on Saturday, July 7, a little more than a week after Whirlpool Corp. closed its local refrigerator Fort Smith factory.
USW President Rick Nemeth said:
We want to work. We’ve got a lot of companies still here. Let’s keep them and grow on them.
Rick Belk, secretary-treasurer for the Arkansas AFL-CIO, said the factory closing cost the community decent wages. “If you just came to listen to speeches, that’s not going to be enough,” he told the Southwest Times Record. He urged those at the meeting to "tell their elected officials to stand up for the American worker."Among the unions present at the meeting were United Steelworkers (USW), AFSCME, Actors’ Equity (AEA), UAW, Fire Fighters (IAFF), Communications Workers of America (CWA), Sheet Metal Workers (SMWIA) and Plumbers and Pipe Fitters (UA). Representatives from the Crawford County Democratic Party and the Sebastian and Crawford County Central Labor Council also attended the Bring Jobs Home event.
The Bring Jobs Home Act—a bill that would stop companies from taking a tax deduction for moving expenses when they ship jobs overseas—was discussed as a piece of legislation that congressional leaders can immediately act on as a first step in a comprehensive plan to end incentives for sending good jobs away.
All over the country thousands of working families and their unions are urging Congress to take action on the nation’s jobs crisis, part of the AFL-CIO’s Bring Jobs Home campaign.
After the July 4 recess, Congress will take up the Bring Jobs Home Act (S. 2884), which will cut taxes for U.S. companies that move jobs and business operations to the United States and end tax loopholes that reward companies that ship jobs overseas. Working families also are pushing for a call center bill that would bar companies that send call center jobs overseas from receiving federal grants and tax breaks.
Along with building support for the Bring Jobs Home Act and the call center bill and for stopping currency manipulation, the AFL-CIO is calling on lawmakers to:
- Tax the overseas income of U.S. corporations the same way we tax their domestic income, so they can no longer lower their tax bill by shifting income and jobs overseas; and
- Push for fair trade policies that benefit workers—not just multinational corporations.
Thursday, July 5, 2012
CWA Phone Workers Protest TPP Trade Deal
CWA Activists Challenge Secret TPP Trade Deal
CWA Union activists from Local 9509
Protest top secret TPP Trade deal in San Diego.
CWA activists were part of a big crowd that stood up to Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiators this week, demanding more transparency and openness in what could be the biggest free trade agreement in the world.
Rallying in San Diego, site of the 13th round of negotiations, CWAers joined nearly 200 others activists from the AFL-CIO and other unions, Citizens Trade Campaign, Sierra Club and other organizations.
CWA is working with allies to highlight the dangers of TPP — what some have dubbed "NAFTA on steroids" — including the possible end to "Buy American" policies, offshoring of millions of good-paying jobs and rolling back of important Wall Street regulations. In addition, the deal would jeopardize the sovereignty of the 11 nations by giving more power to large corporations like Walmart, Monsanto, Goldman Sachs and Halliburton.
"This not only contributes to the nation's severe unemployment problems, but it pushes down wages and benefits for the jobs we have left," said Lorena Gonzalez, chief executive officer of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, at the rally outside the Hilton San Diego Bayfront Hotel. "That means a smaller tax base to support our schools, our infrastructure, and other critical services."
"Let us say, 'open these negotiations to the people,'" Rep. Bob Filner, a San Diego Democrat, told the crowd. "Let's stop this so-called free trade."
The talks include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam; Mexico, Canada and Japan have expressed interest in joining.
But, despite growing support for public access to the documents and discussions, the United States Trade Representative continues to deny key stakeholders a seat at the table.
On Saturday, the Coalition plans to make some noise throughout downtown San Diego in the Occupy-led "Pots & Pans" protest.
Read more at http://stoptpp.org/.
CWA Union activists from Local 9509
Protest top secret TPP Trade deal in San Diego.
CWA activists were part of a big crowd that stood up to Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiators this week, demanding more transparency and openness in what could be the biggest free trade agreement in the world.
Rallying in San Diego, site of the 13th round of negotiations, CWAers joined nearly 200 others activists from the AFL-CIO and other unions, Citizens Trade Campaign, Sierra Club and other organizations.
CWA is working with allies to highlight the dangers of TPP — what some have dubbed "NAFTA on steroids" — including the possible end to "Buy American" policies, offshoring of millions of good-paying jobs and rolling back of important Wall Street regulations. In addition, the deal would jeopardize the sovereignty of the 11 nations by giving more power to large corporations like Walmart, Monsanto, Goldman Sachs and Halliburton.
"This not only contributes to the nation's severe unemployment problems, but it pushes down wages and benefits for the jobs we have left," said Lorena Gonzalez, chief executive officer of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, at the rally outside the Hilton San Diego Bayfront Hotel. "That means a smaller tax base to support our schools, our infrastructure, and other critical services."
"Let us say, 'open these negotiations to the people,'" Rep. Bob Filner, a San Diego Democrat, told the crowd. "Let's stop this so-called free trade."
The talks include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam; Mexico, Canada and Japan have expressed interest in joining.
But, despite growing support for public access to the documents and discussions, the United States Trade Representative continues to deny key stakeholders a seat at the table.
On Saturday, the Coalition plans to make some noise throughout downtown San Diego in the Occupy-led "Pots & Pans" protest.
Read more at http://stoptpp.org/.
Monday, June 25, 2012
Supremes Cut Labor Rights
Supreme Court Deals Blow to Unions
Especially in SEIU fight over Extra Dues
The Supreme Court ruled that unions must win approval in advance from dissenting members before they collect extra dues in mid-year to pay for a political campaign.
June 21, 2012, 11:06 a.m.WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court dealt a defeat Thursday to public employee Unions in a case from California, ruling that Unions must win approval in advance from dissenting members before they collect extra dues in mid-year to pay for a political campaign.
The dispute turned on a relatively small amount of money, but one that involved an important principle of the 1st Amendment. The case also carried echoes of the recent fights in Wisconsin and other states over limiting the power of public employee unions.
By a 7-2 vote, the justices said the Service Employees International Union violated the 1stAmendment when it collected an extra $6.45 per month from state employees in fall 2005.
The Union’s leaders had vowed to create a special $12-million fund to oppose two ballot measures sponsored by then-Gov.Arnold Schwarzenegger that was seen as targeting public unions. They decided on a mid-year dues increase to pay for the campaign and said they would refund money later to those non-union employees who objected.
But a group of dissenting union members sued, alleging the forced special assessment violated their rights.
For decades, the Supreme Court has upheld an uneasy compromise between two rights. On the one hand, federal labor law protects the right of workers to form unions and the right of unions in some states to collect dues money from all employees to pay for collective bargaining.
On the other hand, the 1st Amendment bars the government from forcing persons, including public employees, to pay for political causes and candidates who they oppose. For that reason, public employee Unions must give dissenting members the right to opt out of paying the share of dues that goes to politics.
In the California case, the SEIU said it gave employees an annual notice of the dues and what share would go to supporting the Union and what share would go to politics. Its leaders maintained they were not required to send a mid-year notice at the time of the special assessment in 2005.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had agreed with the union in a 2-1 decision, but the Supreme Court disagreed in Knox vs. SEIU.
In a strongly worded opinion, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said the Union had a duty to seek approval from the dissenting members before using their dues money for the special political fund.
"This aggressive use of power by the SEIU to collect fees from nonmembers is indefensible,” he wrote. “Even a full refund would not undo the violation of 1st Amendment rights.… Therefore, when a public-sector Union imposes a special assessment or dues increase, the Unions must provide a fresh … notice and may not exact any funds from nonmembers without their affirmative consent.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas agreed. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed, but did not join Alito’s opinion.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan dissented. They said dissenting members deserved the right to “opt out” of such a special assessment, but they disagreed with requiring the Union to get their advance approval to “opt in” to such a fund.
Breyer said he worried the court’s opinion could be read to mean that public unions must seek affirmative approval from all members before spending dues money on politics.
“The debate about public unions’ collective bargaining rights is currently intense,” Breyer said.
“The question of how a nonmember indicates a desire not to pay constitutes an important part of this debate.… There is no good reason for this court suddenly to enter the debate, much less now
by David Savage
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-supreme-court-union-donations-20120621,0,2860404.story
Especially in SEIU fight over Extra Dues
The Supreme Court ruled that unions must win approval in advance from dissenting members before they collect extra dues in mid-year to pay for a political campaign.
June 21, 2012, 11:06 a.m.WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court dealt a defeat Thursday to public employee Unions in a case from California, ruling that Unions must win approval in advance from dissenting members before they collect extra dues in mid-year to pay for a political campaign.
The dispute turned on a relatively small amount of money, but one that involved an important principle of the 1st Amendment. The case also carried echoes of the recent fights in Wisconsin and other states over limiting the power of public employee unions.
By a 7-2 vote, the justices said the Service Employees International Union violated the 1stAmendment when it collected an extra $6.45 per month from state employees in fall 2005.
The Union’s leaders had vowed to create a special $12-million fund to oppose two ballot measures sponsored by then-Gov.Arnold Schwarzenegger that was seen as targeting public unions. They decided on a mid-year dues increase to pay for the campaign and said they would refund money later to those non-union employees who objected.
But a group of dissenting union members sued, alleging the forced special assessment violated their rights.
For decades, the Supreme Court has upheld an uneasy compromise between two rights. On the one hand, federal labor law protects the right of workers to form unions and the right of unions in some states to collect dues money from all employees to pay for collective bargaining.
On the other hand, the 1st Amendment bars the government from forcing persons, including public employees, to pay for political causes and candidates who they oppose. For that reason, public employee Unions must give dissenting members the right to opt out of paying the share of dues that goes to politics.
In the California case, the SEIU said it gave employees an annual notice of the dues and what share would go to supporting the Union and what share would go to politics. Its leaders maintained they were not required to send a mid-year notice at the time of the special assessment in 2005.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had agreed with the union in a 2-1 decision, but the Supreme Court disagreed in Knox vs. SEIU.
In a strongly worded opinion, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said the Union had a duty to seek approval from the dissenting members before using their dues money for the special political fund.
"This aggressive use of power by the SEIU to collect fees from nonmembers is indefensible,” he wrote. “Even a full refund would not undo the violation of 1st Amendment rights.… Therefore, when a public-sector Union imposes a special assessment or dues increase, the Unions must provide a fresh … notice and may not exact any funds from nonmembers without their affirmative consent.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas agreed. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed, but did not join Alito’s opinion.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan dissented. They said dissenting members deserved the right to “opt out” of such a special assessment, but they disagreed with requiring the Union to get their advance approval to “opt in” to such a fund.
Breyer said he worried the court’s opinion could be read to mean that public unions must seek affirmative approval from all members before spending dues money on politics.
“The debate about public unions’ collective bargaining rights is currently intense,” Breyer said.
“The question of how a nonmember indicates a desire not to pay constitutes an important part of this debate.… There is no good reason for this court suddenly to enter the debate, much less now
by David Savage
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-supreme-court-union-donations-20120621,0,2860404.story
Thursday, June 21, 2012
No. Car. Snubs Labor Day
Charlotte, NC Snubs Labor Day Parade
Jason Cherkis
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/20/democratic-national-convention-charlotte-labor-day-unions_n_1613476.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008
The Democratic National Committee's selection of Charlotte, N.C., to host its convention has angered labor Unions, with advocates arguing that the right-to-work state is one of the least supportive for Union work, and that the city -- home to Bank of America's headquarters -- has no Unionized hotel workers. Now unions say they have another reason to gripe.
Charlotte is snubbing its local Labor Day parade, Union representatives claim, with the city citing security concerns though the parade takes place the day before the Democratic National Convention starts. The city has forced organizers to jettison the parade's traditional route -- passing through the heart of downtown -- for a more out-of-the-way route along the city's outer edge. City officials have also banned motorized vehicles from participating in the festivities, and even tried to ban marching bands, according to the parade organizers.`
Union representatives say something bigger than drum lines might be at stake, if what had once been considered a family-friendly event is now being considered threatening. "We are not really happy," says Cindy Foster, president of the Southern Piedmont Central Labor Council, a part of the AFL-CIO representing North Carolina. "The event is being treated more as a protest."
And now the parade may look a lot more like one, organizers say.
The hour-long parade has typically resembled nothing more than a community gathering to celebrate work and wave a few American flags, participants describe. High school bands marched alongside Teamsters in big trucks. Local dignitaries waved from convertibles and vintage cars. Firefighters rode by and marching bands strutted in sync. The parade's chairman, Ben Lee, estimates that about a third of the parade had been on wheels. "Everything's different this year," Lee says. "We knew last summer things were going to be different."
Convention organizers say any dealings over the parade are the city's responsibility. Robert A. Tufano, a spokesperson for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, says the old parade route had been in the way of the convention activities. "With the DNC beginning the following day, security and transportation set-up and planning preclude the use of the traditional route," Tufano wrote in an email.
Tufano refutes Lee and Foster's claim that marching bands were at first barred from the parade. He adds that the parade's use of cars might still be on the table. "We will continue to discuss the possible inclusion of floats and/or motorized vehicles with the parade organizers in light of security concerns," he said.
Parade chairman Lee says he considers the security issue a legitimate reason for the parade downsizing and that the city has been cooperative during the negotiations. But Jeremy Sprinkle, the communications director for the North Carolina AFL-CIO, says the city's fight over parade has been unnecessary. "To the extent that the city is making it difficult, that doesn't paint the city of Charlotte in a good light," Sprinkle tells HuffPost.
At least the parade rerouting has stirred up Union members, Sprinkle adds. "It has gotten more people fired up about exercising their freedom of speech," he says.
Scott Thrower, president of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 379, is not so much a fired-up participant as a disappointed one. This time, he'll have to leave his float on the sidelines. Last year, he says the float marked the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 with a tribute to the twin towers. "We had 12 IBEW members who passed away," Thrower says. The display was 10 feet by 10 feet, and members recreated the towers out of wood.
"We always take pride in our float,'' Thrower says. "It's the one day a year we get to shine. It's not the Macy's Day parade, but we always get a good crowd."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/20/democratic-national-convention-charlotte-labor-day-unions_n_1613476.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008
Jason Cherkis
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/20/democratic-national-convention-charlotte-labor-day-unions_n_1613476.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008
The Democratic National Committee's selection of Charlotte, N.C., to host its convention has angered labor Unions, with advocates arguing that the right-to-work state is one of the least supportive for Union work, and that the city -- home to Bank of America's headquarters -- has no Unionized hotel workers. Now unions say they have another reason to gripe.
Charlotte is snubbing its local Labor Day parade, Union representatives claim, with the city citing security concerns though the parade takes place the day before the Democratic National Convention starts. The city has forced organizers to jettison the parade's traditional route -- passing through the heart of downtown -- for a more out-of-the-way route along the city's outer edge. City officials have also banned motorized vehicles from participating in the festivities, and even tried to ban marching bands, according to the parade organizers.`
Union representatives say something bigger than drum lines might be at stake, if what had once been considered a family-friendly event is now being considered threatening. "We are not really happy," says Cindy Foster, president of the Southern Piedmont Central Labor Council, a part of the AFL-CIO representing North Carolina. "The event is being treated more as a protest."
And now the parade may look a lot more like one, organizers say.
The hour-long parade has typically resembled nothing more than a community gathering to celebrate work and wave a few American flags, participants describe. High school bands marched alongside Teamsters in big trucks. Local dignitaries waved from convertibles and vintage cars. Firefighters rode by and marching bands strutted in sync. The parade's chairman, Ben Lee, estimates that about a third of the parade had been on wheels. "Everything's different this year," Lee says. "We knew last summer things were going to be different."
Convention organizers say any dealings over the parade are the city's responsibility. Robert A. Tufano, a spokesperson for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, says the old parade route had been in the way of the convention activities. "With the DNC beginning the following day, security and transportation set-up and planning preclude the use of the traditional route," Tufano wrote in an email.
Tufano refutes Lee and Foster's claim that marching bands were at first barred from the parade. He adds that the parade's use of cars might still be on the table. "We will continue to discuss the possible inclusion of floats and/or motorized vehicles with the parade organizers in light of security concerns," he said.
Parade chairman Lee says he considers the security issue a legitimate reason for the parade downsizing and that the city has been cooperative during the negotiations. But Jeremy Sprinkle, the communications director for the North Carolina AFL-CIO, says the city's fight over parade has been unnecessary. "To the extent that the city is making it difficult, that doesn't paint the city of Charlotte in a good light," Sprinkle tells HuffPost.
At least the parade rerouting has stirred up Union members, Sprinkle adds. "It has gotten more people fired up about exercising their freedom of speech," he says.
Scott Thrower, president of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 379, is not so much a fired-up participant as a disappointed one. This time, he'll have to leave his float on the sidelines. Last year, he says the float marked the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 with a tribute to the twin towers. "We had 12 IBEW members who passed away," Thrower says. The display was 10 feet by 10 feet, and members recreated the towers out of wood.
"We always take pride in our float,'' Thrower says. "It's the one day a year we get to shine. It's not the Macy's Day parade, but we always get a good crowd."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/20/democratic-national-convention-charlotte-labor-day-unions_n_1613476.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008
Friday, June 1, 2012
Postal Unions Fight Back
Postal Workers, Community Allies Increase Pressure
as USPS Cuts Loom
Theresa Moran
As Congress dallies, some Postal workers and community activists are turning to civil disobedience to combat the sweeping cuts planned for the Postal Service. Union tops are sticking to a legislative strategy.
Ten postal worker and community activists in Portland, Oregon, were arrested May 24 when they occupied the city’s University Station Post Office, refusing to leave and blocking the closure of the office’s retail desk.
Nearly 100 supporters rallied outside as the activists inside held their ground, singing and holding banners proclaiming “Occupy the Post Office” and “No Closures! No Cuts!”
Police hauled them out after an hour and a half.
The occupation was organized by members of Communities and Postal Workers United, a cross-union network of postal worker activists. Other groups active in the “Occupy the Post Office” coalition include Jobs with Justice, the Rural Organizing Project, and Occupy groups.
The arrests, the first in the fight to save the post office, mark an escalation in tactics that CPWU organizers hope will spread to communities across the country.
According to Jamie Partridge, an arrestee from Occupy Portland and a retired postal worker, the action was meant to press Postmaster General Patrick Donohoe to halt his announced cuts and closures, which could slow mail and cost thousands of jobs as soon as this summer.
“It’s Congress and the President who can fix postal finances, but our immediate target is the Postmaster General,” Partridge said.
Activists with the Rural Organizing Project have occupied rural post offices in Oregon, and c+ommunity/labor coalitions against cuts have been active in New York, Baltimore, and rural Vermont.
The four postal unions (Mail Handlers, Postal Workers, Letter Carriers, and Rural Letter Carriers) have stuck to traditional rallies, jointly organizing a September 27 day of action with events in nearly 500 cities.
NO LEGISLATIVE FIX
The arrests come a month after the Senate passed a bill meant to provide relief to the financially struggling post office, a bill CPWU activists criticize for not going far enough.
Absent a fix from Congress, Donohoe’s plans for massive cuts to jobs and services will soon be underway. The Senate’s bill would do little to chase away the albatross dragging on USPS finances: an obligation passed by Congress in 2006 that requires the postal service to pre-fund the health benefits of retirees up to 75 years in the future. This requirement, not shared by any other federal agency, costs the postal service a hefty $5.5 billion per year.
The bill aims to ease the burden by allowing the postal service to make payments over a longer period of time but would also slash 100,000 postal jobs, largely through buyouts. If made law, the bill would make it harder for USPS to close small rural post offices and would preserve overnight delivery standards for three more years and Saturday delivery for two.
While some laud these provisions as victories—if enacted—there’s nothing to prevent the USPS from slashing standards after the protections expire. Indeed, postal managers have already said eliminating overnight delivery is one key strategy for cost savings in the near future.
Postal activists like Partridge, who’s on the Letter Carriers Branch 82 organizing committee, doubt the bill would do much to help. “It doesn’t actually take anything off the chopping block and it doesn’t fix the pre-funding issue,” he said.
Even leaders of the Postal Workers and the Letter Carriers criticized the bill as “flawed” and “deeply flawed” for allowing cuts and not doing enough to relieve the financial burden that Congress itself placed upon the USPS.
CAN’T CATCH A BREAK
Of course, none of these provisions will become law until postal relief legislation passes in the House, which seems unlikely anytime soon. That’s just as well, as the leading bill is one sponsored by California Republican Darrell Issa, who seeks to slash postal jobs and services into oblivion. Issa has refused to let a more favorable bill with broad support among House members come to a vote.
In the wake of Congress’s failure to pass timely relief legislation, Donohoe is moving ahead with major cuts. Plans to slash hours at post offices and to close processing plants were announced just in time for expiration of a May 15 moratorium on cuts and closures.
On May 17, the Postal Service announced it would go forward with plans to close half of its 461 mail processing plants over the next two years. The first round of 48 closures will happen this summer. On the chopping block are the 28,000 jobs in those plants, positions represented by the Postal Workers.
The week before, USPS announced it would reduce hours at 13,000 rural post offices across the country. There are 31,500 post offices nationwide. In the rural locations, full-time postmasters will be replaced with part-timers. The USPS is pushing early retirement for 21,000 postmasters. It’s not yet clear how many other jobs will be lost.
The newly announced cuts are a departure from the Postal Service’s original plan. Last July, Donohoe said he would close 3,700 rural, urban, and suburban offices that the USPS identified as low-revenue.
In a May 9 press release, Donohoe said the switch from closures to shorter hours was made in response to public opposition and that the agency would not shutter any offices “without having provided a viable solution.”
NOT A VICTORY
Postal activists caution, however, against labeling Donohoe’s new plan a win.
“This is no victory at all. It doesn’t make a difference if you’re closing 3,700 or cutting hours at 13,000—you’re still cutting service,” says Tom Dodge, a truck driver at the Baltimore mail processing center and an organizer with Communities and Postal Workers United.
At most offices, service cuts will come in the form of slashing operating hours. Many retail desks could see their open hours whittled down to as little as two a day. Such drastic cuts will effectively render post offices inaccessible to “anybody who has to work for a living,” Partridge said. Towns with offices on the cuts list also have the option of replacing the office with a “village post office,” a retail desk located within a private business such as a gas station or Walmart. Village post offices can sell stamps and ship flat-rate packages, but can’t handle weighing packages, shipping express or registered mail, or selling money orders.
The desks are staffed not by Unionized USPS workers but by non-union employees of the business where they’re located. Processing plant closures also mean serious problems for customers. Dodge knows firsthand how problematic these “consolidations” are. In November, the Frederick, Maryland, plant was closed and its mail sent to the Baltimore plant where Dodge works, 50 miles away.
The facility was so ill-prepared to accommodate the deluge of mail from Frederick that soon 22 semi trucks full of mail were lined up outside waiting to be unloaded. Mail has been delayed, sometimes comically so. Customers reported receiving circulars for Thanksgiving sales as late as February. Even after mail was diverted to Virginia and D.C. facilities, postal workers received reports of people receiving coupons weeks after they’d expired.
As Congress stalls in fixing the financial mess it created, activists are targeting Donohoe, who has ultimate authority to stop the closures and cuts. Some hope actions like the Portland occupation may pressure him into halting the cuts, while others are calling for his ouster.
Activists believe that Postmaster Donohoe’s cuts, by increasing customer dissatisfaction with the Postal Service, fit in to his master plan to shrink it to a fraction of its current self.
Labor Notes Theresa Moran
as USPS Cuts Loom
Theresa Moran
As Congress dallies, some Postal workers and community activists are turning to civil disobedience to combat the sweeping cuts planned for the Postal Service. Union tops are sticking to a legislative strategy.
Ten postal worker and community activists in Portland, Oregon, were arrested May 24 when they occupied the city’s University Station Post Office, refusing to leave and blocking the closure of the office’s retail desk.
Nearly 100 supporters rallied outside as the activists inside held their ground, singing and holding banners proclaiming “Occupy the Post Office” and “No Closures! No Cuts!”
Police hauled them out after an hour and a half.
The occupation was organized by members of Communities and Postal Workers United, a cross-union network of postal worker activists. Other groups active in the “Occupy the Post Office” coalition include Jobs with Justice, the Rural Organizing Project, and Occupy groups.
The arrests, the first in the fight to save the post office, mark an escalation in tactics that CPWU organizers hope will spread to communities across the country.
According to Jamie Partridge, an arrestee from Occupy Portland and a retired postal worker, the action was meant to press Postmaster General Patrick Donohoe to halt his announced cuts and closures, which could slow mail and cost thousands of jobs as soon as this summer.
“It’s Congress and the President who can fix postal finances, but our immediate target is the Postmaster General,” Partridge said.
Activists with the Rural Organizing Project have occupied rural post offices in Oregon, and c+ommunity/labor coalitions against cuts have been active in New York, Baltimore, and rural Vermont.
The four postal unions (Mail Handlers, Postal Workers, Letter Carriers, and Rural Letter Carriers) have stuck to traditional rallies, jointly organizing a September 27 day of action with events in nearly 500 cities.
NO LEGISLATIVE FIX
The arrests come a month after the Senate passed a bill meant to provide relief to the financially struggling post office, a bill CPWU activists criticize for not going far enough.
Absent a fix from Congress, Donohoe’s plans for massive cuts to jobs and services will soon be underway. The Senate’s bill would do little to chase away the albatross dragging on USPS finances: an obligation passed by Congress in 2006 that requires the postal service to pre-fund the health benefits of retirees up to 75 years in the future. This requirement, not shared by any other federal agency, costs the postal service a hefty $5.5 billion per year.
The bill aims to ease the burden by allowing the postal service to make payments over a longer period of time but would also slash 100,000 postal jobs, largely through buyouts. If made law, the bill would make it harder for USPS to close small rural post offices and would preserve overnight delivery standards for three more years and Saturday delivery for two.
While some laud these provisions as victories—if enacted—there’s nothing to prevent the USPS from slashing standards after the protections expire. Indeed, postal managers have already said eliminating overnight delivery is one key strategy for cost savings in the near future.
Postal activists like Partridge, who’s on the Letter Carriers Branch 82 organizing committee, doubt the bill would do much to help. “It doesn’t actually take anything off the chopping block and it doesn’t fix the pre-funding issue,” he said.
Even leaders of the Postal Workers and the Letter Carriers criticized the bill as “flawed” and “deeply flawed” for allowing cuts and not doing enough to relieve the financial burden that Congress itself placed upon the USPS.
CAN’T CATCH A BREAK
Of course, none of these provisions will become law until postal relief legislation passes in the House, which seems unlikely anytime soon. That’s just as well, as the leading bill is one sponsored by California Republican Darrell Issa, who seeks to slash postal jobs and services into oblivion. Issa has refused to let a more favorable bill with broad support among House members come to a vote.
In the wake of Congress’s failure to pass timely relief legislation, Donohoe is moving ahead with major cuts. Plans to slash hours at post offices and to close processing plants were announced just in time for expiration of a May 15 moratorium on cuts and closures.
On May 17, the Postal Service announced it would go forward with plans to close half of its 461 mail processing plants over the next two years. The first round of 48 closures will happen this summer. On the chopping block are the 28,000 jobs in those plants, positions represented by the Postal Workers.
The week before, USPS announced it would reduce hours at 13,000 rural post offices across the country. There are 31,500 post offices nationwide. In the rural locations, full-time postmasters will be replaced with part-timers. The USPS is pushing early retirement for 21,000 postmasters. It’s not yet clear how many other jobs will be lost.
The newly announced cuts are a departure from the Postal Service’s original plan. Last July, Donohoe said he would close 3,700 rural, urban, and suburban offices that the USPS identified as low-revenue.
In a May 9 press release, Donohoe said the switch from closures to shorter hours was made in response to public opposition and that the agency would not shutter any offices “without having provided a viable solution.”
NOT A VICTORY
Postal activists caution, however, against labeling Donohoe’s new plan a win.
“This is no victory at all. It doesn’t make a difference if you’re closing 3,700 or cutting hours at 13,000—you’re still cutting service,” says Tom Dodge, a truck driver at the Baltimore mail processing center and an organizer with Communities and Postal Workers United.
At most offices, service cuts will come in the form of slashing operating hours. Many retail desks could see their open hours whittled down to as little as two a day. Such drastic cuts will effectively render post offices inaccessible to “anybody who has to work for a living,” Partridge said. Towns with offices on the cuts list also have the option of replacing the office with a “village post office,” a retail desk located within a private business such as a gas station or Walmart. Village post offices can sell stamps and ship flat-rate packages, but can’t handle weighing packages, shipping express or registered mail, or selling money orders.
The desks are staffed not by Unionized USPS workers but by non-union employees of the business where they’re located. Processing plant closures also mean serious problems for customers. Dodge knows firsthand how problematic these “consolidations” are. In November, the Frederick, Maryland, plant was closed and its mail sent to the Baltimore plant where Dodge works, 50 miles away.
The facility was so ill-prepared to accommodate the deluge of mail from Frederick that soon 22 semi trucks full of mail were lined up outside waiting to be unloaded. Mail has been delayed, sometimes comically so. Customers reported receiving circulars for Thanksgiving sales as late as February. Even after mail was diverted to Virginia and D.C. facilities, postal workers received reports of people receiving coupons weeks after they’d expired.
As Congress stalls in fixing the financial mess it created, activists are targeting Donohoe, who has ultimate authority to stop the closures and cuts. Some hope actions like the Portland occupation may pressure him into halting the cuts, while others are calling for his ouster.
Activists believe that Postmaster Donohoe’s cuts, by increasing customer dissatisfaction with the Postal Service, fit in to his master plan to shrink it to a fraction of its current self.
Labor Notes Theresa Moran
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)