RSS Feed

August, 2011

  1. Tunisian & Egyptian Women Place Hope in their Revolutions

    August 22, 2011 by admin

    by Carl Finamore

    Tunisian and Egyptian girls unionists in California

    A number of girls union leaders fresh from the frontlines in Tunisia and Egypt visited California at the invitation of the Sacramento Labor Council, AFL-CIO. They first appeared at the August 16 Ladies of Labor conference attended by 200 females union leaders throughout the state.

    In the days following, there have been other fruitful exchanges amongst the overseas guests and their American audiences who had been very eager to discover and, perhaps, shed some Western misconceptions about the part of girls in the rebellions marking the region.

    “Until now guys have often considered us 2nd class,” explained Nahed Ben Dakhla, a Women’s Committee member from Tunisia’s strong national trade union federation, UGTT.

    But in the two Tunisia and Egypt, she emphasized to a August 18 meeting in San Francisco‘s Mission district, “men saw us in the front lines preventing the police from making make contact with. We stood in between them and police bullets.

    “As a outcome of mass participation by the two guys and females struggling collectively, the revolution has altered every little thing. There has been an awakening of a communal spirit. We are not going back.”

    Stepping closer to me with lots of emotion in her face, Nahed passionately conveyed a dramatic image from these early days of police violence in the area exactly where hundreds had been killed and thousands injured. These losses are deeply imbedded in the consciousness of millions.

    Not Just an Empty Slogan of Bravado

    “The revolution has transformed every thing, we are not going back” was a mantra I heard often repeated on the streets of Cairo when I arrived final February, only a couple of hours right after President Hosni Mubarak’s forced resignation. I heard it voiced once more by Nahed and other individuals on the podium in San Francisco now some six months later.

    This need to not be misread as shallow enthusiasm. Enshrined in mass consciousness is the belief, and even the expectation, that possibilities for transform are endless.

    This emotional spirit embodies the political conviction that “there is no going back” and is one main purpose the mass reform movements in both Tunisian and Egypt have not been sidelined or demobilized by still-entrenched remnants of the old regimes.

    The momentum continues according to Marwa Khalil Farghali Khalil, Standard Secretary of the influential Public Tax Authority Union in Egypt. With some deserved pride, she announced to the San Francisco meeting that “there had been four independent unions prior to the January revolution. Now, we have 88 new unions with a membership of 250,000 in our Egyptian Federation of Independent Trade Unions (EFITU).”

    “And our Tunisian national trade union federation (UGTT),” echoed Ayda Zerai, secretary general of a garment workers neighborhood union, “has grown 35% given that the uprising. We are now 700,000 as a outcome of the prominent part we played in challenging the regime major to the downfall of dictator Ben Ali.

    “Without labor, there would have been no revolution in Tunisia!” Ayda proclaimed.

    All speakers agreed, there are big opportunities, along with significant challenges, to actually change society. “When the Prime Minister told the UGTT to quit striking and protesting, we refused. The government does not have significantly power simply because they refuse to follow by way of on the hopes of the revolution.

    “We in the UGTT persisted and lately won a five % wage improve, not just for our members but for all Tunisian employees,” Ayda told an enthusiastic audience that quickly erupted into cheers.

    The girls unionists from Egypt told of a comparable concentrate by the EFITU to carry on strikes and protests as necessary in order to attain financial and social reforms. Their persistence also resulted many months ago in significant increases in wages and benefits.

    The Revolution is Incomplete

    “Our revolution is not finished” was another theme of the speakers. In Tunisia, for example, many democratic reforms have however to be accomplished. “Women have not been appointed to important positions of energy and we are hoping this modifications with the revolution,” Nahed stated.

    Madga Mohamed Ibrahim, a leader of the extremely active Sales Tax Union in Egypt, followed her Tunisian sister by acknowledging that the “representation of women is nonetheless inadequate on all levels.”

    Marwa was clearly speaking for the entire delegation from both countries when she commented that “the major obstacle is to rid us of all levels of the old regime, not just the top rated but mid-level as well. We require additional cleansing,” she stated to large applause.

    One particular Last Factor

    My interview ended late at evening as the speakers were rushing to their hotel to rest soon after ending their Ramadan Muslim religious Rapidly and just before an additional very early morning speaking engagement. But Marwa stopped me to make a point she wanted quite much to emphasize.

    “Women now comprise fifty percent of the free of charge trade unions (EFITU) national membership. That becoming mentioned, we are not about to go back.” She plainly needed me to completely enjoy the determination of ladies to push forward.

    I took the chance to sneak in an additional query and asked her what she learned about American people during her short stay. I observed that there was very good and undesirable in this nation with the negative including lots of discrimination against Muslims.

    Marwa nodded in agreement and said that prior to leaving Egypt, her union hosted an American delegation that discerningly readied her for what to anticipate. But since arriving, she said approvingly, “I have changed my mind about America.”

    The translator, a native Arabic-speaker now residing in this nation for sometime, rapidly, and knowingly, cautioned me that the women had only appeared just before extremely friendly audiences.

    Our resident translator, it seems, picked up on the quandary we Americans know only as well properly – our far better side does not often represent the whole.

    Carl Finamore is Machinist Local Lodge 1781 delegate to the San Francisco Labor Council, AFL-CIO. He wrote several dispatches that appeared on Speaking Union from Cairo in the days right away following President Hosni Mubarak’s resignation and can be reached at local1781@yahoo.com

    Enhanced by Zemanta

    TALKINGREADER.COM

    The Big Chapter Books have been aimed at the older readers (primarily 5th Grade and Up), and dealt with stories that centered all around Boy-Girl Relationships, Drugs, Guns, School Dances and Rock Contests, and a lot far more.


  2. CWA and IBEW to Resume Talks with Verizon

    August 22, 2011 by admin

    Following is a statement by the Communications Employees of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers:

    For release 1 p.m., Saturday, Aug. 20, 2011

    Washington, D.C. – Members of CWA and IBEW at Verizon Communications will return to operate on Tuesday, Aug. 23, at which time the contract will be back in force for an indefinite period.

    We have reached agreement with Verizon on how bargaining will proceed and how it will be restructured. The main issues remain to be discussed, but overall, concerns now are focused and narrowed.

    We appreciate the unity of our members and the support of so numerous in the better community. Now we will focus on bargaining relatively and moving forward.

    CWA and IBEW represent 45,000 workers at Verizon covered by this contract from Virginia to New England.

    Enhanced by Zemanta

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  3. Ayn Rand 2.0

    August 19, 2011 by admin

    by Stan Sorscher

    Stan Sorscher

    I went to France in June and couldn’t help comparing the French revolution to our own. So let’s commence with aristocracy, then we’ll get to Ayn Rand. Stick with me.

    In a nutshell, shortly following our revolution, peasants in France concluded that aristocrats have been giving them a genuinely crappy deal. Inside a quick time, peasants and employees rounded up aristocrats, and took them to Location de la Concorde in downtown Paris, and chopped off their heads. Extremely critical stuff.

    In a museum, I saw “The Gleaners,” a popular work by Jean-François Millet, depicting three peasant ladies stooping above to choose up wheat left behind in the harvest. I knew this painting from Sunday school, exactly where I discovered as a kid that folks of wealth have a moral obligation to acknowledge the dignity of poor people.

    Gleaning in the fields was a situation in point, going back to the Old Testament.

    The Gleaners (Des glaneuses) by Jean-François Millet

    Envision my shock to hear from the museum audio manual that the painting was controversial when displayed in 1857. Aristocrats (evidently some had survived with their heads intact, if not their human compassion) regarded the 3 peasant ladies as brutes. Aristocrats objected to painting peasants in a sympathetic light.

    On the opposite wall in the museum was an additional instance of French realism, painted a few years later by Jules Breton. Its title is translated as “Recalling the Gleaners from the Field.” This a single was wonderful – more compelling than The Gleaners.

    In the second painting, the peasant females are just as poor, with bare feet and torn clothes, but this is a work group, with confident presence – all business, capable, focused even at the finish of the functioning day. The ladies seem to communicate among themselves instinctively, like players on a strong sports team. Their recent ancestors had chopped off the heads of aristocrats, and they appear prepared to do it once again, if required.

    Recalling the Gleaners from the Field (Le rappel des glaneuses) by Jules Breton

    Which brings me to Ayn Rand.

    Ayn Rand’s books, Atlas Shrugged in specific, serve as an intellectual foundation for free of charge industry ideology. Atlas Shrugged came out as a movie not too long ago. At the time, Rand’s outlook regarding the wealthy was characterized in these terms:

    “… wealthy individuals “produce” and are rich simply because they “produce.” The rest of us are “parasites” who suck blood and energy from the productive rich, by taxing them.”

    Jon Stewart captures this in one particular of his videos.

    I entirely disagree with Ayn Rand’s reasoning about how rich men and women turn into rich. My good results depends on powerful communities, shared prosperity, opportunity and fairness, and investment in the future. Alex de Tocqueville named this “self interest, effectively understood.”

    As Paul Wellstone stated, “We all do much better when we all do far better.”

    Eric Reinert asks why a barber in Honduras earns much less than $ 1 per hour while the normal of living for a barber in Ohio may possibly be 30 occasions greater, even though both are comparably productive and skillful, and the two are equally deserving of prosperity. Basically put, the Ohio barber’s consumers are more prosperous.

    This stands in contrast to the Ayn Rand view that rich individuals do well largely as a consequence of their inner nobility. I call that the Ayn Rand 1. viewpoint. Ideally, in an Ayn Rand 1. world, some people obtain excellent wealth, but the political and economic technique will keep an equitable social balance and wholesome dynamic amongst various earnings groups, with upward and downward mobility, and chance for all – the American Dream, as it were. Wealthy individuals can picture for themselves whatever inner qualities they want. Anyone would have the possibility to do well.

    Nonetheless, think about an Ayn Rand 2. world, exactly where the wealthiest accumulate unchecked power and dominate policy-producing.

    For three decades, we’ve observed a constant shift in political power away from workers and communities and toward corporate interests and investors. Wages have stagnated, jobs have moved to low wage countries and government policies now align mainly with enterprise, leaving employees and civil society behind.

    If those all around us do worse, we will also do worse.

    America’s founding fathers rejected aristocracy. Our Constitution prohibits titles of nobility. But nothing at all in the Constitution prevents us from sliding backwards into a functional aristocracy.

    We are turning out to be a society of the 1 %, by the 1 percent, for the 1 percent. If we enable the best 1% to rewrite policies to solidify their positions of privilege, we will have a functional aristocracy, a shrunken middle class and millions of workers in wage peonage.

    Let’s go back to the two paintings. We can see other folks as brutes, and extract wealth from these beneath us, or we can see other folks as neighbors, co-employees, teammates, or even merely as customers, whose prosperity is tied to ours.

    Stan Sorscher is Labor Representative at Society for Specialist Engineering Staff in Aerospace (SPEEA), a union representing over 20,000 scientists, engineers, technical and specialist employees in the aerospace sector. He has been with SPEEA because 2000

    Enhanced by Zemanta

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  4. Sheraton Anchorage: An Assault on Alaska’s Tourism Workers

    August 19, 2011 by admin

    by Marvin Jones

    In 2006, Texas-based firm Ashford Hospitality acquired the 370-space downtown Sheraton Anchorage hotel. Ashford has paired up with its hotel management company, Remington Hospitality Companies, to carry out a brutal anti-union campaign that is singularly out of step with the history of cooperation among the hotel owners and employees who have built our effective tourism industry in Alaska.

    Ashford/Remington’s assault on Sheraton workers and their union started in late 2009 following the union filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the Sheraton alleging negative faith bargaining. This first charge marked the beginning of the workers’ efforts to defend themselves against Ashford/Remington’s attempts to break their union and to compromise their job requirements. Workers rallied to support each other against intimidation and retaliation and to speak out in opposition to management’s attacks against their union.

    As an organized committee of devoted employee activists grew inside the hotel, the workers’ actions became much more visible. They began to conduct protests inside and outdoors of the workplace they picketed, they rallied, and an overwhelming majority of them signed a petition to declare that they were going to begin asking the public to boycott their hotel.

    In February 2010, Sheraton management fired four workers shortly soon after they engaged in federally protected union activity. Fortunately, right after the employees and their union filed charges with the NLRB and investigators threatened to look for a federal injunction, the Sheraton acquiesced by giving the fired employees their jobs back. Numerous months later, the union filed a lot more charges, and by June 2010, the National Labor Relations Board’s workplace of the common counsel issued a complaint against the hotel alleging a wide array of added unfair labor practices. 1 month later, hotel management announced that it was no longer going to acknowledge the workers’ union.

    Given that the Sheraton stopped recognizing the union, the workers’ struggle has intensified. A lot of this struggle has focused on the ongoing legal battle in between the Sheraton and the NLRB’s chief prosecuting attorney (basic counsel) above the government’s unfair labor practice allegations. Numerous employees spent months giving testimony at a hearing before an administrative law judge of the NLRB above the allegations that Ashford/Remington engaged in illegal conduct in violation of federal labor law. One worker alleged in sworn testimony that just before he was hired at the hotel, he was asked by a manager to sign a document establishing his opposition to getting a union represent him. In the exact same hearing, one more worker alleged that she was told by the hotel’s former basic manager that these who didn’t sign the anti-union petition would be fired. She also alleged that the basic manager named the 3 employees who were “causing the most trouble” by supporting the union and was told that they would be the 1st to be fired.

    Though the trial has concluded and several wait for the judge to situation his ruling relating to the legality of the Sheraton’s conduct, workers continue to allege that the Sheraton is threatening, intimidating, and retaliating against these who speak out. In the previous six months, at least six worker activists have been terminated – including two of the three workers who had been singled out by the common manager – and the union has filed over 30 further unfair labor practice charges against Sheraton management. Other worker activists, numerous of whom are senior hotel employees, have had to endure substantial cuts to their hours even during the busy season. A single senior employee lost her property due to the fact she was not functioning sufficient hours to qualify for her mortgage.

    For decades it has been Alaskans who have owned, operated, and worked at Anchorage hotels. Collectively, hotel employees and owners have coexisted, without the want for strikes, boycotts, and other divisive techniques. This all changed when Ashford/Remington began to conduct company here. As Alaskans, it is essential that we stick together and let this outdoors company know that we will not enable them to take benefit of us by compromising our extended held job standards.

    Marvin Jones has been the President of UNITE Here! Neighborhood 878 given that he was elected by union members in 2000. He has lead negotiations and bargained dozens of union contracts with employers from across Alaska. Prior to functioning on the union staff, Marvin worked as a bellman at the Sheraton Anchorage Hotel for 14 many years.

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  5. Thousands protest new NYC DOE contract with Verizon

    August 19, 2011 by admin

    by Michael Landau

    Dealing a disappointing – though not altogether unsurprising – blow to 45,000 employees on strike at Verizon, New York City’s Panel for Educational Policy, dominated by mayoral appointees, voted on August 17 to approve a $ 120 million contract between the Department of Education and the rewarding telecom giant.

    UFT President Michael Mulgrew received a lion’s welcome from striking employees who chanted “UFT, UFT!” as he took the stage at a pre-meeting rally organized by their union, the Communication Employees of America, in opposition to the deal.

    “That panel within that creating has no alternative but to say no to Verizon till they clean up their act and treat their employees appropriate,” Mulgrew stated to the cheering crowd of 1000′s of strikers and supporters, pledging the UFT’s assistance for the strike.

    “What you’re doing is what really should be happening all across the nation – fighting to shield the middle class so this nation can once once again be fantastic,” he told the strikers to thunderous applause.

    Across the northeast, Verizon workers in the company’s landline division walked off the task on August 7 in response to harsh concession demands that union officials say will shave $ 20,000 from each and every worker’s compensation, taking a complete of $ 1 billion from employees at a organization that grossed $ 19 billion in earnings in the last 4 many years and paid a special $ ten billion dividend to shareholders in July.

    Among its demands, Verizon wants to end pension accruals for current employees and eradicate defined-benefit pensions for new hires scale back paid sick time and holidays and shift wellness care expenses onto staff.

    According to Richard Condon, the unique commissioner of investigation for New York City colleges, the firm was also not too long ago implicated in a corruption scandal that cost city schools $ three.six million over six years, one more purpose Mulgrew stated the DOE deal should be a no-go. Condon identified that Verizon was in on the alleged overbilling scheme perpetrated by $ 200,000-a-year- technological innovation consultant Willard Lanham, who was arrested in April.

    Rod Schneider, the UFT chapter leader at Staten Island’s PS 36, in which he teaches computer systems, came out to the rally simply because, he stated, the attack on unions is “not just about public employees, it’s about absolutely everyone.”

    “Corporate America desires every thing and they want to take it from us,” he mentioned.

    One more Staten Islander, Mark Zinc from IS 2, expressed a comparable sentiment.

    “Some of the new employees may possibly not have pensions. It’s outrageous,” he said. “What happens to them could take place to us – so we can not let this take place to everyone.”

    Longtime union ally Zakiyeh Ansari, of the Coalition for Educational Justice and one of the rally’s hosts, very best summed up the fighting spirit amongst the strikers and their supporters. Addressing herself to the panel and the business, Ansari riffed on Verizon’s ubiquitous commercial tagline: “We say to them and to Verizon: Can you hear us now?”

    Sign the online petition to Verizon: Quit attacking the middle class &gt&gt

    Michael Landau is a writer for the United Federation of Teachers in New York City. This article 1st appeared on the UFT web site.

    Enhanced by Zemanta

    TALKINGREADER.COM

    Related EBook Readers Articles


  6. The Audacity of Free Trade

    August 16, 2011 by admin

    Vendedora de frutas Cartagena, Colombia

    Image by way of WikipediaCongress could vote any day now to strike a new blow against currently-battered U.S. workers and the unemployed.

    by Laura Carlsen. The Americas System

    Congress could vote any day now to strike a new blow against already-battered U.S. employees and the unemployed.

    Committees in the Residence and Senate just lately marked up the Colombia, Panama, and South Korea Free of charge Trade Agreements (FTAs). The Obama administration is urging passage of all three relics of the Bush administration ahead of the summer recess.

    The full-court press on the FTAs represents a reversal for a president elected on a trade reform platform. For the duration of the presidential campaign, Barack Obama proclaimed his opposition to the NAFTA-style FTAs and boasted of his stance against the devastating North American and Central American agreements. As candidate Obama, he carefully distanced himself from the open-market, pro-corporate policies of his predecessor, calling for important modifications to the NAFTA model, like enforceable labor and environmental standards, and customer protections.

    The Worldwide Crisis

    In the 3 years considering that Obama wooed voters with speak of bold alterations in trade policy, the need to have for reforms has reached crisis proportions. The global financial crisis left the United States with skyrocketing un- and underneath-employment rates. The government paid billions of dollars in bailout cash to the corporations who triggered the crisis. These corporations then turned close to to post record income and hand out astronomical executive pay bonuses. The evidence that FTA-fueled outsourcing rewards these corporations while placing Americans out of perform has piled up, and polls show that a majority of U.S. citizens oppose NAFTA-style FTAs.

    Abroad, labor violations and increasing inequality have exacerbated the plight of poor and operating men and women in FTA nations, although developing a new class of mega-rich that typically handle national economies.

    This would seem to be precisely the second to make excellent on the guarantees to fix trade and investment policy, and to give workers everywhere a fair shake in a globalized economic system that has been severely skewed toward the interests of potent corporations — to devastating effect.

    Rather, the Obama administration has gone from the audacity of hope to the audacity of presenting three pro-corporate trade agreements to a public suffering from a almost ten % unemployment rate. As United Steel Workers President Leo Gerard concludes in a letter to Congress opposing the trade agreements, “Trade offers force working Americans to presume all the threat and encourage big multinationals to reap all the rewards.”

    NAFTA Appear-alikes

    The new agreements look practically identical to the NAFTA model, regardless of some tweaks and promises of advances that are largely left outdoors the actual text of the agreements. Some of the most noxious elements that persist in the FTAs before Congress are: prohibitions on monetary sector regulation and capital controls, foreign investment incentives that encourage off-shoring, separate legal regimes in which corporations can sue governments in specialized tribunals, weak environmental standards, vague and toothless labor requirements, and intellectual home guidelines that monopolize expertise necessary for the public good.

    The Financial Policy Institute calculates that the South Korean FTA alone will cost 159,000 U.S. jobs. Department of Commerce data exhibits that more than the previous decade of totally free trade policy multinational corporations cut their U.S. workforce by 2.9 million and enhanced overseas employment by 2.four million. Underneath these trade and investment regimes, U.S. employees clearly suffer, which is why voters have supported candidates critical of NAFTA-style no cost trade. Although job displacement is regularly viewed as a zero-sum program where workers of diverse nations compete, the reality is that decent jobs — with dignified working problems and real labor rights — are lost everywhere. FTAs turn the world into a global labor bazaar for corporations to bargain-hunt.

    Labor unions in the countries purportedly hungering for a U.S. FTA overwhelmingly oppose them. Colombian labor organizations have consistently taken a stand against the Colombia FTA, asserting that it produces binding terms between two vastly unequal economies would negatively have an effect on agriculture, manufacturing, medicines and other essential sectors would produce few if any net jobs and would location thousands of local companies in jeopardy. A group of Korean unions, farmers, and civil society groups traveled to Washington final January to “prevent the unfavorable consequences that the Korea-US FTA will have on both of our nations.”

    Both groups have presented their testimony to the U.S. Congress, exploding another myth: that FTAs are a “reward” to be bestowed on deserving allies. Strong financial interests in these nations – usually above-represented by their governments — have brought great pressure to bear in favor of the agreements. Meanwhile, the poor, employees, little farmers, the displaced, and indigenous and ethnic organizations nearly unanimously oppose them.

    Colombians Against the FTA

    A letter to the U.S. Congress signed by 431 U.S. and Colombian organizations urges members to reject the U.S.-Colombia FTA, citing “serious labor, human rights, Afro-Colombian, indigenous, and environmental considerations in Colombia.” The letter points out that Colombia continues to be “the most hazardous country in the globe for trade union activists” and cites a 94 % impunity rate for assassins of labor leaders. Fifty-a single trade unionists were killed in 2010, and killings continue unabated in 2011.

    An Action Plan created among the U.S. and Colombian governments to assuage issues does not type element of the binding text of the agreement. At this stage, the strategy amounts to excellent intentions without establishing a firm basis for collective bargaining for cooperative members, or clear benchmarks for minimizing violence, abuses, and impunity.

    Promoters have countered criticisms of the Colombian government’s labor practices by asserting that elevated U.S. investment can serve as a positive force in upholding workers’ rights. This argument has not been borne out in practice. In Guatemala, unionist murders enhanced following passage of CAFTA. The logic is easy. With much more powerful financial interests in the country competing in a globalized economic climate, businesses as well frequently view workers’ rights as financial liabilities.

    The debate on the Colombian FTA has also ignored the need to have to assess the effects of improved foreign investment on the continued armed conflict in Colombia. NAFTA proved that FTAs have significantly more to do with revamping investment regimes for multinational corporations than with the exchange of goods and services.

    These investments also direct dollars into paramilitaries involved in drug export, dollars-laundering, and other crimes. There is ample evidence of these shady relations in the past, most notably the latest case of Chiquita’s payoffs to paramilitary organizations as part of “doing business” in Colombia. Such investments, related with massive agricultural projects and mining ventures, often go hand in hand with violence and displacement. A report on Inter-American Improvement Financial institution megaprojects by the Americas Plan and the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities showed the correlation amongst the expansion of palm oil mono-crops and forced displacement. At a recent prayer breakfast, Lisa Haugaard of the Latin American Working Group spoke of her expertise gathering evidence of landowners expanding cattle ranching or mining operations at the point of a gun.

    The several attacks on Afro-Colombian populations as part of this procedure led 24 members of Congress to write President Obama on July 6 stating, “We are concerned that the FTA would stimulate organization advancement in Colombia at the expense of these vulnerable populations.” The congressional members also note that an estimated five.two million people in the nation are already displaced – far more than 1 out of nine Colombians. .

    Jobs Very first

    The Colombia FTA supplies the clearest case of why free of charge trade in the context of inequity and violence not only does not support but exacerbates the difficulties. The query of no matter whether Colombia “deserves” the FTA can be quickly answered. No population deserves an international agreement that straight or indirectly promotes displacement, violence, targeted murder, and the continued violation of the rights of indigenous and Afro-American populations.

    Labor, human rights, and faith-primarily based organizations are pushing back hard against the FTA onslaught, and offer you tools for citizens to make their voices heard above the din of corporate lobbies.

    For Congress to turn a deaf ear to these at greatest danger and in greatest want — the two in the United States, and in the nations impacted by the toxic trio of FTAs now creating the rounds — would contradict U.S. values and U.S. public opinion. Specially now, as the U.S. economic system nonetheless struggles to regain its footing, the very best way to rebuild stability is to learn from blunders of the past and strive for far more fairness. A essential step is to reject the Colombia, South Korea, and Panama Free of charge Trade Agreements.

    Laura Carlsen is director of the Americas Plan of the Center for International Policy in Mexico City at www.cipamericas.org.

    Reprinted with permission. www.cpiamercas.org

    For much more details: A talk by Laura Carlsen on Colombia FTA in Ottawa, Canada

    Portion One particular: http://youtu.be/9SRHMWJRunI

    Component Two: http://youtu.be/cploAMtQdic

    Carlsen, Laura. “www.cipamericas.org.” U.S.- Latin America: The Intersection of Trade and Safety. October 2008. http://www.cipamericas.org/archives/715

    Enhanced by Zemanta

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  7. What’s the Real Lesson of Wisconsin for Progressives?

    August 16, 2011 by admin

    by Amy Dean

    Amy B. Dean

    The reality that there had been recall elections at all meant that voter anger overcame the standard inertia of off-cycle, specific elections. Contrary to conventional assumptions, turnout in some places was practically 60 %. Democrats have been victorious in recalling two Republican senators and they were competitive in every single recall district, which is even more substantial offered the truth that when Obama carried Wisconsin by 14 points in 2008, Democrats did not win any of these seats. In reality, the GOP carried these districts with 55 percent.

    Democrats could have won just two far more seats, but they need to not see that as the end. It really should just be the beginning. Past the message sent at the polls, I think we need to concern ourselves with an additional question: What lessons will labor and its community allies take away from these recall races? This query is vital. We miss a key opportunity if we measure our results primarily based only on Election Day results and not also on our capability to develop permanent progressive infrastructure at the state and regional levels.

    At the moment, a lot of points are going nicely on that front. Beneath the umbrella of an impressive political action committee known as We Are Wisconsin (WAW), a coalition of unions, neighborhood groups and outraged citizens in the state have joined together to undertake voter education, grassroots lobbying and media advocacy activities. Even though progressives are typically fractured, this organization has demonstrated an admirable degree of coordination amongst varied groups.

    WAW is also innovative since of its independence from the Democratic Party. Labor and its allies have built a field operation functioning outside of celebration structures. They have raised cash independently, tying funds very first and foremost to progressive values, not to person candidates. They have carried out so with a mission not solely of supporting any candidates who put a “D” subsequent to their names, but rather of promoting an agenda that stands up for civil rights, vital public solutions and the capability for men and women to have a voice in their workplaces. Short of nominating candidates on their own ballot line, they have operated extremely significantly like a separate party in their campaign all around the state senate recalls.

    The question for WAW, now that the recall elections are above, is in which to go from right here. Therefore far, the coalition has mainly – and necessarily – waged defensive fights, battles around the state budget and around ousting conservative senators who aided Gov, Scott Walker’s energy grab. But now, they have an opportunity to create in a a lot more proactive way.

    Their challenge is taking the impressive operate they’ve completed so far in creating neighborhood-labor alliances and creating certain it does not fall apart now that the polls are closed. Their challenge is to grow to be far more than just a conventional electioneering operation and as an alternative, seeking to the future, develop a real organizing system on the ground.

    Above the previous many months, the focus of WAW has understandably been the recall election. But, already, they have planted seeds of what should be a robust, ongoing organization. They have gone door to door and talked with countless Wisconsinites. They have asked neighbors to vote, but also to get engaged in opposing the assault on employees’ rights and defending the middle class. If done proper, the energies of Election Day can be channeled into an organizing system that will continue to advocate for working folks in the state. There will be a loud voice helping to guarantee that politicians “do the appropriate factor” once in workplace.

    The men and women working most closely with the organization understand that it would be a shame for WAW to disintegrate and then have to be recreated for the 2012 election cycle. Their challenge is to convince a wider set of allies to keep invested for the lengthy haul. Inevitably, the operation will lose some funding, staff and focus when the substantial-profile recalls are more than. To lessen the possible for a wholesale shutdown, these of us outdoors Wisconsin ought to carry on to extend our support and enthusiasm. We must continue to spread the word that this is a fight that affects us all – and that it is not above.

    Inside the state of Wisconsin, public-sector unions will have to face the responsibility of rebuilding their very own organizations. The need to have will be to convince officials in these unions that keeping an investment in their neighborhoods via community concerns is not a distraction from internal union organization or from constructing political electrical power. Rather it is an vital asset in these duties. Community-labor involvement and worker organizing can’t be seen as “either/or” alternatives they need to be acknowledged as mutually beneficial.

    A “day soon after” evaluation of the recall efforts ought to go beyond the traditional evaluation of races and districts where campaigning was or was not effective. It need to involve assessing how numerous long term leaders were cultivated out of door-to-door mobilizations and how these folks could be integrated into a prolonged-term political operation. The item of such a assessment need to incorporate plans for leadership development, outreach and organizing connected to nearby and statewide concerns. It ought to mean developing, among leaders and activists, a shared evaluation, a shared vision and, ultimately, a shared program that people can take into 2012. Functioning for the long term, with each other, is the greatest way for this newborn coalition to demonstrate that all of the perform of the previous months was not a a single-time occurrence, but one thing that has the potential to be a good force in shaping the long term of Wisconsin politics.

    The people of Wisconsin have created incredible progress in taking back their state. Yet, they nevertheless have a lot of operate ahead of them to construct a model for a new variety of political action primarily based on independence, values and collaboration. All of us have an interest in seeing this model constructed – so we can defend the interests of functioning people from future attacks and we can take the offensive in advancing them.

    Amy Dean is co-author, with David Reynolds, of “A New New Deal: How Regional Activism Will Reshape the American Labor Movement.” She worked for practically two decades in the labor motion and now works to build new and innovative organizing methods for social change organizations in progressive, labor and faith communities. You can follow Amy on Twitter at @amybdean, or she can be reached through her internet internet site, www.amybdean.com.

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  8. Code of the Pirates: Boeing and the NLRB

    August 16, 2011 by admin

    by Stan Sorscher

    A excellent line in the Disney pirate movie was wherever Geoffrey Rush (as Captain Barbossa) explained the Code of the Pirates, this way, to Keira Knightley (as Elizabeth Swann), “… the Code is more what you’d call ‘guidelines’ really, than actual guidelines.” He was a pirate, following all.

    Citizens are expected to obey laws, and we all get nervous when laws are ignored or swept aside, specifically at the insistence of an individual who is wealthy or strong.

    We are witnessing a situation in point, in the latest investigation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which charges that Boeing threatened and intimidated its unionized employees in Washington State. The intimidation and punishment are effectively documented. Boeing executives repeatedly threatened to move assembly work for the new 787 airplane from Washington State to South Carolina, pointing to strikes above the many years by the Machinists’ union.

    In labor law, this is a textbook example of “runaway shop.” It is illegal. Employees’ right to strike is protected by law, and employers can not punish or threaten workers for working out that correct. The National Labor Relations Board has a duty to safeguard that right.

    Boeing’s threats to workers have been steady with a statewide campaign, pressuring elected officials, newspapers and other media, civic groups, and residents around Washington state. A single state legislator was so fed up with pressure from Boeing that he introduced a bill saying lobbyists may not

    threaten any legislator … with the relocation of manufacturing jobs … involving commercial airplane manufacturing, primarily based upon the outcome of any pending or proposed legislation.”

    Considering that the NLRB complaint was announced, Boeing and its supporters have been exceptionally harsh and intense in their criticism.

    Boeing, the financial press, and sympathetic elected officials in South Carolina brush aside the threats Boeing made to staff and elected officials. The genuine concern, they say, is that the NLRB finding prevents Boeing from moving function to South Carolina.

    I’ve attempted to follow this logic. I think it goes like this:

    The only way to move operate from Washington to South Carolina is to threaten employees. If you cannot threaten workers in Washington, then it’s impossible to move perform to South Carolina. Laws prohibiting this kind of threats can not seriously apply to us, so it’s OK when we do it.

    One thing like that. ….

    By the way, that mentality explains a great deal about why the 787 system is three years late and billions over price range.

    Generally in America, an employer need to comply with specific minimum legal standards of behavior. If I am filling a task opening, I can not say, “Sorry, we don’t employ Italians, or veterans, or older employees.” If I’m renting an apartment, or operating a restaurant, or selling airline tickets, I ought to comply with selected minimal protections for those I’m dealing with.

    In this case Boeing threatened retaliation openly, repeatedly and persuasively.

    Right after the NLRB announcement, Boeing and political allies personally threatened the Acting Common Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) – the official who conducted the investigation. Then they threatened funding for the whole National Labor Relations Board. Then they threatened to block any new appointments to the NLRB. Then they threatened the law itself, introducing legislation to forbid any enforcement related to the case with Boeing. Political allies demanded that the NLRB officials turn over internal documents, and subject themselves to threatening intrusions from Congress.

    What’s impressive, right here, is that Boeing sees itself as the victim.

    The proposed remedy is to move work back. The NLRB investigator knows that Boeing is already moving function back, and is presently creating a new assembly line in the original factory. Each communication from the NLRB encourages the parties to negotiate a settlement, which is normal in these circumstances.

    Let’s be clear about the issue. Companies all above America can move work to West Virginia, South Carolina, North Dakota or Eastern Washington, complying with zoning laws, environmental regulations, labor protections and other state and federal laws. Boeing just lately raised the salary of its Legal Counsel to $ three.7 million. He and his quite capable staff could sort all this out AND respect labor law AND set an admirable normal for corporate citizenship. If they chose to.

    As the stakes continue to rise, it’s becoming clear that Boeing has no intention of settling the case, or ever complying with the law. They’ve mentioned they count on to eliminate their case prior to the NLRB. Their goal is to re-write the law. They will use this situation to assert a new correct for employers to intimidate employees who strike. This would shift power away from employees on a scale comparable to Ronald Reagan making use of scabs to break the Air Targeted traffic Controllers’ strike in 1981.

    Karl Rove teaches us to attack your opponent’s strength. Organized labor is robust in the public sector, and powerful in Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. Attack it there. In the private sector, Boeing Machinists are amongst the most successful unions. Attack there.

    So, what about laws safeguarding workers’ correct to strike? To Boeing and its allies, that protection is “more what you’d call a guideline, genuinely.” With globalization, plus scab replacement employees, plus legitimizing runaway shop, the right to strike would be a hollow shell.

    At a broader level, we need to ask how Boeing sees its part in American life? Boeing CEO, Jim McNerney, co-chairs the President’s Export Commission, with a goal of doubling exports in five many years. This Commission is close to the heart of what ever manufacturing tactic we will produce as a country. It’s worth asking whether or not Mr. McNerney sees himself as acting in the public interest in that part, or does he see public policy as his tool for pursuing his narrow self-interest as an industrialist?

    A public servant would start off by respecting the rule of law, and by acknowledging that employees, communities, and government are reputable stakeholders in generating shared prosperity.

    Stan Sorscher is Labor Representative at Society for Specialist Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA), a union representing more than 20,000 scientists, engineers, technical and expert employees in the aerospace market. He has been with SPEEA because 2000.

    Enhanced by Zemanta

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  9. The Verizon Strike as the Next Wisconsin

    August 13, 2011 by admin

    by Mark Engler

    Mark Engler

    The picket lines are up. This previous weekend 45,000 Verizon workers on the East Coast, represented by the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), went on strike. The trigger of the strike was the company’s attempts to win massive concessions from the unions. Verizon argued that the employees ought to give up gains they had won above several many years of struggle and negotiation in past contract fights.

    As the Wall Street Journal put it, “Verizon Communications Inc. is looking for some of the greatest concessions in many years from its unions.” Demands contain the weakening of health-care positive aspects, cuts in pensions, lowered job safety, and elimination of paid holidays this kind of as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. This regardless of the fact that the firm reported billions in profit last year, and that, in the words of New York Instances reporter Steven Greenhouse, “Verizon’s top 5 executives received a total of $ 258 million in compensation, including stock alternatives, more than the final four years.” The unions argue that Verizon has made some $ 20 billion in profit in the very same time period, and Citizens for Tax Justice has pointed out that the company has done so whilst having to pay small to absolutely nothing in corporate income taxes.

    With no a doubt, this is a conflict of national significance.

    As Bob Master, CWA District 1 legislative and political director, explained Wednesday in a conference call with supporters,

    This is an enormously worthwhile business, which we think is attempting to take advantage of an anti-union surroundings and, in a sense, to replicate at a giant private-sector corporation what the governors of Ohio, New Jersey, and Wisconsin have been attempting to do to the public sector. Our members feel quite strongly that we need to draw a line right here.

    The parallel to Wisconsin is apt for numerous reasons. First, like the Republican elected officials in their attacks on unionized schoolteachers and other public personnel, Verizon is taking aim at one particular of the final bastions of the American middle class. As a primary tactic in its public relations, the firm is attempting to stoke resentment about the reality that the CWA and IBEW workers really have living-wage jobs. It is hoping that “I don’t have a pension, why really should they” logic will carry the day.

    Accordingly, on Wednesday Verizon took out a full-page ad in the Philadelphia Inquirer suggesting that a typical employee tends to make $ 80,600 in annual spend and $ 42,000 in advantages. The union disputes this claim, contending that salaries are usually in the $ 60,000 to $ 77,000 range, and that benefits are much less expensive than the business would recommend. But, regardless, the debate above numbers misses some essential queries: What’s wrong with workers sharing in the earnings of a healthful corporation? Isn’t that the way our economy is supposed to operate?

    (On a side note, it is constantly a treat when organizations plead poverty at the negotiating table and then turn around and spend massive bucks on media spots, anti-union consultants, and pricey PR firms—but that’s yet another story.)

    The fate of 45,000 middle-class jobs is a big deal for all of America. Final month, the complete U.S. economic system had a net obtain of only 117,000 jobs. Not only is that for the complete nation, it represents a pretty decent month given the numbers from the past year. Furthermore, virtually all of the new jobs now getting produced are low-wage. Given these realities—and the truth that concentrating all wealth in the hands of the rich is a quite bad method for making the type of demand the economic climate wants to rebound—what takes place to the Verizon workers is a matter of broad public concern.

    Bob Master is right that Verizon’s aggressive bargaining stance, like Governor Scott Walker’s public-sector energy grab, is the product of a political climate in which corporate interests feel they can do whatever they want to working individuals, and personnel will have no recourse. The Verizon strike is sadly akin to Wisconsin in that it is a defensive battle—an work to quit tragic rollbacks in previously established requirements of fair employment.

    The background for the contract dispute is that Verizon is now creating most of its earnings from its wireless companies. Whilst a tiny amount of wireless technicians are involved in the strike, that portion of the business is largely non-union. In an excellent globe, CWA and IBEW would be in a position to “bargain to organize,” balancing any concessions at the negotiating table for existing union members with agreements that the firm will stay truly neutral and enable workers at Verizon Wireless to make their very own determination about whether or not to unionize. But this is not an ideal globe. Like in Wisconsin, labor and its allies face a hard battle merely to stave off the worst of a rabidly anti-union assault.

    That mentioned, there is a situation for hope. The mass protests in Madison earlier this year gave some trigger for optimism that a new type of energetic, broad-primarily based, community-labor mobilization may grow to be a lasting force in that state’s politics—and become a model for movements in other parts of the country. Wisconsinites’ good results this week in recalling some Republican State Senators (although not as many as hoped) recommended that the struggle will be a extended one particular, but that progressive efforts could have some genuine legs.

    As for the strike, all those who have been asking yourself when operating America will be fed up sufficient to finally stand up and battle should not sit this one particular out. If the Verizon strike becomes a rallying point in this nation for a movement against runaway corporate power and for a fairer economy, it could have considerably broader implications than what contract terms are eventually hammered out for those now walking the picket lines. That these workers are not rolling above in the face of firm insistence on concessions is important and courageous. And they deserve widespread help.

    ***

    Those on the East Coast can find a picket line to pay a visit to right here.

    Supporters all above the nation will quickly be capable to “adopt a Verizon Wireless store” in their region and assist to organize pickets at that location.

    Finally, without even leaving your personal computer, you can sign the petition in support of the 45,000 CWA and IBEW workers on strike.

    Mark Engler is a freelance journalist and a senior analyst with Foreign Policy In Focus, a network of foreign policy professionals. He is writer of How to Rule the Planet: The Coming Battle Over the International Economic system. He can be reached by way of the internet site http://www.DemocracyUprising.com. Follow him on Facebook right here. He is a standard commentator for Dissent’s Arguing the Planet weblog, exactly where this post initially appeared.

    TALKINGREADER.COM


  10. Rise Up America!

    August 13, 2011 by admin

    View this moving video with soundtrack by Bruce Springsteen. It’s time for a Main Street Contract for the American People. National Nurses United has embarked on a campaign to reverse national priorities and policies that have placed the interests of Wall Street over the crisis facing American families today.

    TALKINGREADER.COM