In the wake of President Barack Obama's announced public support for marriage equality, a number of major labor unions have come out in support of the president's position and equality for the LGBT community. This is a great development for a number of reasons. One, it's a clear statement from unions that they recognize that LGBT families are working families, too. Two, it gives Obama strong public support on an issue that he is certain to be attacked on. Third, it is a good way to attract new people to the labor movement who might have otherwise not paid much attention to unions because they had other issues that were more important to them. If it is clear that unions support LGBT families -- which it is -- there is more reason for people to move out of issue silos, recognizing that they have allies they can work together with to improve everybody's situation.

Communications Workers of America President Larry Cohen:

"The Communications Workers of America stands with the President and those who support equality and human rights. We oppose all discrimination and recognize the direct linkage between civil and workers’ rights, and the attempts to divide Americans based on these issues.

Nearly ten years ago, CWA convention delegates called for full and equal rights including civil marriage, pointing out that far too many benefits and protections of civil marriage are denied to people on the basis of sexual orientation. These often include health care and survivor benefits as well as other legal rights for partners. It’s time to move forward."

Service Employees International Union President Mary Kay Henry:

"Earlier today, President Obama joined a host of faith, civil rights, business and political leaders who have publicly voiced their support of marriage equality. The president's support comes at a critical moment as the rights of LGBT people are under legislative attack in Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina and elsewhere. The president understands what we do - marriage equality is about family, community, love and justice.

"Across this country, right-wing Republican politicians are seeking to divide us with attacks on immigrants, the middle class, women's health, the environment and the LGBT community - but the growing numbers of Americans who believe in marriage equality reminds us that we cannot live up to our promise as a nation until we extend equal rights to all.

"To those who have chosen to stand on the wrong side of history, we say this: There is growing momentum for equality in this country. And with each American that believes in equality, we are reminded that the continued dream of equality is our birthright, our heritage and our promise.

"For anyone who counts equality among the basic tenets of a free and just America, Pres. Obama's announcement today is a victory."

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka:

Working people believe in equality and fairness and that’s why we are happy to stand with millions of Americans and with President Obama in supporting marriage equality.

LGBT working people face numerous inequities in the workplace and in society as they struggle to care for their families. Civil unions do not guarantee the 1,138 rights, benefits and responsibilities that are triggered by the word "marriage” under federal law.

Most important, we should respect and honor our friends, neighbors, and family members who want to take care of their families and their loved ones – whatever their sexual orientation. We are proud to come together for a more just America.

United Food and Commercial Workers President Joe Hansen:

“I commend President Obama for his support of marriage equality, and I’m proud to support him as he takes this historic stand.

“Marriage equality is an economic justice issue, and a social justice issue – and that makes it a union issue. In the UFCW, we have a long, proud history of standing up for fair and equal treatment for all workers – regardless of what they look like, where they come from, what language they speak, or who they love. These values are heartfelt. We work every day to fight discrimination and unfair treatment against LGBT people on the job. That’s why our union is a strong supporter of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would ensure justice in the workplace for LGBT workers. UFCW members have been negotiating equal health care coverage for same-sex couples into their union contracts all over the country for years. It’s the right thing to do, and the fair thing to do. I’m proud that the UFCW’s advocacy on behalf of families includes all families.”

AFSCME President Gerald W. McEntee:

“President Obama’s announcement today recognizes a fundamental American right – that every citizen is entitled to respect and dignity, and the equal protection of our laws. For too long, lesbian and gay Americans have been denied the right to marry the person they love, raise a family and live as equal citizens in our country. They are denied access to pension benefits, Social Security survivor benefits, family health and bereavement leave and family immigration rights. That discrimination harms all of us, not just LGBT Americans. We have an obligation to work to overturn unjust laws and amendments to state constitutions that codify prejudice and promote discrimination against fellow citizens. The President deserves praise for recognizing that this issue is about equality under the law and the right of all Americans to live their lives free from discrimination.”

DOWNLOADS: (122)

PLAYS: (571)

Embed

Mary McBroom told us her story at a closed Starbucks restaurant in Detroit. It's one we've heard too many times before: For 18 years she worked hard for her employer, GE before discovering GE cared less about her than she did about the company. Mary was not an unskilled worker: she wired circuit boards, most recently for Chevy Volt charging stations. Hired in 1991, she was a college graduate who had worked her way up in the company from entry level wages to $23 per hour in 2009.

Along the way, she raised two daughters and sent them to college, bought a house, saved for retirement, and did all the things "responsible people" do. Mary is a college graduate with a passion for giving her job her all. Even as she told her story, it was evident that more than feeling angry, she was hurt.

In 2009 GE laid Mary off due to the economic downturn with the promise that there was always a possibility she could be called back. On May 13, 2011 she was called back to the same job she had before the layoff. GE trumpeted the recall as a Big Move, publishing a "Welcome Back" to the eleven employees.

Yet, on her first day back she was told that she was classified as a "competitive wage" employee, and would be paid $13 per hour to do the same work she had been paid $23 per hour to do. She was expected to work alongside co-workers making the higher wage who had managed to get their 20 years of service so they could be considered "legacy employees." Worse, some of the coworkers receiving the higher rate had been hired one week before Mary. Whether they escaped the layoff or there was another reason, the inescapable fact was that employees were working side-by-side doing the same work, but one employee was paid $13 per hour and the other was being paid $23.67 per hour, and everybody knew it.

Mary's shock quickly turned to action, and she wrote to Human Resources in June, 2011 asking them to reconsider her classification and asking about the status of her pension, which was based on years of service and compensation levels. She also wrote a letter to Jeffrey Immelt expressing her concern that she was being recalled to a job she had done well for 18 years, only to suffer a 40 percent pay cut.

GE's response was to send out an investigator to assess the situation without interviewing any of the "competitive wage" employees causing supervisors and coworkers to be hostile to those who complained. In a second letter to Jeffrey Immelt on September 30, 2011, Mary and her fellow "competitive wage" coworkers asked Immelt to intervene and restore her pay to its former level.

Continue reading »

When compared to other similar countries, retirement benefits in the United States are relatively modest. A report from CNBC took a closer look at retirement systems in numerous countries and found the U.S. to be performing lower than the average. Retirees in the U.S. generally receive about 47 percent of their pre-retirement income on Social Security. Similar programs in Europe and elsewhere generally pay about 68 percent of pre-retirement income.

In the 2011 Melbourne Mercer Global Pensions Index, the U.S. was given a middling grade of "C," along with France, Singapore, Brazil, Poland and Germany.

A country given a C has “a system that has some good features, but also has major risks and/or shortcomings that should be addressed,” the report states. “Without these improvements, its efficacy and/or long-term sustainability can be questioned.”

The United States ranked close to average among 16 countries in adequacy of benefits provided and above average in sustainability, the likelihood that the system can maintain the benefits in the future. It fell short, however, on a sub-index focused on the private sector pension system.

The U.S. could take steps for a better score, the report said, including raising the minimum benefit for low-income retirees, improving benefits vesting, and further limiting access to funds before retirement.

The Service Employees International Union, among other organizations, is calling upon Washington to improve the U.S. retirement system:

The fastest, most efficient and fairest way to improve retirement security in the United States is to strengthen Social Security. Social Security is often the sole source of retirement income for low wage workers who are less likely to have access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan. The problem with Social Security is that its retirement benefits are less than $1,200 per month for millions of low wage workers.

Continue reading »

Tax dodger dodgeball in Clinton Square in Syracuse.

A series of rallies was held across the nation on Tuesday in honor of national tax day. A variety of events across the nation used creative methods to focus on issues related to holding the one percent more accountable.

SEIU President Mary Kay Henry said:

"Our country's lopsided tax structure has fueled the most drastic income inequality in history. On this tax day, working people are rightly frustrated with a system that has failed to live up to our nation's ideals of widespread opportunity and instead rewards the rich and corporations with huge tax breaks and loopholes - sometimes even for sending jobs overseas.

"The fact that most millionaires pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than the average worker runs contrary to our country's ideals of fairness and equality. Corporate income taxes account for a tiny 1 percent of the nation's GDP, but some of our nation's policy makers tell working people that, in spite of historically low tax rates, the wealthy few and corporations pay 'too much' and if we just allow them to keep more of their wealth, eventually the rest of us will benefit. This trickle-down theory has never worked, and now working people-the 99 percent-are rightly taking a stand and saying 'enough is enough.'

"Just yesterday, U.S. senators had a chance to stand with the 99 percent by passing the Buffett Rule, which calls on millionaires to pay their fair share. A group of Senators blocked the bill even though poll after poll shows that the public favors eliminating tax giveaways for the rich. Those who voted against this bill owe their constituents an explanation.

"Workers are rallying today because they fundamentally believe that we all have a responsibility to invest in our nation's prosperity - including corporations and the rich. But it's a bitter pill to swallow when the system is rigged to allow corporations to dodge paying taxes, while home care workers, janitors, sanitation workers and other working people are falling behind and struggling to support their families."

Some of the more notable events:

Continue reading »

The Service Employees International Union is campaigning to increase retirement security and pushing back against right-wing myths about the true costs of public employee pensions in the wake of more than a year of direct attacks on those pensions by Republicans in the states.

The mission on retirement security:

After working hard and playing by the rules, working people should be able to retire with dignity and security. This is a fundamental part of the American Dream. But the Wall Street-induced housing crisis and stock market crash jeopardized this dream for countless public and private sector workers.

SEIU is promoting three basic policies towards making sure this happens. The first is protecting Social Security by eliminating the cap on taxes for the wealthy, which would extend the funding for the program for many years to come. The second and third parts of the plan deals with private and public pensions:

Our efforts to help deliver retirement security to all include exploring new models for private sector retirement plans that allow workers to set aside wages through a vehicle that provides guaranteed retirement income, as well as strengthening the rules for existing multi-employer and single-employer defined benefit funds to protect their participants.

...

Recent attacks on public pensions and subsequent statewide pension "reforms" jeopardize the retirement security of millions of teachers, police officers, bus drivers, nurses and other public sector workers, many of whom do not receive Social Security. We are committed to addressing this issue with comprehensive solutions. In the last two years alone, public employee unions have negotiated pension solutions that have saved the taxpayers nearly $600 million in California. Our efforts include safeguarding against all forms of cheating or abuse, and ensuring everybody pays their fair share, and all pension fund trustees, staff and service providers adhere to the highest ethical and fiduciary standards, devoid of conflicts of interest.

SEIU also issued a fact sheet that takes on a number of the right-wing myths that are being spread in an attempt to build support for cutting public pensions. The key points:

enlarge

Nearly 5,000 military families may have been illegally foreclosed upon by banks

The President has adopted the language of the 99 percent, and it's paying off for him. He's surged from a position slightly behind Mitt Romney in last month's CNN polling to a 52 percent-45 percent lead against the Republican this week. While other factors were involved, his new rhetoric about income inequality and forcing everybody to "play by the same rules" resonated especially well with voters who have seen their government enforce one rule of conduct for Wall Street and another for the rest of us.

Unfortunately, his Administration hasn’t backed up that rhetoric with action. It has steadfastly refused to investigate and prosecute the bank crimes who brought this economy to its knees. So have the chief law enforcement officials for most states. Instead they’re trying to cut sweetheart deals that would let crooked bankers go with a slap on the wrist.

People are getting fed up. Grassroots outrage against the lack of prosecutions is giving rise to organized citizen action who are protesting these injustices under a "fair settlement" banner. Will this public backlash become strong enough to finally force national and state governments to enforce the law and protect the economy?

The Excuse Makers

If excuses were investigations there'd be justice for everyone. But only a handful of state Attorneys General, led by New York's Eric Schneiderman, have been willing to stand up to big bankers and their friends in high places. The President himself has been serving as Excuse Maker-in-Chief, as when he told 60 Minutes that “Some of the most damaging behavior on Wall Street, in some cases, some of the least ethical behavior on Wall Street, wasn’t illegal."

That's right, of course, in a literal "what the meaning of 'is' is" sense.. Some of the damaging behavior wasn't illegal. And some car accidents aren't caused by drunk drivers. But many, if not most of them, are. If a country road was littered with whiskey bottles and corpses, and the county sheriff hadn't booked anyone for a DUI in three years, people would be asking why he's not doing his job.

That's what many people are asking about this President and his Justice Department.

You can't set your foot down around this place without stepping in excuses. Another Administration official told a bank-friendly reporter at the Wall Street Journal that it’s too difficult to win convictions for crimes that are as as complicated as banking fraud. “Our job is too hard,” the Justice Department seems to be saying.

But it wasn’t too hard in the 1980s, when a fairly bank-friendly President named Ronald Reagan was running the Federal government. More than 1,000 bankers were convicted in the Savings & Loan scandal for crimes that were very similar to the ones that led to the 2008 financial crisis. A man named Bill Black led the investigations that resulted in those convictions, and the Obama Justice Department hasn’t even asked for his advice.

It isn’t hard for juries to understand lying, either, and stock fraud is usually a case of somebody lying to someone else. There seem to be some pretty clear-cut cases of it lying around waiting to be prosecuted. There is widely documented fraud involving false title documents submitted in foreclosure proceedings; several big banks have already admitted to illegally foreclosing on military families,and investigations show that nearly 5,000 military families may have been illegally evicted; and there's very compelling evidence regarding my former employer AIG.

And it isn’t hard to understand widespread and organized rings designed to forge court documents, commit perjury, and evade state taxes. And yet that’s exactly what big banks did in order to commit massive foreclosure fraud on US homeowners.

Continue reading »

"What Kind of Pie? OCCUPY!"

The mainstream media may be ignoring the protests in New York by the Occupy Wall Street group, but they won't be able to ignore it much longer as the support for their mission continues to grow. The latest development is that the Transit Workers Union voted to join the protests, with more than 200,000 members nationally.

Yesterday, Crooks and Liars writer murshedz called on progressive groups to join in support of the protests and it seems that the number of groups that agree with him is growing quickly. Blogger Matt Stoller argues that the occupation of Wall Street is indicative of much more than a simple protest.

Other groups that have expressed their support are the United Federation of Teachers, 32BJ SEIU, 1199 SEIU, Workers United, the Working Families party, the Coalition for the Homeless, MoveOn.org, Make the Road New York, the Coalition for the Homeless, the Alliance for Quality Education, Community Voices Heard, United New York and Strong Economy For All.

Separately, union members from the Air Line Pilots Association protested in the New York streets in favor of fair wages and benefits.

The actions in New York by Occupy Wall Street and other organizations are also spreading to other locations and are related to protests like the Wisconsin rallies against Scott Walker and the Awake the State movement in Florida. They are a sign that the mass of Americans is tired of conservative economic politicians and businessmen who are selling out the people while making themselves rich.

EDITOR'S NOTE:

We are getting donations together to buy pizzas for the occupiers around the nation:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (248)

PLAYS: (1013)

Embed

Ever notice how conservatives love to preach to everyone else about the virtues of responsibility and accountability, but really, really hate it whenever anyone holds them accountable?

When they get called out for destroying the economy, they shift the blame to minority lending. When their underlying racism comes bubbling up and people point it out, they run to shout "bloody shirt" and turn the victims into demagoging perpetrators, declaring that liberals are the real racists. When it's pointed out that they coddle far-right extremists within their ranks, they claim they're just being smeared. When some far-right extremist indulges in some act of extreme violence inspired by their insane rhetoric, they claim that mean liberals are just trying to silence them by pointing out the connection.

And when organized labor tries to hold corporate CEOs and banking executives responsible for the economic havoc they have wreaked on working people, they call it "thuggery."

Michelle Malkin was on Fox earlier this week promoting the anti-unionists' latest smear campaign against SEIU, claiming that a union members' handbook they just discovered -- even though it has been generally available for a long time, and certainly was not a secret -- somehow coaches union "thugs" in various tactics of "intimidation."

They trotted out footage of that protest held by the SEIU in May 2010 where they went to the home of Bank of America lobbyist Greg Baer to ask him to speak with some of the people whose homes were being foreclosed upon. Malkin and the Fox host tried to make this out to be some unspeakable horror, claiming that Baer's teenage son was alone in the house and had to hide in the bathroom.

In reality, Baer himself was out on the lawn of the house, mingling with the protesters:

Not surprisingly, neither of them talked with us. In fact, Gregory Baer from Bank of America initially tried to blend in with the crowd and, instead, let a family member answer the door. When one of his neighbors pointed him out to us, he announced he "didn't have time for [us]," and went inside.

Police at both events described the proceedings as entirely peaceful and cordial. That, of course, didn't stop Nina Easton, Baer's next-door neighbor, from describing them in her Fortune column as "a mob." That might have some thing to do with the fact that Easton's own husband has close business ties with Bank of America. (We're also acutely aware of Easton's deep compassion for the unemployed.)

Malkin was actually just teeing off a Vincent Cernuccio column in the Moonie Times, claiming that the handbook they "uncovered" gives union members all kinds of tips for thuggish behavior.

SEIU is in federal court defending itself against charges of racketeering and extortion filed by one of its unionizing targets, the catering company Sodexo Inc.Sodexo's court discovery recently revealed an SEIU “Contract Campaign Manual” on “Pressuring the Employer.” Union pressure is nothing new, but what SEIU recommends is not limited to organizing drives and strikes. Rather, the pressure takes the form of a so-called corporate campaign, whereby the union allies itself with outside third parties to raise intimidation to a new level.

SEIU’s manual details how “outside pressure can involve jeopardizing relationships between the employer and lenders, investors, stockholders, customers, clients, patients, tenants, politicians, or others on whom the employer depends for funds.” The union advises using legal and regulatory pressure to “threaten the employer with costly action by government agencies or the courts.”

Continue reading »

We've been saying all along -- practically since it happened, in fact -- that the right's claims that Tea Partier Kenneth Gladney, a black man, was victimized by SEIU "thugs" during a health-care protest was dubious at best, and Gladney's subsequent claims (particularly that this was a "hate crime") even more ludicrous.

Now it seems that a Missouri jury agrees:

CLAYTON, MO –(KMOX)–Almost two years after the national uproar over health care reform, a jury has acquitted two labor union activists accused of assaulting a man selling conservative buttons outside a Cogressman Russ Carnahan town hall forum.

Service Employees International Union members Elston McCowan and Perry Molens had been accused of misdemeanor assault in the August, 2009 tussle with button salesman Kenneth Gladney. The fight caught national attention at a time when there was rampant speculation the union had been dispatched to tamp down opposition to President Obama’s health care reform.

Jurors heard conflicting testimony in the two-day trial over who actually started the fight, and they viewed video tape showing the end and aftermath of the brawl — but no video showed who threw the first punch.

Of course, the wingnutosphere -- particularly those like Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit (aka the World's Dumbest Blogger), who heavily promoted the claims in the first place -- is outraged, outraged we tell you.

But as Adam Shriver at St. Louis Activist Hub observes:

The conspiracy pushed relentlessly for the past two years by Dana Loesch, Jim Hoft, Andrew Breitbart, Fox News, and the tea party has been shown at long last to be a complete fraud. Two innocent men have been harassed and threatened for two years as a result of a tea party smear campaign with only one objective: to make unions look evil.

Shriver covered the trial, and pointedly observed that Gladney's own testimony doomed the prosecution:

Gladney's testimony was the most damaging to the prosecution's case. For starters, Gladney appeared in a neck brace, which brought back memories of him showing up at a tea party rally in a wheel chair despite the fact that he was running around with no obvious discomfort immediately after the altercation took place. The defense lawyer said that Gladney's neck brace, which he was wearing because of surgery for a herniated disc, had nothing to do with the altercation, and Gladney did not challenge him on that point, so I assume it's true. But this opened up a criticism from the defense lawyer who asked Gladney why he showed up at the tea party rally in a wheelchair. Gladney said, basically, that it was hot and he was on medication and "they didn't have folding chairs or lawn chairs." Ouch.

... A more important problem for Gladney was that his previous descriptions of what happened did not match his current testimony. He previously had claimed that Elston McCowan, a black minister, had called him the n-word. In today's testimony, he now claimed that Perry Molens, a white man, also called him the n-word, which would be a strange detail to leave out of all of his previous interviews. More importantly, he had previously claimed that 4 different people "attacked" him, yet now he clams only two. He also claimed that he "never said a word" to McCowan, which I'm pretty sure is at odds with his previous interviews. And finally, his story of the altercation provided no explanation of why Elston McCowan was seen lying on the ground at the beginning of the video And all of this was despite the fact that he told the defense attorney that his memory today was as good or better as immediately after the incident happened.

And as Riverfront Times noted:

The defense also hammered Gladney on why he was seen walking around virtually unscathed in the immediate aftermath of the fight only to show up in a wheelchair two days later at a Tea Party rally.

Shriver also completely demolishes Hoft's new conspiracy theory about Gladney with an impressive array of facts. This guarantees, of course, that it will continue to enjoy a significant half-life of several more years as one of the Right's classic Zombie Lies.

Eric Boehlert is (as always) on the money:

As I said, the incident was regrettable and I'm sure everyone involved, if they had a chance to go back, would make sure the night did not unfold the same way again. But the idea that the mini-altercation was some sort of on-command union attack directed from the Oval Office and that it represented a looming wave of left-wing violence in this country? That was always a sick joke. It was a sick joke played at the expense of Gladney, and at the expense of two union members who were crucified by the right-wing press and called every conceivable name. All without a shred of evidence to support the union-bashing denunciations.

enlarge

Unfortunately, Washington Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire has been forced to adopt the "slash, don't tax" mentality more common with Republican governors after voters rejected several new taxes in November's election and restricted the Legislature's ability to raise taxes without a statewide vote.

Labor unions aren't going to let it go unchallenged:

Seventeen people were arrested after trying to storm the governor’s office in a third day of protests over state budget cuts Thursday.

In a prelude to what unions say will be a bigger rally today, a protest organized by the Service Employees International Union brought about 500 people to Olympia to call on lawmakers to end corporate tax exemptions before cutting state services.

Most protesters rallied in the Rotunda of the Legislative Building Thursday afternoon. Several were eventually arrested when they tried to push past Washington State Patrol officers guarding the governor’s office and refused to leave.

Protesters pushed against troopers stationed at the governor’s door shouting “let us in” and “we want the governor.”

“They (legislators) need to listen to us,” said Sharon Kitchel-Perdue, a home-care worker from Olympia and one of the protesters arrested.

Sgt. John Sager, one of the troopers on the scene, said that some of the protesters said they wanted to be arrested, and eventually, their actions gave troopers no choice.

“It was getting pretty hairy in here,” Sager said.

Back in December, Gregoire proposed cuts in the budget targeting the "Disability Lifeline" formerly known as GA-U or General Assistance Unemployable:

Programs that help Washington's poor were among those cut from Gov. Chris Gregoire's proposed two-year budget Wednesday, a plan she said she hated so much that "in some places, I don't even think it's moral."

Gregoire used a mix of cuts to state programs, suspension of voter initiatives and use of the state's "rainy day" fund to patch a projected $4.6 billion deficit.

The approximately $3 billion in cuts to her 2011-13 budget included the elimination of the Basic Health Program, which provides subsidized medical insurance to 66,000 poorer Washingtonians. Also eliminated is cash grants and medical care for the Disability Lifeline program, which mostly aids childless adults who are unemployable but not receiving federal aid.

Among local recipients of Disability Lifeline grants are survivors of domestic violence, who often suffer from post-traumatic stress and other mental health issues that can make it difficult for them to hold employment.

[...] Gregoire noted that the word "eliminate" is used about 80 times in her budget.

"I hate my budget," she said, tearing up. "I hate it because in some places, I don't even think it's moral."

Sate Republicans, of course, are thrilled. Austerity makes them tingly!