document.write('

A Collective Solution to a ?Personal Problem??Unions Fight for Paid Sick Days
Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:00:26 +0000 - Jenya Cassidy, with the Labor Project for Working Families, sends us this cross-post from MomsRising. When my son was almost 10, I found out I was pregnant with twin girls. I was excited but a little intimidated. I remembered one newborn being a lot of work?what would two be like? I mentally prepared for double the amount of diaper changes, laundry, bottles and child care costs. But what didn?t occur to me until after my return to work was how going from one child to three more than tripled my chances of needing to call in sick. In a recent workweek, the family cat was diagnosed with feline diabetes, my son got hit by a baseball in P.E. and one of the twins threw up on the other twin?s shoes at preschool. All of this added up to coming in late, leaving early and taking a sick day to care for my child. Not an easy week ?it can be stressful to have to miss work for any reason. But I have a union contract and paid sick days. I don?t lose money for taking a day when I need it and, even more importantly, I don?t risk losing my job. Sadly, this is not true for everyone. Almost half of all private-sector workers in the United States lose pay when they take a day off work to care for themselves or a family member. Many risk disciplinary action as well. According to a recent study, one in six workers report that they have been fired, suspended or disciplined for taking a sick day to care for themselves, a child or another family member. They are literally being forced to choose between a paycheck and getting well. The Union Solution Union members are 50 percent more likely than nonunion workers to have paid sick time for themselves and their children. But even as a union member, I can?t take my right to paid sick days for granted. The union movement is still working on this?fighting negative sick leave policies through grievances and at the bargaining table. In the long run, the only way for union members to be ensured the right to paid sick days is to push for this right for all workers. And they are. Unions are joining with Family Values @ Work, a multistate consortium, to push for public policy that would provide a minimum number of paid sick days for everyone. Everyone gets sick. But not everyone has the same right to take a day or two to get well. Needing to take a sick day?like I did recently?can seem like just a personal problem. Working in Coalition with Unions, we can take a personal problem and work collectively on the solution. Together we can win.

Tell Your Senator to Support State Aid to Save Essential Jobs
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:11:43 +0000 - The Senate on Monday will make one more attempt to overcome a Republican filibuster of aid to state and local governments that would save or create nearly a million jobs for teachers, public employees, police officers, firefighters and others. Without such funding, the states that are facing huge budget shortfalls will be forced to begin massive layoffs that could cost nearly a million workers their jobs. An amendment to the Federal Aviation authorization bill (H.R. 1586) would provide $16 billion for a Medicaid funding assistance program known as FMAP and $10 million for teachers? jobs. The vote is expected to occur late Monday afternoon. On Monday please call your senators and tell them to pass H.R. 1586 with essential aid to states and school districts. A recent study by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) shows that at least 25 states assumed an extension of the enhanced FMAP funding for their 2011 budgets. Without it, according to the report, budget gaps could grow by more than $12 billion in the current fiscal year and as much as $72 billion next fiscal year, forcing cuts in vital services and jobs to make up for the shortfalls. Says AFSCME President Gerald McEntee: Republicans continue to block emergency aid for state and local governments, funding that the majority of U.S. governors have specifically requested, and almost half have factored into their state budgets. Without this funding, nearly a million more jobs will be lost in the private and public sectors.

CWA: Let the Senate Breathe and Work, End Republican Filibuster Stranglehold
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:14:48 +0000 - Long gone are the days of U.S. senators standing on the floor of the Senate as hours turned to days while they filibustered legislation they hoped they could talk to death because they didn?t have the votes to kill it outright. Senate rules no longer require filibustering senators to stay on the floor and speak while all Senate business grinds to a halt, as in the iconic scene in ?Mr. Smith Goes to Washington? where Jimmy Stewart?s character filibusters to exhaustion. That?s meant the once-rare filibuster that requires 60 votes to break is now the biggest and most frequent weapon in the Republican obstructionist arsenal. And it?s being fired at a record rate, stalling or killing legislation such as health care reform, unemployment insurance, Wall Street reform, jobs legislation, aid to states, vital spending bills and just about anything that?s not on the Republican corporate/right-wing agenda. These and other filibuster targets likely would have passed on a simple majority vote. This week at the Communications Workers of America (CWA) convention in Washington, D.C., delegates approved a resolution calling for an end to filibusters and the use of ?holds? on nominations that have stalled hundreds of Obama administration judicial nominees and other vital appointments. The resolution says the frequent use of the filibuster has now become: a vicious partisan tool that prevents consideration of most legislation. As the use of the filibuster has become routine, it has become increasingly rare for the Senate to consider legislation, approve nominations and pass annual appropriations bills. The Senate?s dysfunction and the continued abuse of this procedure by the current Republican minority have led to paralysis throughout the federal government. Senators aren’t even required to officially filibuster. The threat of a filibuster alone stalls legislation, writes Paul Hogarth at BeyondChron.com. Senate Republicans have made ?60 the new 51? by simply announcing that they?ll filibuster everything. But these are effectively pre-emptive filibusters?killing legislation before any debate starts (let alone ends). The CWA resolution says reform of Senate rules must take place: if we are to make progress on any progressive reforms in our country….The filibuster must be eliminated and the use of holds to deny the appointment of qualified individuals must come to an end. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) this week told Talking Points Memo (TPM) that Republican filibuster tactics are taking their toll. A lot of us have been completely worn down by a requirement of 60 votes on everything. This was rare when I got here 14 years ago and now it is rare otherwise. While CWA?s resolution calls on the Senate to change its rules when it reconvenes as the 112th Congress in January and completely eliminate filibusters and holds, there are other efforts to modify the filibuster and hold rules that would still allow the tactics but make it easier for a majority to end the stalls. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) addressed the Netroots Nation meeting last week and said: We’re going to have to change it….We’re looking at ways to change what has been an abuse. Earlier this week, Dylan Matthews at Ezra Klein?s Washington Post blog reported on proposals from Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). Bennet?s would: eliminate anonymous holds, limit holds without bipartisan support to two days and limit all holds to 30 days. It would require 41 senators to vote to uphold the filibuster, reversing the current requirement that 60 senators vote to stop it. Lautenberg?s plan has been dubbed the “Mr. Smith bill” because it would require senators to stay in the chamber and continue speaking throughout the filibuster. Says Lautenberg: Filibusters should happen on Capitol Hill, not from the Capital Grille [restaurant]. If any of my colleagues feel strongly enough about a bill or nomination to stop all work in the Senate, they should have no problem standing on the Senate floor to explain their opposition to the American public. Click here for more from Matthews on a Senate Rules and Administration Committee hearing on filibusters and holds. Also, Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) has proposed that the Senate assert its authority at the beginning of the next Congress to change the filibuster rule by a majority vote of the Senate, rather than subject that change itself to a filibuster. And Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has proposed a rule that would enable successive votes to end debate on a matter, with 60 as the first necessary threshold, then 57, 54 and 51?a simple majority.

New Health Care Law Gives Medicare Lots to Celebrate at 45
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:24:56 +0000 - Medicare turns 45 today?and as Dr. Don Berwick, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, points out: “Before Medicare, millions of the nation’s seniors were uninsured. Since then, Medicare has been the bedrock of the nation’s health care system.” The new health care legislation Congress passed this year gives Medicare?and the seniors who depend upon it?lots to celebrate, because the law enhances Medicare coverage. But “unfortunately, too many retirees remain skeptical and unaware of these new benefits,” says Edward F. Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans. This is the shameful legacy of sustained scare tactics and falsehoods aimed at older Americans during the health care debate. Medicare’s 45th birthday is a good time to check out how the health care legislation boosts benefits, and the Alliance, which has prepared an extensive series of fact sheets on these new benefits, says the new health care law: ? Provides a $250 rebate to those in the Medicare “doughnut hole,” and in subsequent years fully closes this coverage gap. ? Ends co-payments and deductibles for annual physicals, mammograms, colonoscopies and other preventive screenings. ? Helps early retirees (ages 55 to 64) better afford and keep their private health insurance. ? Enables middle-class families to better afford the high costs of long-term care. ? Strengthens the life of the Medicare Trust Fund by ending wasteful taxpayer subsidies and overpayments to private insurance companies who operate Medicare Advantage programs. So, why do so many Republican Senate candidates oppose Medicare? In fact, nine Republican candidates would end Medicare, think it’s a mistake or believe it is Soviet socialism. They are: Sharron Angle in Nevada, Rand Paul in Kentucky, Dan Coats in Indiana, David Vitter in Louisiana, Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, John Boozman in Arkansas, Roy Blunt in Missouri and Jane Norton and Ken Buck in Colorado. Angle has said that Medicare needs to be phased out, while Johnson would eliminate traditional Medicare by limiting eligibility. Paul thinks it’s out and out socialism. Find out more about why these Senate Republican candidates would kill Medicare here.

UAW: U.S. Cars on the Road to Success
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:51:00 +0000 - Higher profits and new fuel-efficient models have put American-made cars back on the road again?with the help of taxpayers and the workers who have worked closely with the Big Three automakers to ensure their success. In July, Ford posted a stronger-than-expected quarterly profit of $2.6 billion?some $1 billion more than analysts predicted?with promises of more earnings in 2011. Chrysler, which cut its net loss to $197 million from January through March, expects to announce its second-quarter earnings in mid-August. General Motor’s (GM’s) U.S. sales for June rose 11 percent from the year-ago period and the company is again building popular cars. Says UAW President Bob King: The commitment, sacrifices and hard work of the men and women at UAW-represented companies is an enormous part of the positive news coming from Ford, GM and Chrysler, where UAW members are producing best-in-class quality results and building vehicles that hands-down beat global competition. Taxpayer investment in aiding GM and Chrysler is paying off: A July 25 analysis by the Detroit Free Press suggested taxpayers could get back about $74 billion of the $86 billion the federal government made available in 2008 and 2009 to save GM, Chrysler and Ally Financial. The Obama administration made the right move in aiding GM and Chrysler, King says, adding that because the administration understands: how vital auto manufacturing jobs are to every community in this country, these companies and UAW workers can and will continue to succeed.

Medicare at 45: Health Reform Means New Benefits for Seniors
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:53:14 +0000 - Barbara Easterling is the president of the Alliance for Retired Americans and former secretary-treasurer of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the AFL-CIO. She began her union career 36 years ago as a telephone operator and local union officer in Akron, Ohio. July 30 is the 45th anniversary of Medicare, a milestone for a true American success story that has helped reduce senior poverty by two-thirds. This year is an especially happy birthday for Medicare, because the new health care reform law makes it easier for seniors to afford to see a doctor, fill a prescription and receive free preventive screenings and tests for serious diseases. But as the president of the Alliance for Retired Americans, I am concerned that too many retirees remain skeptical and unaware of these new benefits. This is the shameful legacy of sustained scare tactics and falsehoods aimed at older Americans during the health care debate. So forget about Sarah Palin and the “death panels” she warned you about. Here are a few facts about the new health law: It lowers drug costs by providing a $250 rebate in 2010 for those in the Medicare “doughnut hole,” and it begins to close this loophole that has been financially devastating for many seniors; It ends co-payments and deductibles for annual physicals, mammograms, colonoscopies, and other preventive screenings; It helps early retirees age 55-64 better afford and keep their private health insurance through financial assistance programs, and also by prohibiting insurance companies from discriminating against those with pre-existing medical conditions; It helps middle-class families afford the high costs of long-term care through a new insurance plan known as the CLASS Act; and It strengthens the fiscal solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund by ending wasteful taxpayer subsidies to private insurance companies who operate Medicare Advantage programs at a cost 14 percent higher than if Medicare directly provided these same services. The Alliance for Retired Americans has prepared an extensive series of fact sheets on these new benefits. They are available at www.RetiredAmericans.org. To me, the best way to celebrate Medicare’s 45th birthday is to educate our friends and neighbors on how this new health law can help them live longer, healthier lives.

House Republicans Block Medical Help for 9/11 Heroes
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:15:21 +0000 - House Republicans last night blocked a bill that would provide long-term medical care and monitoring for the nearly 60,000 Sept. 11 rescue and recovery workers and community members whose health is at serious risk from their exposure to the contaminated and toxic rubble at Ground Zero of the World Trade Center. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called the vote a deep disappointment and said: Helping the thousands of 9/11 responders and others who are now sick as a result of their exposures at the World Trade Center should not be a partisan issue. But sadly, the majority of House Republicans voted against this bill. The 255-159 vote in favor of the bill included 12 Republicans. But because the bill was on what is known as the suspension calendar used for non-controversial bills, it needed a two-thirds majority to pass. What?s controversial about helping Sept. 11 heroes who faced a toxic mix of chemicals, jet fuel, asbestos, lead, glass fragments and other debris? Trumka noted that the cost of the bill was paid for by closing tax loopholes for foreign companies operating in the United States. It appears that some Republicans and business groups, including the Chamber of Commerce, are more concerned with protecting the interests of the foreign based companies who try to avoid paying taxes than helping those who answered the nation?s call on 9/11. Rep. Michael E. McMahon (D-N.Y.) said the Republican arguments against the bill are ?ridiculous and baseless.? It is utterly unconscionable to me that my Republican colleagues decided to put their own petty, partisan agenda ahead of the solemn moral obligation to help the countless volunteers who were there for us in our nation?s greatest hour of need. Shame on them. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y), one of the bill?s chief sponsors, said she expects the House to take up the Sept. 11 medical aid bill when it returns from its August recess under normal rules that require just a simple majority for passage. Nine long years after the attacks, the living victims of 9/11 are still suffering. We must pass this bill. It is the least we can do as a grateful nation.

Better Access to WARN Act Information Needed for Workers, Communities
Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:02:33 +0000 - Last year, more than 2.8 million workers were victims of mass layoffs or plant closings that should have fallen under the 1988 WARN Act, which requires employers to give workers and communities advance notice before shutting down. But, as a new AFL-CIO report reveals, the plant closing law ?has proven severely flawed.? Numerous reports have concluded that most layoffs are not subject to WARN Act requirements; few employers act in compliance with the law; and penalties for noncompliance are so lax that they do not act as deterrents. The AFL-CIO report, “The Public Availability of WARN Notices: Lack of Accessibility and Disclosure Calls for Reform,” examines the difficulty in obtaining WARN notice information that can be vital in planning for the economic and jobs impact of a mass layoff or plant closure. With access to comprehensive and easy-to-use data bases of past layoffs and plant closures, organizations working to increase employment in states can look for trends in past economic dislocations as they chart their paths forward. We presented the report to the U.S. Department of Labor?s Employment and Training Administration today. Essentially, the WARN Act requires employers with more than 100 full-time workers to provide 60 days advance notice of a plant closing to local and state officials, the workers and their union. Community leaders and workers who are given this advance notice can then work to mitigate the effects of the job losses by offering retraining programs, providing social services and working to avoid layoffs altogether. But nearly each state has its own set of rules and regulations on handling WARN notices, which the report describes as a: flawed jumble of websites, offices, and email accounts, which organizations and individuals must keep track of to obtain information on economic dislocations across the country. Most states have Rapid Response Teams to assist employers, workers and communities during a mass layoff or plant closing. But the report found that in many cases when those coordinators tried to push for easier and more WARN notice public disclosure, the coordinators reported they had: encountered pressure from businesses and politicians when they tried to push for disclosure on websites. The report examines states with difficult or flawed disclosure rules and states with best practices and makes a series of recommendations to the Labor Department, including: Issuing a regulation, training and employment notice or guidance letter requiring states to forward any WARN notices received to the Department of Labor for inclusion in a centralized, publicly accessible database. Developing a standardized format for WARN notices and conducting an educational campaign to encourage adoption of the format in the submission of notices. Adopting the best practices described within this report for the handling of WARN information within that centralized database. Connecting WARN data to other site-specific employment information using unique, site-specific nine-digit identification numbers. Click here for a copy of the full report.

Coalition Launches Drive to Fight Social Security Cuts
Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:28:04 +0000 - AFL-CIO Media Outreach fellow Jennifer Angarita contributed to this report. As Social Security turns 75 years old Aug. 14, the nation’s most successful social program likely will be under attack by the federal budget deficit commission, which, by all accounts, is considering benefits cuts and raising the retirement age. Today, more than 60 groups, including the AFL-CIO, announced the creation of the coalition Strengthen Social Security?Don?t Cut It. The group is launching a major mobilization to push back the commission?s phony assertions, backed by the Wall Street spin machine, that claim Social Security is a major component of the budget deficit and is teetering on the brink of disaster. In a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., the group outlined plans to build support in Congress to fight benefits cuts and press candidates this election to pledge to fight any move to raise the retirement age or privatization scheme. Says Ed Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans: The Strengthen Social Security campaign unites everyone here to improve?not weaken?Social Security. We are united against any cuts in benefits, such as increases in the retirement age, and to any form of privatization of Social Security. We will stand united if the commission calls for any cuts to Social Security. We are launching a major lobbying campaign for Congress to block their recommendations. Speaking at the press conference, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said that raising the retirement age is: a benefit cut, plain and simple. It is a cut that is unnecessary and one that Americans can ill-afford. He also says it unfairly singles out workers in demanding physical occupations, workers like my father who spent his life in the mines and couldn?t work another day by the time he qualified for Social Security?and those older workers who may no longer be able to find work due to age discrimination. Social Security benefits are the largest source of retirement income for most retirees. For six of 10 seniors, Social Security represents more than half of their income. In addition, nearly one-half of older unmarried women and widows, and one-third of all beneficiaries, have little other than Social Security and rely on its monthly benefit for 90 percent or more of their retirement income. Says Terry O?Neill, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW): Social Security is the mainstay for millions of older women. Every year, a major share of the nearly 24 million women age 62 and older who receive benefits are kept out of poverty because of Social Security. Often that monthly Social Security check is their only income. A new Gallup Poll out today shows that by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, Americans oppose raising the retirement age and, by an even bigger margin, say the best way to strengthen Social Security is to ensure the wealthiest pay their fair share. Currently, all workers pay the Social Security payroll tax on the first $106,000 of their earnings. Earnings above $106,000 are exempt from the Social Security payroll tax. That means a grocery clerk or warehouse worker pays a bigger chunk of income to Social Security than a hedge fund manager. By a 67 percent to 30 percent margin, the public supports raising the Social Security payroll tax to cover all earnings. Also taking part in the press conference, AFSCME President Gerald McEntee says the deficit commission is trying to turn Social Security into a scapegoat for the deficit. Social Security is not the problem. Social Security?with a $2.6 trillion surplus projected to grow to $4.3 trillion by 2023?is not the cause of the nation?s deficit. Says O?Neill: The fiscal commission should address the real causes of the deficit?unfunded wars, irresponsible tax breaks for the wealthiest, and an economic crisis caused by financial regulatory failures. This fall, says Coyle, coalition members will be ?demanding clear, unequivocal answers from the candidates on where they stand on Social Security.? As McEntee warns congressional candidates: If you break promise from 75 years ago, we will hold you accountable. Keep your hands off our Social Security.

Businessweek Profiles CNA/NNU?s DeMoro
Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:53:17 +0000 - In a major profile of Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses United (CNA/NNU), Bloomberg Businessweek writes: DeMoro is expert at dishing out political pain with a flourish, a talent that has endeared her to her 86,000 constituents in the California Nurses Association. Under DeMoro’s leadership, the union has recast itself from a special-interest trade group to a consumer and patient advocate that lobbies hard?and volubly?for universal health care and patients’ rights. “Nurses are the last line of defense for patients,” says DeMoro from a seat in her cactus-filled office at the union’s Oakland headquarters. “This isn’t about just bread-and-butter issues for registered nurses, this is about living in a good and a just society.” Click here for the full article. Most recently, CNA/NNU created a crowned and scepter-carrying Queen Meg parody of Meg Whitman, the billionaire former eBay CEO and California Republican gubernatorial candidate, a sharp-elbowed spoof that DeMoro says is a sharp poke at: the new corporate aristocracy, they’re used to unilateral control, no democracy.

RSS feed reader provided by Magic RSS

');document.write('');