Three of every four oil and gas lobbyists worked for federal government. With 600 lobbists who have very close relationships to DC, proposals to enact new restrictions or curb oil use have stalled amid concerted Republican opposition and strong objections from Democrats in oil-producing states.
All is not well in the Gulf Coast, to put it mildly.
Solutions to coping with the effects of the disastrous oil spill seem all but sidelined as the nation watches effort after effort to staunch the flow of spewing oil fail. We can only hope that the latest attempt -- the containment cap -- will work.
Meanwhile, the workers from coastal communities who made their living in Gulf waters face increasing uncertainty -- over what will happen to their livelihoods, their futures, their families -- and building frustration. America Magazine tells the story of one such man:
[Chris] Nelhig, a fisherman for 36 years, wears a tan visor over a long ponytail. His face is glossy with sweat.
“What’s going on down here, [with regard to the oil spill], I don’t completely understand it yet,” he says. “I can’t get the truth from nobody. Don’t know how long it’s going to last.” His eyes shine, but show his worry. The environmental and economic effects of the explosion at the Deepwater Horizon drilling site off the Gulf Coast more than a month ago are obvious, but what many don’t see are the emotional effects on the fishermen and their families.
Already, local and national charities have sprung into action. And the Jewish community -- and Jewish Funds for Justice are not exception. [Follow the link to read more about JFSJ and other Jewish efforts to help individuals in the affected coastal communities.]
1. Yesterday I went to a large demonstration at Trader Joes in Union Square for the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW), demanding Trader Joes to pay a penny more per pound of tomatoes picked in their fields. So inspiring to go to a demo when you know there's precedent and power to actually make it happen.Trader Joes should agree now and move on, cause it's in the bag.
2. The first five people who showed up- Jews! Timely and concerned...two awesome qualitiies. Go Jews!
3.There were awesome musicians playing Son Jarocho...definitely a crowd pleaser. Son Jarocho is a traditional musical style of Veracruz, a Mexican state along the Gulf of Mexico. Lots of Son Jarocho players seem to love the CIW and social justice. Here's a video of some CIW loving musicians based in Santa Ana that I've come to know through the CIW.
The executive director of the Jewish Labor Committee makes her case for legislation that would remove obstacles to workers ability to join unions.
By Sybil Sanchez
Aug 29, 2009: NEW YORK (JTA) -- This Labor Day, take a moment to remember people like Lupe Hernandez.
When she toured a Jewish family's apartment in the Lower East Side Tenement Museum, she felt connected to our history as immigrants struggling to make better lives for ourselves and our families. Hernandez is one of the immigrant workers on strike in the 2007 film "Made in LA" struggling to receive a fair wage and stop sweatshop abuse by organizing.
Labor Day might seem like a quaint throwback, but the struggle for workers' rights is still being fought today in our own backyards.
Our community's relationship to labor is very different today than in yesteryear, but the Jewish obligation to remember our history remains relevant. As Jews, we must respect and support workers' rights, whether it's those of our ancestors or today's immigrants.
While most headlines are focused on health care reform, labor law reform should stay on our agenda -- specifically, the Employee Free Choice Act. This much-needed legislation has three important principles: Workers would more easily be able to join or form a union; employers who break the law in efforts to stop union organizing would face more stringent penalties and workers who have chosen to form a union would have a clear path to an initial collective bargaining agreement with their employer.
Today, 44 percent of newly formed unions are unable to reach initial agreements, a serious problem the current law fails to address.
The majority sign-up route to union recognition provided by the Employee Free Choice Act has a long history and is in widespread use today in the United States and many other countries. But there's a catch: Under current law, workers can form a union via majority sign-up only if their employer agrees to it - which most employers refuse to do, even when worker support for the union is overwhelming.
Supporting this legislation is a no-brainer if one supports workers' right to collectively negotiate for decent wages and working conditions.
The Jewish Labor Committee has been a longtime supporter of the Employee Free Choice Act. We're not alone. A number of other Jewish organizations also have endorsed it, including the Progressive Jewish Alliance in Los Angeles, Chicago's Jewish Council for Urban Affairs, Philadelphia's Jewish Social Policy Action Network, Washington's Jews United for Justice and New York's Uri L'Tzedek. A visit to Rabbisforworkerschoice.org reveals the support of dozens of rabbis.
Ofer Eini, chairman of Israel's federation of labor, the Histadrut, also has weighed in on the issue, conveying his support In a recent letter to John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO.
"The Employee Free Choice Act will bring U.S. law for union recognition into conformity with Israeli law and international human rights standards on the freedom of association in the workplace," Eini wrote. "We believe that U.S. workers, and all workers, should have the same rights as Israeli workers, to organize unions free from employer interrogation, intimidation and harassment.
"In Israel, when workers seek to bargain collectively, they just join together into a union, in the same manner that they join any other organization," he added. "When a sufficient number of workers have joined a union, they can demand recognition from their employer. If the employer refuses, the Labour Courts of Israel can investigate, and when it has determined that the required number of the workers are union members, that they have joined freely and without coercion, the court can require the employer to recognize the union."
According to Eini, the Employee Free Choice Act will "reform U.S. labor law so that the U.S. National Labor Relations Board is, like the National Labour Court of Israel, empowered to protect freedom of association, instead of thwarting it, as it is currently compelled to do by U.S. labor law."
"Unlike the National Labour Court of Israel, the National Labor Relations Board [NLRB] of the United States has no power to require the employer to recognize the workers' union except by first imposing an NLRB election," he said. "But NLRB elections are a cruel violation of the fundamental principles of free and fair and secret elections. In practice, they effectively prevent workers from exercising their right to freedom of association.
"Paid supervisors are trained by anti-union consultants to act as spies in the workplace. Thousands of workers are harassed, intimidated or fired each year by employers who do everything in their power to rob workers of their right to join unions and bargain collectively.
"So long as the employer-employee relationship remains one of power imbalance there is no way to reform an NLRB election to make it approach the standard of a free, fair and secret election.
"But as the experience of Israel teaches us, there is no reason to force workers through such a process. The National Labor Relations Board of the United States, like the National Labour Court of Israel, is fully capable of assessing the validity of union membership and verifying that membership was achieved without intimidation and coercion. It can do so without being required to impose an undemocratic and workers-rights-violating NLRB election. But it can do so only if the Employee Free Choice Act will pass as written."
The Histadrut leader concluded by calling on "all who desire that our countries' laws reflect our shared ideals of workplace social justice to support Employee Free Choice."
In this respect, Israeli law is pointing the way to a society that treats its workers with justice and dignity. Can we do any less?
The New York Times reports that the company that owns Stella D'Oro cookies has been ordered to reinstate the 134 Bronx-based workers who have been on strike since their contract expired last summer, and to pay the workers back wages plus interest.
As I wrote in a post on The Jew and the Carrot, Brynwood Partners bought Stella D'Oro in 2006 and, when the workers' contracts ran out last summer, demanded that workers accept pay cuts of up to 26% and begin contributing to their health insurance costs.
As far as I can tell, Jews are just about the only consumers of Stella D'Oro cookies, whose major advantage is that they're parve (dairy free) and therefore can be eaten after a meat meal. A few years ago, the company decided to begin using dairy chocolate in some of its cookies; the ensuing outrage from the kosher-keeping community forced a return to (more expensive) parve chocolate.
As I suggested in my earlier post, the Jewish community can use this economic power not only to hold onto parve chocolatey goodness, but to make sure that the workers who help satisfy our sweet tooths are paid decent wages.
While this victory is a huge step forward for the workers, the fight might not be over yet. The company still can appeal the decision to the National Labor Relations Board, which is notoriously slow in hearing cases. In the meantime, it's still worth it to shoot a note to Henrik Hartong, Jr., the senior partner of Brynwood at huppsy@brynwoodpartners.com to let him know how glad you are that the workers will be getting their jobs and their wages back. Can't hurt to tell him that you're now more likely to buy his cookies.
The Jewish Labor Committee has been working both nationally and locally to support the Employees Free Choice Act (EFCA). Hundreds of people across the country have signed onto the JLC’s petition {you can add your name here}.
In Philadelphia, the traditionally secular organization has organized something distinctive: a rabbinic appeal to Senator Arlen Specter. JLC Philadelphia Director Rosalind Spigel has enlisted 25 local rabbis plus rabbinical students to sign an open letter urging Pennsylvania’s newly minted Democratic senior senator to put Jewish values to work and help safeguard the rights of employees who wish to secure union representation.{Additional signatories are of course welcome – see here.} Congress is currently considering the Employee Free Choice Act. While Sen. Specter previously supported the legislation, most recently he indicated a disinclination to support this legislation.
On Tuesday, June 9, a rabbinic delegation of the Philadelphia JLC met Senator Arlen Specter to urge his support for the Employee Free Choice Act. Included in the delegation were Rabbis Anna Boswell-Levy, Reba Carmel, Leonard Gordon, and Alan LaPayover; also participating were Philadelphia JLC Vice President William Epstein {who is communications director for Local 1776 of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, and board member of the Jewish Social Policy Action Network}, Philadelphia JLC President Jeff Hornstein {who is district organizing coordinator of SEIU Local 32 BJ}, and Philadelphia JLC Director Rosalind Spigel.
That day also marks the official launch of the website of Rabbis for Workers’ Choice. The delegation visiting Specter urging him to stand with working families held a short ceremony to reinforce their message at his Philadelphia office.
The rabbis’ open letter begins by characterizing biblical references about the Sabbath, the day of rest from daily labors, as an affirmation of human dignity for the worker. It goes on to quote D’varim/Deuteronomy [24:14-15]: “You shall not abuse a needy and destitute laborer, but you must pay him his wages on the same day, for he is needy and urgently depends on it.”
Under the proposed EFCA legislation, workers would be empowered to choose between a secret ballot and a majority sign-up process. Under current labor law, employers often use a combination of legal and illegal methods of intimidation to silence employees who attempt to form unions and bargain for better wages and working conditions. When faced with union organizing drives, up to 25 percent of employers fire at least one pro-union worker. [See Kate Bronfenbrenner, `Uneasy Terrain: The Impact of Capital Mobility on Workers, Wages and Union Organizing' (September 6, 2000).]
Penalties for employer transgressions are too weak to deter violations. For example, an employer found guilty of illegally firing an employee for union activity must only give back pay to that employee – and is allowed to deduct whatever that worker earned elsewhere in the interim. Many employers find the punishment for breaking the law a bargain if firing a pro-union employee scares off others from supporting the union.
Even if workers successfully form a union despite such tactics, their employer is allowed to repeatedly appeal the results – which can take years to resolve, by which time some employees may no longer be working there, and momentum of any organizing campaign may well be depleted. Such delays mock the democratic process and weaken union support by inviting more opportunities for employee turnover, harassment, and firings by management.
In the course of elections to secure union representation, workers are twice as likely (46 percent vs. 23 percent) as those in sign-up campaigns to report that management coerced them to oppose the campaign to unionize. Whereas less than one in 20 workers (4.6 percent) who signed a card in the presence of a union organizer reported feeling pressured to sign the card. Currently, 91 percent of employers faced with organizing drives force employees to attend one-on-one anti-union meetings with their supervisors; 34 percent of employers coerce workers into opposing the unionization drive with bribes and favoritism; and 51 percent threaten to close a work site if unionization prevails.
The proposed Employee Free Choice Act was crafted to remedy these pernicious practices and outcomes. Moreover, the implications for social justice are clear: the resulting growth in the unionized work force would produce better wages and working conditions for many of America’s society’s most impoverished and hard-pressed workers. Supporting the Employee Free Act is the right thing to do.
