Category Archives: Abolition Of Work

Whenever I see an LGBT+ event advertised on campus I feel joy that attitudes have changed so dramatically and wonderfully over my lifetime.

February was LGBT History Month, and this year is significant because it marks 50 years since the partial decriminalisation of male homosexuality in England and Wales. Universities across the UK have been holding events looking back and celebrating what has been achieved and preparing for the challenges that still face us. Above all, these events provide an opportunity for people to demonstrate their commitment to diversity and a fair and just society for all.

LGBT History Month was established just over a decade ago, following the abolition of Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988, which banned local authorities and teachers from promoting homosexuality or publishing materials that promoted its acceptance as a pretended family relationship.

The University of Leicester has a programme of wide-ranging events open to staff, students and the general public, and Leicester City Council is showing its support by flying the rainbow flag for inclusion and diversity at the town hall and other public buildings.

It is worth noting that in the not-so-distant past, this series of public lectures, research seminars and social events could well have been deemed illegal or, at best, distasteful.

Things have come a long way since I was a teenager, when I was convinced I was the only one with a different sexual identity, and that I had some sort of disease because, growing up, I hadnt heard of any others like me. I grew up in a very ordinary suburb in a small Australian city, and I neither knew nor learned much about sex.

It was only when I got to university that it started to become clear to me that I was not alone, that there were many people out there with different sexual identities.

The change has been wonderful and amazing but, of course, the work is not finished. There are still LGBT+ people (especially transgender) living in fear and hiding. Young people still get bullied and worry about whether they are and will be OK. There are still people who think we should just shut up about it and dont realise that its hard to shut up when a lot of what you see around you is still shouting out that only heterosexual is really normal.

Theres a philosophical argument that we cannot learn from what has happened in the past because it is we in the present who construct our history. I would argue that, in practice, we in the LGBT+ community do have a lot to learn from our history and the activism and bravery that has got us this far.

Starting work as a lecturer in Australia in the early 1980s, I kept my sexual orientation to myself although most people probably realised and I was once denied a position because, I heard later, members of the panel preferred a family man and someone with whom they could feel comfortable.

Thirty years later I can not only come out as a homosexual provost of a leading UK university but can also, I believe, regard my sexual identity as an asset in my work. It has given me first hand experience of the way the mores and prejudices of a society can impact so negatively on the individual. It has given me a taste for justice and doing things properly, and compassion and sensitivity towards people dealing with bullying, harassment or marginalisation.

It is very important to say to younger people that change happens, that good arguments move people, change their minds and move their hearts. Straight people dont think about gay people the way they used to. That is an incredible achievement for activism from "our side", but straight people had to change themselves too. They had to do the work as well, in recognising the humanity and dignity of people who are different and understanding difference as valuable and enriching rather than threatening.

That is why it is so heartening to see so many diverse groups working together to make LGBT History Month a success, and opening up events to the wider community in Leicester.

I hope it is helpful for people who are marginalised, for people who are younger and fear that maybe the world doesnt change, to hear from someone a bit older who says: Yes it does but it doesnt just change by itself, you have to speak it, you have to argue it, you have to live it.

You have to embody the pride and embody the insistence that you are not going to take the lies and the misrepresentations. Good people listen and they respond and they change.

One of the things I am most proud of is that when I was younger, despite the insults and the fear about what taking a stand might mean, I was prepared to play a part in the activism that has created a world in which I am pretty sure the average teenager with a different sexual identity would no longer think they are the only one. There is always someone they can look to, someone who is confident in their skin, has someone who loves them and has a family that loves and respects them.

A lot of people in my generation didnt have that at all. We had no one to show us what the end of the journey might look like.

What is different about the world now compared with 20 or 30 years ago is that there are more allies. Some people are legally required to help you, and not to stand by and watch bullying and harassment, but there are even more people who are morally driven not to stand by. That helps us call it out, shout it out. It strengthens our voice.

Big gains have been made and this is a time to look back at the past and celebrate them. It is also a time to reflect on what still lurks beneath the surface because there is still sometimes a gap between what people say and what they feel.

Here at Leicester, the university celebrates diversity and our leadership reflects that. But it is everyones business. Young people have just as much ability to influence others with their courage, their example and the power of their arguments.

The work is not yet done, and there are times it feels like it is being undone. You wonder why you have to say certain things again.

But change does happen when people decide to act and when they decide to really listen. It happens when people who are advantaged or "normal" understand the justice of the arguments being made by those who are disadvantaged or "abnormal", and do something about it. I know, I have witnessed it.

Mark Peel is Provost at the University of Leicester.

Read more:

'As a lecturer in the 1980s, I kept my sexual orientation to myself' - Times Higher Education (THE)

Sinn Fein has slapped down the DUP Education Minister's efforts to resolve a decade-old split between two unofficial transfer test providers.

The Belfast Telegraph revealed yesterday that the Association for Quality Education (AQE) and the Post-Primary Transfer Consortium (PPTC) will next week enter talks to agree a single unofficial test system.

The two groups which currently run the unofficial transfer tests - which see more than 14,000 entrants by P7 children across Northern Ireland each year - say they are "eager to work together to find a common transfer test".

The old official 11-plus test was abolished by former Sinn Fein Education Minister Caitriona Ruane in 2008.

In response to that, the AQE and the PPTC were set up by grammar school supporters to run unofficial transfer tests.

However, the two organisations have never been able to agree a single test system.

But in a statement they paid tribute to Peter Weir, saying significant policy changes under his watch offered them a starting point for talks.

When Mr Weir took on the Education portfolio last May, he was the first in the post since the restoration of devolution to back academic selection.

He said he would not reimpose the old 11-plus but would encourage negotiations to find a single unofficial transfer test.

The education brief had been held by successive Sinn Fein members Martin McGuinness, Ms Ruane and then John O'Dowd. All three were strongly against academic selection.

When Mr Weir took office last May he overturned a ban on primary schools being able to prepare pupils to sit the unofficial transfer tests during class hours.

And last October the minister appointed Durham University educationalist Professor Peter Tymms to lead an initiative to investigate whether agreement could be reached for a single transfer test in Northern Ireland.

Following the conclusion of his work this month, the AQE and the PPTC committed to enter talks to agree a single test.

However, Sinn Fein education spokesperson Barry McElduff slammed the progress towards the single test system.

He has claimed there have been improvements in educational attainment in recent years - which he says proves that academic selection is "both wrong and unnecessary".

"Sinn Fein believes strongly that academic selection in our schools has a hugely negative impact on children," he said.

"We are not alone in our opposition to academic selection.

"Many educationalists, parents, teaching unions, and both children's and human rights organisations also oppose academic selection.

"The Human Rights Commission in the north has called for the abolition of academic selection, as it is socially divisive and not in the educational interests of children or young people."

He added: "The huge improvements in educational attainment under successive Sinn Fein education ministers demonstrates clearly that academic selection is wrong and unnecessary."

Belfast Telegraph

Go here to see the original:

Sinn Fein attacks schools minister over plan to merge two transfer tests - Belfast Telegraph

Committee sources last night said there was now a growing consensus that refunds should be issued in lieu of the option of pursuing those who had boycotted the charges.

Members are also leaning towards the introduction of an excessive usage charge, which will be levelled on households found to be wasting water.

The measure is a key recommendation in the report produced by the expert commission on water charges.

Special provisions for those on group water schemes will also form part of the package voted on in the Dil, sources say.

But TDs and senators remain split on key issues, including whether the metering programme should be continued.

With the Dil due to debate the issue of water charges next month, the work of the committee has now entered its most critical phase.

There is growing unease within Government that failure to strike an agreement on the issue could precipitate a general election.

While no measures have been agreed, various sources say they believe the issue of refunds has emerged as one of the least contentious issues.

The committee has now sought an option paper in relation to how best to reimburse the one million households that have paid their bills.

It's estimated that refunds will cost the State in the region of 100m.

Given the Dil arithmetic, the overall fate of water charges will depend on whether Fine Gael and Fianna Fil can reach a "compromise", according to senior sources in both parties.

Fine Gael remains in favour of a "modest charge" for households and has said the recommendation by the expert commission that the State becomes the main customer of Irish Water, rather than the household, is doable.

But Fianna Fil is coming under pressure to soften its position, which has changed on several occasions already.

In its submission to the expert commission, the party proposes the abolition of charges and the funding of the water system through general taxation.

Link:

Committee expected to recommend 100m water charges refunds to those who have paid up - Irish Independent

21 Apr 2016, 5:50 p.m.

A Labor government would accept the decision of the Fair Work Commission on Sunday penalty rates, even if the commission opts to reduce them, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten says.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten told 3AW's Neil Mitchell that while Sunday penalty rates should not be cut "just like that", he would accept the independent tribunal's decision on the issue.

ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver says any cut to penalty rates would be a "crippling blow" for hundreds of workers. Photo: Dominic Lorrimer

Employment Employment Michaelia Cash seized on the comments. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

A Labor government would accept the decision of the Fair Work Commission on Sunday penalty rates, even if the commission opts to reduce them, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten says.

Mr Shorten's commentscame as reports suggested the commissioncould hand down its decisionby July, potentiallylobbing it into the middle of a knife-edge election campaign.

The concession would appear to undermineLabor's ability to usepenalty rates as a political weapon, in which the Coalition is accused of plotting to cut penalty ratesand Labor is cast as their protector.It also threatens to put Labor at odds with its key union backers, who have pledged to fight any adverse decision.

Fair Work is reviewing penalty rates forseven retail and hospitalityawards, and will evaluatedemands by employers to bring Sunday rates down to Saturday levels.Asked on Melbourne's 3AWwhether a Labor government would accept the commission's decision, Mr Shorten said: "Yes."

"I've said I'll accept the independent tribunal," he said. WhileSunday rates should not be cut "just like that", it was ultimately up to the commission, he said.

"I've got my opinion. At the end of the day though, the way minimum wages get set in this country is throughevidence, it's through the submissions of workers, their representatives and employers," Mr Shorten said.

The Coalition seized on theremarks, with Employment Minister Michaelia Cash labelling Labor's campaign on penalty rates a "sham", and asserting the ALP's position was now the same as the Coalition's.

However, Labor made a submission to the commissiondefending the current system of penalty rates, while senior members of the Coalition have openly entertained the idea of cuts. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has described the Sunday allowances as a quirk of history that would inevitably be done away with. Under Tony Abbott, the government referred the matter to the Productivity Commission, which in December recommended the FWC reduce Sundaypenalty rates.

The Greens immediately sought to draw a distinction with Labor, promising to consider legislation that would get around any decision to cut penalty rates.

"The Greens will wait to see the commission's ruling, however we will not rule out legislating," employment spokesman Adam Bandt said.

As recently as last week, the country's biggest unions were calling on the government to guarantee penalty rates would go untouched. United Voice national secretary Jo-anne Schofield warned:"If the Prime Minister does not commit to retain weekend pay rates, workers will ramp up campaigning on this issue in marginal seats across the country."

On Thursday, Ms Schofield would not be drawn on Mr Shorten's comments but said the "critical issue" was that Labor openly supported penalty rates while the Coalition did not.

Australian Council of Trade Unions secretary Dave Oliver said it was "difficult to overstate the importance of penalty rates" and that any cut would be "a crippling blow" for hundreds of thousands of workers. TheACTU would "explore all its options" if the commission decidedto cut penalty rates, he said.

Polls show penalty rates are overwhelmingly popular with voters. Evenin conservative Coalition seats, support for maintaining or increasing Sunday penalty rates exceeds 70 per cent, according to recent research.

Mr Shorten compared his non-interventionstance to the government's recent abolition of the independent Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, which published a controversial rulingon minimum pay rates for owner-driver truckies."When the government didn't like what the tribunal did, they abolished it," Mr Shorten said.

Labor sees industrial relations as one of its electoral strengths, particularly since the successful 2007 campaign against WorkChoices. With a July 2 election looming, the commission's decision may feed into a broader debateabout workers' interests and union corruption.

The benchmark turnaround time for Fair Work to hand down its decision is three months from the date of the final hearing, which would mean about the middle of July. But it could come earlier or later, Fairfax Media understands.

Follow us on Twitter

The story Labor won't fight any Fair Work Commission decision to cut Sunday penalty rates: Bill Shorten first appeared on The Sydney Morning Herald.

See the original post here:

Labor won't fight any Fair Work Commission decision to cut Sunday penalty rates: Bill Shorten - Western Advocate

It's quite probable that never in the history of sport anywhere in the world have such relatively minor proposals for competition structure change received so much attention.

Replacing the All-Ireland football quarter-finals with a round-robin series, bringing forward the final to August and playing extra-time in all Championship games that finish level except provincial and All-Ireland deciders isn't exactly revolutionary stuff, yet it has dominated GAA discussion for weeks.

Today, the pros and cons will be batted around Croke Park for quite some time, gathering heat and emotion as they go, before being voted on by Congress. Whatever the outcome, it's hard to believe it will have much overall impact.

If the round-robin plan is accepted against wishes of the Gaelic Players' Association (GPA) and the Club Players' Association (CPA), accusations will fly in all directions.

The popular line will be how the 'suits' ignored the wishes of the players, even if at this stage neither the inter-county nor club population have any plans of their own on the table. And if the motion is defeated, it will be another serious setback for Central Council, the body responsible for running the GAA on a day-to-day basis.

Rejected

Last year, Central Council was forced to withdraw a motion on Championship reform on the night before Congress after being told that players in Division 4 counties would boycott a suggested 'secondary' championship.

So if Central Council were to have another proposal rejected this year, it would raise the logical question: how and why is the second highest authority after Congress so out of touch with the membership?

Not that sensitivities should matter on any side of the argument. Besides, it's all largely irrelevant what happens today.

Replace the quarter-finals with a round-robin? Big deal. Anyway, it only applies to eight counties in any year.

Bring forward the All-Ireland finals? Okay, so the GAA takes a promotional hit in September but it can easily survive that.

Play extra-time in most Championship games in order to avoid the disruption caused to fixtures schedules by replays? It will cost provincial councils revenue over a period of time but since replays cannot be factored into their budgets anyway, it's not a big issue.

The reality is that while these three motions are being debated, every delegate knows that it's all peripheral to the real problem, one caused by the provincial championships.

Congress can add or subtract to fixtures as they wish, squeeze the Championship programme until it's squealing for mercy and tweak the system every year, but it still won't make any difference to the underlying problem.

For as long as the provincial championships remain as the foundation for the All-Ireland Championship, there were always be uncertainty over fixtures and unfairness in the format.

And in ten - and probably 20 - years' time Congress will still be trying to correct a flawed system,

You might think all of that would be a sufficiently good reason for the GAA to address the fundamental question: why aren't we dealing with the root cause of the problem rather than skirting around the edges?

Just as it's pointless polishing out the scratch marks on an old car if the engine is blown, it's futile trying to balance the All-Ireland Championship in everyone's interest without removing the provincials.

This weekend 16 games will be played in the Allianz League, featuring action between counties whose performances decide they level at which they operate. It will continue until April when placings for next year will be decided by the tables.

It's orderly and logical, with all counties playing on the same weekend at a level appropriate to their current talents.

It's the secondary competition, yet when the main event comes along in summer, order and logic is dispensed with in favour a system based on geography. Even then, it's lopsided, with different numbers in each province.

If that were changed, many of the difficulties that led to the launch of the CPA could be sorted out quite easily. Instead of being dictated to by uneven provincial structures, a whole range of Championship options would become available.

Most of all, the programme could be laid out clearly and concisely, with the only possible variations arising for counties who progressed to the latter stages of the All-Ireland race. It's so obvious that it defies logic why there hasn't been any meaningful debate on starting with a blank page and devising a number of possible formats.

Instead, every review of the Championship works off the premise that the provincial championships are sacrosanct, even if that's patently not the case any more in Leinster hurling, which hosts outsiders.

Removing the provincials as the starting point for the All-Ireland Championships should not mean the abolition of provincial councils. That fear underpins the thinking in many counties - hence the reluctance to concede anything.

There will always be a need for regional structures to administer the huge amount of work that goes on away from Croke Park, but why should that have anything to do with Championship formats?

Funding

Obviously, if provincial championships, complete with the various councils retaining their own income, were abolished as part of the All-Ireland Championship, the entire GAA funding model would have to change.

Would that be such a bad thing? Surely not. In fact, it would lead to a fairer distribution of finance, carefully calibrated to suit particular requirements.

What's urgently needed now is really radical thinking across all spheres of GAA activity, not the tinkering that will go on today.

Club players are on the verge of mutiny, a situation brought about not by too much inter-county activity but by shambolic competition structures. Inter-county players, through the GPA, oppose much but propose little about how the championships should be run.

Granted, their plan for a continuation of the provincial championships, followed by a full-blown Champions League-style All-Ireland series, was rejected by Central Council in late 2015 but surely that should not be the end of their deliberations.

All sides have a responsibility to continue offering possible solutions to a problem where contagion has spread to club activity.

The trouble is that while everyone wants to tidy the room, they ignore the large provincial elephant that's causing the mess in the first place. It's time he was whooshed out the door.

Irish Independent

The rest is here:

Abolishing provincial championships only way to cure fixture ... - Irish Independent

In his Feb. 4 column, Darrell Berkheimer used an interesting argument to support the need for abortion namely that making abortions an exception rather than a rule would lead to increase costs to care for the mothers and the children who resulted from the births. He suggested that the public was not ready to pay the extra costs that would result.

I wonder if Mr. Berkheimer, had he lived in the early 1800s, would have justified slavery on the basis that it would cost the slave masters too much to give up slaves, the public would be forced to support the now-freed slaves, and the cost of paying decent wages to the laborers would increase the cost of clothing to the consumers. Those arguments were no doubt made at that time, and those reasons are as false in supporting slavery as the reasons Mr. Berkheimer used to support the abortion mind-set that has pervaded our culture since Roe v. Wade?

Now in the early 21st century, most of us in the United States consider that slavery was, and still is, an evil. Many of us believe that the killing of live fetuses for convenience is just as much an evil as slavery. Women, who have been nurturing life for thousands of years, have justified this evil by calling it "a woman's right to choose." A woman certainly has a right to choose, but shouldn't that be done prior to engaging in sexual intercourse? And what about the female fetus, is she granted the same right to choose? I will admit that there are exceptional circumstances where abortion might be considered, but I believe we need to change the mind-set that abortions should be the rule, not the exception.

Along with most Christians, I believe that life begins at conception. I hear explanations by abortion supporters that life only starts when the fetus is viable. Is the fetus viable (able to live without its mother) within the first two years? I don't think so. Should we then be able to kill babies as well? Didn't we just put Dr. Kermit Gosnell in prison in 2013 as a serial baby killer for executing babies immediately after birth? Why is that wrong if we allow fetuses to be killed just a few months earlier?

A second step is to change the publics mind-set to recognize that abortion is actually murder, and is unacceptable to educated, reasonable people.

What is the solution? Just as the abolition of slavery required a major change to our thought processes and our economic structures, the abolition of abortions as generally accepted procedures requires the same changes. We need to continue to educate boys and girls concerning the dangers of unprotected sex, one of which is an unwanted baby.

A second step is to change the public's mind-set to recognize that "abortion" is actually "murder," and is unacceptable to educated, reasonable people. As long as we split hairs about when a fetus is viable in order to condone the killing of living human beings, aren't we acting in the same way that slave owners did when they claimed that slaves were not really human beings?

A third step is to make adoptions more accessible to more people who actually want to have children. We place high costs and a lot of hoops to jump through as part of our adoption process. We certainly need to screen parents before putting other's unwanted babies in their hands, but we have made it exceedingly difficult in the U.S. for would-be parents to become real parents.

A fourth step is to shift the funding of abortions to the funding of adoptions and to the care of unwanted children who may not be adopted. I don't want my taxes to fund abortions, but I am willing that those taxes be used to facilitate the care of unwanted children and mothers who need a helping hand.

As an aside: why am I against the support of Planned Parenthood? While it claims that only 3 percent of its "procedures" include abortions, that amounts to one-third to one-half of all the abortions performed in the United States. Planned Parenthood counts "services," not the time spent in providing those services. Since many of their "services" involve handing out condoms and referring women for mammograms, I believe the manpower spent handling abortions is far higher than 3 percent of the total work effort.

It's time for all of us to recognize an evil in our world and eliminate it in the 21st century, as the abolitionists did for slavery in the 19th century!

Jim Goetsch lives in Lake of the Pines.

See more here:

Jim Goetsch: Abolition of abortions means changing the way we think - The Union of Grass Valley

I first met Cinderria, an 18-year-old woman of color, in a library in Downtown Madison. She approached the table marked Voter ID Assistance and explained that with the 2016 presidential primary only a few months away, and despite several trips to the DMV, she still didnt have a valid ID as mandated by Wisconsins strict new laws. It turned out she needed a Social Security card but wasnt sure how to obtain one.

Proponents of voter ID laws dont want to acknowledge that Cinderrias case is far from unusual. Experts project that in Wisconsin alone, 300,000 eligible voters lack the ID necessary to cast a ballot. Across the country, 32 states have some form of voter ID law, creating a crisis of disenfranchisement not seen since the civil rights era.

These ID laws dont touch all groups equally: Voters of color, like Cinderria, are hit hardest. The elderly, students and low-income voters also are disproportionately affected. (A new study published in the Journal of Politics, for instance, found that strict ID laws lower African-American, Latino, Asian-American and multiracial American turnout.)

States that have implemented voter ID laws have shown little to no interest in helping their citizens comply. And the advocacy organizations that oppose these laws have few resources for direct voter assistance. Instead, groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union have focused on challenging voter ID mandates in court. Thats essential, but its not enough. As court battles proceed, we must acknowledge our collective obligation to voters like Cinderria by investing in on-the-ground, in-person support.

Before the 2016 election, a group of us in Madison recognized the problem and got to work, partnering with local organizations such as the League of Women Voters and NAACP. As one coalition, we collaborated with social service agencies, churches, food pantries, employers, schools and election administrators.

Outreach continued through the November election and is ongoing for spring elections. But tons of work is left to do in Madison, to say nothing of the state or nation as a whole.

The right to vote is not denied only in large volume. Our democracy deteriorates every single time an older voter cant find transportation to a distant DMV, and every single time a working mother cant afford the fees associated with redundant paperwork to prove her citizenship.

Having worked one-on-one with would-be voters, a nefarious truth about these laws has become clear to me. Not only do the requirements hamper individuals in the short term, they also can send a long-term signal to historically disenfranchised communities that theyre not invited into their countrys democratic process a feeling all too familiar to those who were born before the abolition of Jim Crow.

We cannot return to the era of literacy tests and poll taxes. Its crucial all voters are offered help because they must not lose the belief their vote is precious and their participation essential to our democracy. These voters are our neighbors, our co-workers and, at the most basic level, our fellow citizens. Their rights are as valuable as those of any big-spending campaign donor.

Despite repeated assurances from voter ID proponents that these laws arent discriminatory and are easy to comply with, lived experience proves the opposite.

Cinderria was finally able to obtain an ID, but only weeks after we first met. I traveled with her to the DMV to make sure nothing went wrong.

Claudelle, a voter in his 60s whose mother mistakenly spelled his name Clardelle on his birth certificate, was refused an ID with his correct name twice.

On a trip to the DMV with a 34-year-old named Zack, we were given inaccurate information on how to receive a free ID to vote. A recording of that interaction prompted a federal judge to order retraining of DMV workers across Wisconsin.

The voters affected by these laws who, again, are more likely to be low-income, transient and elderly often are unreachable through social media campaigns or other online communication. That makes in-person outreach indispensable.

A young Madison woman named Treasure, for instance, was unable to obtain an ID until neighborhood canvassers knocked on her door and gave her accurate information and assistance.

Such work is not an admission that voter ID laws arent worth fighting. They are. It represents, rather, a commitment to fight suppression at every level. We have no choice but to organize, lace up our shoes and meet would-be voters where they live and work.

McGrath, of Madison, is an attorney, voting rights advocate and organizer: @votermolly and votermolly.com.

Link:

Molly J. McGrath: Fight ID laws one voter at a time - Madison.com

The mayor made it official this week. "Fred Douglas Park" will be renamed.

Nearly 80 years ago, the City of Nashville opened a new park in East Nashville. For many years, this park has gone by the name of Fred Douglas Park. Many have wondered who the park was named after, and whether or not it was actually named after abolitionist leader Frederick Douglass.

Thanks to the work of local historians, journalists, and curious Nashvillians, evidence has come to light, including an old Tennessean article, indicating that the park was indeed originally named after Frederick Douglass.

We dont know exactly why or how the name evolved into Fred Douglas Park. It may have been a clerical error, or a more sinister effort by segregationists who wanted to take away a park named after a civil rights hero who fought for the abolition of slavery.

This is really great news.

We have many annoying typos around town that weve codified into things Dickenson Meetinghouse Pike is now Dickerson Pike and the road that leads to the spot where the Clee brothers used to run the ferry, literally, Cleess Ferry Road, at some point became Cleeces Ferry Road because we dont like apostrophes or logic. Give us another hundred years and that road will probably be Cleecesesecessesses Ferry Road. And back in the day people were looser with the spelling of their names, hence why we have Eatons Creek Road and the old Heaton Station, even though theyre named for the same dude, who did, indeed, seem to have an H when he felt like it and not when he didnt.

But the Heaton/Eaton issue does preserve the history of the name. Ive seen plenty of old documents where hes referred to either way. Someone looking into the issue will be led to interesting knowledge about Nashville. The Cleess/Cleeces situation is annoying, but if you say the name of the road out loud, you can hear what happened there. And there are so few Clees in Nashville history that its hard to get led very far astray.

I cant speak to the Dickenson/Dickerson situation, but the Dickensons are an old (or a couple of old) Nashville family/families who inherited Travellers Rest, supposedly evicted the dead Polks from Polk Place, got shot by Andrew Jackson, were well-known horse breeders, birthed lawyers and judges, served in the Hayes Administration, and take up a lot of prime real estate at Mt. Olivet. Itd be nice to have the name right, but in the scheme of things, the Dickensons place in Nashville history is secured. They dont need a road to tell people they existed.

Having the name of Fred Douglas Park wrong, though, does distort Nashville history and it promotes a lie over the truth. Fred Douglas Park is just a park named for a guy no one knows. Frederick Douglass Park a black park in a black part of town tells us a lot about Nashville, even if weve spent eighty years pretending we dont know it. It tells us clearly something that is true in Nashvilles history, but is obscured at the same time Nashvilles black communities faced incredibly persecution and constant devaluation by Nashvilles white power structure, Nashvilles black communities have been seen as valuable to the city and worth, to some small extent, keeping happy.

The tension the city has been in for its whole history is that we need and benefit from the contributions of black Nashvillians we as a city have flourished when black Nashvillians have been able to flourish and yet our systemic racism makes us resentful of that fact and compelled to end or downplay that flourishing.

It is weird, with as racist as Nashville was, that we would name a park for Frederick Douglass. It is more surprising that we would do this than it is that some goober would fuck up the name.

But it tells you that even in the 1930s, some portion of white Nashville had made a calculation that it was worth it to the whole city to let black Nashvillians have a park that honored a man many white Nashvillians didnt care for. Obviously, that calculation didnt weigh so heavily in favor of black Nashvillians that we, say, didnt misspell his name for eighty years.

But if we want a clearer picture of the fits and starts Nashville has made to fully recognize black Nashvillians as Nashvillians, period, there can be no more accurate illustration of that fact than that we named a park for Frederick Douglass as is evidenced by that Tennessean story at the time then spent all this time pretending that we didnt and now, even though we all know the truth. it still takes Metro Parks, the city council, and pressure from the mayor to fix a typo.

Dont get me wrong. Im very glad were doing this.

I just hope we take a minute to dwell on the fact that this was a relatively minor thing and its taken this much effort to get it corrected. How much more effort, then, will be needed to fix the major things?

Read the original here:

Frederick Douglass Park: We're Fixing Our Typo! - Nashville Scene

Vice president of the International Longshoremens Association (ILA) Kenneth Riley has called for the abolition of the Waterfront Commission of New York.

He claims it has overstepped its remit to investigate waterfront crime and is now seeking to regulate and reduce dockworker numbers.

Mr Riley told The Loadstara planned protest in Washington DC originally intended for27 February but delayed for a week or so was not something the ILA wanted but was forced to do to address untenable conditions.

He said: The Waterfront Commission was set up to rid the New York waterfront of crime. But now it is overstepping its mandate and is seeking to regulate the docks and cull the workforce.

In one incident, Mr Riley said, commission staff had refused a work permit for a US military veteran due to potential links to crime.

This is not acceptable, he said. That young man subsequently went on to work for the New Jersey Highway Department as a highway patrolman youre telling me that he can work for a body protecting people but cannot work on the docks?

The US Maritime Alliance (USMX) said the threat of a coastwide work stoppage was disturbing, and added that the ILA-USMX Master Contract forbade any unilateral work stoppage by the dockworkers union.

If the ILA engages in any unilateral walkout, USMX will enforce the contractual rights of its members to the fullest, said the USMX, urging the ILA to remain in compliance with the contract.

Mr Riley said the protest had been postponed to educate rank and file members, as well as industry stakeholders, on the problems faced by dockworkers, but said a new date would be announced within the week and the protest would proceed if the commission remained in place.

We will bus our members up to Washington to protest while Congress is in session, so those in government that want to help can come and show their support for our cause, he said.

Everyone agrees that in New York, more than 700 waterfront workers and 120 clerical staff are needed for the safe and effective running of the port.

The ILA and USMX held informal contract discussions last week to discuss the current master contract, which is due to expire in September 2018, and both sides described the discussions as productive and fruitful.

The meeting followed a two-day workshop when leaders from ILA locals at Atlantic and Gulf Coast ports examined both the contract and their respective local bargaining agreements.

The ILA and USMX are confident that holding informal contract discussions 19 months prior to expirationdemonstrates the commitment each side has to maintaining stability and growth at all ports covered by the agreement, the statement added.

However, Mr Riley, who also presides over the ILA Local 1422 Charleston South Carolina, said the problems faced by workers in New York would spread out across other US east and Gulf coast ports.

What happens in New York sets a precedent for the rest of the community, which is why we are building solidarity and promising this protest, he added.

Asked by The Loadstar if ILA president Harold Daggett had given his support to the planned protest, Mr Riley said that they had not consulted the national branch of the ILA, noting that this was a rank and file decision.

His comments came during a visit to European ports, including Algeciras, to build solidarity with Spanish longshore workers protesting against the Spanish governments decision to alter legislation, which could threaten 6,500 jobs.

He was accompanied by ILA executive vice president Dennis Daggett, who told Spanish dockworkers to not take even one step back.

The ILA is with you all the way, he added.

The Waterfront Commission was set up in 1953 to investigated reputed mob ties to the port of New York and New Jersey. In 2008, charges dating back more than three decades, including racketeering, conspiracy and extortion, were brought against leaders of the Gambino crime family, their associates and union officials.

The following year, New York state inspector general Joseph Fisch issued a report after a two-year investigation of the Waterfront Commission, which detailed extensive illegal, corrupt and unethical behaviour among staff.

The reports release resulted in many commission executives losing their jobs, including New Jersey commissioner Michael Madonna.

View post:

New York dockers' union calls for abolition of crime-busting Waterfront Commission - The Loadstar

Molly J. McGrath, Tribune News Service 11:00 a.m. ET Feb. 23, 2017

In this Nov. 4, 2016, photo, voters wait in line to cast ballots at an early polling site in San Antonio. Your parents were right: Math really does matter. After all of the tumult and tedium of a long, ugly presidential campaign, Election Day is all about which candidate can win enough states to get to 270 electoral votes.(AP Photo/Eric Gay)(Photo: Eric Gay / AP)

I first met Cinderria, an 18-year-old woman of color, in a library in downtown Madison, Wis. She approached the table marked "Voter ID Assistance" and explained that with the 2016 presidential primary only a few months away, and despite several trips to the DMV, she still didn't have a valid ID as mandated by Wisconsin's strict new laws. It turned out she needed a Social Security card but wasn't sure how to obtain one.

Proponents of voter ID laws don't want to acknowledge that Cinderria's case is far from unusual. Experts project that in Wisconsin alone, 300,000 eligible voters lack the ID necessary to cast a ballot. Across the country, 32 states have some form of voter ID law, creating a crisis of disenfranchisement not seen since the civil rights era. These ID laws don't touch all groups equally: Voters of color, like Cinderria, are hit hardest. The elderly, students and low-income voters also are disproportionately affected. (A new study published in the Journal of Politics, for instance, found that strict ID laws lower African-American, Latino, Asian-American and multiracial American turnout.)

States that have implemented voter ID laws have shown little to no interest in helping their citizens comply. And the advocacy organizations that oppose these laws have few resources for direct voter assistance. Instead, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union have focused on challenging voter ID mandates in court. That's essential, but it's not enough. As court battles proceed, we must acknowledge our collective obligation to voters like Cinderria by investing in on-the-ground, in-person support.

Before the 2016 election, a group of us in Madison recognized the problem and got to work, partnering with local organizations like the League of Women Voters and NAACP. As one coalition, we collaborated with social service agencies, churches, food pantries, employers, schools and election administrators. Outreach continued through the November election and is ongoing for spring elections. But there's tons of work left to do in Madison, to say nothing of the state or nation as a whole.

The right to vote is not denied only in large volume. Our democracy deteriorates every single time an older voter can't find transportation to a distant DMV, and every single time a working mother can't afford the fees associated with redundant paperwork to prove her citizenship.

Having worked one-on-one with would-be voters, a nefarious truth about these laws has become clear to me. Not only do the requirements hamper individuals in the short term, they also can send a long-term signal to historically disenfranchised communities that they're not "invited" into their country's democratic process a feeling all too familiar to those who were born before the abolition of Jim Crow.

We cannot return to the era of literacy tests and poll taxes. It's crucial that all voters are offered help because they must not lose the belief that their vote is precious and their participation essential to our democracy. These voters are our neighbors, our co-workers and, at the most basic level, our fellow citizens. Their rights are as valuable as those of any big-spending campaign donor.

Despite repeated assurances from voter ID proponents that these laws aren't discriminatory and are easy to comply with, lived experience proves the opposite.

Cinderria was finally able to obtain an ID, but only weeks after we first met; I traveled with her to the DMV to make sure nothing went wrong. Claudelle, a voter in his 60s whose mother mistakenly spelled his name "Clardelle" on his birth certificate, was refused an ID with his correct name twice. On a trip to the DMV with a 34-year-old named Zack, we were given inaccurate information on how to receive a free ID to vote. A recording of that interaction prompted a federal judge to order retraining of DMV workers across Wisconsin.

The voters affected by these laws who, again, are more likely to be low-income, transient and elderly often are unreachable through social media campaigns or other online communication. That makes in-person outreach indispensable. A young Madison woman named Treasure, for instance, was unable to obtain an ID until neighborhood canvassers knocked on her door and gave her accurate information and assistance.

Such work is not an admission that voter ID laws aren't worth fighting; they are. It represents, rather, a commitment to fight suppression at every level. We have no choice but to organize, lace up our shoes and meet would-be voters where they live and work.

Molly J. McGrath is an attorney, voting rights advocate and organizer. She can be found @votermolly or votermolly.com.

Read or Share this story: http://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/opinion/columnists/2017/02/23/oped-fight-id-laws-one-voter-time/98297612/

Here is the original post:

Oped: Fight ID laws one voter at a time - York Dispatch