Category Archives: Wage Slavery

Eliminating the subminimum tipped wage would also eliminate a shameful relic of slavery. Tipping became prevalent in the United States after the Civil War, when restaurants and railway companies embraced the practice because it meant they didnt have to pay wages to recently freed slaves.

That past hangs heavily over many Black workers.

Lets face it, Wallace-Gobern told Inequality.org, 50 years after President Lyndon B. Johnson declared a war on poverty, Black people in the South still contend with economic hardships, persistent poverty, and the enduring legacy of slavery. We believe that in order for there to be justice for all workers, we must expand the capacity of Black workers, and for us that means that our work has to be concentrated in the South.

Currently based in Raleigh, North Carolina, Wallace-Gobern began her organizing work in Chicago as a student at Loyola University. Her work on a range of racial justice issues, from combatting racist stereotypes and attacks on Black students to fighting for Black professors to receive tenure, caught the eye of labor movement recruiters. When they offered her a job, she said she would only do it if she could organize Black people and Black women in particular.

Black workers are the canaries in the economic coalmine of our country, Wallace-Gobern told Inequality.org. When the canary died, that was a signal that the conditions were bad for the miners. Thats the role Black workers play. If you improve their working conditions, that will lift all workers.

She became the first executive director of National Black Worker Center Project three years ago, after stints with the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union (a predecessor of UNITE HERE), the AFL-CIOs Historical Black College Recruitment program, and the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions.

One Fair Wage rally for a $15 minimum wage for all U.S. workers, Feb. 8, 2021. Credit: Rebekah Entralgo.

Wallace-Goberns aim now is to strengthen the capacity of Black worker centers to win progressive policies like minimum wage increases, build up a cadre of Civil Rights 2.0 organizers, and advance a Southern strategy on racial justice and democratic freedoms.

The challenges are many. Particularly in the south, worker advocates are up against anti-union right to work laws and pre-emption restrictions that block cities from improving labor protections at the local level.

But Wallace-Gobern is optimistic about the future.

Young people are not turning their back on the legacy of the civil rights movement, but they are ready to lead if we step aside and give them space, she remarked. I welcome the opportunity for them to stand on our shoulders and take us to heights that I and my grandparents could never imagine.

Read more:

Ending the Subminimum Tipped Wage Is a Step Towards Building Black Worker Power - Inequality.org

Rigor and Honesty

To the Editor,

The minimum wage debate is one economists and social scientists have grappled with for decades. It is ongoing, and the labor economists who lead the research charge continue to draw conclusions often at odds with one another. What is aligned, are the intentions of those doing this important work seek truth to motivate social policy.

In the Beacon Hill Times recent editorial Minimum Wage Should be $15, I was disappointedthat none of the deep and pertinentquestions on the matter were mentioned!

Might doubling the minimumwage lead firms to respond by reducing their workforce? I for one was disappointedto see the Whole Foods on Cambridge Street, last week, reconfigure their small-item check-out lines to self-check-out.

Should the minimum wage be $15 everywhere? $15 goes a lot further in Mobile AL thanBrookline MA. Might we expect employment effects to be exacerbatedin low COL regions?

Could such a sudden and sharp broad-stroke increase in minimum wage lead to inflationary effects that reduce the real wealth gain from those affected under the policy in question? What second-order policies might we consider invoking to avoid mere nominal gains, and ensure the benefit results in actual increased buying power?

Instead, the editorial piece reads like ideological fodder for a left-of-center audience who seeks local consensus with their own priors. It needlessly provokes divisive Trump-isms (Make America Great Again) that serve only to center policy discourse more around political performance and gesturing, and less around the productive activity of careful reasoning via conversation.

This sentence I took the greatest exception to: it is below the dignity of anyone to work for wages that amount to not much better than slave labor. This is exceptionally dismissive of how tortuous and devastating chattel slavery was in the United States. There remains much to be done to give black Americans greater access to economic opportunity, something I am actively involved with in the Bostonareabut to liken living on minimum wage in America to enslavement!? That is beyond. There remain 40 million people enslaved globally, and I assure you they would give arm and leg to live on minimum wage incomes in the US. Moreover, low-income Americans are better off than even most of the non-enslaved global population. Please, lets have this conversation, but can we do so with rigor and honesty?

Leo Hsia

More here:

Letter to the Editor - Beacon Hill Times

Attack my data, attack my analysis, but attack me? You dont know me, said Frank Gunter, professor of Economics, regarding responses to his video, titled Kitchen Table Talks 3.

Every quarter, Gunter writes a 700 to 900 word op-ed. Lehigh Universitys College of Business asked him to turn his most recent op-ed,Three Myths About Poverty, into a short video, prompting the third table talk of Gunters video series.

The video, which was posted on YouTube by Lehigh University College of Business on Jan. 29, has since been taken down from the schools channel due to significant backlash.

Lehighs media relations director Lori Friedman said the video was taken down to allow time for the concerns to be reviewed and to invite those in the Lehigh academic community to participate in the conversation.

As an academic institution, we welcome public discourse and discussion. We affirm the right of the faculty, as well as other members of the community, to express their viewpoints and engage in a respectful and open exchange of ideas, Friedman said.

Since the video was posted, both Gunters op-ed and his character have received hundreds of critical comments, most of which have been posted in comment sections on student-run Instagram accounts such as @dearpwi, @lehighstudentsforblm, and @dearlehigh.

In his op-ed and the video, Gunter attempted to debunk three myths concerning povertythat poverty is mostly a matter of race, poverty is a generational curse, and the poor have no agency.

The general belief is that if youre born into a poor family, God help you, there is nothing that can be done. But it turns out the reality is different, Gunter said in an interview with The Brown and White. What I was hoping the average reader would read and say is that cant be right, look into it, then discover that the facts are true and the analysis I provided is plausible. Maybe it would change their thinking about these important issues.

Gunters first conclusion of the video was that poverty is not mostly a product of race.

In 1940, it was estimated that 87 percent of black families lived in poverty. In 2019 most Blacks were not poor. Only 18.8 percent of Blacks were below the poverty line. In other words, four-fifths, over 80 percent of African Americans were not poor. Secondly, most poor were not Black in 2019, only 24 percent. The reality is most Blacks are not poor and most poor are not Black, Gunter said in the video.

Sara Boyd, 22, took issue with his conclusion.

Boyd said the data Gutner provided said most poor people are not Black and most Black people are not poor, but that this does not imply that poverty and race are unrelated.

Its lazy economics. Its incomplete research, Boyd said.

Lehigh Students for BLM, @lehighstudentsforBLM on Instagram, posted an infographic to contextualize Gunters claims.

The post laid out a more in depth statistical analysis of the US population by race in attempts to better debunk Gunters claims.

In response, Gunter said he stands by his statement that poverty is not mostly a matter of race.

Are (Black people) disproportionately represented? Absolutely, but what if we looked at the 2019 data and the numbers were reversed? What if we found that 80 percent of Blacks were below the poverty line and three-fourths of the poor in America were African American, Gunter asked. What would be the policy implication? If that was what the data found, I would say we have a severe racial problem in this country that is as bad as it was during Jim Crow in the 1930s and 1940s, but what conclusions can be made with the information we have, that 18.8 percent of Blacks are poor and 24 percent of the poor are Black? There is probably a racial element there, but race cant be the whole answer because the majority of the poor are white.

Gunters next conclusion of the video was that poverty is not a generational curse. To dispel this myth, Gunter explained a study that divided America into quintiles of income and explained trends in their quintile mobility.

Even in a period of time as short as three years, 31 percent of the persons who were in the lowest quintile are in a higher quintile now. Escaped from poverty. Over 10 years58 percent have escaped from poverty, Gunter said in the video. 84 percent of Americans have a higher income than their parentsthe myth is not true. Poverty is not a generational trap.

The @lehighstudentsforblm post said The rate of absolute mobility for people born in 1940 was 90 percent. For people born in 1984, this figure has dropped to 50 percent, indicating absolute mobility in America is not what it used to be.

In response, Gunter said he thinks that is true, however he believes the degree of remaining mobility is still substantial and has policy implications.

In the video, Gunter explained that even if someone is born impoverished, there are three steps one can take to nearly eliminate their chances of being impoverished as an adult: graduate from high school, work full time even if you are earning minimum wage, and do not get married until 21 while also not having children until you are married.

If you follow these three rules, according to the Brookings institute, you only have a 2 percent chance of being poor as an adult, Gunter said in the video.

Kate Luther, 22, is concerned with Gunters points about poverty being escapable and the three choices because she said it makes being poor sound like a simple choice.

Luther said Gunters points do not consider the obstacles one can face in life.

You never know, Luther said. Sometimes kids have to drop out of high school because something happened to their family and then they have to work to take care of them.

However, Gunter explained that he meant this to be motivational.

I think a lot of kids growing up in poor families might say Really, all I have to do is struggle through graduation, even though school stinks, and start working at a job, even though it starts out minimum wage and the boss hates me, and I love the girl, but wont get married until 21 or have kids until we are married, then I will be able to avoid the poverty that I see around me? Gunter said. Some young people might find that an influential force.

Boyd discovered this video shortly after it was posted and her initial reaction was that the overall data was cherry picked.

Boyd said she feels Gunters views were responsible for the type of data he used in the video.

When you have a worldview and look for data that informs it, instead of looking for data to inform your worldview, youre not actually doing research, youre not doing critical thinking, youre cherry picking dataeven when its not in line with the facts, Boyd said. I could not get away with this in any of my classes.

Luther and Boyd found Gunters language throughout the video particularly insensitive.

His use of the word Blacks as a noun was pretty much in line with the datedness of the data he was citing, Boyd said. It was very clear both his views on poverty and race and how to engage in research are stuck in a previous century that have no place here now.

Meanwhile, Garret Anderson,21, secretary of Lehigh College Republicans, said Everyone was so concerned about his wording and not what he was trying to say, thats problematic to me.

Gunter said he has done his research on which terms to use.

If you search to find out what is the preferred reference to African Americans, its almost a tie among the African American community, whether they prefer to be referred to as African Americans or as Blacksone of the style references I use in my book writing treats the two as alternatives, Gunter said. I think it is a matter of courtesy you are to refer to someone in the way they wish to be referred.

Gunter expected normal criticism to his op-ed, but not criticism of his character.

He said he was surprised that people who didnt know him accused him of being racist.

That is an insult now, you only call a person racist if you know 102 percent that they are. You dont read one op-ed that they wrote and say this person says something I dont agree with Im not going to argue with their data, Im not going to argue with their analysis. Im just going to call them a name. Thats surprising, Gunter said.

@dearpwi on Instagram posted the slides from Gunters video with an attached slide at the end that read While I dont endorse slavery, economically, it is genius, suggesting it was said by Gunter.

Gunter said the attached statement associated with him led to a lot of disturbed people, as it should if it were true, but that it was a hoax.

Slavery along with genocide are probably some of the worst actions that can be committed but its also bad economics slavery has been a dead end in economic development. It has destroyed every society that adopted it, Gunter said.

Friedman affirmed the inaccuracies of these claims.

The quote has beenfalsely attributed to Professor Gunter. Professor Gunter denies having made such astatement, Friedman said. A 2019 inquiry by Lehighs Equal Opportunity Compliance Coordinator into the origin of the quote, which was posted to an Instagram account that same year, found no evidence supporting the claim that thestatementwas made by Professor Gunter.

Because of controversy, Lehigh College of Business issued a statement to explain the motive behind the video.

Despite this statement, Boyd does not think Lehigh truly cares about an intellectual discourse.

Boyd was specifically bothered by the College of Business choice to delete comments that criticized Gunter and highlighted inaccuracies in his statements.

Marietta Sisca, 23, vice president of the Lehigh College Republicans, believes the anger toward Gunter in these comment sections is unnecessary and will do harm.

The outrage and ad hominem attacks against Professor Gunter dont address the body of his argument specifically talking about poverty, Sisca said. We cant have a civil discussion about this important and interesting issue, including the aspect of race, by silencing an economics professor trying to bring more complex aspects of the topic to light.

Gunter emphasized that there should be a meaningful dialogue.

The purpose of a university is to have people look at old things in new ways or things that nobody has ever seen before. Are you going to upset people? Of course you are, Gunter said. The whole purpose of the university is to have some really great women and really great men looking at these things and saying the truth as they see it, even if the world is offended by the truth.

See the original post:

Economics professor faces criticism over op-ed titled "Three Myths About Poverty" - The Brown and White

Displaying the thin blue line flag as a means of showing support for the police is under increased scrutiny due to the flags adoption by white supremacist groups, like those involved in the violent insurrection at the capitol on Jan. 6, and the related use of the flag as a statement of opposition to the Black Lives Matter movement.

I personally believe that events over the last four years have deeply and irrevocably connected the flag to racist bigotry and support for the use of state violence against racial minorities in the United States. In addition, I also believe that the iconography of the flag itself is deeply problematic. In other words, this flag is problematic both because of the beliefs of many groups that display it (e.g. The Proud Boys) and because of the history and attitudes referenced by the flags imagery.

Before the thin blue line was ever displayed on a flag, the idea was used as rhetoric by police departments in the United States to describe themselves as the only force that separates society from chaos. According to a 2020 narrative criminology article tracing the history of the thin blue line flag by Maurice Chammah and Cary Aspinwall of the Marshall Project, the idea of a thin blue line was first used to describe police in the United States in the 1920s and was popularized in the 1950s by Los Angeles Police Chief William H. Parker. It is worth noting that according to Chammah and Aspinwall, Parker was also notorious for making racist remarks. In summary, the origin of the thin blue line as a concept lies in the idea that the police separate ordered society from the chaos of a criminal element, and the idea was popularized by a police chief who was overtly racist. I believe it would be nave to assert that Parkers racism and his promotion of a policing philosophy that divides society into an us deserving protection and a them that does not, are unconnected.

Even without considering its racist origin, the thin blue line mentality is counterproductive to effective policing. Criminals do not exist as an element separate from society, they exist within it, and like all of us hold multifaceted identities. Reducing a human being to a label, to a criminal, makes it easier to wage war against them (or lock them away), but harder to recognize and address the forces within society that promotes criminal behavior. The thin blue line mentality makes law enforcement about punishing criminals, rather than promoting the wellbeing of society.

Of course, given the history of the United States, removing race from the equation is a mistake. When the us versus them of the thin blue line mentality is combined with the bigotry, racial bias and racist policies that have afflicted our nation in general, and our criminal justice system in particular, we get the broken system and tragedy of mass incarceration we see in the United States today. Furthermore, if we engage in an honest dialogue with our national conscience, we become all too aware that the us versus them of the thin blue line mentality was never entirely separate from the us versus them of slavery, the us versus them of Jim Crow or the us versus them of the modern for-profit prison system.

In recent years, the thin blue line flag has, rightly, become controversial because of its adoption by white supremacist groups, but I feel that more attention needs to be paid as to why white supremacists were drawn to the flag in the first place. Considering the full context of its history, the thin blue line on its namesake flag represents the U.S. divided along racial lines where the polices mission to protect and serve is applied to white people and their mission to enforce the law is applied to everyone else. Therefore, the thin blue line flag has no place in a society that claims to extoll the principles of liberty and justice for all.

Editors Note: The North Wind is committed to offering a free and open public forum of ideas, publishing a wide range of viewpoints to accurately represent the NMU student body. This piece is a guest column, written by a Northern Michigan University student, faculty member, or community member. It expresses the personal opinions of the individual writer and does not necessarily reflect the views of the North Wind. The North Wind reserves the right to avoid publishing columns that do not meet the North Winds publication standards. To submit a guest column contact the opinion editor at opinion.northwind@gmail.com with the subject North Wind Guest Column.

Excerpt from:

OpinionThe thin blue line flag, a problematic symbol - North Wind Online

The All-Nite Images from NY, NY, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Back in July 2009, as the nation was emerging from the depths of the Great Recession, the federal minimum wage increased by 70 cents to $7.25 per hour. Today, there it sits, unchanged 12 years later. Initially included in President Joe Bidens $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief plan was a proposal to increase the minimum wage to $15 by 2025. Although it was stripped from the coronavirus relief bill yesterday, with Congress deciding to delay any increase in the minimum wage until after the pandemic subsides, advocates are pressing on with their campaign to raise the wage floor afterward.

A bill to raise the minimum wage has already been introduced by Representative Robert C. Bobby Scott (D-VA) and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Their bill, called the Raise The Wage Act (HR 603), would, if enacted, affect the lives of millions of low-wage workers. With an immediate increase to $9.50 an hour, minimum wages would be stepped up over the next four years. After that, the level would be indexed to the median wage for all workers. The bill also calls for removing the exceptions that have allowed employers to pay tipped workers, those with disabilities, and workers younger than 20 significantly below the minimum standard.

According to an analysis done by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), passing this bill would benefit millions. Across the country, they found that almost 32 million workers, or 21 percent of all workers, would see their earnings grow. And that growth would be significant, totaling $107 billion annually, with the average workers yearly increase coming in at $3,300.

Former Speaker of the House Tip ONeill was said to have observed that all politics are local, and so would be the impact of a minimum wage increase. Because federal law sets a level all employers must meet but does not forbid states from setting their standards higher, 29 states along with the District of Columbia, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands have taken action while the federal government stood still, setting minimum wage standards that vary from $8.75 in West Virginia to $15 in our nations capital.

The state of Illinois has already agreed to raise its minimum wage to $15 in 2025, so whether the federal government acts or not will make little difference. Across the states workforce, EPIs analysis indicates that between two and five percent of their workers would directly benefit from federal action. But, just across the border in Indiana, which has not yet chosen to go above the federal wage floor, as many as 36 percent of all workers would be taking home higher paychecks.

But as EPI reminds us, not all workers are the same; Raising the wages of all workers will help those who have most ignored most:

Low wagesare particularly harmful to Black workers and other workers of color, especially women of color, who make up a disproportionate share of workers who are severely underpaid. This is the result of structural racism and sexism, with an economic system rooted in chattel slavery in which workers of colorand especially women of colorhave been and continue to be shunted into the most underpaid jobs.

Setting a national $15 standard will not totally redress historic inequities, but it would result in dramatic improvements. By 2025, nearly one-third (31 percent) of African Americans and one-quarter (26 percent) of [Latinx] workers are likely to have benefitted. Sixty percent of those benefiting from this federal action would be women.

If Congress acts, frontline workersthose that many have called heroes over the months we have been combatting the pandemicwill also be helped significantly. According to EPIs analysis, among the beneficiaries would be:

The data make a strong case for acting now and making a new minimum wage part of our economic response to COVID-19. A study conducted by economists Anna Gody and Michael Reich, published two years ago by UC Berkeleys Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics and cited by MarketWatch, looked at the effects of 51 minimum wage changes in 750 counties in 45 states. The two economists found that increases in the minimum wage in places where many employees work minimum-wage jobs and are thus particularly affected by changeslead to higher wages without a corresponding reduction in employment or hours. They also note that raising wages in these low-income areas also led to a decline in household and child poverty.

A new 2021 report coauthored by Reich and postdoctoral researcher Jesse Wursten emphasizes how minimum wage increases reduce the racial wealth gap. According to Wursten and Reich, minimum wage changes since 1990 reduced the 2019 racial wage gaps by 12 percent among all workers and 60 percent among less-educated workers. Black women and Black prime-age (ages 2554) workers gain the most.

As with most arguments about complex issues, opponents can also provide data to support their cause. The similarly named Employment Policies Institute, a fiscally conservative nonprofit think tank, cites a study conducted by economists William Even and David Macpherson that took the same information and came out with a very different picture. Raising the minimum wage, they say, will result in two million jobs lost across the United States.

Of course, the economy is dynamic. The actual effects of any minimum wage increase lie in two directions. Certainly, some low-wage jobs will disappear if sub-living-wage jobs are no longer legally permissible. But if 32 million see pay increases averaging over $3,000, that added income results in demand for more goods and serviceswhich leads to new jobs. Often, the number of these new jobs exceeds those lost. Historically, the EPI report points out that, After the federal minimum wage was raised to its highest historical peak in 1968, wages grew and racial earnings gaps closed without constricting employment opportunities for underpaid workers overall.

Amidst the heated debate, we ought not forget that this is no academic dispute. The outcome will shape the lives of millions of workers, essential and otherwise, who have families to feed, rent and medical bills to pay, and who right now are being asked to make that happen while earning sub-poverty-level wages.

On the other hand, those who advocate leaving things as they are or support only modest increases must be pressed to address the real-life problems of millions of people who still perform these essential jobs. Keep in mind too that even $15 an hour is a low wage. As Dean Baker, cofounder and senior economist for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, points out, had the federal minimum wage increased at the same rate as productivity since 1968, it would be over $24 an hour today.

In 1988, David Elwood, in Poor Support: Poverty in The American Family, proposed that we build our policies around a simple concept: If you work, you should not be poor. The gap between rich and poor has grown to historic levels, and the workers we may be unwilling to help are those who have been left behind. Just last month, as reported by Americans for Tax Fairness, we learned that at $4 trillion, the total wealth of all US billionaires today is nearly double the $2.1 trillion in total wealth held by the bottom half of the population, or 165 million Americans. Given the vast wealth at the top, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour is a modest step to take.Martin Levine

Read more:

Federal Minimum Wage Increase Is a Step in Closing the Racial Wealth Gap - Non Profit News - Nonprofit Quarterly

When characters in The Archers discuss feeding their horses, you assume they are talking about taking hay out to their livestock, so it is perplexing to discover that these horses thrive on pizza, cigarettes and beer.

The more casual listener might have formed the impression that divorced builder Philip Moss was a mild-mannered, middle-aged birdwatcher who never says anything interesting. It has been startling to learn that he is in fact an evil gangmaster. Over the past year, Philip has acquired three slaves, who have been working unpaid on his construction projects. In muttered conversations with his son, he refers to them as horses, talking approvingly about one who is placid and easy to manage, and praising another who is strong as an ox.

The speed of Philips transformation from a boringly reliable benign figure, mostly known for his love of extravagant Christmas lights, into a hardened, modern-day slaver who speaks in a dehumanising way about his workers has slightly stretched credibility. But the programmes writers hope that the plot will force its 5 million listeners to examine their own fondness for suspiciously cheap products and cut-price labour.

The slaves are British men in their 20s who were living on the streets and who have various vulnerabilities. One is barely able to read or write and appears to have learning disabilities, while another has spent time in care. Philip seems able to convince himself that, since he is housing them and providing them with limited access to food and the occasional use of a PlayStation, the wage-free arrangement is justifiable. When he decides the men are becoming a liability, he sells them to another slaver, well-spoken Victoria, who drives an expensive fast car. They negotiate over the pedigree of the horses, before Victoria offers to pay just 20 for one of them, because he is damaged goods after a workplace accident.

The decision to make these unpaid workers British, rather than eastern European or south Asian labourers, feels curious. Exploitation of modern-day slaves frequently relies on the victims speaking poor English and knowing that they do not have the correct documentation to be in the UK. They are too frightened to seek help from the police in case this triggers Home Office involvement and deportation. Ive been left wondering whether this plot twist isnt somewhat implausible.

Theresa Mays government did a lot to put modern-day slavery on the political agenda, but mostly by highlighting the Home Offices duty to crack down on people-smuggling. Cynics saw her preoccupation as a way of putting a positive spin on a hostile environment and tighter immigration enforcement. There has been very little discussion of British slaves, beyond the exploitation of young girls in Rotherham and young boys caught up in county lines drug rings.

But The Archers editors have been meticulous with their research, and stress that they have presented a less familiar manifestation of modern slavery in order to educate listeners about a little-understood phenomenon. The shows adviser, Susan Banister, from the modern slavery charity Hope for Justice, says the common perception of modern slavery is narrowly focused on nail bars and car washes but statistics from the governments National Referral Mechanism, the body set up to support people rescued from exploitation, show British nationals are most frequently referred to the service, followed by people from Albania and Vietnam.

People tend to think its eastern Europeans or people from south-east Asia being exploited, says Banister, who hopes the show will encourage people to be more alert to signs of abuse. I think if we can open peoples eyes, so they respond to a gut feeling that somethings not quite right, it means somebody could be rescued sooner.

Other organisations are already responding to the plotline. The Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, which oversees England and Wales, has put out a video highlighting signs to look out for. Does the workers freedom appear to be restricted? Are they driven to and from the workplace by someone who appears to be restricting their freedom? Are they unwilling to speak? Do they work excessively long hours? Do they have injuries that have not been medically treated? Are there signs they are living in poor, overcrowded accommodation?

The Archers editor, Jeremy Howe, had been thinking about including modern slavery as a theme since he started at the beginning of 2018. Accompanying the shows agricultural adviser to a country fair three years ago, he noticed a huge banner at the entrance erected by the Home Office telling farmers how to recognise signs of modern slavery. He discussed the issue with the Farming Community Network. They told me it was a significant problem in rural Britain, he says. And, because a lot of the countryside is quite remote, its incredibly easy for it to go undetected. My view of modern slavery was that it was an urban issue. But actually, it really has seeped into the rural economy.

The most compelling part of the plotline has been the sudden realisation by many people in the village that they have been complicit. For months, Philip has been offering his neighbours competitive quotes on building work, undercutting rivals. He has been contracted to mend the church, renovate the pub, restore a barn and repair the village playground pro bono. Villagers have been feeling guilty, subsequently, about their failure to question how Philip was able to offer such low prices. No one spoke to the workers, or noticed that they were entirely in the control of Philip and his son.

If the price of goods or services seem too good to be true, they probably are, the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority states, in its Archers-inspired awareness drive. Cheap goods are only possibly because somewhere workers are being exploited.

Howe says: The more culpable we could make a lot of people in Ambridge feel seemed to be the way to make the story hit home. Thats how its playing out at the moment everybody feels utterly wretched. People were flocking to him because he was able to undercut everyone else, but you need to think about why. Everyone is asking how they missed it, but the brilliant thing about good villains is they hide in plain sight.

The Archers has always had a public service tradition. It was hugely successful in educating listeners about coercive control through Rob Titcheners abusive behaviour towards his wife Helen. Recently, the programme has also tried to inform listeners about sepsis, the power of counselling to help depression, and historical sexual abuse.

Mostly, however, Howe wants the story to work as drama. I hope weve shone a light on something that is a shocking part of the UK, and that our audiences understand better exactly what modern slavery is about. But real success for us is that the story works. If it has an impact outside that, thats a bonus.

The Archers is on Radio 4, weekdays, at 2pm and 7pm, with an omnibus edition on Sundays.

More:

Modern slavery in The Archers: how credible is its latest shocking plotline? - The Guardian

Despite its progressive branding, New York State is home to the notorious 24-hour workdays, in which home attendantsmost of them immigrants and women of colorwork 24-hour shifts taking care of seriously-ill seniors and people with disabilities with needs for around-the-clock care. These shifts have taken a toll on the workers health and on their family relations, while imposing safety risks to those they take care of, as such grueling overwork makes it impossible for workers to provide the best care.The insurance companies have benefited from the 24-hour workdays by paying workers only 13 hours of pay.

The call to end the 24-hour workdays has grown and State lawmakers are taking up the legislative effort to end the inhumane 24-hour shifts by making them into split shifts.

Many home agencies have been forcing 24-hour shifts on the workers, but disguise them as "choice."

But recently, some people have been raising skepticism about ending the 24-hour workdays. While defending the 24-hour workdays is morally impossible, they put the responsibility on workers, claiming that there are workers who want to work 24-hour shifts; therefore the government should not stop the workers from working 24-hour shifts. It is as if working long hours is a matter of choice.

For home attendants who work 24-hour shifts, this claim is a cruel joke. Many home agencies have been forcing 24-hour shifts on the workers, but disguise them as choice. But in reality, its choosing between 24-hour shifts and no work or little work. Mei Kum Chu, retired home attendant from Chinese-American Planning Council, said that after the training to become a home attendant there, There was only 24-hour work. Many workers after the training refused the 24-hour shift so the agency would give it to the next person. The workers kept waiting for the agency to arrange non-24-hour work but they just kept waiting. Then we knew we had to work the 24-hour shifts. Alvaro Ramirez, former home attendant of United Jewish Council, was fired when he tried to refuse 24-hour shifts: I said no, I wasnt going to work 24 hours. Then the home care agency said, Alvaro, send in your resignation; you are out of the agency.

Countless stories from the home attendants show that the 24-hour workday can exist, not because the workers really want to choose it, but because the insurance companies and those pro-exploitation home care agencies want to maintain it for their profit.

Therefore, "choosing24-hour shifts is a false concept thatthey put outtoconfuse people and perpetuatethis deplorable sweatshop practice.In the past, slave owners and those who profited off the institution of chattel slavery tried to create a narrative that slaves were happy and cared for in order to justify and maintain the most egregious form of human exploitation for profit. Slavery may have been legally abolished in the US but we are still haunted by its legacy. Under the guise of democracy and freedom, we are being sold a different false narrative: one that tries to convince us that an individuals choice to consent to exploitative working conditions means the system is good and should remain. Under this narrative, one could even argue that minimum wage laws should not exist since millions of workers choose to have their wages stolen by unscrupulous bosses. False narratives like these serve the interest of profit-hoarding bosses and undermine working peoples fight for control of their time and lives.

Past and present shows us that we cannot allow these lies to perpetuate. Workers are organizing to abolish the legal 24-hour workdays because it shouldnt be about the individuals right to choose how much to be exploited, but rather, how we can unify against the agenda of those who wish to maintain systems of exploitation that view all workers as an endless supply of disposable labor to be tossed aside once maximum profit has been extracted. Home attendants are on the frontlines of labors forgotten fight -the fight for control of our time.They are leading the charge, fighting for themselves and paving the way for a new labor movement.

We urge legislators to ignore the noise from insurance companies and home care agencies that profit from the 24-hour workdays, and stand with the workers to pass the legislation (A3145/S359) to change 24-hour shifts to split shifts.

Read the original:

Should We Not Stop the 24-Hour Shifts if There Are Workers Who Like It? - Common Dreams

From the risk of school reopenings to peeved snowbirds, weve selected some of the best long reads of the week on thestar.com.

Want to dive into more long features? Sign up for the Weekend Long Reads newsletter to get them delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning.

1. The real question is, what was in the wallet?: The TTC fired a bus driver for returning a wallet empty. He claims that was a $3-million overreaction

Its a strange legal saga with more twists and turns than a TTC bus on a detour. At the heart of it is a question: what was in the wallet that a young transit rider left on the seat of a bus one winter day in Etobicoke three years ago? Was it stuffed with hundred dollar bills, as he claimed? Or was it empty?

TTC driver Kevin Higgins is suing the transit agency for more than $3 million, alleging he was unjustly fired after he returned a wallet a passenger left on his bus.

The passenger insisted there had been more than $3,000 in the wallet when he dropped it, but by the time Higgins returned it, it was empty. The TTC believed the student, fired Higgins, and called in the police, who charged him with theft. After a judge dismissed the charge months later, the TTC hired Higgins back. Now hes suing.

2. How risky are Ontario schools for COVID-19 transmission? We looked south of the border to find out

The Ontario public health units where thousands of students will return to in-person learning next week would fall under the higher or highest risk categories for school transmission of COVID-19, according to thresholds set by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

On Feb. 8, students in 13 more public health units will join those already back in the classroom, Education Minister Stephen Lecce announced Wednesday, bringing the total number of health regions with reopened schools to 31. Schools in Toronto, Peel and York will remain closed until Feb. 16, after the Family Day long weekend.

A Star analysis of population-adjusted COVID-19 infection rates over the last two weeks finds that 24 of Ontarios 34 public health units fall within the CDCs two highest categories for risk of transmission in schools.

3. Theyre lost. The pandemic is taking a silent toll on athletes young and old

A Toronto doctor volunteered to share some stories with a group of young athletes the other day.

It was Dr. Shady Ashamalla, the head of surgery at Sunnybrook Health Sciences, one of the front-line workers whos been grinding through a blur of 12-hour days since the coronavirus arrived here. The athletes, listening and watching via Zoom, were of the sort mostly sidelined during the pandemic. They were junior hockey players with no games on their upcoming schedule and elite baseball players who cant currently find an open indoor batting cage to hone their crafts. Basically, they were a cross-section of those not lucky enough to be playing sports in high-revenue operations like the NBA and NHL.

Ashamalla said he saw a parallel between his existence and theirs.

You dont have to get the virus to suffer from it, he told them. Just being told youre not important, youre not essential, youre not needed sit over there for a couple of years while we sort this out thats enough to feel empty. For high-performance people, high-performance athletes, high-performance coaches, thats enough to take away part of who you are. And thats dangerous. And its just as dangerous as this virus.

4. We are also human: North York Generals ICU staff struggling as they treat younger COVID-19 patients, amid their own emotional exhaustion

For weeks, Ciara Blair has watched the endless stream of COVID-19 patients flowing into the intensive care unit with mounting fear.

With each patient admitted, the registered nurse worries whether ICU staff at North York General Hospital have the stamina to endure this second pandemic wave.

Were all so tired; you can see and feel the burnout.

As bad as it was in the spring, when so much was unknown about the virus, this winter is even worse: Many COVID-19 patients in the ICU are young, in their 40s or 50s. They seem sicker the infection tearing through their bodies faster than those who filled hospital beds in April and May. And they are arriving to the ICU at relentless speed.

It all takes a toll.

You dont forget the terror in your patients eyes, the words theyve spoken to you, the words theyve spoken to their family before you put them on life support, the way they get sicker and sicker as their body tries to fight the virus, said Blair, her voice catching.

5. Justin Trudeau talks about the challenge of Trump, his relationship with Biden and the Canadian idea the new president might steal

After four years of dealing with Donald Trump, Justin Trudeau says that talking to President Joe Biden in the White House feels like a dam breaking.

In a wide-ranging interview with the Star this week, Trudeau talked at length about how Canada-U.S. relations will be shifting in important ways with Biden now at the helm. Things wont always be easy as Canadians have already seen with the new presidents orders on pipelines and Buy America policies.

But Trudeau says that fundamentally, he and Biden are speaking the same language.

I feel I can be a little more straightforward. Not that I wasnt with president Trump. I was always very clear on where I was and my values, Trudeau said. But youd emphasize different things in a conversation.

6. Peeved Canadian snowbirds devising plans to avoid hotel-quarantine jail

Jacqueline and Carey Ellingson, Canadian snowbirds in Yuma, Ariz., are scheduled to fly home March 9. But instead of enjoying their final weeks in this desert oasis reputed to be the sunniest place on Earth the couple from Barrhead, Alta., say their anxiety levels couldnt be higher.

Since the federal government announced that most air travellers arriving in Canada will soon be required at their own expense to book a room in a government-approved hotel for three nights while they await the results of a COVID-19 test, the Ellingsons have been scrambling to find alternative arrangements to get home.

They say they are on a fixed income and cant afford a mandatory hotel quarantine. So as a backup plan, theyve tentatively booked a car rental that will take them from Yuma to Great Falls, Mont., and then another car rental that will allow them to drive across the border into Alberta.

At one point, they even considered taking an Uber from Great Falls to the border and then just walking across.

Its like changing the rules of a baseball game halfway through, Jacqueline said Thursday. Its a logistical nightmare.

7. What we dont know about the history of slavery in Canada and why we dont talk about it

Canadians generally have a pretty good grasp of the Underground Railroad, the network to help enslaved Black people in the U.S. escape north to Canada, which was established in the 30 years following the abolition of slavery in this country.

But the 200 years prior to that, when slavery was widespread in what would become Canada those are years that are less comfortable to examine. They are often overlooked and understudied.

Charmaine Nelson hopes to change that.

8. A new Ontario law was meant to punish careless drivers who kill. The vast majority are still avoiding serious consequences

Growing up, Simon was an outgoing boy who was always top of his class and excelled on the school robotics team, was so responsible that Watfa didnt worry when he ventured out into their suburban Ottawa neighbourhood to play with friends. I always had that in mind, that hes safe, hes careful, hes smart, and he makes good choices, his mother, Ragheda Watfa, said.

On July 23, 2019, someone elses choices ended Simons life. Just after 5 p.m. that afternoon, he was struck and killed by a driver as he rode his bike across Jeanne dArc Boulevard with two friends. He was 13.

On Jan. 18, the driver, an 80-year-old man named Robert Ryan, pleaded guilty to careless driving causing death. He admitted in court that at the time of the collision he wasnt wearing the prescription glasses required by his licence. He received a $5,000 fine and a four-year driving ban.

To Watfa her husband, Bassel Khouri, that sentence is painfully inadequate. I dont think its justice, Khouri said. The only message Im getting from this (is) that anybody can hit somebody and kill them and (the driver) is going to be OK, Watfa said.

Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...

9. Who is an essential worker in the GTA? Millions of us, data shows. This is life outside lockdown in five graphs

Since arriving in Toronto in 1994, Lily Wong has assumed many roles: driving school secretary, software saleswoman, part-time postal outlet worker, and now, a nursing home dietary aide.

In all those years, she has never had a paid sick day or made over $20 an hour.

She is not alone. In fact, 65 per cent of workers in the GTA over two million people are in sectors that can remain open with some form of in-person staffing under current lockdown guidelines, a Star analysis has found. These essential workers are more likely to be lower-wage and immigrants to Canada, and less likely to be unionized than those who can work from home.

10. What would life be like without Googles search engine? Australia might be about to give Canada a preview

For a generation of Canadians who grew up with Google Search at their fingertips, it might be difficult to imagine a world where the term google it becomes defunct.

But losing the search engine could become a reality due to an information-technology cold war that spans the globe.

There is a push from news companies and governments to make tech giants like Google and Facebook pay media companies some of the revenue they make by featuring journalism that appears on those platforms.

Australia is leading the charge, proposing a framework under which the tech giants would be required to negotiate fair payments to news organizations.

But last month, Google dropped a bombshell: if Australia continues with those plans as they stand, the company said, Google will completely disable access to its search engine within that country.

11. What Clearview does is mass surveillance and it is illegal: Privacy watchdog slams facial recognition tech previously used by RCMP and Toronto police

Canadian regulators say a facial recognition tool used by scores of police services and some private companies nationwide was illegal, and that use of Clearview AIs artificial intelligence technology amounted to mass surveillance on millions of innocent citizens.

In a scathing report released Wednesday, the Canadian privacy commissioner and provincial counterparts in Alberta, Quebec and British Columbia blasted the U.S.-based company for amassing and profiting off of millions of images of Canadians, including children, without consent.

The watchdogs also called for strengthened federal and provincial privacy laws to stop another company from doing the same, saying the case exposes the lack of clear rules and regulations about facial recognition.

What Clearview does is mass surveillance and it is illegal, Daniel Therrien, Canadas privacy commissioner, told reporters in a press conference Wednesday.

12. Ghosts, guns and solving the mystery of my grandfathers death on the Oak Ridges Moraine

I dont believe in ghosts, which is one reason why I remember my long-dead grandfathers first visitation so vividly, writes Star contributor John Barber. I was skiing on the Oak Ridges Moraine, at a spot where my favourite wooded trail opens out to show the whole broad urban plain to the south and the blue infinity of the great lake beyond.

I absolutely did not commit suicide, my grandfather declared at that moment, barging unbidden into my consciousness in a manner I had never before experienced. Now you know.

And I did: It all seemed so clear. At that moment a long-standing cloud of doubt magically evaporated into the clear winter air, commanded by an inner voice of uncommon authority. Perhaps it was an epiphany something Id never felt before but it worked. I was satisfied to know the truth at last.

13. I have no expectations of forgiveness: A Halton cop stole opioids from an evidence vault. Hes urging officers to seek help for addiction

Brad Murrays letter is addressed to the entire Halton police service more than 1,000 of his former colleagues and subordinates, among them cops he knows he hurt, embarrassed or betrayed.

There are no words that can adequately demonstrate my regret and sincere repentance for my actions, begins the message distributed by Halton Regional Police Monday, after much deliberation by senior management.

Its an apology, though the former high-ranking officer says he does not expect forgiveness. Mostly, Murray wants to share a perspective borne of a personal and professional downfall that of a decorated drug cop who became addicted to opioids, one who committed a serious crime of stealing drugs from his own forces evidence vault, instead of asking for help.

14. Everyone that I know, that I grew up with, has PTSD: What an interactive map of police tweets says about routine gun violence in Toronto

The sound of gunshots was so clear that Rev. Sky Starr thought it must have been just next door. But it wasnt the closeness to a potential tragedy that immediately rattled her. It was that her youngest son was not at home.

Thats the very first thing that came to mind. I mean, if your children are around you, then you know they are safe, she said, remembering that evening early in the fall last year.

Almost exactly at the same time as she was scrambling to find out, her son, who was 20 years old then, called to say he was on his way home. Police cruisers were starting to flock to the area a neighbourhood made of a handful of highrise buildings near Jane Street and Driftwood Avenue, in northwestern North York.

Excerpt from:

14 of the weeks best long reads from the Star, Jan. 30 to Feb. 5, 2021 - Toronto Star

Most would assume that after the Civil War ended in 1865 and the 13th Amendment was passed that slavery was prohibited in the United States. Unfortunately, there is a loophole in the amendment that allowed a form of slavery to exist after the war that is still legal to this day.

The 13th Amendment states: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

The "involuntary servitude" caveat allowed for a form of pseudo-slavery to continue after the war during Reconstruction and beyond.

"What we see after the passage of the 13th Amendment is a couple of different things converging," Andrea Armstrong, a law professor at Loyola University in New Orleans, told History.

"First, the 13th Amendment text allows for involuntary servitude where convicted of a crime," she continued. At the same time, "black codes" in the south created "new types of offenses, especially attitudinal offensesnot showing proper respect, those types of things."

via Wikipedia

This led to a prison boom in the 19th century and the practice of "convict leasing" where states would lend prisoners to plantation owners and industrialists to use for labor. This meant that countless imprisoned Blacks were forced to work for no compensation in the decades after the war.

The death toll caused by this practice was so high that after 3,500 Texas prisoners died between 1866 and 1912, the state outlawed the practice.

These days, private companies continue to benefit from free or low-wage labor provided by prisoners. According to NPR, the annual value of labor provided by prisoners is $2 billion and big companies, including Walmart, AT&T, Whole Foods, and Victoria's Secret, profit from involuntary labor.

The State of California saves $100 million every year by using prisoners as volunteer firefighters.

The huge benefit that involuntary servitude has for major companies means amending the 13th Amendment will be a tough task. However, Democrats Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Representative William Lacy Clay of Missouri have taken up the challenge.

Jeff Merkley and William Lacy Clay via Wikimedia Commons

On Wednesday, they proposed a joint resolution for the House and Senate to craft an amendment saying that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude may be imposed as a punishment for a crime."

"America was founded on beautiful principles of equality and justice and horrific realities of slavery and white supremacy, and if we are ever going to fully deliver on the principles we have to directly confront the realities," said Merkley.

"The exception to the 13th Amendment's ban on slavery corrupted criminal justice into a tool of racist control of Black Americans and other people of color, and we see that legacy every day in police encounters, courtrooms, and prisons throughout our country," Merkley continued.

"Slavery is incompatible with justice. No slavery, no exceptions," Merkley said.

"Our Abolition Amendment seeks to finish the job that President Lincoln started by ending the punishment clause in the 13th Amendment to eliminate the dehumanizing and discriminatory forced labor of prisoners for profit that has been used to drive the over-incarceration of African Americans since the end of the Civil War," Clay added.

"No American should ever be subject to involuntary servitude, even if they are incarcerated," Clay said.

Merkley and Clay have been joined by 17 co-sponsors in introducing the legislation, including Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Laura Pitter, deputy director of the U.S. program at Human Rights Watch, believes that it's a much-needed step to finally put an end to an ugly remnant of the black-code era.

"The punishment clause in the 13th amendment is a legacy of slavery that has allowed people incarcerated, disproportionately Black and brown, to be exploited for decades. It is long past time that Congress excise this language from the US Constitution which should begin to put an end the abusive practices derived from it," Pitter said.

For the new amendment to pass, it would have to be approved by a two-thirds majority of both the House and Senate or by a constitutional convention in which two-thirds of the state legislature vote to support the measure.

After that, three-quarters of the state conventions or legislatures must approve of the change.

From Your Site Articles

Related Articles Around the Web

Original post:

A loophole in the Constitution makes a form of slavery legal and is nearly impossible to fix - GOOD Magazine

One of President-elect Joe Bidens promises is that the US will recommit itself to defending democracy in the world, together with other democratic allies. The EU, it appears, plans to firmly embrace this proposal, with a particular focus on presenting a united front to China.

Yet criticizing Beijings mass internment of Muslim Uighurs or the Kremlins attempts to manipulate elections draws accusations of hypocrisy at a time when many western governments struggle to convince their citizens that representative democracy remains the most trustworthy way to deliver good governance. If the transatlantic alliance is to hold its own in competition with illiberal authoritarian rivals, its members had better fix their democratic problems at home. But how?

Granted, in the context of a decade of global democratic recession, the US and Europe still look quite respectable on the surface. The US presidential election last month was in many ways a triumph of democracy: Americans saw historic voter turnout, a process that broadly worked and officials and judges who refused to be intimidated. In Europe, populists hoping to exploit the Covid-19 pandemic to stoke fear and polarization have instead seen voters support centrist governments and fact-based policies.

Yet it is also true that the widespread commitment to liberal democracy a foundational value of the west is under fire. The fact that, in some cases, the attacks come from opposition parties within the political system is no cause for complacency.

In Germany, for example, the hard-right Alternative for Germany has been plateauing in the polls at around 10 per cent, and its leadership is mired in shambolic infighting. But it continues to wage a quiet and disciplined campaign to undermine and delegitimize democratic institutions. In France, Marine Le Pen, the leader of the far-right National Rally, remains a serious contender in the 2022 presidential election.

Elsewhere, in Hungary, Poland and Turkey, the authoritarians are in government and have used their positions to change the rules of governance in order to expand or perpetuate their hold on power. And in the US, the alliances anchor democracy, an outgoing president is claiming against all evidence and with the support of his partys leadership that a massive fraud has denied him an election victory.

This democratic backsliding undercuts the cohesion of Nato at a time when conflicts around the world are heating up. It undermines trust between allies, limits intelligence sharing and reduces the effectiveness of diplomacy, deterrence and operations.

As for the EU, which the incoming US administration (unlike its predecessor) sees as a key provider of diplomatic and economic leverage, its budget is being blocked by Budapest and Warsaw in a fight over the rule of law. All this allows adversaries to exploit the wests divisions and gives them a welcome pretext to dismiss critiques of their own failings.

The transatlantic alliance, born out of the crucible of the second world war and the Holocaust, always had liberal democracy at its heart. For decades, the American security umbrella enabled the conditions for stable representative governance to take root in Europe: functioning states, open market economies, inclusive social contracts. Yet when some Nato member states took authoritarian turns as happened in Greece, Portugal and Turkey others turned a blind eye. Our allies domestic affairs, it was held, were none of our business.

This has to change. The alliance is based on the principle that the security of one member is the security of all. The 2008 financial crisis and its long aftermath taught us a hard lesson: in an interdependent world, the vulnerability of one is the vulnerability of all. And security today begins with resilient domestic governance.

Americans, Canadians and Europeans must now help each other think through how their own democracies can be made fit for purpose in an age of great power competition and deepening global networks. State institutions must be able to do their job providing public goods effectively and free from political interference or corruption. Economies must be made fairer, to minimize the kind of structural inequity that fuels popular grievances. Social and racial injustices, as well as the toxic legacy of slavery and colonialism, must be tackled head-on.

In short, we must live up to our own principles again. Then, and only then, can we offer others advice about democracy.

See original here:

The West must live up to its own principles on democracy - Brookings Institution