Quasi-Organizing at Walmart
Posted: April 23, 2013 Filed under: Corporations Leave a comment
Workers in dozens of Walmart stores around the country are planning actions Wednesday that will confront their local managers with demands for changes to the firm’s system for scheduling employee shifts. As The Nation‘s Josh Eidelson reports, Walmart employees have been collectively upset with with erratic work schedules that limit hours and complicate personal lives, all while keeping aggregate wages at poverty levels.
If organizers’ estimates hold, Wednesday’s coordinated worker delegations will represent the largest mobilization of OUR Walmart members since last November’s Black Friday strikes, in which organizers say 400-some workers walked off the job. In some stores, workers will go together to talk to management before or after their shifts; in others, workers will do so during the work day….While the delegations’ shared date and message may amplify attention, their greatest significance will be as the latest test of rank-and-file OUR Walmart leaders’ ability to mobilize co-workers amid fear of retaliation.
It’s also a interesting and important show of the power of organizing even where workers aren’t already organized in the formal labor union sense — using labor law’s statutory protections covering “concerted activity” to advance employee interests.
Atlas Vounteers a Shrug
Posted: April 11, 2013 Filed under: Disgust Leave a comment
How’s this for buzz(kill) in the national press?
If you’re worried about where America is heading, look no further than Tennessee. Its lush mountains and verdant rolling countryside belie a mean-spirited public policy that only makes sense if you believe deeply in the anti-collectivist, anti-altruist philosophy of Ayn Rand. It’s what you get when you combine hatred for government with disgust for poor people.
That’s the lede of a piece by Les Leopold at Alternet (and picked up by Salon) titled “The Southern State Fast Becoming Ayn Rand’s Vision of Paradise.” Leopold runs the numbers:
Tennessee starves what little government it has, ranking dead last in per capita tax revenue. To fund its minimalist public sector, it makes sure that low-income residents pay as much as possible through heavily regressive sales taxes, which rank 10th highest among all states as a percent of total tax revenues….As you would expect, this translates into hard times for its public school systems, which rank 48th in school revenues per student and 45th in teacher salaries. The failure to invest in education also corresponds with poverty: the state has the 40th worst poverty rate (15%) and the 13th highest state percentage of poor children (26%). Employment opportunities also are extremely poor for the poor. Only 25% have full-time jobs, 45% are employed part-time, and a whopping 30% have no jobs at all.
Pointing to legislation making welfare contingent on school attendance and performance and other reactionary measures all too familiar to Pith readers, Leopold spins a Randian explantion: those running our state believe that public policy should reward “creators” for their ingenuity and general fabulousness, and lay the blame where it belongs — on the poor and “the collectivist government liberals who cater to them.”
Leopold’s larger argument is about the overall approach to poverty adopted by movement conservatives across the country, with Tennessee offered up as a bleeding edge example. It’s nice to lead in something I suppose.
A version of this post appears on the Nashville Scene‘s Pith in the Wind blog.
A Very Broad Reading of the First Amendment
Posted: April 9, 2013 Filed under: Free Speech, Media Leave a comment
The Tennnessean runs a curious editorial this morning arguing that a noise ordinance citation slapped by the city of Franklin on street preacher John McGlone amounts to an infringement of First Amendment rights. McGlone was ticketed last April for doing his preaching with a mic and amplifier in violation of Franklin’s noise ordinance (contained in a municipal code section charmingly titled “Offenses Against the Peace and Quiet”).
The editorial is curious because it seems so patently misguided on the law. I’m as much of a free speech fan as the next person, but it is well-settled First Amendment law that government can regulate the time, place, and manner of expressive activity on public property. Laws or regulations that do restrict speech have to advance an important governmental interest, and must do so in a narrowly drawn way that allows alternative means of communication. It is well understood that limiting sound amplification qualifies (see, for instance, the 1989 Supreme Court case Ward v. Rock Against Racism), as long as the rules aren’t written in such a way as to penalize a particular viewpoint or stifle more expression than necessary.
In the Franklin case, McGlone was doing his thing during Franklin’s Main Street Festival near the Public Square. The noise ordinance says that “when a special event permit has been obtained from the City of Franklin, no other amplification of sound will be permitted within the area of the special event except that which has been applied for and authorized by the city pursuant to the permit application.” So when a festival vendor complained about McGlone’s amplified activity, the preacher was issued a ticket for an ordinance violation.
It is perfectly reasonable, practically and constitutionally, for municipalities to regulate with a permit process the use of amplified sound in public spaces. Cities can run afoul of constitutionality if they make the obstacles for obtaining a permit onerous, or are too restrictive in framing the circumstances in which amplified speech is permit-eligible. Franklin’s ordinance doesn’t arouse concern on either of these dimensions, even if there are other elements of the law that seem bizarrely specific (for instance, the actions “declared to be loud, disturbing and unnecessary” include “the blowing of any locomotive steam whistle or steam whistle attached to any stationary boiler except to give notice of the time to begin or stop work or as a warning of fire or danger”).
Bottom line: A rule saying that the authorized amplified sound within a permitted special event is the only amplification allowed within the area of that event offends neither common sense nor the First Amendment. As long as the Main Street Festival permit didn’t cover (and therefore restrict expressive activity within) an unjustifiably large area of the city center, it’s hard to see how McGlone has a case, nor how The Tennessean fathoms a free speech infringement. And even if the permit did reach too broadly in defining the festival’s footprint, there is still the city’s legitimate ability to regulate sound amplification on public sidewalks.
A version of this post appears on the Nashville Scene‘s Pith in the Wind blog.
Feeling Better About Tennessee’s Unhinged State GOP
Posted: March 29, 2013 Filed under: Disgust Leave a comment
It’s pretty depressing this time of year looking in on the Tennessee legislature’s weekly wing-nut chronicle — those persistent reminders of just how far our GOP-led state can stray from sanity. Fortunately, for those of us dispirited by the right-wing mayhem that sucks all the rational air out of the room in Tennessee, scientific psychology offers an easy remedy: social comparison theory. In simple terms, we can shore up our self-worth by comparing ourselves with others. The good news is it turns out Tennessee lacks a monopoly on unhinged conservatism. So let’s take a quick look and feel better about ourselves.
Exhibit A: Michigan Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema, who put up on his Facebook page a post that (as quoted in the Detroit Free Press) “depicts gays as sexually promiscuous, rife with sexually transmitted diseases and responsible for ‘half the murders in large cities.’ ” Asked to clarify his views on homosexuality, Agema told a Slate writer that “this is not about hate but a lifestyle that is against 230 years of American history and filled with medical, psychological, legal and costs reasons to oppose it.” See? We aren’t the only state with GOP crazy-bigot juice in the water supply. On the other hand, a group of more than 20 Republicans in Michigan did sign a statement calling Agema’s actions “deplorable” and calling for his resignation, so apparently theirs is a tad more dilute.
Exhibit B: In Idaho, a public school science teacher finds himself under fire for using the word “vagina” during a biology class on human reproduction. You probably don’t need me to point out that the school is located in an area that has the state’s highest teen pregnancy rate.
Exhibit C: And then there is Ben Carson, the Maryland-based celebrity right-wing pediatric neurosurgeon who has been getting conservative buzz as a possible 2016 presidential hopeful. Turns out that in a recent appearance on Fox News the good doctor likened support for marriage equality to pedophilia and bestiality: “Marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition.”
There … now don’t we all you feel better?
A version of this post appears on the Nashville Scene‘s Pith in the Wind blog.
Euphemism of the Month: Fairness in Ticketing
Posted: March 19, 2013 Filed under: Policy Leave a comment
While there are some positive aspects of the so-called Fairness in Ticketing Act working its way through the Tennessee state legislature, it is disappointing to see Tennessee Performing Arts Center CEO Kathleen O’Brien embrace the bill so wholeheartedly in a Tennessean op-ed this morning. Railing against a ticket “resale market rife with bad actors” who “make lots of money at the expense of real fans,” O’Brien wants us to see TPAC as part of a coalition working to give consumers “transparency and protection and the opportunity to buy the best tickets at face value prices.” These are lovely goals, but ones that the bill will do very little to accomplish.
The legislation (SB609/HB1000) does have some salutary features. Requirements that the resellers (be they ticket brokers or online marketplaces such as StubHub) disclose on their websites the face value and exact location of seats offered for sale, and say whether or not tickets are actually in their position and ready for delivery, strike me as eminently reasonable. Regulating the industry by having brokers register with the state may also be an improvement, although the requirement that a registered broker “maintain a permanent office or place of business in this state” seems a tad twentieth century.
As originally introduced it was a terrible bill, but the bill may be shedding some of its worst parts. A Senate committee last week approved an amended version that omits absurd provisions in the original bill eliminating ticket holders’ property rights and giving venues and original ticket issuers (such as Ticketbastard) unbridled power to monopolistic control over the resale market. A House committee takes up the measure later this week.
Even with the worst parts amended out, the bill still does nothing to meet the promise by TPAC’s O’Brien that it will help fans obtain the best tickets at face value prices. As news reports have amply documented, event promoters and ticket issuers not only don’t object to scalping, they are at times in cahoots with scalpers. The industry trumpets paperless ticketing as the answer to scalper bots that scarf up all the good seats when a show goes on sale, but most fans see paperless ticketing as an enormous inconvenience that makes it very cumbersome to do what you want with the ticket you buy. Lobbyists for the secondary ticket industry (StubHub and brethren) point out that that if Ticketmaster really wants to lessen the impact of bots on ticket buying, as they righteously claim, then they could easily inform authorities and request prosecution under an existing Tennessee law — but they never do.
On both sides of this issue we find well-funded corporate interests pretending that this is really about consumer protection, when it’s actually about the protection of each side’s business model. As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The legislation as amended in the state Senate would inject some consumer-friendly transparency into the secondary ticket market, but does nothing to dilute the excesses of event promoters and original ticket issuers whose claims to be looking out for fan interests ring hollow. A horrible bill is apparently being amended into a weak bill. Even if it passes, you still won’t get those highly sought tickets you want at face value unless you happen to be very very lucky on some given Saturday morning at 10:01 am.
A version of this post appears on the Nashville Scene‘s Pith in the Wind blog.
Definitely A Trend
Posted: March 18, 2013 Filed under: Policy Leave a commentNo longer just a surge.
Hey Memphis, You’re Doing This Parks Thing Wrong
Posted: February 25, 2013 Filed under: Policy Leave a comment
The latest effort by Republicans in the Tennessee legislature to throw local government control under the bus comes in the form of the Tennessee Heritage Protection Act of 2013, slated for a vote in the state House later today. Rep. Steve McDaniel says the point of his bill, which bars changes to just about anything named for or commemorating military history is “to preserve our history.” The real aim, of course, is to prevent further moves like those in Memphis rebranding parks away from names that celebrate the Confederacy.
The sweep of McDaniel’s bill is breathtaking:
No statue, monument, memorial, nameplate, or plaque which has been erected for, or named or dedicated in honor of, the French and Indian War, American Revolution, War of 1812, U.S.-Mexican War, the War Between the States, Spanish American War, the Mexican border period, World War I, World War II, the Korean conflict, the Vietnam War, Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada), Operation El Dorado Canyon (Libya), Operation Just Cause (Panama), Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm (Persian Gulf War I), Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan), and Operation Iraqi Freedom (Persian Gulf War II), and is located on public property, may be relocated, removed, altered, renamed, rededicated, or otherwise disturbed.
The other key paragraph says that “no statue, monument, memorial, nameplate, plaque, historic flag display, school, street, bridge, building, park, preserve, or reserve” that has been named for any historical military figure, event, or organization can be renamed.
Aiming to get ahead of this bill, the Memphis City Council in recent weeks has renamed multiple parks. Nathan Bedford Forrest Park is now Health Sciences Park (that’s catchy), Confederate Park is now Memphis Park, and Jefferson Davis Park has become Mississippi River Park. Interestingly, Memphis NAACP branch head Keith Norman opposes name changes for historically themed parks: “We believe that history should be kept as history.”
The Memphis City Council is missing a real opportunity here. There is a way they could rename parks to end glorification of racism and the Confederacy, retain the historical references that McDaniel and Norman want preserved, and send a “go to hell” message to state lawmakers gleefully dismantling local control, all at the same time. It’s simple: give the parks names that tell it like it is.
So, for instance: “Racist Nathan Bedford Forrest Park.” “Blow Me Jefferson Davis Park.” And how about “Ashamed to Have Been Part of the Confederacy Park.” Perhaps while they’re at it the good folks in Memphis can find a patch of grass to dedicate as “Ronald Reagan’s Illegal Grenada War Park.”
So get to work, Memphis City Council. And then go ahead, Rep. McDaniel, pass your bill. Let’s preserve us some real history.
A version of this post appears on the Nashville Scene‘s Pith in the Wind blog.
BruceBarry.net 