AMERICA:
WALL STREET, THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, THE GOP and LA RAZA SAY NO
LEGAL NEED APPLY!
“The percentage of foreign-born workers in the U.S. labor
force has more than tripled over the last four decades and while the U.S.
represents just 5 percent of the world’s population it attracts 20 percent of
the world’s immigrants,
THE GIG JOB ECONOMY…. To keep wages DEPRESSED
As Barack Obama invites hordes to jump our borders jobs, welfare
offices and voting booths…. WHAT IS LEFT FOR THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS HE HATES
SO MUCH?
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-gig-economy-america-no-legal-need.html
CUT MEDICAID AND SOCIAL SECURITY TO FINANCE TAX CUTS FOR THE SUPER RICH!
OBAMA-CLINTON-TRUMPERnomics: America’s Road to REVOLUTION
….. but will they finish off the
American middle-class first???
“The Tax Policy Center finds
that for the top 0.1 percent of income earners—those making more than $3.75
million annually—repealing this investment tax would amount to an average tax
cut of $165,090.”
Trump administration rolls back “joint-employer” labor provision in favor of big business
By E.P. Milligan
13 June 2017
On June 7, US
Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta announced the withdrawal of joint
employment independent contractor informal guidance, effectively removing what
are called “administrator interpretations” implemented under the Obama
administration designed to create employer liability. The decision will serve
to further empower the major corporations while reducing their accountability
and restricting the rights of workers.
The decision of the Obama administration to implement the
regulation in 2016 grew out of legal problems over the question of employee and
employer definitions in the context of the growth of third-party labor
providers, gig-economy platforms, and franchise relationships.
The new legal interpretation was designed to provide some form of
basic representation to workers employed by companies that refuse to recognize
themselves as employers while still maintaining the level of control over the
worker that an employer would have.
BLOG: DURING OBAMA'S OPEN BORDERS REGIME 2/3 OF ALL JOBS WENT TO FOREIGN BORN, BOTH LEGAL AND ILLEGAL.
Following the 2007-2008 economic crisis and the subsequent
“recovery” under the Obama administration, such forms of employment have been
on the rise. Since the recession, small businesses have accounted for 67
percent of net new jobs—most of them low-wage, temp or contract work. From 2012
to 2016, franchises accounted for 10.9 percent of new private sector jobs.
Franchises now account directly and indirectly for over 13 million jobs in the
United States.
For example, drivers for car hailing services such as Uber and
Lyft have been declared “contractors” and not employees. In the fast food
industry, workers frequently have to report to a franchise operation rather
than the corporation itself. Some workers also may be removed from employment
at a large firm and told they now work for a third party.
A particular concern raised by the union bureaucracy is over their
right to unionization and collective bargaining in this section of the economy,
which they see as a growing and potentially lucrative pool of dues money. If
workers such as these are not considered full employees, they have no legal
basis for any form of representation.
Furthermore self-employed individuals are not allowed to organize
or be involved in collective bargaining of any sort. In fact, for such
employees to work together on pricing and conditions would be considered
illegal price fixing.
In cases where issues concerning labor law compliance have arisen,
companies often attempt to shift liability onto another business and vice
versa. Under Obama, the Department of Labor at times used an interpretation
that major corporations could be effectively considered to be “joint employers”
who are therefore legally responsible for their employees. The Trump
administration has put an end to this.
In a press release, Acosta stated: “Removal of the administrator
interpretations does not change the legal responsibilities of employers under
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker
Protection Act, as reflected in the department’s long-standing regulations and
case law. The department will continue to fully and fairly enforce all laws
within its jurisdiction, including the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Migrant
and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act.”
This means that the Department of Labor will not establish any new
interpretations of regulations, regardless of changes within the economy.
Furthermore, this in effect represents a change in how employer legal
responsibility is defined. The rolling back of the joint employer provision
means that major corporations which profit off of the labor of contract or
third party employees will no longer be liable.
Companies that do not directly employ the workers argue that
questions regarding labor law compliance and working conditions are not
applicable because they are “self-employed” contractors or their concerns are a
matter for the smaller third-party employer.
Workers under third party employers likewise face many problems.
Employees of third party employers may not be entitled to file a class action
lawsuit against the central company through which the third party is employed.
Fast food workers, for example, may not be able to sue the chain itself because
they are technically employees of the local franchise only.
The decision to redefine labor law by the Trump administration is
made all the more significant when taken in the context of a series of legal
disputes in which workers have been fighting to be recognized as employees.
Uber drivers have filed class-action lawsuits seeking to be
entitled to benefits, gas reimbursement and other expenses. Three drivers in
the Amazon Flex program have sued Amazon on identical grounds, arguing they are
owed back benefits, overtime pay and money for gas and vehicle maintenance. In
2014, McDonalds franchise workers sued the company over wage theft. The
National Labor Relations Board ruled that the workers should be considered
full-time employees of McDonalds.
For the ongoing lawsuits, the decision by the Department of Labor
to reverse this will undercut the legal standing of workers’ claims, paving the
way for further cuts to living standards and working conditions on the part of
the companies. Furthermore, it will provide a legal precedent further
normalizing wage theft and lack of oversight of working conditions.
The rise of contract, subcontract, third party or otherwise “gig”
labor points to the overall destruction of the living standards of the working
class and the inability of capitalism to provide any relief to the growing
social crisis.
It is clear the Obama administrations guideline did not
drastically change conditions for workers that fall into this category.
However, with its reversal, the Trump administration has made clear that it is
committed to a renewed and ruthless onslaught to destroy any of the meager
legal protections left for workers that may stand in the way of the insatiable
drive for profit by the large corporations and big banks.
THE OPEN BORDERS PARTY of GEORGE SOROS, HILLARY
& BILLARY CLINTON, BARACK OBAMA and DONALD TRUMP
DONALD TRUMP, HIS PARASITIC FAMILY, HIS GOLDMAN SACHS
REGIME and GOD FATHER, GEORGE SOROS… .global looters of the
poor!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-jared-kushner-donald-trump-george.html
THE OBAMA AND THE REVOLUTION:
Will His Bid For A Third Term For Life Come About? Will Illegals Vote the
La Raza Supremacist Back Into the White House?
DESTROY AMERICA TO BUILD A MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP WHERE LA RAZA
MEXICANS VOTE HIM PRESIDENT FOR LIFE
"He is intent on maximizing the damage he inflicted on
the country during the two terms of his faux presidency, having now
set up shop in Washington to pursue a post-presidency agenda advancing a
left-wing insurgency, civil unrest, racial
conflict and the destabilizing activities of a shadow."
conflict and the destabilizing activities of a shadow."
TRUMPERNOMICS: IMPLEMENTING
OBAMA-CLINTONIMCS
“CRIMINAL BANKSTERS WILL CONTINUE TO RULE
AMERICA!” Twitter Trumper
BUT WE KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE!
“The massive transfer
of wealth will not go to investment, but to acquiring bigger
OBAMA-CLINTON-TRUMPERnomics: The
Massive Transfer of Wealth to the Super Rich Ratcheted up!
The American oligarchy, steeped in
criminality and parasitism, can produce only a government of war, social
reaction and repression. In its blind avarice, it is creating the conditions
for unprecedented social upheavals. It is hurtling toward its own revolutionary
demise at the hands of the working class.
“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike,
has become a
kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes.
This is the way a
great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen
McQuillan AMERICAN
THINKER.com
THE LEGACY OF
BARACK OBAMA:
Final Death of the American White Middle Class
Under the Obama administration, more Americans have found themselves consigned to economic ghettos, living in neighborhoods where more than 40 percent subsist below the poverty level.
Millions more now live in “high poverty” districts
of 20-40 percent poverty, according to recently released report by the
Brookings Institution.
America’s Super-rich Live 15 Years Longer!
………….. America’s Bludgeoned Middle-Class Dies Young, Addicted and Poor!
WHICH SIDE OF THE EQUATION ARE YOU DIGGING YOUR CHILDRENS’ GRAVES?
“Millions
of middle class families have been driven to bankruptcy by illness and
medical bills.”
“This dramatic contrast in
life expectancy between the rich and poor is directly correlated to the growth
of obscene wealth at the top among a tiny elite and entrenched poverty among
growing numbers of people at the bottom.”….. BUT AMERICA STILL FINDS BILLIONS
TO HAND TO MEXICAN INVADERS, WHICH INCLUDES “FREE” HEALTHCARE.
In the first part of
the Lancet series, “Inequality and the health-care system in
the USA,” the British medical journal’s researchers found that these
income-based disparities in US life expectancy are worsened by the for-profit
US health care system itself, which relies on private insurers, pharmaceutical
companies and health care chains. It is also the most expensive health system
in the world.
MEDICAID SLASHED!
TRUMPERNOMICS: IMPLEMENTING SEVERE
OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS TO SERVE THE SUPER RICH!
“The Republican proposal builds on the
core features of Obamacare, designed to boost the profits of the private
insurers and slash health care costs for the government and big business.”
“The lifetime costs of Social Security and Medicare
benefits of illegal immigrant beneficiaries of President Obama’s executive amnesty
would be well over a trillion dollars, according to Heritage Foundation expert Robert
Rector’s prepared testimony for a House panel obtained in advance by Breitbart
News.”
THE ENTIRE REASON WE HAVE OPEN BORDERS IS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED.
70% OF ALL ILLEGALS END UP ON WELFARE
The Seattle Minimum Wage Study Is Utter B.S.
http://fortune.com/2017/06/27/seattle-minimum-wage-study-results-impact-15-dollar-uw/
4:45 PM ET
For decades, conservative ideologues have insisted that raising the minimum wage will hurt, not help, low-wage workers. Mandating higher wages will cost jobs, the old canard goes, and the obvious solution is to let the free market function unfettered.
This argument received a significant bump from a recent study by the University of Washington (UW) looking at the impact of the minimum wage increase in Seattle, where in 2014 the city council voted to phase in a $15 wage over the next few years.
The UW study appeared to show that the 2015–2016 wage floor increase from $11 to $13 per hour, one phase on that journey to $15, caused low-wage workers’ annual pay to go down, not up, and overall low-wage jobs to also go down.
Free-market fanatics around the country flung praise at the study, and serious publications like the Washington Post deemed it “very credible.” But fortunately for working people, it turns out the study’s findings are far from that.
RELATED
The research has significant flaws—most glaringly that its data excludes 40% of the Seattle workforce. It also stands in contrast to a massive trove of actually credible studies showing that raising the minimum wage is a boon for working class families and the communities they live in.
For instance, a team led by Michael Reich, an economics professor at University of California-Berkeley, looked at the impact of the Seattle wage increase on the food industry over the same period and found that wages did in fact go up for restaurant workers, and that employment wasn't affected. These findings were, they claim, “in line with the lion’s share of results in previous credible minimum wage studies.”
Reich and his colleagues have done a significant portion of this research , recently studying cities with the highest minimum wage laws in the country, including Chicago, San Francisco, and Oakland. They've consistently found that higher wages boost worker pay and haven't led to either job loss or a slowdown in economic growth.
Employers see big benefits, too. Workers stay on the job longer, reducing turnover and training costs. They’re also significantly more productive, according to researchers studying wage increases in the United Kingdom.
There are big benefits for broader society as well. Poverty goes down, as does reliance on public assistance programs—one of the few things both Democrats and Republicans can agree is a net positive. Also improved are infant health and adult mental health outcomes, including a significant reduction in depression. (At a time when one in six Americans pops an anti-depressant every day, this seems particularly important.)
If so much research shows significantly raising the minimum wage has a major net-positive impact, what’s the story with the UW study?
One of the major limitations of the study, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) points out, is that the data it analyzed excluded business with multiple locations, such as chain restaurants and big box retailers. So the 40% of employees they left out work at places like McDonald's, Best Buy, and other stores that rely heavily on the low-wage workers who got the actual boost. That is a highly significant oversight.
The UW study also draws what the EPI calls "implausible findings." Since high-paying jobs went up during the period that low-paying jobs went down, the study implies that the minimum wage hike created better jobs for the rich at the expense of the poor. But this explanation fails to take into account the overall robustness and gentrification of Seattle's economy—a much more reasonable explanation for the disparity.
Given these flaws, it's no wonder that UW's findings diverge greatly from the broader body of research on this topic, much of which the UW researchers themselves cite.
Raising the minimum wage—at the city, state, or federal level, where it remains an unlivable $7.25 an hour—is still a reliable solution to the scourge of inequality. Research should continue to look critically at its impact, but so far the only credible research gives the policy a big thumps up.
Josh Hoxie is director of the Project on Opportunity and Taxation at the Institute for Policy Studies and co-editor of Inequality.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment