November, 21 2013, 12:11pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Derrick Plummer, 202-466-1576; Giovanna Vitale, 646-200-5334; Alex Edwards, 810-986-0880
Walmart Workers, Community Allies to Hold 1500 Protests Across Country on Black Friday
Protests in Los Angeles, Miami, Bay Area, Chicago, Seattle, Washington D.C., Minneapolis, Sacramento Mark Largest Mobilization of Working Families in Recent History
WASHINGTON
Walmart workers and community allies today announced plans leading up to and on Black Friday, saying 1500 protests are scheduled for across the country, in what is set to be one of the largest mobilizations of working families in American history. Workers are calling for an end to illegal retaliation, and for Walmart to publicly commit to improving labor standards, such as providing workers with more full time work and $25,000 a year. As the country's largest retailer and employer, Walmart makes more than $17 billion in profits, with the wealth of the Walton family totaling over $144.7 billion - equal to that of 42% of Americans.
"Black Friday 2013 will mark a turning point in American history," said Dorian Warren, associate professor at Columbia University. "Fifteen hundred protests against Walmart is unprecedented. Working families are fighting back like never before - and have the support of America behind them.
Emboldened by news from Walmart CEO Bill Simon that as many as 825,000 workers are paid less than $25,000 a year, workers and supporters are calling for better jobs nationwide. Major protests are planned in more than a dozen metropolitan cities, including Los Angeles, Chicago, Bay Area, Seattle, Sacramento, Miami, Minneapolis and Washington, DC.
The announcement follows revelations this week that many Walmart workers don't have enough money tocover Thanksgiving dinner for their families. A photo from a Canton, Ohio store set the internet abuzz Monday, with workers, customersand commentatorspointing to a food drive set up for Walmart's own employees as proof that the retailer pays its workers poverty wages.
"Walmart's right that associates do stick together and look out for each other. We have to because Walmart and the Waltons seem to be fine with the financial struggles that we're all facing," said Barbara Gertz, a five-year Walmart employee from Colorado. "We're are all in the same situation, one that Walmart creates by paying us poverty wages that aren't enough to cover holiday meals. We don't want handouts; we want an employer that pays us enough to afford Thanksgiving dinner - and dinner every night of the year."
Workers and community supporters have been inspired by actions across the country in recent weeks. In Los Angeles, workers went on a two-day strike that culminated in the largest-ever act of civil disobedience against Walmart, and last week, workers in Seattle, Chicago, Ohioand Dallas joined them in walking off their jobs.
The strikes, which call for an end to illegal retaliation at Walmart, come as the federal labor board this week issued a decision to prosecute Walmart for widespread violationsof its workers' rights. The decision will provide additional protection for Walmart's 1.3 million employees when they are speaking out for better jobs. The Board will prosecute Walmart's illegal firings and disciplinary actions involving more than 117 workers, including those who went on strike last June.
With the Labor Relations Board moves forward to seek a settlement that could include the reinstatement of fired workers, a group of Walmart employees who were illegally retaliated against are traveling to Bentonville, Arkansas to call on Walmart CEO Bill Simon to reinstate them immediately. Early Friday morning, November 22, the fired workers will visit Home Office to urge Walmart to live up to the anti-retaliation policy it professes to follow.
"I'm traveling to Bentonville with other workers who were wrongfully fired because Walmart needs to hear from us directly: we want our jobs back, and we want you to put theanti-retaliation policy you talk about into practice," said Jeanna Slate, a fired striker, mother and grandmother from rural Texas who is traveling to Bentonville. "Walmart makes $17 billion dollars in profits while the majority of its workers makeless than $25,000 a year. Walmart can do better."
Walmart workers have escalated their online organizing andcommunity outreach ahead of Black Friday 2013, allowing customers and community members to join the fight for $25,000 and an end to illegal retaliation. Chicago worker Charmaine Givens-Thomas launched an online petitionasking President Obama to meet with Walmart workers, which currently has more than 100,000 signers; individuals can sponsor a Walmart striker online; and a new online portal, www.associatevoices.com, allows associates to step forward and request Black Friday protests at their stores. Just weeks since the launch, the number of cities that have requested a Black Friday rally is well ahead of the number at this point in 2012.
National leaders and community groups representing tens of millions of Americans, from every corner of thecountry, will join workers at protests leading up to and on Black Friday. Members of Congress, including Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN); women's groups including the National Organization for Women and Family Values @ Work; and environmental and consumer protection organizations such as The Sierra Club, the National Consumers League and Food and Water Watch, have all pledged support for the courageous workers, saying their fight is a fight for all Americans.
"I learned about the growing protests online, and after seeing the news that Walmart was asking its own employees to feed one another, I knew I had to speak out," said Rev. Holly Beaumont, organizing director for Interfaith Worker Justice New Mexico, who plans to join protests around Black Friday. "It's not right. Anyone who works hard shouldn't have to rely on food stamps, or charity from their coworkers, just to get by."
Growing voices in business and the media have denounced Walmart for its unsustainable business model. A Bloomberg columnist recently called the company the true "welfare queen," noting that Walmart is the largest consumer of taxpayer-supported aid. Following third quarter revenues that fell short of expectations, Forbes added that shoppers, shareholders and the retail giant have reason to worry. And the New York Times argued that Walmart employees deserve both raises and to have the federal government behind them.
As calls for change intensify, academics, business experts and think tanks are offering ways that Walmart can increase workers' wages without costing taxpayers, customers or the business a dime. A Fortune article pointed to investors wanting change- Walmart could easily raise wages by 50% without affecting its stock value. And public policy organization Demos released a report this week finding that Walmart could easily payevery employee $14.89without raising prices by simply not buying its own stock to further enrich the Walton family.
Walmart's low-wage model winds up costing us all," said Amy Traub, Demos senior policy analyst and co-author of A Higher Wage is Possible. "When the biggest employer in the country doesn't pay its workers enough to spend money in their communities, we don't get the economic growth that creates more jobs. And when jobs don't pay enough to support a family, taxpayers end up subsidizing Walmart's workforce costs through public benefits like Medicaid and nutrition assistance."
For more information on Black Friday protests, visit www.BlackFridayProtests.org and follow the conversation and see photos at @ChangeWalmart, #WalmartStrikers and changewalmart.tumblr.com.
OUR Walmart works to ensure that every Associate, regardless of his or her title, age, race, or sex, is respected at Walmart. We join together to offer strength and support in addressing the challenges that arise in our stores and our company everyday.
LATEST NEWS
Report Urges Curbs on Development of 'Deceptive and Dangerous' Human-Like AI
"Lawmakers and regulators must step up and confront this threat before it's too late," the report's author warns.
Sep 26, 2023
Tech companies are creating and deploying artificial intelligence systems "that deceptively mimic human behavior to aggressively sell their products and services, dispense dubious medical and mental health advice, and trap people in psychologically dependent, potentially toxic relationships with machines," according to a report published Tuesday by Public Citizen.
The report—entitled Chatbots Are Not People: Designed-In Dangers of Human-Like AI Systems—asserts that "conversational artificial intelligence (AI) is among the most striking technologies to emerge from the generative AI boom kicked off by the release of OpenAI's ChatGPT. It also has the potential to be among the most dangerous."
"The subtle and not-so-subtle design choices made by the businesses behind these technologies have produced chatbots that engage well enough in fluid, spontaneous back-and-forth conversations to pose as people and to deceptively present themselves as possessing uniquely human qualities they in fact lack," the publication warns.
The report continues:
Deceptive anthropomorphic design elements... are fooling people into falsely believing AI systems possess consciousness, understanding, and sentience. These features range from AI using first-person pronouns, such as "I" and "me," to expressions of emotion and opinion, to human-like avatars with faces, limbs, and bodies. Even worse, AI can be combined with emerging and frequently undisclosed technologies—such as facial and emotional recognition software—to hypercharge its manipulative and commercial capabilities.
This, the publication says, is happening "with little or no testing, oversight, and accountability—including in places no one expects them, like the drive-thru at fast food restaurants, sometimes without any disclosure to customers."
The report contains a series of policy recommendations including:
- Banning counterfeit humans in commercial transactions, both online and offline;
- Restricting and regulating deceptive anthropomorphizing techniques;
- Banning anthropomorphic AI from marketing to, targeting, or collecting data on kids;
- Banning AI from exploiting psychological vulnerabilities and data on users;
- Special scrutiny and testing for all health-related AI systems—especially those intended for use by vulnerable people; and
- Severe penalties for lawbreakers, including banning them from developing and deploying AI systems.
"The tech sector is recklessly rolling out AI systems masquerading as people that can hijack our attention, exploit our trust, and manipulate our emotions," Public Citizen researcher and report author Rick Claypool said in a statement. "Already Big Businesses and bad actors can't resist using these fake humans to manipulate consumers."
"Lawmakers and regulators must step up and confront this threat before it's too late," he added.
In July, the Biden administration secured voluntary risk management commitments from seven leading AI companies, a move that was welcomed by experts—who also urged lawmakers and regulators to take further action.
A report on the dangers of AI published earlier this year by Claypool and tech accountability advocate Cheyenne Hunt urged a pause in the development of generative artificial intelligence systems "until meaningful government safeguards are in place to protect the public."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FCC Chair Confirms Plan to Reinstate Net Neutrality Rules Eviscerated Under Trump
"To allow a handful of monopoly-aspiring gatekeepers to control access to the internet is a direct threat to our democracy," said Michael Copps, a Common Cause special adviser and former FCC commissioner.
Sep 26, 2023
Open internet advocates across the United States celebrated on Tuesday as Federal Communications Commission Chair Jessica Rosenworcel announced her highly anticipated proposal to reestablish FCC oversight of broadband and restore net neutrality rules.
"We thank the FCC for moving swiftly to begin the process of reinstating net neutrality regulations," said ACLU senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff. "The internet is our nation's primary marketplace of ideas—and it's critical that access to that marketplace is not controlled by the profit-seeking whims of powerful telecommunications giants."
Rosenworcel—appointed to lead the commission by President Joe Biden—discussed the history of net neutrality and her new plan to treat broadband as a public utility in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., which came on the heels of the U.S. Senate's recent confirmation of Anna Gomez to a long-vacant FCC seat.
Back in 2005, "the agency made clear that when it came to net neutrality, consumers should expect that their broadband providers would not block, throttle, or engage in paid prioritization of lawful internet traffic," she recalled. "In other words, your broadband provider had no business cutting off access to websites, slowing down internet services, and censoring online speech."
"Giant corporations and their lobbyists... will try every trick to block or delay the agency from restoring net neutrality."
After a decade of policymaking and litigation, net neutrality rules were finalized in 2015. However, a few years later—under former FCC Chair Ajit Pai, an appointee of ex-President Donald Trump—the commission caved to industry pressure and repealed them.
"The public backlash was overwhelming. People lit up our phone lines, clogged our email inboxes, and jammed our online comment system to express their disapproval," noted Rosenworcel, who was a commissioner at the time and opposed the repeal. "So today we begin a process to make this right."
The chair is proposing to reclassify broadband under Title II of the Communications Act, which "is the part of the law that gives the FCC clear authority to serve as a watchdog over the communications marketplace and look out for the public interest," she explained. "Title II took on special importance in the net neutrality debate because the courts have ruled that the FCC has clear authority to enforce open internet policies if broadband internet is classified as a Title II service."
"On issue after issue, reclassifying broadband as a Title II service would help the FCC serve the public interest more efficiently and effectively," she pointed out, detailing how it relates to public safety, national security, cybersecurity, network resilience and reliability, privacy, broadband deployment, and robotexts.
Rosenworcel intends to release the full text of the proposal on Thursday and hold a vote regarding whether to kick off rulemaking on October 19. While Brendan Carr, one of the two Republican commissioners, signaled his opposition to the Title II approach on Tuesday, Gomez's confirmation earlier this month gives Democrats a 3-2 majority at the FCC.
"Giant corporations and their lobbyists blocked President Biden from filling the final FCC seat for more than two years, and they will try every trick to block or delay the agency from restoring net neutrality now," Demand Progress communications director Maria Langholz warned Tuesday. "The commission must remain resolute and fully restore free and open internet protections to ensure broadband service providers like Comcast and Verizon treat all content equally."
"Americans' internet experience should not be at the whims of corporate executives whose primary concerns are the pockets of their stakeholders and the corporations' bottom line," she added, also applauding the chair.
Free Press co-CEO Jessica J. González similarly praised Rosenworcel and stressed that "without Title II, broadband users are left vulnerable to discrimination, content throttling, dwindling competition, extortionate and monopolistic prices, billing fraud, and other shady behavior."
"As this proceeding gets under way, we will hear all manner of lies from the lobbyists and lawyers representing big phone and cable companies," she predicted. "They'll say anything and everything to avoid being held accountable. But broadband providers and their spin doctors are deeply out of touch with people across the political spectrum, who are fed up with high prices and unreliable services. These people demand a referee on the field to call fouls and issue penalties when broadband companies are being unfair."
Like Rosenworcel, in her Tuesday speech, González also highlighted that "one thing we learned from the Covid-19 pandemic is that broadband is essential infrastructure—it enables us to access education, employment, healthcare, and more."
That "more" includes civic engagement, as leaders at Common Cause noted Tuesday. Ishan Mehta, who directs the group's Media and Democracy Program, said that "the internet has fundamentally changed how people are civically engaged and is critical to participating in society today. It is the primary communications platform, a virtual public square, and has been a powerful organizing tool, allowing social justice movements to gain momentum and widespread support."
After the Trump-era repeal, Mehta explained, "we saw broadband providers throttle popular video streaming services, degrade video quality, forcing customers to pay higher prices for improved quality, offer service plans that favor their own services over competitors, and make hollow, voluntary, and unenforceable promises not to disconnect their customers during the pandemic."
Given how broadband providers have behaved, Michael Copps, a Common Cause special adviser and former FCC commissioner, said that "to allow a handful of monopoly-aspiring gatekeepers to control access to the internet is a direct threat to our democracy."
Rosenworcel's speech came a day after U.S. Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) led over two dozen of their colleagues in sending a letter calling for the restoration of net neutrality protections. The pair said in a statement Tuesday that "broadband is not a luxury. It is an essential utility and it is imperative that the FCC's authority reflects the necessary nature of the internet in Americans' lives today."
"We need net neutrality so that small businesses are not shoved into online slow lanes, so that powerful social media companies cannot stifle competition, and so that users can always freely speak their minds on social media and advocate for the issues that are most important to them," they said. "We applaud Chairwoman Rosenworcel for her leadership and look forward to working with the FCC to ensure a just broadband future for everyone."
Keep ReadingShow Less
NY Judge Rules Trump Defrauded Banks, Insurers by Overvaluing His Worth and Assets
The judge in the case wrote that the Trump Organization's deceptive business practices were something out of "a fantasy world, not the real world."
Sep 26, 2023
This is a breaking story... Please check back for possible updates.
A U.S. federal judge on Tuesday ruled that former President Donald Trump—the twice-impeached GOP presidential front-runner facing 91 federal and state criminal charges in four separate cases—committed fraud over years while building his real estate businesses.
The Associated Pressreports Judge Arthur Engoron of the New York Supreme Court's 1st Judicial District ruled in a civil suit that Trump, his company—the Trump Organization—and other defendants including his sons Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. and longtime chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg, lied to banks, insurers, and others by massively exaggerating the value of his assets and net worth in documents used to secure deals and financing.
In his ruling—which comes days before the commencement of a non-jury trial—Engoron ordered the revocation of Trump's New York business licenses, a move that will likely make it impossible for the Trump Organization to do business in the state. Engoron also said he would mandate an independent monitor to oversee Trump Organization operations.
The judge also ordered the defendants to propose up to three potential independent receivers to manage the dissolution of the canceled limited liability companies within 10 days.
"In defendants' world: Rent-regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments; restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land; restrictions can evaporate into thin air; a disclaimer by one party casting responsibility on another party exonerates the other party's lies," wrote Engoron. "That is a fantasy world, not the real world."
Engoron sanctioned five of Trump's lawyers, including Christopher Kise, who represents the former president in the federal case over his alleged illegal retention and mishandling of classified documents. The attorneys must each pay $7,500.
Kise previously said Trump's fraudulent valuations were a sign of his "investment genius."
Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the civil suit, says the former president at times overvalued his assets by up to $2.2 billion.
According toThe New York Times:
Ms. James started investigating Mr. Trump in March 2019 and filed a lawsuit against him last September, accusing him of "staggering" fraud in representing the value of his apartment buildings, hotels, and golf clubs, among other assets. Her filings have accused Mr. Trump of using simple, duplicitous tricks to multiply the value of his signature properties, from Trump Tower to Mar-a-Lago.
James' lawsuit is seeking a fine of around $250 million and a ban on Trump family members leading the Trump Organization. Trump denies any wrongdoing and accuses James of politically motivated persecution.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
Independent, nonprofit journalism needs your help.
Please Pitch In
Today!
Today!