SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
paid sick leave
Missouri's Racist Gerrymander Is an Attack on Working Voters
As these attacks target communities of color, we’re witnessing the systematic disenfranchisement of people who’ve fought hardest for economic justice and workers’ rights.
Sep 13, 2025
As a Wendy’s worker, mother of two, and leader with Missouri Workers Center and Stand Up KC in Kansas City, I’ve dedicated my life to fighting for working families. I’ve worked in fast food for over 20 years, and I know what it means to struggle to barely make ends meet while corporations make record profits off our backs.
Today, I’m writing as someone who believes deeply in democracy, especially as a group of anti-worker Missouri lawmakers prepare to divide our community so that they can silence our voices, including my own.
States usually redraw electoral district boundaries every 10 years following the US Census to account for population shifts and demographic changes. But for political reasons, Texas lawmakers have gone ahead and redrawn their political map. And now several other states, including Missouri, are trying to do the same thing.
The NAACP is suing the State of Missouri to stop this action, calling it an “unconstitutional redistricting process” and a “blatant effort to silence Black voters and strip them of their fundamental rights.”
In Missouri’s 5th Congressional District, where I live, the clear aim of this gerrymandering is to dilute the voting power of Black and brown communities instead of letting us choose leaders who reflect our values. This isn’t just politics as usual. It’s a calculated assault on democracy and a power grab for an elite few.
As these attacks target communities of color, we’re witnessing the systematic disenfranchisement of people who’ve fought hardest for economic justice and workers’ rights. These same corporate-backed lawmakers recently repealed guaranteed sick days for more than 700,000 workers, including me and my coworkers.
My community deserves a voice in choosing our representation instead of having politicians strip it away—politicians who care more about protecting themselves instead of the people they were elected to represent.
A couple years ago, I got sick with what I thought was the flu. I didn’t have health insurance, so I couldn’t see a doctor. I stayed home from my shift at Taco Bell to protect my coworkers and customers from a potentially contagious illness. I was already falling behind on rent after management cut my hours prior to getting sick, and taking time to recover was the final straw. I missed $450—over half my rent. I came home from work to an eviction notice. My son Rashaad and I lost our home.
As a parent, few things are more heartbreaking than not being able to care for your children properly. Had I been able to take a few days off while still getting paid, we could have stayed housed. I couldn’t help getting sick, but the greedy corporation I worked for chose to abandon me as soon as I stopped making them rich.
If I had paid sick days, that wouldn’t happen. And ironically enough, I previously helped win paid sick days through a ballot initiative. Despite promises to respect the will of the people, Missouri politicians sided with big business over working families and overturned our right to paid leave. By gutting this policy, these corporate-backed politicians didn’t just force workers like me to go to work sick—they stole money from our pockets and food from our cupboards.
This redistricting scheme is clearly part of a two-pronged plan to suppress voter participation and double down on attacking the rights of working people. In fact, they’re using the same special session they’ve called to pass redistricting to also destroy a 115-year old ballot initiative process in our state constitution that won us—across party lines—paid leave, Medicaid expansion, and restored abortion rights.
But working people like me don’t back down when our lives are on the line. We stay committed to the fight for our rights, from the streets, to the strike line, to the statehouse. My community deserves a voice in choosing our representation instead of having politicians strip it away—politicians who care more about protecting themselves instead of the people they were elected to represent.
We were already living in modern-day economic slavery. Now they’re trying to put us in political slavery too. But we won’t let them. Across this country, working people will not be silenced or divided. Our political leaders need to stop trying to rig the rules and let the people decide who represents us.
Keep ReadingShow Less
3 Simple Things a Republican Congress Could Do to Help Workers (But Probably Won’t)
If Republicans in Congress were willing to listen to the voices of their constituents, they could act immediately to help millions of workers in tangible ways.
Sep 01, 2025
When US President Donald Trump prevailed on election night, headlines touted the emergence of the GOP as the party of the working class. Just as Trump has been quick to market himself as putting “America workers first,” a small but increasing number of Republicans in Congress have also taken up the cause, championing their pro-worker credentials and even expressing tentative support for initiatives to promote unions and workers’ rights—conversations that would have been unheard of a decade ago.
This shift in messaging is hardly surprising—recent polling shows increasing support for unions and pro-worker initiatives across the political spectrum, even in polling sponsored by Republican-leaning organizations. But while President Trump has publicly touted his support for proposals like “no tax on tips” (a misleading talking point for a proposal that may hurt more workers than it helps), the White House has simultaneously launched an all-out assault on workers’ rights—effectively shuttering the National Labor Relations Board, stripping collective bargaining rights from 1 million federal workers, and proposing to scale back minimum wage, overtime, and health and safety protections for millions of workers.
It’s clear that President Trump has no real interest in helping working people. But it’s equally noteworthy that “pro-worker” congressional Republicans are doing very little to counter these attacks, and have no real agenda of their own to help workers succeed.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Workers have told elected officials—again and again—what government can do to help them. When working people are given the opportunity to vote directly on pro-worker policies through state and local ballot initiatives, strong majorities of voters—across party lines—support these policies. If Republicans in Congress were willing to listen to the voices of their constituents, they could act immediately to help millions of workers in tangible ways.
(1) A $15 minimum wage by 2026. Even someone who is working full time, year-round at the current minimum wage of $7.25 will live in poverty. While Democrats have introduced the leading proposal to raise the minimum wage to $17 per hour, Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley has introduced a different bill that would raise the wage to $15 by 2026—still a huge improvement that would benefit nearly 40 million American workers.
Raising the minimum wage is immensely popular, with 34 states having already increased their minimum wages above the federal level. Ten states already have minimum wages of $15 or more, and by the end of 2026 Florida and Nebraska will join this group—through ballot initiatives that passed with overwhelming public support. If the Republican senators and representatives from Florida and Nebraska would follow their constituents’ lead and join Sen. Hawley to support a raise, there would be a majority vote to pass a $15 minimum wage in both houses of Congress.
(2) Paid sick days. As of March 2023, nearly 28 million US workers did not have a guarantee of even a single day of paid sick leave. The Healthy Families Act (HFA) would let private sector workers earn up to seven paid sick days per year, benefiting 34 million workers and ensuring that they do not have to make impossible choices between their jobs and caring for themselves or a sick family member.
In the absence of federal protections, many states have taken the initiative to help workers. As of December 2024, 18 states have enacted laws that require private employers to provide paid sick leave. The three most recent state laws passed last November in Nebraska, Alaska, and Missouri by wide voter margins (though the Missouri initiative was subsequently repealed by the legislature and the governor). Even excluding the Missouri delegation, a total of 48 GOP representatives and four senators come from states that have already passed a paid sick days guarantee similar to the HFA—thus, paid sick days should easily have enough votes to win majority support in both houses of Congress.
(3) Restoring the Federal Right to Organize. As of July, 2025 almost 3 million people were employed by the federal government. Federal workers comprise a significant portion of the workforce in many states across the country. These public servants have faced mass firings and unprecedented attacks in the new Trump administration, including an executive order purporting to strip nearly 1 million federal workers of their right to form and join a union.
Whether in federal, state, or local government, both public servants and the people they serve benefit from collective bargaining. The process is a valuable tool to resolve conflicts early, reduce litigation, improve morale, and help attract and retain a qualified workforce, all of which helps the government function better. Thirty-four states and the District of Columbia recognize this and provide some collective bargaining rights for their public sector workers. When politicians attempt to revoke these rights, voters can use ballot initiatives to protect them—as in 2011 when Ohio voters overwhelmingly rejected an effort to strip rights from their public servants.
The Protect America’s Workforce Act (PAWA), recently introduced in the House of Representatives, would reverse the Trump executive order and protect federal workers’ right to form and join a union. This popular legislation has 222 cosponsors, including seven Republicans. Two Senate Republicans—Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska—have already voted for an unsuccessful amendment on the Budget resolution to protect collective bargaining rights for federal workers. If the two GOP senators from Ohio would follow their constituents’ lead in supporting public sector collective bargaining rights, PAWA could pass both houses of Congress and restore these important protections to more than 1 million American workers.
More than seven months into this Congress’ work, the fact that none of these commonsense proposals are even under discussion by our nation’s elected leaders sends a strong message about this Congress’ priorities. And it is manifestly clear that Republicans in Congress stand with President Trump, and not with working Americans.
These three simple proposals are overwhelmingly popular with people across the political spectrum and would collectively benefit millions of American workers. A Republican-controlled Congress that was willing to work across party lines could move these proposals to the president’s desk in a matter of days. (While the filibuster might prove a stumbling block in the Senate, there are opportunities every Congress to consider legislation under rules that provide a simple majority vote if proponents are properly motivated.) It’s time for congressional leaders to step up this Labor Day and put helping working families front and center on their agendas.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Slap in the Face': Missouri's GOP Governor Repeals Voter-Approved Paid Sick Leave
"The governor's action today demonstrates the absolute disdain Republicans have for working Missourians."
Jul 11, 2025
Missouri's Republican governor on Thursday signed legislation repealing the paid sick leave portion of a ballot measure that the state's voters approved with nearly 60% support in the 2024 election.
The short-lived provision, which will officially be repealed on August 28, required Missouri employers to provide workers with an hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours of work. Businesses with 15 or more employees were required to provide up to 56 hours of earned paid sick time per year, and businesses with fewer than 15 employees were required to provide at least 40 hours of paid sick time.
The Missouri Budget Project estimated before its passage that the ballot measure's paid sick leave benefits would reach 728,000 private-sector workers in the state.
The bill that Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe signed Thursday, known as H.B. 567, also restricts increases in the state's minimum wage. The voter-approved initiative called for raising the state's minimum wage to $15 an hour in 2026 and indexing it to inflation thereafter. H.B. 567 eliminates the inflation adjustment.
The Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, a business lobbying group, characterized H.B. 567 as its top legislative priority. The bill was led by state Rep. Sherri Gallick (R-62) and state Sen. Mike Bernskoetter (R-6).
Kehoe's Facebook post announcing his signature was deluged with comments from Missourians decrying the governor's decision to overturn the will of the public.
"We the people collected signatures," wrote one commenter. "We voted. And we passed Prop A into law. Remember you work for us. How dare you reverse the voice of your people?! The people you took an oath to serve."
Missouri Jobs With Justice, which helped lead the campaign for the ballot measure, said in a statement that "with Governor Kehoe's decision to sign H.B. 567 into law, workers will again face increased economic insecurity when balancing being sick with maintaining their job."
The group noted that Kehoe's support for repealing paid sick leave came after he "recently called a special session to approve spending millions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize billionaire-owned stadiums." On Thursday, Kehoe also signed legislation slashing the state's capital gains tax.
"Simply put, Missouri workers and their families do not deserve to see their newly earned paid sick leave stripped away," said Missouri Jobs With Justice. "Not only is this a slap in the face to workers asking for an opportunity to earn paid sick leave, it’s an insult to over 57% of Missourians who voted for Proposition A in November."
Throughout the process of pushing H.B. 567 through the Legislature, Missouri Republicans openly voiced contempt for voters who supported the paid sick leave and minimum wage initiative. One GOP lawmaker, state Rep. Mitch Boggs, said, "Of course the people voted for it."
"It'd be like asking your teenager if he wanted a checkbook," said Boggs.
State Rep. Ashley Aune (D-14), the Democratic leader in the Missouri House, said Thursday that "the governor's action today demonstrates the absolute disdain Republicans have for working Missourians."
"But in stripping workers of their legal right to earned sick leave," Aune added, "the governor and his allies have probably guaranteed this issue will be back on the ballot next year as a constitutional amendment that will place worker protections beyond their reach."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Brain Drain': Study Shows Workers Fleeing States With Abortion Bans
"Workers are not willing to trade their health and autonomy for a paycheck," said one advocate.
Mar 03, 2025
Republican lawmakers across the United States are determined to force people who become pregnant to carry their pregnancies to term by passing abortion bans and "fetal personhood" laws, but a new report shows that in many states, they are choosing choosing restrictions on reproductive rights over their states' workforce.
" Workers are not willing to trade their health and autonomy for a paycheck," said Dr. Jamila K. Taylor, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) as the group released a report Monday on "brain drain" in states with abortion bans.
The group analyzed a survey of 10,000 adults by Morning Consult and found that 1 in 5 respondents who are planning to have children in the next decade has moved to a new state due to abortion restrictions, or knows someone who has.
Among people with advanced degrees, 14% have moved out-of-state because of anti-abortion laws or know someone who has.
Nancy Northrup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), which advised on the study, said the report showed that "reproductive healthcare is a personal issue and workplace imperative."
"For business leaders and policymakers, protecting reproductive rights isn't just the right thing to do—it's essential for talent and long-term economic stability," said Northrup.
The two groups said the study showed employees' demands for policymakers and workplaces in states that are hostile to abortion rights.
"Access to reproductive healthcare is a fundamental component of workplace equity, and businesses can no longer afford to ignore the impact of abortion restrictions on their workforce."
Fifty-seven percent of workers who plan to have children prioritize employers who offer reproductive healthcare benefits and 56% person think companies should actively engage with lawmakers to protect abortion rights.
In states with restrictive abortion laws, people broadly support family-friendly workplace policies, according to the report, including 83% of Mississippi residents who back paid sick leave; 56% of people in West Virginia who think employers should offer paid time off for fertility treatments; and 70% of people in Alabama who support paid leave for pregnancy-related healthcare.
"Access to reproductive healthcare is a fundamental component of workplace equity, and businesses can no longer afford to ignore the impact of abortion restrictions on their workforce," said Taylor. "Our report makes it clear that companies who fail to address these needs risk losing their competitive edge. To build a resilient workforce and thriving economy, it's up to corporate leaders and lawmakers to take decisive action and make reproductive health care a top priority."
Workers expect their employers to not only provide reproductive healthcare and family-friendly benefits, but also to "stand up for these rights at a policy level," the report reads.
"Companies can play a critical role in helping to shape more accessible state policies and creating an environment that respects and safeguards access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare," it continues.
The report suggests that with workers thinking of moving to new states to get away from anti-abortion laws, employers will likely be incentivized to help ensure their states safeguard "access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare."
"Most employees are deeply concerned about their ability to access healthcare services while building their families, and they expect their employers to take an active role in protecting them," reads the report. "Accepting that reality and then making decisions from there will enable companies to attract and retain talent and, by advocating to improve the reproductive landscape across the U.S., drive economic progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
10 Wins Against Inequality to Celebrate in 2024
Champions in the fight against inequality face formidable challenges in 2025. But by working together at all levels—from the shop floor to state houses to the halls of Congress—we can still find ways to build power.
Dec 31, 2024
In dark times like these, shining a light on successful efforts to reverse our country’s extreme inequality is more important than ever. As we looked back on 2024, we actually found plenty to celebrate. Here are 10 inspiring wins that deserve more attention.
1. Labor Breakthrough in the South
Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, Tennessee voted overwhelmingly in April to join the United Auto Workers (UAW), a landmark win for labor organizing in the South. The region has suffered deeply because of its low-road, anti-union economic model. Seven out of ten states with the highest levels of poverty are in the South, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
Whatever happens on the national political stage over the next four years, local communities can still win important fights for a more just society.
Another UAW election, at a Mercedes-Benz facility in Vance, Alabama, where management was more aggressively anti-union, went the other way in May. But the union has vowed to continue organizing in the region. “This is a David and Goliath fight,” UAW President Shawn Fain said after the Mercedes loss. “Sometimes Goliath wins a battle. But David wins the war.”
2. Union Momentum at Amazon
Organizing workers at Amazon—now the nation’s second largest private employer—has been a white whale of the labor movement for years. Aside from a breakthrough union election win in Staten Island, puncturing the e-commerce giant’s anti-labor strategy has been challenging. That is, until this year, when the Teamsters made sizable gains.
The National Labor Relations Board ruled this summer that Amazon should be considered a joint employer of the delivery drivers it subcontracts, opening up that class of workers to organize. And organize they did—according to the Teamsters, over 5,000 drivers have joined the union at nine Amazon locations. Warehouse workers have made advances as well. In California, Amazon employees in San Francisco and at the company’s air hub in San Bernardino are now demanding union recognition.
3. Grocery Mega-Merger Blocked
For the past two years, the United Food and Commercial Workers union has led a coalition of more than 100 organizations against the proposed merger of grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons. The union predicted the mega-merger would result in “lost jobs, closed stores, food deserts, and higher prices.”
By contrast, corporate executives stood to make a killing. At Albertsons alone, the proposed merger agreement would’ve delivered as much as $146 million to the firm’s top 10 officials.
On December 10, one federal court judge and another in Washington state sided with the Federal Trade Commission and issued temporary injunctions against the deal. The following day, Albertsons threw in the towel on what would’ve been the biggest grocery store merger in U.S. history. “This is the first time the FTC has ever sought to block a merger not just because it’s gonna be bad for consumers, but also for workers,” FTC chair Lina Khan said shortly after the decision.
4. Ballot Wins on Taxes, Wages, Paid Leave
Despite the red wave on November 5, voters in several states passed ballot initiatives to adopt inequality-fighting policies that most Republican politicians oppose.
In the red states of Nebraska, Missouri, and Alaska, voters approved guaranteed paid leave, while Missouri and Alaska also passed state minimum wage hikes.
Washington state voters rejected a hedge fund-financed ballot proposal to repeal the state’s path-breaking capital gains tax on the rich. They also beat back an effort to gut a state-operated long-term care insurance program. In Illinois, voters adopted a nonbinding measure expressing support for an extra 3% tax on income of over $1 million.
5. TurboTax Got Turbo-Trounced
In 2024, for the first time ever, over 100,000 Americans filed their tax returns digitally directly to the IRS. The agency’s Direct File system went live in 12 pilot states, breaking the dominance that for-profit tax preparation companies have enjoyed for years.
“This is an important fight to ensure greedy tax prep companies don’t continue to rake in money from filers who are simply doing their civic duty,” wrote Public Citizen’s Susan Harley for Inequality.org.
Direct file also advances racial justice. Color of Change and the Groundwork Collaborative exposed how Intuit’s TurboTax and H&R Block target Black and low-income communities for costly and unnecessary services.
Unfortunately, this fight is not over. House Republicans are urging President-elect Donald Trump to kill the IRS’s free direct file service on day one of his second administration.
6. Biden’s Worker Protection Spree
President Joe Biden adopted a range of pathbreaking executive actions to protect U.S. workers—including safeguards against toiling in extreme heat, broader overtime pay coverage, and new measures protecting organizing rights. He also authorized rules to crack down on bosses who misclassify employees as independent contractors or force them to sign noncompete agreements.
The beauty of executive actions: no need for Congressional approval. The downside: The next president has the power to roll them back.
Will that happen under Trump, a self-declared but dubious champion of the working class? We shall see. In the meantime, the National Employment Law Project and several other organizations have put together a guide on how state policymakers could enact similar standards at the subfederal level.
7. Grounding Private Jets
Did you know that private jets pollute 10 to 20 times more per passenger than commercial airplanes? And the typical private jet owner, with a net worth of nearly $200 million, actually pays a far smaller share of air safety fees than commercial coach passengers, according to Institute for Policy Studies research.
In 2024, Stop Private Jet Expansion, a 100-organization coalition, won two major victories in their campaign to block the expansion of New England’s largest private jet airport, Hanscom Field outside Boston. Massachusetts state rejected the developer’s environmental impact submission, demanding supplemental information. As part of a comprehensive climate bill, the state legislature also updated the charter of Massport, the agency that will decide the future of the airport, to require them to consider carbon emissions and climate change in their decision-making.
8. Arming Millions of Davids Against Wall Street Goliaths
Elon Musk has called for “deleting” the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. What’s his problem with this federal agency? For Musk and his finance bro buddies, it appears the CFPB has been overly effective in helping ordinary Americans stand up to big money interests.
Recently the agency announced it’s forcing shady “credit repair” companies to return $1.8 billion in illegal junk fees to 4.3 million Americans. The agency also just issued new limits on overdraft fees that will save consumers billions more. During its nearly 14-year history, the CFPB has won nearly $21 billion in compensation for victims of fraud, racial discrimination in lending, and other financial abuse.
“Weakening the CFPB, slowing its work, or steering it to favor industry over the public interest,” explains the advocacy group Americans for Financial Reform, “would give bad actors a green light to do their worst and further deepen this country’s racial wealth gap.”
9. Public Money for the Public Good
For four decades, procurement rules made it difficult for local and state policymakers to ensure that federally funded projects create good jobs. With megabillions in new public investment about to flow into infrastructure and clean energy projects, a labor-community alliance known as the Local Opportunities Coalition led the charge to get rid of these anti-worker vestiges of the conservative Reagan era.
Finally, in 2024, the Biden administration got the job done. Now state and local governments can give companies a leg up in bidding competitions if they commit to creating specific numbers of jobs with minimum levels of pay and benefits. They can also require hiring preferences for local workers and disadvantaged communities, ban the use of contract funds for union-busting, and prohibit employers from misclassifying workers as “independent contractors” to skirt labor laws.
10. Communities Standing up for Quality Care
Whatever happens on the national political stage over the next four years, local communities can still win important fights for a more just society.
One particularly inspiring example from 2024: the battles to protect county-owned nursing homes in rural Wisconsin against privatization. Study after study has shown that private equity-owned facilities have lower-quality care and higher mortality rates. And yet many Republican lawmakers are backing for-profit corporations’ efforts to take over this critical service.
As veteran community organizer George Goehl has reported, Wisconsin seniors put up a strong fight this year. They succeeded in ousting pro-privatization members of at least three county boards and are continuing to organize to protect their healthcare from corporate greed.
Champions in the fight against inequality face formidable challenges. But by working together at all levels—from the shop floor to state houses to the halls of Congress—we can still find ways to build power and move our country towards a just economy that works for everyone.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Record 88 US Jurisdictions to Raise Minimum Wages in 2025 as Federal Pay Floor Remains Stagnant
"It's time for Congress to deliver for workers on the federal level," said one advocate.
Dec 24, 2024
While the federal minimum wage hasn't budged from a paltry $7.25 an hour since the last time it was raised in 2009, states and local governments are taking action to boost wages in the face of rising costs.
A record 88 jurisdictions will raise their minimum wage floors by the end of the coming year, according to a report from the National Employment Law Project (NELP), a nonprofit advocacy organization. The 88 jurisdictions include 23 states and 65 cities and counties—of those, 70 jurisdictions are enacting wages that will reach or exceed $15 an hour for some or all employees, and 53 jurisdictions will enact a wage floor that reaches or exceeds $17 an hour for all or some workers.
The states enacting increases on January 1, 2025 include Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington, per NELP.
"Next year, Illinois's workers are getting another raise," Illinois Governor JB Pritzker announced proudly on X. Workers will be getting a minimum wage increase of $1 per hour in Illinois in 2025, from $14 to $15.
"In the absence of progress at the federal level, workers and advocates are continuing to take action at the ballot box, statehouses, and in their city councils. Thanks to years-long worker-led campaigns, these victories will help workers keep up with the rising cost of living, especially Black and brown workers who are disproportionately affected by low wages and economic insecurity," said Rebecca Dixon, president and CEO of the NELP in a statement.
"Now it's time for Congress to deliver for workers on the federal level," she added.
Arkansas, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Mexico, and West Virginia, which all have minimum wage laws above the federal rate of $7.25, are not slated to raise their minimum wages in 2025. Currently there 20 states with a minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, either because the state's minimum wage is $7.25 or below, or there is no state-mandated minimum wage, so the federal dollar amount applies, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
The NELP report highlights particularly consequential wage increase victories. For example, voters in the GOP-controlled state of Alaska approved a ballot initiative that raised the minimum wage to $15 by 2027 and also enacted a paid sick leave policy, according to NELP.
"Alaska is one of seven states that do not currently allow employers to subsidize their payroll costs through the use of tip credits, making this victory especially consequential for tipped workers," according to the report.
In Arizona, voters defeated Proposition 138 by a wide margin. The ballot measure was restaurant industry-backed and "would have cut wages for tipped workers by expanding the 'tip credit' from a fixed $3.00 less than the full minimum wage to 25% less than the full minimum wage," according to NELP.
Keep ReadingShow Less
State Victories Against Inequality to Celebrate Despite Bleak Election Day
Any near-term policy progress will have to start at the city and state levels and work its way up to the federal level. Three progressive tax victories from last night are an encouraging sign.
Nov 06, 2024
If you’ve ever questioned whether our country has an inequality problem, this election should provide all the evidence you need. As billionaires used their financial firepower to throw support their preferred candidates’ way, Americans who’ve been left behind took out their frustrations at the ballot box.
How do we get started on this next chapter in the fight to reverse extreme inequality? With Senate Republicans still short of a filibuster-proof supermajority, next year’s debate over the expiration of the Trump tax cuts could still present one opportunity.
But it’s also likely that any near-term policy progress will have to start at the city and state levels and work its way up to the federal level. Three progressive tax victories from last night are an encouraging sign.
In addition to these fair tax victories, I’m heartened by the passage of pro-worker reforms in several “red” states last night—in sharp contrast to the positions of their Republican representatives in the U.S. Congress.
Washington state’s Initiative 2109 was the most important tax-related ballot measure of the year. Hedge fund executive Brian Heywood bankrolled this campaign, hoping to repeal the state’s innovative capital gains tax on high earners.
With 62% of votes counted, the rollback proposal went down in a 63-37% landslide.
“This victory shows that advocacy in support of creating a more equitable tax code works,” Melinda Young-Flynn, communications director at the Washington State Budget and Policy Center, told Inequality.org.
“So many groups and individuals—including business owners, labor unions, teachers, racial justice advocates, parents, lawmakers, and many more—have worked together for more than a decade to help the public at large in our state make the connection between commonsense progressive taxes and the very real needs of our communities.”
Introduced in 2022, Washington state’s path-breaking policy imposes a 7% excise tax on capital gains from the sale of stocks, bonds, and other assets that exceed $250,000 per year (excluding real estate sales). Who makes that much from their financial investments? Fewer than 1% of the state’s richest resident.
Prior to the introduction of this tax in 2022, Washington’s wealthy had flourished under a state constitution that prohibits income tax. The capital gains tax does an end-run around that ban and the state supreme court has ruled it constitutional.
In its first two years, the capital gains levy has raised $1.3 billion for investments in childcare and early learning, public schools, and school construction.
“The people of Washington have sent a clear message,” says Young-Flynn. “The well-being of kids takes precedence over tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy. All those of us who care about economic justice know it’s well past time to stop giving the ultra-wealthy a special deal in the tax code at the expense of everyone else.”
Washington state voters also beat back an effort to allow employees to opt out of a new payroll tax for long-term care insurance if they waive the benefit of that state-operated program. If this measure had passed, it likely would’ve rendered the insurance program financially unviable. Fortunately, voters rejected the proposal by a 55-45% margin.
In Illinois, voters expressed support for an extra 3% tax on income of over $1 million, with revenue going to property tax relief. With 89% of votes counted, Illinois voters approved the ballot measure by an 89-11% margin. While this measure is nonbinding, organizers hope this victory will stoke efforts to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2026 to authorize the new tax on the rich.
In addition to these fair tax victories, I’m heartened by the passage of pro-worker reforms in several “red” states last night—in sharp contrast to the positions of their Republican representatives in the U.S. Congress. Voters in Nebraska, Missouri, and Alaska approved guaranteed paid leave and Missouri and Alaska also passed state minimum wage hikes.
A friend just wrote to me with this message: “A tree outside my window is nearly bare. Perhaps it is an image of our national life this morning. We have a choice: to focus on the bare branches or to appreciate the colorful leaves.”
These state victories against the scourge of inequality are some of the colorful leaves I’m appreciating today.
Keep ReadingShow Less
To Address Inequalities, the US Needs a Federal Mandate for Paid Sick Leave
While private sector gains are welcome news for millions of working families, access to paid sick leave remains vastly unequal.
Sep 20, 2024
Absent federal action, states and localities have expanded workers’ ability to earn paid sick leave to care for themselves and their families. The results of these efforts over the past dozen years are clear: There have been significant gains in access to paid sick time among private-sector workers. The latest data released Thursday morning from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that these trends continued into 2024: 79% of private-sector workers have the ability to earn paid sick leave, an increase from 63% in 2012.
While these gains are welcome news for millions of working families, access to paid sick leave remains vastly unequal. As shown in the graph below, higher-wage workers have greater access to paid sick days than lower-wage workers. Among the 25% of private-sector workers with the highest wages, 94% have access to paid sick days. By contrast, among the 25% of workers with the lowest wages, only 58% have access to paid sick days. Prior releases have shown that the bottom 10% fare even worse, with only 39% having access to paid sick days in 2023 (though their access has improved, likely from state action).
This unequal access to paid sick days is particularly troubling since low-wage workers are least able to absorb lost wages when they or their family members are sick. Workers may have trouble paying for housing, food, health care, and other necessities (see Table 1 of this report).
While federal inaction on paid sick days continues to erode families’ economic security and needlessly spread illness, cities and states are stepping up for working people and serving as models for jurisdictions throughout the country. Minnesota is the latest example of states granting workers the ability to earn paid sick time in 2024. Measures to provide paid sick time are also on the ballots this November in Nebraska, Missouri, and Alaska.
Given variation in state laws, it’s no surprise that there are significant differences in access to paid sick time across the country, as shown below.
The share with access to paid sick days ranges from only 64% in the East South Central states (Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Tennessee) and 65% in the West South Central (Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas) up to 95% in the Pacific states (California, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, and Alaska). Notably, many state governments in the East South Central and West South Central Census divisions have passed preemption laws prohibiting local municipalities from passing paid leave and sick day policies.
There is also huge variation in access to paid sick days across the private sector. Full-time workers are much more likely to have paid sick days than part-time workers (87% versus 55%). Unionized workers have greater access to paid sick days than nonunion workers (84% versus 79%).
Fortunately, there is a relatively simple way to address some of these inequities: The federal government can pass legislation to mandate paid sick leave for all workers. Paid sick leave not only helps reduce transmission of disease, it also provides economic security for workers who might otherwise lose income if they have to take time off from work.
Keep ReadingShow Less
There Can Be No American Dream Without Paid Sick Leave and Low-Cost Child Care
America gives a lot of lip service to the American Dream, but we haven’t led the world in meeting human needs since the Reagan Revolution.
Sep 18, 2023
American families with children — and the American Dream they’re trying to live — are about to face a serious crisis.
Counterintuitively, the pandemic brought a child-care boon to working families with kids. This was in large part due to the extraordinary efforts of Nancy Pelosi in the House and Bernie Sanders in the Senate, who got billions for expanded childcare funds to families in distress.
Although these were technically emergency funds, they were similar to normal, routine programs offered by virtually every other developed country in the world.
But when the pandemic was declared officially over, Republicans dug their feet in and said that there was no way America would ever do for its families what Europe, Canada, and the democracies of Asia do for theirs.
So the funds are expiring this month and one-in-three American children’s families will lose the money to cover childcare costs, causing an estimated 3.2 million kids to lose care and lead to the shut-down of an estimated 70,000 child-care programs.
This is crazy, but it makes perfect sense to Republicans who believe if kids weren’t born to wealthy parents they should have no claim to life’s best opportunities.
There’s a backstory here that’s worth understanding.
Most of America’s labor and child care policies were established or find their foundation in FDR’s New Deal and the work of his Labor Secretary, Francis Perkins. At the time, women had few rights and little economic or political power.
Their opportunities in the workplace were strictly circumscribed (I still remember, in the 1970s, The Lansing State Journal requiring me to place a “Help Wanted: Secretary” classified ad in the “Women Wanted” section), pay was correspondingly low, and benefits were non-existent.
A historian for the US Department of Labor tells a story that was repeated often back in the early 1930s before the passage of New Deal labor protections:
“While President Franklin Roosevelt was in Bedford, Mass., campaigning for reelection, a young girl tried to pass him an envelope. But a policeman threw her back into the crowd. Roosevelt told an aide, ‘Get the note from the girl.
“Her note read, ‘I wish you could do something to help us girls....We have been working in a sewing factory,... and up to a few months ago we were getting our minimum pay of $11 a week... Today the 200 of us girls have been cut down to $4 and $5 and $6 a week.’
“To a reporter's question, the President replied, ‘Something has to be done about the elimination of child labor, and long hours and starvation wages [for women].’”
The battle over working conditions and pay was particularly bitter in the South. As an Indiana congressman declared during a 1937 debate on legislation to establish a minimum wage:
“There are in the State of Georgia, canning factories working ... women 10 hours a day for $4.50 a week. Can the canning factories of Indiana, Connecticut, and New York continue to exist and meet such competitive labor costs?”
The result — after considerable public pressure by FDR and Perkins — was the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which established the minimum wage, created boundaries on the ability of employers to exploit workers, and outlawed child labor but also — because of the hostile-to-women-in-the-workplace business climate of the day — ended up cutting the working opportunities for women.
At that time, most families subsisted on a single paycheck, and the “homemaker mom” was the norm across America. Outside of the upper middle class and the morbidly rich, childcare that would allow leisure or work time for a working class or poor mom was, outside of a grandparent or close relative, nonexistent.
Travel was also far more expensive and inconvenient than it is today, so families tended to live closer to grandparents, who, when mom did work, could often fill that childcare gap. I saw this in my own family: my stay-at-home mom cared for several of my brothers’ kids over the decades when my sisters-in-law went to work in the 1980s.
That era — the Reagan/Bush Revolution 1980s — was the transitional time. As Reagan took a meataxe to unions and cut taxes on the morbidly rich while raising them repeatedly on the middle class, working class wages and take-home pay first froze and then began to collapse at the same time housing and Reagan-deregulated medical costs were exploding. Mom, in many cases, had no choice but to go to work if the family wanted to continue to live the American Dream.
In pushing women into the workplace to make up for dad’s loss of income and the shipping of good jobs overseas, Reagan and his neoliberal heirs had some help. The birth control pill was legalized in 1961 and was in widespread use by 1965. Abortion was legalized with the Supreme Court’s Roe v Wade decision in 1973.
As women gained control of their own fertility and the women’s movement expanded workplace opportunities, the economic definition of the normal American family shifted from a single breadwinner to two (or more).
When you look at household income statistics you see that they’ve been steadily but incrementally growing ever since the 1970s; when you look at individual income, though, the story is quite different, as pay only increased slightly, then declined, particularly over the past two decades, in the years since Reagan put the US into his trickle-down supply-side model.
Many of these dynamics — particularly the empowerment of women in the job market post-1960s — are not unique to the US. Developed countries across the world have stepped up to backstop women in their entry into the workplace by providing, paying for, or subsidizing childcare from an early age. These policies are assisted by family leave provisions that cover months and sometimes years after childbirth.
As Claire Cain Miller noted in The New York Times:
“Typical 2-year-olds in Denmark attend child care during the day, where they are guaranteed a spot, and their parents pay no more than 25 percent of the cost. That guaranteed spot will remain until the children are in after-school care at age 10. If their parents choose to stay home or hire a nanny, the government helps pay for that, too.”
Miller notes that rich countries “contribute an average of $14,000 a year for a toddler’s care” while here in the US it’s around $500.
And it really is that stark. Norway, at the top of the OECD list of the world’s developed nations, spends an average $29,276 per child per year and Hungary, at the bottom, spends $7,222. The OECD average is $14,436. As noted, the US spends $500.
President Biden proposed legislation in 2022 that would cap American families’ childcare expenses at 7 percent of their income, but Republicans in Congress killed that part of what ultimately became the Inflation Reduction Act.
Another crisis for working families — particularly two-income working families without union protections — is illness. In addition to the costs of illness and the constant rip-offs by insurance companies demanding co-pays and pre-approval for tests and procedures, millions of American workers don’t have paid time off work when they fall sick.
While 76 percent of workers have access to some form of paid sick leave, those numbers are heavily skewed by high-income employees. Among the bottom 25% of workers (wage-wise) only about half have paid sick leave. For people in the bottom 10% of income it’s fewer than 30 percent.
In February of this year, President Biden called on Congress to fix that situation by passing legislation to mandate paid family and medical leave.
“No American should ever have to choose between a paycheck and taking care of a family member or taking care of themselves,” the President said, adding, “Workers must have access to paid leave when they face a medical or caregiving need that affects their ability to work. Yet, the United States is one of the few countries in the world that does not guarantee paid leave.”
Republicans immediately announced their opposition to the proposal and at the moment it’s frozen in Congress, blocked in the House by Speaker Kevin McCarthy and in the Senate by Tennessee Republican Senator Lamar Alexander.
Given the paucity of childcare options and the number of two-wage-earner families, family and sick leave is no luxury. Paid sick leave is even a public health issue: for example, do you want a waiter or cook sick with the flu or some other disease sneezing on or handling your food?
When people don’t have paid sick leave and they’re barely able to pay the rent with their wages, there’s a powerful incentive to work when sick, infecting both their co-workers and their company’s customers.
In some countries, like Germany, sick leave is paid by the government; Germany allocates 2.3 percent of GDP for this purpose. Other countries, like Luxembourg, require employers to cover the cost for a specific time (in Luxembourg it’s up to 3 months) and then the cost rolls over to the government. Most developed countries have specific subsidies or exceptions for small employers who would be hit hard by such expenses.
This is such a commonsense perspective that the United States is the only developed country in the world that neither offers paid sick leave nor paid family leave.
And it’s not just the rich countries of the world: fully 98 countries mandate one or both, and even at the bottom of the OECD wealth scale you find Slovenia with unlimited sick time and Lithuania offering 15 months of leave for childbirth or other family emergencies.
Repeatedly since the 1970s Democrats have proposed both paid sick and family leave, only to see their proposals shot down every time by Republicans. The result has been increased stress on our families and, when contagious diseases are circulating like during flu season, a public health crisis.
America gives a lot of lip service to the American Dream, but we haven’t led the world in meeting human needs since the Reagan Revolution.
It’s time to wake the hell up and start putting families above the interests of billionaires and corporate bosses who just want to squeeze every last penny out of their employees, consequences to them and their children be damned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Norfolk Southern CEO Refuses to Commit to Giving Workers 7 Paid Sick Days, Halting Stock Buybacks
Questioned at a Senate hearing on the East Palestine disaster, Alan Shaw also wouldn't agree to end "precision-scheduled railroading," a Wall Street-led profit-maximizing approach that critics say endangers communities nationwide.
Mar 09, 2023
Thursday's U.S. Senate hearing about the ongoing environmental and public health disaster in East Palestine, Ohio "did not go well" for Norfolk Southern president and CEO Alan Shaw, the progressive media outlet More Perfect Union declared.
Shaw refused to commit to providing workers with seven days of paid sick leave, ceasing stock buybacks, and abandoning Wall Street-endorsed policies that critics say contribute to the 1,500-plus derailments seen each year in the U.S., including Norfolk Southern's toxic crash near the Ohio-Pennsylvania border last month as well as a derailment that happened in Alabama just before the multimillionaire executive testified.
In remarks prepared for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Shaw wrote, "I am deeply sorry for the impact this derailment has had on the people of East Palestine and surrounding communities, and I am determined to make it right."
But during the committee's hearing, Shaw refused to use the multiple opportunities he was given to publicly commit to enacting meaningful changes.
Noting that Norfolk Southern has recently rewarded wealthy investors with $10 billion in stock buybacks, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont asked Shaw if he could "tell the American people and your employees right now that... you will guarantee at least seven paid sick days to the 15,000 workers you employ."
Sanders acknowledged that Norfolk Southern recently agreed to provide up to a week of paid sick leave per year to roughly 3,000 track maintenance workers. However, he asked Shaw, "Will you make that commitment right now to your entire workforce?"
"I will commit to continuing to discuss with them important quality-of-life issues," Shaw responded.
Sanders told Shaw he sounds "like a politician" and reiterated his question, but the executive repeated his dodge.
Sanders, chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, then told Shaw that he looks forward to discussing the matter further, hinting at a potential request to testify before the panel he leads.
Later during the hearing, Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon asked Shaw, "Will you pledge today that you will do no more stock buybacks until a raft of safety measures have been completed to reduce the risk of derailments and crashes in the future?"
Once again, Shaw refused to give a straight answer, saying that he will commit to "continuing to invest in safety." Merkley repeated his question, to no avail.
More Perfect Union has calculated that payouts to Norfolk Southern's shareholders surged by more than 4,500% over the past 20 years, from $101 million in stock repurchases and dividend bumps in 2002 to $4.7 billion in 2022.
In response to Merkely's inquiry, Shaw claimed that thanks to his company's safety investments, "the number of derailments, hazardous material releases, and personal injuries has declined" over time.
Not helping Shaw's case, a Norfolk Southern train careened off the tracks in Calhoun County, Alabama around 6:45 am ET on Thursday, about three hours before the hearing began. The rail giant was also responsible for other derailments last month in addition to the highly visible one in East Palestine. Moreover, a Norfolk Southern conductor was killed in a collision in Ohio early Tuesday.
More Perfect Union shared data showing that Norfolk Southern's accident rate grew faster than the industry average over the past decade and accused the CEO of lying about his company's safety record.
According to Railroad Workers United and others, industry-led deregulation and Wall Street-backed policies such as "precision-scheduled railroading" (PSR) have made the U.S. rail system more dangerous.
During Thursday's hearing, Sanders brought up PSR, which forces fewer workers to manage longer trains in less time.
The profit-maximizing practice championed by Wall Street has enabled Norfolk Southern to rake in billions of dollars while reducing the size of its workforce by nearly 40% over a recent six-year period, said Sanders, but that has come at the expense of safety.
"Will you make a commitment right now to the American people that you will lead the industry in ending this disastrous precision-scheduled railroading?"
Despite Sanders' request for a "yes or no" answer, Shaw danced around the question, saying that he has increased hiring since becoming CEO last May.
Sanders characterized the recent uptick in hiring as an attempt to recover from a preceding round of mass layoffs and asked once again if Shaw "will lead the industry in doing away with" the PSR model that was "imposed" by profit-hungry Wall Street actors.
Shaw, however, refused to commit to such a change.
Thursday's hearing comes two days after the National Transportation Safety Board—which is already probing the causes of the East Palestine disaster—announced a "special investigation" into Norfolk Southern's "organization and safety culture."
It also comes less than a month after Shaw angered East Palestine residents by skipping a town hall where people expressed their concerns over the long-term consequences of air pollution and groundwater contamination stemming from the release and burnoff of carcinogenic chemicals, a move that was made to avoid a catastrophic explosion.
Following the hearing on Capitol Hill, Food & Water Watch executive director Wenonah Hauter said in a statement that "Shaw's apology today rings hollow," coming as it did "after years spent pushing to roll back the very sorts of safety regulations that would have prevented an accident like this."
"If Norfolk Southern had real concern for the safety of the countless communities like East Palestine through which their trains run, they would be calling for more safety measures for the industry," said Hauter. "Instead they offer voluntary steps that can easily be undone, prioritizing profit margins over people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy