Report says transit times extra long for commuters of color
Star Tribune - 05-12-2015 - Twin Cities transit users of color spend almost 160 additional hours a year commuting when...
Star Tribune - 05-12-2015 - Twin Cities transit users of color spend almost 160 additional hours a year commuting when compared to whites who drive to work solo. That's according to a report out Tuesday from four advocacy groups opposing cuts to public transportation funding.
The report "It's About Time: The Transit Time Penalty and Its Racial Implications" cited infrequent service, indirect routes, delays, overcrowded vehicles, and insufficient shelter at bus stops as factors that contribute to a transit time penalty that adds time and stress to each commute. For Blacks and Asians who used public transit, that totaled an extra 3.5 weeks a year and for Latinos it was 4 hours a year of additional time required to travel between two points by public transportation, compared with going by car.
"That means that for a month a year more than white drivers, transit commuters of color are unavailable for working, helping children with homework, helping parents get to the doctor, running errands, volunteering in their communities or participating in their churches," said the report compiled by Neighborhoods Organizing for Change, TakeAction Minnesota, ISAIAH and the Center for Popular Democracy.
The groups released their findings during a news conference at the State Office Building in St. Paul.
As the legislative session come down to the wire and a transportation budget still up in the air, the advocacy groups are urging law makers to approve a bill that would not cut service but allow Metro Transit to move forward with its Service Improvement Plan. That plan calls for an expansion of service that would institute Arterial Bus Rapid Transit, which would speed up service on local urban routes by as much as 30 percent among other things, the report said.
A proposal passed by the Minnesota House would force Metro Transit to reduce regular bus service by at least 17 percent. The fate of that proposal will be decided in the overall transportation spending bill hashed out by the House, Senate and Gov. Mark Dayton
"These improvements can only happen with enough funding. If transit funding is cut, the time penalty is certain to worsen," the report said. "Funding cuts proposed by House Republicans will result in lost service—longer waits, more delays, longer travel times, and more crowded buses and trains."
About 5 percent of whites and Minnesotans of Asian descent commute by public transit, 8 percent of Latinos, 10 percent of Blacks, and 29 percent of American Indians commute to work on public transit.
Source: Star Tribune
Zara Can't Seem to Stop Racially Discriminating Against Its Employees and Shoppers
Zara Can't Seem to Stop Racially Discriminating Against Its Employees and Shoppers
Another day, another discriminatory incident at Zara. When the chain first came to the U.S., like many women, I was...
Another day, another discriminatory incident at Zara. When the chain first came to the U.S., like many women, I was thrilled. I loved Zara's designer looks sold for a fraction of designer prices. I had outgrown Forever 21 and was excited that the creation of an upscale, sophisticated wardrobe was within my reach.
Oh, and the blazers. I love, love, loved a Zara blazer.
Unfortunately, my love has faded as allegations of discrimination against both employees and customers continue to multiply. The latest incident took place in an East End Toronto store. Cree Ballah, an employee, is filing a lawsuit for discrimination after managers asked her to take her braids out of a bun, and then attempted to "fix" her hair outside of the store in a busy mall in full view of other employees and customers.
“They took me outside of the store and they said, 'We're not trying to offend you, but we're going for a clean, professional look with Zara and the hairstyle you have now is not the look for Zara,” Ballah said.
“It was very humiliating, it was unprofessional,” she continued.
“My hair type is also linked to my race, so to me, I felt like it was direct discrimination against my ethnicity in the sense of what comes along with it,” said Ballah, who describes herself as bi-racial. “My hair type is out of my control and I try to control it to the best of my ability, which wasn't up to standard for Zara.” (Interestingly, Zara has no formal policy regarding employees' hairstyles, as long as they look professional.)
If that was the end of the story, then I’d probably be filling my online shopping cart with their new Palm Springs collection right about now. But, last year Zara's former U.S. general counsel filed a $40 million dollar lawsuit against the retail giant, claiming he was discriminated against for being Jewish, American, and gay. During his time at the company (from January 2008 to March 2015), he reported receiving homophobic emails, witnessing anti-Semitic remarks that were made in his presence, and that Spanish employees were assured of more job security and received greater pay raises despite his strong performance reviews and growing company profitability.
Then the Center for Popular Democracy released a survey of New York–based Zara employees, titled “Stitched with Prejudice: Zara USA’s Corporate Culture of Favoritism.” The report found that black employees are more dissatisfied with their hours than white employees, are reviewed more harshly by management, and are less likely to be promoted.
I took note of that report, but also saw that the sample included a very small number of employees. Plus, I had shopped at several Zara stores in Manhattan and never had a problem, but admittedly, ignorance is bliss.
As time marched on, however, more and more stories made headlines and it seemed not even Zara customers were safe from discrimination. In 2015, a Muslim woman was refused entrance to a Paris store because she was wearing a hijab. And the Center for Popular Democracy study also found that black customers are far more likely to be targeted as potential thieves than white customers. "The "Stitched with Prejudice" report describes a practice within Zara of referring to suspected shoplifters as “special orders,” leading to the racial profiling of black shoppers as soon as they enter the store.
In 2014, the retailer received backlash for a children’s shirt that drew comparisons to a Holocaust uniform. And in 2007, the store withdrew handbags from their store that featured swastikas.
As luck would have it, my cognitive dissonance regarding Zara wasn't to last. Last summer, while shopping in a Zara in my hometown of Los Angeles, I bought a mini-skirt that I wasn’t quite sure of and asked a sales associate if I could return it if I changed my mind. She said yes, and added that I didn’t even need my receipt to do so. Well, a week later I found myself in that exact situation.
The skirt was a little too short for my taste, so I attempted to return it (and of course I had lost the receipt). I was informed by the sales associate that the item had gone on sale and I would have to return or exchange it at the sale price. I offered to provide the sales associate (and then her manager) with both my credit card number (so they could look up the transaction), as well as my credit card statement to confirm that I had in fact paid full price for the item.
Admittedly, the interaction may not have been motivated by racial bias. The employees may have been tired, underpaid or having a bad day and that’s why they spoke to me in a way that left me feeling angry and humiliated. However, something didn’t feel right about the experience. And when I combined all of their missteps together I decided that I could no longer be a Zara customer. Thus far, I haven’t spent one dollar at a Zara store in about a year.
My personal experience aside, my advice for Zara executives is to get it together and do it fast. The world is more connected than ever before, and multiple allegations of gender, ethnic and religious intolerance are tipping the scales against you (no matter how cute your spring collection is). If more and more of these stories continue to come to light, I won’t be the only former fan girl voting against what appears to be a disgusting company culture by keeping my credit card firmly in it’s wallet.
By xoJane
Source
One city’s crime-fighting quandary: Where exactly to invest?
One city’s crime-fighting quandary: Where exactly to invest?
Chicago spends 39 percent of its municipal budget on policing, while New York spends just 8 percent and Los Angeles...
Chicago spends 39 percent of its municipal budget on policing, while New York spends just 8 percent and Los Angeles spends 26 percent, according to a report released last year by the Center for Popular Democracy. This means the city has less funds for things like schools and social services. The proposed $95 million academy comes just five years after the city announced the biggest mass closing of schools in US history, shutting down 50 schools because of a $1 billion budget shortfall.
Read the full article here.
Will Another White Big-Banker Oversee Wall Street?
“Fed Up, a coalition of community and labor groups, argues in a new report that this homogeneity creates blind spots,...
“Fed Up, a coalition of community and labor groups, argues in a new report that this homogeneity creates blind spots, protecting financial institutions while neglecting those who are still struggling 10 years after the financial crisis struck. Fed Up was formed to highlight how central bankers neglect corners of the economy. Though the Fed is supposed to be independent of politics, its decisions affect everyone, especially vulnerable populations who need support. An economy run for banks, inattentive to black and brown families, will necessarily expand the wide wealth and income gaps. The New York Fed’s district also includes Puerto Rico, which is especially struggling of late.”
Read the full article here.
Let cities better help their retirees
In less than 20 years, one in every five Americans will be over the age of 65 and we will live longer than any...
In less than 20 years, one in every five Americans will be over the age of 65 and we will live longer than any generation before us. For those without adequate savings for retirement, those added years will be a time of uncertainty and dependency rather than leisure.
Connecticut is the latest state seeking to stave off this looming crisis in elder poverty, passing legislation to provide access to a state-sponsored retirement plan for the 600,000 Connecticut residents who do not have a plan through their employers. The bill will automatically enroll workers in businesses with five or more workers in a retirement plan overseen by a new quasi-public authority. Connecticut joins California, Illinois, and more than a dozen other states pushing for state-sponsored plans to encourage workers to save for retirement.
The accelerated pace of activity follows decades of wage stagnation that have left the average American worker with just half of what workers saved in the 1970s. Half of those nearing retirement have no retirement savings at all and those that do have savings have only enough to provide a median income of around $400 per month.
At the same time, employers have largely abandoned defined benefit pension plans that once guaranteed a minimum level of security based on salary and length of service, opting instead for plans that put the onus on workers to build up their own retirement accounts. Today, more than half of American workers have no private pension coverage at all.
Those who retire without a pension or sufficient savings will depend largely on Social Security for their retirement income, a system that will grow increasingly burdened as baby boomers retire, leaving fewer workers to cover the costs of each retiree.
This daunting reality has spurred states like Connecticut to act.
Innovation at the state level, however, is currently hindered by the federal Employment Retirement Security Act (ERISA), which generally preempts state action on private sector pensions. State legislatures have had to build language into bills making any plan contingent on an exemption from federal ERISA requirements. This burden creates uncertainty for both workers and state administrators, preventing many states from even exploring the possibility of a plan.
In response, the Department of Labor (DOL) is currently developing a safe harbor rule that would clarify how states can bypass ERISA requirements. The rule would let states develop the retirement security model that best suits their residents, while also learning from the successes and missteps of other state plans.
While the proposed DOL rule is a great first step, it does not go far enough in its present form. The rule is limited to states, but cities such as New York are also considering similar plans. They should be afforded the same opportunity to ensure a secure retirement for their residents.
In developing its rule, the DOL should aim to reach the largest possible number of workers, including those whose state legislatures are unable or unwilling to address retirement security. Including cities also allows for more tailored programs when demographics and industries vary widely across a state.
Preventing an elder poverty crisis will require creative solutions at all levels of government. The DOL should ensure that federal regulations foster that creativity, rather than stifle it.
By ANDREW FRIEDMAN
Source
Bad deals with Wall Street are costing the city as much as $1 billion a year
NY Daily News - December 2, 2013, by Phyllis Furman - Coalition urges city to change its relationship with banks as a...
NY Daily News - December 2, 2013, by Phyllis Furman - Coalition urges city to change its relationship with banks as a way to address income inequality.
Wall Street has put the squeeze on the city to the tune of $1 billion, a report due out Tuesday claims.
As much as $723 million worth of unnecessary fees and bad deals, coupled with $300 million in bank subsidies should be rejiggered, says a study from a new left-leaning coalition called New Day, New York Coalition.
"New York City could be saving $1 billion annually just by changing the way it does business with Wall Street," one of the report's authors, Connie Razza, director of strategic research initiatives at the Center for Popular Democracy, told the Daily News.
The study, dubbed "Leveraging New York's Financial Power to Combat Inequality," kicks off a week of events organized by the group, culminating in a rally set for Thursday at Foley Square.
The coalition, whose members include veterans of Occupy Wall Street, labor unions such as 1199SEIU, and faith organizations, says its goal is to "draw attention to the ways Wall Street and big corporations continue to siphon resources away from average New Yorkers and point toward solutions that would help reduce inequality and build economic fairness."
Mirroring a key campaign theme of Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio, the report notes the huge disparity between the city's haves and have-nots, with the 1% controlling a whopping 40% of the city's income.
The city and its pension funds have tremendous leverage that can be used to bridge the gap, the study says: $350 billion that travels through the financial system.
"We should be using that leverage to demand a different relationship" with Wall Street, Razza said.
Among the key findings: the city, its pension funds and the MTA pay $563 million in Wall Street fees each year.
Rather than pay out megabucks to Wall Street big shots, the city should set up an in-house group to manage its pension assets and bond offerings, the report recommends.
That suggestion comes on the heels of a recent city report that showed fees paid by New York City pension funds surged by 28% to $472.5 million in the year ended June 30.
The idea of bringing the management of the city's money in-house isn't new.
New York's former chief investment officer, Larry Schloss, recommended just that before he recently stepped down. A number of public pension funds in Canada, including Ontario's $126 billion teachers' pension fund, have already moved in that direction.
But achieving that goal here is a long shot, said Leo Kolivakis, publisher of Pension Pulse Blog.
"Attracting and retaining qualified managers to manage money in-house is a huge challenge," Kolivakis told the News.
Patrick Muncie, a spokesman for Mayor Bloomberg, noted the financial services industry's crucial contributions to the local economy.
"The financial services sector is a critical driver of New York City's economy, providing more than 400,000 jobs and generating $3 billion in tax revenue last year alone," he said.
A spokesman for outgoing New York City Comptroller John Liu said the report encapsulates many of the comptroller's efforts, including "better and more cost-effective in-house management of pension assets."
The report "effectively and succinctly aggregates the real underlying issues of deepening inequality," Liu said in a statement.
Reps for de Blasio and incoming New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer, declined to comment.
Other recommendations of the report include holding banks to firm commitments to improve the community in exchange for the $300 million a year they receive in subsidies.
pfurman@nydailynews.com
What they want:
*Renegotiate financial deals to save up to $725 million each year
*Hold banks to commitments in exchange for $300 million in subsidies
*Banks should write down underwater mortgages to keep 86,000 families in their homes
SourceNot one of the regional Fed banks has ever been run by a black or Latino
Not one of the regional Fed banks has ever been run by a black or Latino
Atlanta, located in the heart of the South, was a center of the civil rights movement, became a corporate hub of the...
Atlanta, located in the heart of the South, was a center of the civil rights movement, became a corporate hub of the New South economy, and boasts a large black professional class.
Can it help break the Federal Reserve's color barrier?
Dennis Lockhart's retirement early next year as head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta has spotlighted the selection of his replacement as members of Congress and a coalition of activist groups call for an aggressive search among blacks and Latinos with finance or economics expertise.
African-Americans have served on the Federal Reserve's Washington-based Board of Governors three times in the Fed's 103-year history, and the central bank now has a female chair, Janet Yellen.
But none of the regional banks have ever been run by a black or Latino, a lack of diversity some argue is worrisome on its face and could make the system as a whole less attentive to how policy impacts less advantaged communities.
"Grave racial disparities exist across our nation in unemployment, wages and income. ... It is critical that incoming leadership ... be committed to doing more," four African-American members of the House of Representatives wrote in a letter this week to Yellen and Thomas Fanning, chair of the Atlanta Fed's private board of directors.
"Lockhart's recent retirement announcement presents an opportunity to enhance and expand the Federal Reserve's leadership," they said in the letter.
In a public webcast on Thursday, Fanning said he wants to hold "one of the most transparent processes ever," and that the search committee has already received nominations from the public at large.
As in other districts, the search will be national in scope. There is no requirement that the head of the Atlanta Fed come from the bank's southeastern region, and the 12 regional Fed banks often bring in a president from outside their own geographic area.
Executive search firm SpencerStuart has been hired to run the search. Consultant John Harpole said the firm has helped place 1,600 women, minorities and other "underrepresented groups" in corporate positions, and would cast a wide net among local institutions, national organizations and its "strong network" of sitting executives to find candidates.
The issue is sensitive for the Fed, whose policies affect every citizen but which is designed to be immune from the day-to-day politics that influence other U.S. government agencies.
Group says Fed is unaccountable
Because monetary policy focuses on influencing interest rates that apply nationwide, Fed officials say it is too blunt a tool to address issues like the persistent gap between unemployment rates for blacks and white.
Activists counter that those sorts of problems might improve if unemployment was driven as low as possible — even at the risk of higher inflation. The Fed sets policy with two goals in mind, low employment and stable inflation of around 2 percent annually.
The U.S. unemployment rate in August, the latest month for which data is available, was 4.9 percent.
A labor-affiliated coalition of civic groups, known as Fed Up, has taken the argument even further, arguing that the Fed's very structure makes it unaccountable.
The regional banks in particular have supervisory power over local financial institutions as well as a voice in national policymaking, but are set up as private entities owned by the banks they oversee. The regional bank presidents are chosen by a local board of directors, though the choice must be approved by the Fed governors in Washington.
In a meeting with civic activists in August, New York Fed President William Dudley agreed the institution had done a "pretty lousy" job of promoting diversity. But Fed officials in general argue that the current structure has worked well, and that changes would need to offer clear advantages without risking the central bank's independence.
In that environment, the Atlanta Fed appointment will be watched closely. Though many regional bank heads come from within the broader Fed system, tapped from its ready pool of economists with doctoral degrees, Lockhart had a varied career in private equity and banking before taking over the Atlanta Fed 10 years ago.
And while the search will be national, Atlanta has a deep pool of black professionals - 10 percent of African-Americans in the city have a graduate or professional degree, three percentage points higher than the national average.
"That would be a great thing," Fanning said. "We want the best person as well."
By Howard Schneider
Source
'Kill the Bill' Sit-Ins Target Senators to Protest Health Bill
Outside the office of U.S. Senator Pat Toomey in Philadelphia Tuesday, a group of activists chanted, “Don't cut...
Outside the office of U.S. Senator Pat Toomey in Philadelphia Tuesday, a group of activists chanted, “Don't cut Medicaid, save our liberty," in a day of actions outside congressional offices in 39 states around the United States.
The national grassroots organization ADAPT of disability rights activists led the sit-in at the Republican's office.
Read the full article here.
This Week In Sports Law: Ezekiel Elliott News, Phil Ivey U.K. Loss, Pop Warner Case Goes On
Dallas Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott will suit up and play against the Washington Redskins, as the ongoing drama...
Dallas Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott will suit up and play against the Washington Redskins, as the ongoing drama in the courtroom over the NFL's tabled six game suspension continues. On Monday, the U.S. district court judge in New York denied the NFL's attempt to hurry up the scheduling on a hearing that will provide more clarity as to whether Elliott will actually be held out of any games this season while the case goes on.
Read the full article here.
Federal Reserve keeps key interest rate at zero, citing global turmoil
The Federal Reserve on Thursday voted to maintain its unprecedented support for the U.S. recovery, leaving a key...
The Federal Reserve on Thursday voted to maintain its unprecedented support for the U.S. recovery, leaving a key interest rate unchanged amid gathering clouds over the global economy.
In an official statement, the nation’s central bank said the job market is recovering and hiring is “solid.” But it expressed concern that inflation remains too low and exports have weakened. Meanwhile, the risk is building that turmoil overseas will drag down growth in America.
"Recent global economic and financial developments may restrain economic activity somewhat and are likely to put further downward pressure on inflation in the near term," the central bank's official statement read.
The decision to keep the Fed’s benchmark interest rate at zero amounts to a recognition that the robust recovery central bank officials had hoped for when they launched into an uncharted era of easy money during the throes of the 2008 financial crisis has yet to materialize. The Fed has repeatedly pushed back the goal line as the economy failed to deliver. Seven years after the central bank cut its target rate to zero, Fed officials believe the recovery is not yet ready to stand on its own.
At the press conference that followed the rate announcement Thursday afternoon, Fed Chair Janet Yellen said that a rate hike was still likely by the end of the year. But she reiterated that though “domestic developments have been strong, we want to see continued improvement in the labor market," and the central bank would like "to bolster our confidence that inflation will move toward" the Fed’s 2 percent target before a rate hike.
“We have very large drags from energy prices and import prices," Yellen said, adding that the central bank views those as transitory. As the labor market heals, "we will see further upward pressure on inflation," she said. “We expect to achieve our 2 percent goal over the medium term.”
Markets grew volatile immediately after news of the rate hold, going flat by the end of Yellen's press conference. The Dow Jones Industrial average closed down 0.4 percent and the Standard & Poor’s index closed down about 0.3 percent on Thursday.
Documents released by the Fed show most of the Fed's top brass now anticipate increasing rates only once this year, instead of twice. A growing minority think the central bank should not raise its benchmark rate this year at all, and one suggested it should stimulate the economy even more by taking the rate negative.
Three officials are advocating a 2016 liftoff, while one person pinned 2017 as the date -- longer than anyone has suggested so far.
“Even though the summer stresses in financial markets have abated, the impact of the intense market volatility on domestic economic activity is yet to fully play out,” Millan Mulraine, deputy chief U.S. macro strategist at TD Securities, wrote in a research note.
The Fed lowers its target rate when it wants to stimulate the economy by encouraging businesses and consumers to spend. It hikes when the economy begins to grow too quickly and inflation picks up, making saving money more attractive.
Timing, however, is crucial. If the Fed moves too soon, it risks undercutting the recovery’s momentum. Waiting too long could stock dangerous financial bubbles.
Yellen made reference to that risk at the press conference Thursday when asked whether the Fed should be moving sooner rather than later to raise the rates. "I don't think it's good policy to then have to slam on the brakes," she said.
The Fed modestly upgraded Thursday its expectation for economic growth this year from 1.9 percent to 2.1 percent, but the forecast is still lower than the robust expansion enjoyed a decade ago. The jobless rate has already fallen below the central bank's June estimate of 5.3 percent. The Fed adjusted its forecast to 5 percent. It also nudged up its estimate of core inflation from 1.3 percent to 1.4 percent.
In May, Yellen said speech that she expected the economy would be strong enough to raise the target rate by the end of the year. Other top Fed officials had signaled the long-awaited move could come during its meeting this month.
But that was before the jaw-dropping swings in financial markets over the past few weeks, including a 1,000-point plunge in the Dow Jones industrial average. Evidence is mounting that China’s breakneck economic growth is fizzling out faster than previously thought.
In the meantime, the strong U.S. dollar and low oil prices are weighing on inflation, which has run below the Fed’s target of 2 percent for years. The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, Nobel-laureate Joseph Stiglitz and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers have all called on the central bank to hold off on a rate hike, at least for now.
“Now is the time for the Fed to do what is often hardest for policymakers,” Summers wrote in The Washington Post recently. “Stand still.”
The calls for delay are also coming from a populist campaign known as Fed Up, which protested outside of the central bank’s buildings Thursday. Several lawmakers joined the demonstration, including Michigan Rep. John Conyers, who is sponsoring a bill that would require the Fed to target a 4 percent unemployment rate.
Not everyone agrees the Fed should wait, however. Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker dissented from the central bank’s vote on Thursday. In aspeech earlier this month, he pointed to strong consumer spending, the sharp decline in unemployment and a pickup in inflation measured since the beginning of the year as reasons a rate hike is warranted.
“I am not arguing that the economy is perfect, but nor is it on the ropes, requiring zero interest rates to get it back into the ring,” he said. “It’s time to align our monetary policy with the significant progress we have made.”
In its official statement, the Fed attempted to assure investors and the public that after the first rate hike, it expects to make subsequent hikes only gradually. Though most officials predicted the Fed would raise its target rate several times next year, they also forecast it would remain below its historic norm of about 4 percent for several years. Fed documents released Thursday show the long-run median estimate at just 3.5 percent.
Each hike will also likely be small, analysts expect just one quarter of one percent. That would allow the central bank to assess how an economy grown accustomed to easy money operates under a new regime.
“One should never discount the importance of an interest rate change by a central bank merely because it looks small,” said Scott Sumner, an economist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. “Some pretty big avalanches have started from a small pebble being dislodged.”
Source: Washington Post
2 days ago
2 days ago