Monday, October 22, 2012

U.K.: Nationalize the Criminal Banks

UK Fire Union Leader Calls For Nationalization Of BanksPrintE-mail
By Matt Wrack (General Secretary FBU)   
Friday, 19 October 2012
On Sat Oct 20, thousands of workers, pensioners, unemployed and youth will march in London, Glasgow and Belfast against the attacks of this Tory-led government. Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union, sends a special message through the pages of Socialist Appeal to all those marching for a better future:
matt-wrack.jpg
The economy staggers from crisis to crisis. Overly optimistic government predictions are refuted by the harsh reality of a double-dip recession. The crisis has devastated the lives of workers in Britain and across the world. Austerity measures mean real wages cut, unemployment, pensions destroyed and public services slashed. They are on a scale not seen before.
The aim is to make working people pay for a crisis we did not cause. We need to set out clearly what lies behind the crisis.
The Con-Dem coalition argues that further privatisation and deregulation is the route out of recession but it was the deregulated private finance sector that sparked the crisis. The government's arguments need to be challenged. The banks cannot be allowed to carry on the way they've done before. We need a sharp break with the practices of the past.

Service

The Labour movement should place on the agenda the call for a publicly owned finance industry which would provide a public service to industry and working people.
Taking over the banks will enable the state to plan investment. Instead of investment bankers gambling with money in financial markets, funds could be switched to creating millions of sustainable jobs and investing in the housing, public services and infrastructure we need. The privately owned banking system created a huge credit bubble that burst and triggered the biggest economic slump in Britain for generations.
When the crisis broke, the government took shares in RBS and Lloyds and took over mortgage lenders Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley. The taxpayer advanced £133 billion to restore the capital of these banks.
So far, only £14bn of the original cash outlay has been recovered. The banks are still rigging interest rates, laundering illegal cash, gambling in exotic financial assets and paying their top executives grotesque salaries and bonuses.

Deceit

Three-quarters of the assets of Barclays bank are invested in trading on the stocks, bonds and currency markets. Barclays's elite traders and top executives took £1bn home between them this year to "reward" this gambling.
Banks still engage in outright deceit and law-breaking. Barclays was caught out over the Libor scandal, HSBC in laundering Mexican drug money and Standard Chartered with Iranian banks. The banking system is not doing its job in providing loans on reasonable terms to help the economy recover.
Banks are needed to provide financial services to firms and households. Most workers have wages paid directly into a bank. We need to be able to access our money. Sometimes we need to be able to borrow money. At other times, we need to save.
In addition, we need banks to raise funds and provide credit to finance investment and growth across an economy. This is what banking as a public service should be about. Britain's big banks dispose of £6 trillion in funds. Yet they earmark just £200bn of this to investment in industry, a measly 3 per cent of the total.
Four years after the crisis began, bank lending is falling, not rising. The banking sector stands indicted by these figures. Having been bailed out by the taxpayer the banks continue to fail to assist in any sort of recovery.
Regulation failed to stop banks collapsing and bringing down the economy. More regulation won't work now. It's expensive, bureaucratic and ineffective. Despite the mess the banks have caused, we are still told we should leave them as they are because they make money. But a survey of the period from 2002-2008 shows that the finance sector paid £203bn in tax, while manufacturing paid nearly twice as much. Tax revenue from the finance sector during that period was less than the estimated up-front costs of the bank bailout of £289bn.

Competition

Some argue that the banks should be broken into smaller units so that competition can flourish and the monopoly of the big five can be broken. But the banks are too interconnected - if one goes down, they can all go down like a row of dominos.
In any case, the crisis did not start with the big banks. In Britain, it started with the smaller lenders like Northern Rock. More regulation or a break-up of the banks will not make them operate in the interests of the wider economy. Their main objective will still be to maximise profits for their shareholders and bonuses for their top executives. Private ownership means profit comes before everything else. New regulations can be bypassed. That will continue as long as banks are under private ownership.
The public has no control over the banks' decision-making, even in banks that are majority state-owned. Only public ownership of the major banks with a new democratic structure of control can turn banking into a public service. A publicly owned banking system could finance a mass programme of useful public works, to create jobs and modernise infrastructure.

Public ownership

We therefore welcome that for the first time in history, the TUC has adopted  the policy of the public ownership of the banks.
9In the past, Margaret Thatcher attacked us not because she was mad, but because she was acting in the interests of the ruling class . Today, in the face of economic crisis, this  same class wants to restructure the economy in the interests of capitalism and make the working class pay. But local communities will not sit back and see their services destroyed. In this fight, we must take direct action such as occupying hospitals or schools.
We must see the end of this government at the earliest opportunity. But what happens next? Under New Labour we had attacks on jobs, wages and conditions. No one wants to see the Coalition government that attacks us replaced by another Labour government that attacks us. We need a change in policy.
The resources are there. But they are in the hands of the Billionaires, not in our hands.We need to ask ourselves what sort of society we want – one where spivs and gamblers decide what happens or where the majority decides?
We face a huge challenge. We must rise to the occasion and act decisively in the interests of our class.
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Can. Supremes: "Workers Have Right to Privacy"


Canadian Supreme Court rules employees have right to privacy on work computers

Workplace computers contain so much personal information nowadays that employees have a legitimate expectation of privacy in using them, the Supreme Court of Canada said in a major ruling Friday.
The court said an individual’s Internet browsing history alone is capable of exposing his or her most intimate likes, dislikes, activities and thoughts.
“Canadians may therefore reasonably expect privacy in the information contained on these computers, at least where personal use is permitted or reasonably expected,” Mr. Justice Morris Fish said, writing for the majority.
Notwithstanding that privacy interest, the court ruled that nude photos of an underaged students can be used to prosecute an Ontario high-school teacher who had them on his laptop.
It said that in some cases, the seriousness of an offence and workplace computer policies are sufficient to override the right to privacy.
Scott Hutchison, a privacy expert at Stockwoods LLP, said the decision will play an “incredibly important” role in stepping up the protection of computer privacy.
“For most people, the reality is that they use their work computers for personal matters in the same way they might make a personal call on a work telephone,” Mr. Hutchison said.
While the judgment focused on principles rather than strict rules for workplace computer privacy, its words are bound to feature prominently in future cases.
“There is a big world of litigation coming about how employees are affected when employers try to go in and get information,” said Frank Addario, a lawyer who represented the defendant, Richard Cole.
“Who doesn’t use the Internet at work?” Mr. Addario said. “The Supreme Court is recognizing that the Internet is highly revealing of private personal choices and they have given it constitutional protection.”
Mr. Addario said future cases are likely to focus on the extent to which employers can scrutinize their employees’ computer activity; whether a workplace policy could effectively eliminate an expectation of privacy altogether; and the constitutionality of attempts to obtain Internet search information from companies such as Google.
Employers will have to modernize their workplace computer use policies as a result of Friday’s judgment, Mr. Addario said. He added that the court went out of its way to state that delving into an employee’s Internet browsing history represents a clear incursion into his or her private world.
“There is no ‘on-off’ switch for privacy,” Mr. Addario said. “Policies need to take into account the privacy interest that exists on the device and the information on it. It can’t be invaded willy-nilly.”
Mr. Cole was charged with possessing child pornography and fraudulently obtaining data from another computer hard drive after a school technician who was conducting routine surveillance found a file containing nude photographs of the underaged student.
The court ordered a new trial.
“The evidence is highly reliable and probative physical evidence,” Judge Fish wrote. “The exclusion of the material would have a marked negative impact on the truth-seeking function of the criminal trial process.”
The student depicted in the photographs had sent them to another student by e-mail and Mr. Cole – whose responsibilities included patrolling students’ e-mails and files – had allegedly gained access to it and copied them into his own computer.
The school’s principal seized the computer, searched it more extensively and then provided it to police. Police investigators then searched the laptop and discs without a warrant.
The Supreme Court faulted the police for not having a search warrant. However, it said that their confusion was sincere and a warrant would have certainly been obtainable under the circumstances.
KIRK MAKIN
JUSTICE REPORTER — The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Oct. 19 2012, 8:27 PM EDT
Last updated Friday, Oct. 19 2012, 8:32 PM EDT


Posted by at No comments:

Workers Protest in Britain


UK Thousands march against austerity
By Jane Wild and Conor Sullivan in London
Trade unions have called for a general strike after tens of thousands of people marched through central London to protest against the government’s austerity spending cuts.
Firefighters, nurses and teachers joined unemployed youngsters, anti-war activists and other campaigners on Saturday in a march organised by the Trades Union Congress, to highlight what it says is the government’s failure to solve Britain’s long-term economic problems.
“I’m coming into my pension now and don’t want it to be robbed after 40 years,” said Steve Richards, a former train driver from Wales.
There were cheers as Len Mccluskey, leader of Unite, the UK’s largest trade union, called on the crowd in Hyde Park to support a general strike, a call echoed by Bob Crow, leader of the RMT rail union.
TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said austerity was causing huge damage to the economy. “The economy is flat on its back,” he said.
“There have been cuts in public services, people are worried about their jobs, there has been a squeeze in living standards – all this pain to reduce the deficit and it has demonstrably failed.”
He said it was time for the coalition focus on investment in infrastructure, a massive housebuilding program and reforms to the tax system.
“They really need to put a relentless focus on growth rather than making the deficit the number-one priority. We have got to reverse the logic,” he said.
Labour leader, Ed Miliband accused the Prime Minister of clinging to policies which were not working.
Reiterating his one nation theme, he faced heckling and booing from the crowd. “There will of course be hard choices,” he said, to calls of “liar” and “rubbish”.
There is no need to cut jobs or people’s pensions when there is so much uncollected taxes
- Malcolm, protester
“I do not promise easy times. There will be some cuts,” he said, while vowing that if elected he would immediately tackle youth unemployment, build more houses, and “end the privatisation experiment in the NHS”.
The TUC put the crowd at more than 100,000.
There no reports of the violence that marred a similar demonstration in March last year, although Police said there had been damage to windows on Oxford Street. Branches of Starbucks along the route were heavily guarded following recent charges of tax avoidance.
“There is no need to cut jobs or people’s pensions when there is so much uncollected taxes,” said Malcolm, who had come from Newport in Wales to march with PCS, the public sector union.
Britain’s official fiscal watchdog said on Tuesday that deficit reduction was not the main cause of weak economic performance.
The Office for Budget Responsibility said stubborn inflation and weak export markets were the most likely reason for its too-optimistic view on growth in 2010, although it said the evidence was not yet sufficiently strong to rule out the possibility that austerity was hitting the economy harder than originally thought.
"The numbers here today show the strength of feeling that austerity isn't working," said Frances O'Grady, deputy secretary of the TUC, who will succeed Mr Barber when he retires at the end of the year.
She said data showing record numbers of people in employment masked
long-term unemployment and troubling levels of youth joblessness. "We will
pay a high price if we don't get those people into jobs," she said."There
are millions in part-time work and underemployed. The government is
obsessed with deficit reduction. It must think again."_

Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Democratic Party Deserts Labor



Labor’s Hail Mary pass


This is a maddening time for anyone concerned about the lives of working-class Americans. The frustration and anger that suffused AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka’s declaration last week that labor would distance itself from the Democratic Party was both clear and widely noted. Not so widely noted has been a shift in the organizing strategy of two of labor’s leading institutions — Trumka’s AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union — that reflects a belief that the American labor movement may be on the verge of extinction and must radically change its game.
It took a multitude of Democratic sins and failures to push Trumka to denounce, if not exactly renounce,the political party that has been labor’s home at least since the New Deal. In a speech at the National Press Club last Friday, Trumka said that Republicans were wielding a “wrecking ball” against the rights and interests of working Americans. But Democrats, he added, were “simply standing aside” as the Republicans moved in for the kill.
 primary source of labor’s frustration has been the consistent inability of the Democrats to strengthen the legislation that once allowed workers to join unions without fear of employer reprisals. American business has poked so many holes in the 1935 National Labor Relations Act that it now affords workers no protections at all. Beginning with Lyndon Johnson’s presidency, every time the Democrats have held the White House and strong majorities in both houses of Congress, bills that strengthened workers’ rights to unionize have commanded substantial Democratic support — but never quite enough to win a Senate supermajority. And during that time, the unionized share of the private-sector workforce has dwindled from roughly 30 percent to less than 7 percent.
Many union activists viewed the 2009-10 battle for the most recent iteration of labor law reform — the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) — as labor’s last stand. EFCA could never attain the magic 60-vote threshhold required to cut off a filibuster, despite the presence, at one point, of 60 Democratic senators. Given the rate at which private-sector unionization continues to fall (which in turn imperils support for public-sector unions), many of labor’s most thoughtful leaders now consider the Democrats’ inability to enact EFCA a death sentence for the American labor movement.
“It’s over,” one of labor’s leading strategists told me this month. Indeed, since last November’s elections, half a dozen high-ranking labor leaders from a range of unions have told me they believe that private-sector unions may all but disappear within the next 10 years.
While some unions still wage more conventional organizing campaigns, the campaign that best captures the desperation of American labor today is that of the SEIU. Perhaps the best-funded and most strategically savvy of American unions, SEIU has embarked on a door-to-door canvass in the minority neighborhoods of 17 major American cities. The goal isn’t to enroll the people behind those doors in a conventional union but, rather, into a mass organization of the unemployed and the underpaid that can turn out votes in 2012 and act as an ongoing pressure group for job creation and worker rights during (presumably) Barack Obama’s second term.
“We realized we could organize one million more people into the union and it wouldn’t in itself really change anything,” SEIU President Mary Kay Henry told me earlier this year. “We needed to do something else — something more.”
The SEIU’s program — like its semi-counterpart in the AFL-CIO’s Working Americaprogram, a door-to-door canvass in white working-class neighborhoods — will surely help Democratic candidates, despite the frustrations that nearly all labor leaders feel toward the party. But, like Working America, it signals a strategic shift by American labor, whose ranks have been so reduced that it now must recruit people to a non-union, essentially non-dues-paying organization to amass the political clout that its own diminished ranks can no longer deliver. Since labor law now effectively precludes workplace representation, unions are turning to representing workers anywhere and in any capacity they can. It’s time, they’ve concluded, for the Hail Mary pass.
The unions’ support for the Democrats’ party committees has already diminished considerably, though, as Trumka made clear last week, they will continue to support individual pro-union Democrats. But the greater change in union strategy is the one that’s been forced upon them. They are going outside the workplace. They have no place else to turn.
Posted by at No comments:

Rewards from Wind Energy


Wind power: An American success story?

Wind Farm
Wind farm near Ruthton, Minn.: Wind energy in America has surged in recent years benefiting the environment and creating jobs; that success is now at risk. 
The next chapter is up to Congress
How’s this for an environmental and economic success story? Wind power is now generating enough energy to power 10 million American homes, while bringing down energy costs by 90 percent. In Minnesota, wind now provides 10 percent of the state’s electricity. In Iowa, it’s 15 percent.

So what do some in Congress want to do? Pull the rug out from the industry by letting key clean energy tax credits expire. If these forces in Washington, D.C., get their way, 37,000 Americans will likely lose their jobs, and American manufacturing of wind turbines will come to a screeching halt.

Pollution-free power
“Letting these tax credits expire is a bad idea any way you look at it,” said Environment America’s Courtney Abrams. “Wind energy is providing Americans with pollution-free power and putting people to work across the country. Why end something that’s working so well?”

The good news is that we have the president on our side. He listed the wind incentives among his “Top 5 To-Dos” for Congress this summer. Even Republican political consultant Karl Rove has said Congress should extend the credit.

Big Oil is opposed
But Big Oil and other polluting industries have already begun to weigh in against the incentive, and with only a few short months until it expires, we’re running out of time.

So Environment America is ramping up our efforts, lobbying key members of Congress, reaching out to editorial boards, and organizing public support to get this key wind policy across the finish line before the end of the year.

We’re also working to get the first wind turbines spinning off America’s coast within the next five years.

In addition to campaigning for wind power, we’re working to help Minnesota, Arizona, Oregon and other states get at least 10 percent of their energy from solar power by 2030. Our advocates and members in Massachusetts celebrated a major victory for solar in August, when Gov. Deval Patrick signed a bill that will dramatically expand access to solar energy for families, businesses and local governments.

Posted by at No comments:

Fracked Gas for NYC is Radioactive


Portrait, author and activist Naomi Wolf, 10/19/11. (photo: Guardian UK)
Portrait, author and activist Naomi Wolf, 10/19/11. (photo: Guardian UK)

Occupy the Pipeline Battles Fracking

By Naomi Wolf, Guardian UK
13 October 12

Occupy Wall Street: Take the Bull by the Horns
 A pipeline bringing natural gas produced by 'hydraulic fracturing' into New York City creates a new focus for environmental protest
 saw an odd sight on a quiet, West Village street in New York City on Saturday 6 October. A group of about 30 young women and men - all naked or topless - were dancing about, with their flesh painted green.
Patrick Robbins, a 26-year-old native of Brooklyn who works on sustainable development at Cooper Union, is the spokesperson for the group, Occupy the Pipeline. He explained the purpose of the protest-art show hybrid:
"[We're] protesting the pipeline's construction on New York City's West Side Highway and Gansevoort, which is soon to be completed. The pipeline … is slated to bring hydrofracked gas from the marcellus shale - a bed that lies under Pennsylvania and New York State - into New York City's gas infrastructure."
While the health hazards at the point of fracking are well-known, I was not aware of hazards on the consuming end of using fracked gas. According to Occupy the Pipeline, the fracked gas threatens New Yorkers because gas produced from Marcellus shale has 70 times the average radioactivity of natural gas and very high radon content. The trouble with the noble gas (meaning that it is an inert gas) is that it was not one of the issues looked into by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when it analyzed the pipeline project. The commission asserted that radon risk assessment was "outside their purview", said Robbins. But the element has been linked to increases in the risk of lung cancer among non-smokers, claims Occupy the Pipeline, and poses a special risk to New Yorkers with immuno-compromised systems the moment the gas is burned - dispersing the radon.
Other health and safety concerns with fracking are linked to precedent, such as the undrinkable groundwater at Dimock, Pennsylvania, or the explosion from a pipeline of similar size and pressure in San Bruno, California in 2010 that claimed the lives of eight people.
The activists of Occupy the Pipeline assert that the pipeline's construction was part of an anti-democratic process. A moratorium on fracking in New York state has expired; now, Governor Andrew Cuomo is discussing a pilot program for fracking in the five counties of the southern tier in New York state. He refuses to say he will ban fracking altogether, a goal of the activists. As for Councilwoman Christine Quinn, a contender in the New York City mayoral race, she has also kept mum on the pipeline; she did not even send a representative to listen in on the hearings, says Robbins.
"Occupy the Pipeline and the Sane Energy Project have approached her office countless times … NYH20 sent her a petition letter requesting hearings on the Radon issue; representatives from Food and Water Watch, United for Action and multiple enviro groups met with her a month ago to remind her of the request … why is Christine Quinn ignoring calls to protect public health?"
There is a government-mandated legal buffer zone between the area to be fracked and the watershed for drinking and household use - but it is one that Department of Environmental Protection scientists have called inadequate. Fracking involves pumping underground a chemical cocktail that, according to a New York City government report (pdf) about the chemicals, comprises 58% known immune system suppressants and other toxins:
"Significant percentages contain one or more chemicals that are associated with negative health effects: cancer (33% of products contain one or more chemicals associated with cancer), endocrine disruption (41%), reproductive problems (34%), immune suppression (58%), genetic mutation (43%), and other adverse health impacts."
As for the rest, we don't really know what it may contain since that information is protected by "the Halliburton Loophole" - a Bush administration rollback of environmental regulation under the Clean Water Act. Comments Robbins:
"So they can pump carcinogens into our land and they don't they don't have to tell us what is in it because they say it is 'proprietary information'."
Given all these data, how can New York officials keep silent?
Well, the energy companies, and the major banks that finance them, all donate to the Quinn, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Cuomo campaigns. Occupy the Pipeline claims that the entities profiting from fracking are "the same old cast of characters", namely: Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase and Bank of America. Economists Jeanette Barth, president of JM Barth and Associates, an environmental and economic consulting group, and Deborah Rogers, another energy consultant formerly of Smith Barney and Merrill Lynch, both spoke at a lecture this past April entitled "Frackonomics". They pointed out that in times of crisis, such as we have at present, new growth industries are hyped. Investment companies are parroting the hype around natural gas, claiming that investors will make enormous profits from hydrofracking - despite the fact that these wells are almost certainly not going to live up to economic promises now being made. The economists' message was:
"We have a word for this, and it is a bubble."
In light of all this - with politicians turning a deaf ear to their people's concerns, and companies blinded from the dangers by their greed - I asked Robbins, "What do you say to people who say Occupy is dead?"
"Occupy has given birth to a thousand more extremely important projects that are all still doing the work of transforming society. The environmental working group, from which Occupy the Pipeline sprung, have participated in all aspects of democratic process - from NVDA [nonviolent direct action] to attending hearings and submitting testimony."
As I write, natural gas companies are scouting upstate counties, trying to build, for instance, an expansion to a storage facility for natural gas in a salt cavern that sits on the edge of the Finger Lakes area, in New York. But that plan, too, has met with resistance. The Seneca Three are residents of Seneca County who were arrested for blockading a compressor station this past September by chaining themselves to its gates. On 15 October, Occupy the Pipeline will stage a protest event in solidarity with those arrested for protesting the tar sands pipeline (one notable arrestee being actress Daryl Hannah) and other pipeline activists.
"Occupy can no longer be considered outliers. Occupy groups are what democracy looks like!"
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, October 12, 2012

Union Lockouts on Increase



    Lockout. It's a word that football, hockey, basketball and now the Minnesota Orchestra have put into mainstream discussion. 
First, let's be clear what a lockout is: It's the opposite of a strike. The employer withholds work in order to gain concessions from workers.
Lockouts are growing in frequency. Sotheby's auction house locked out art handlers. Cooper Tire did the same to its workers. Drivers for SuperMom's bakery in the Twin Cities were recently locked out for two weeks. One of the most egregious examples is in the Red River Valley of Minnesota and North Dakota, where 1,300 skilled, highly trained workers who turn beets into sugar have been locked out for nearly 15 months by their already profitable employer -- American Crystal Sugar.
Lockouts have not been very common in the past, because usually businesses would prefer to keep operating and getting the value of workers' labor. But in the current economic climate, even profitable enterprises are seeking to wrangle a few extra dollars out of workers.
But these lockouts have real consequences. There are the obvious ones we can see publicly. In the NFL, millions of viewers saw replacement referees blow call after call. The NHL season is in jeopardy of being canceled once again. Now, Orchestra Hall, a major Twin Cities attraction, has fallen silent.
Some lockout consequences, while not necessarily obvious, are even more painful. In the Red River Valley, the casualties have included homes and marriages.
Crystal Sugar's farmer-shareholders haven't been spared pain, either. Shareholders have typically been paid about the same per ton of sugar beets -- or more -- as shareholders in the nearby Minn-Dak Sugar Cooperative. But this year, Crystal Sugar has estimated a beet payment of $59 per ton, while Minn-Dak's latest estimate is for a payment of $74.05 per ton. At the same time, executive pay is up. In the past three years, the top four officers saw their total compensation increase upwards of 34 percent, with CEO Dave Berg seeing a whopping 52 percent increase between 2009 and 2011.
This trend represents an overreach on the part of employers. The response of fans to the NFL referee conflict is a great example of how the average American sees this issue. We are not sympathetic to rich people deciding that they want to rewrite the rules of the game when they are already winning. Nor are we sympathetic to corporate executives mismanaging their shareholders' investment and rewarding themselves with a raise.
The attacks on public-sector collective bargaining rights are similar. Most Americans continue to believe that we all benefit when workers get some say in their jobs. Just look to the overturning of restrictions on collective bargaining in Ohio, and the overwhelming support by public-school parents for the Chicago teachers' strike.
Why does this support persist despite high unemployment and decreasing union density? It's because most of us know that nobody cares more about the quality of the work than workers themselves. It's true for referees, hockey players, musicians, teachers and technicians in a sugar-beet factory.
Editor:  The answer to the spread of lock-outs is SIT-DOWN STRIKES.
Throw Management OUT.  Strikes will end soon with a solid VICTORY.
----------------------------
Shar Knutson is president of the Minnesota AFL-CIO, a labor federation of more than 3,000 local Unions that represent more than 300,000 working people.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)