By Mike Fishman
Published: August 1, 2008
On Thursday, the minimum wage rises to $6.55 an hour. That’s a seventy cent raise in Virginia and forty cents in Maryland for people living in deep poverty and being hit hardest by the skyrocketing price of milk, bread and gas. Minimum wage earners will take what they can get, but a few extra dollars a week doesn't help much.
It’s not just minimum wage earners that are having a harder time, but one-third of all Americans who are struggling to get by on low wages. And the number of low wage jobs – primarily service jobs in hotels, food prep, home health care and office cleaning – are growing. In the next ten years, at least 5.3 million new jobs in our country will pay low wages unless something is done.
In the Capital area, 3.1 million people are struggling to raise their families on low-wages. No longer is it just unemployment, but also the rising tide of low-paying jobs that accounts for the high urban poverty rates in the area. Too many people are juggling multiple jobs, working more hours than they can count, and still not making enough to pay their bills.
And as the number of working poor grows, so does the number of millionaires – now 10 million in the United States after the fifth consecutive annual increase. A smaller portion of this group, the top 1% of households take home 21.8% of all income - more than double the 8.9% rate of thirty years ago. This is the highest concentration of income in the hands of the wealthiest one percent since 1928, a year before the great stock market crash.
At no time in our history has the disparity in personal income been so wide and in no other industrialized country today does the disparity even come close. Record-high CEO compensation is more than 400 times the take-home pay of an average American worker. For an industrialized country like ours, there is no parallel to this growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in England, for instance, make half as much as American business leaders while the lowest-paid workers there earn a higher wage than their American counterparts.
As we look towards the upcoming election, which will put the fate of our country in new hands, we must demand national policies to change the disturbing direction of our economy before it derails entirely. Pegging the minimum wage to a percentage of median income would raise it and then keep the lowest paid workers on pace with future increases of the rest of the workforce. Expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit – a budget cost that would easily be offset by closing tax loopholes for the very wealthy – would also help low-income families teetering on the brink of poverty.
Aside from government action, companies, particularly those benefiting from tax breaks, must raise pay in low-wage industries if we are to make an immediate and wide scale impact on poverty. Government programs alone will fall short of the mark, and unions have shown they can work with business responsibly to bring low-wage workers out of poverty.
In Maryland and Virginia, low wage union workers make 15 percent more in wages than their non-union counterparts and are 25 percent more likely to get employer-paid health care and a pension. But joining a union can be hard for many workers who fear employer retribution. Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which creates a more neutral environment for workers to decide on union membership, would help low-wage workers join the union and get the raises they need.
We've long held to the notion that having a job means you can make ends meet. But unless steps are taken to address the growing imbalance in our economy, we could wake up one day in a city of just the very rich and the working poor.
Cuando el mínimo no llega
El pasado jueves el salario mínimo subió a $6.55 la hora. Un aumento de setenta céntimos en Virginia y cuarenta en Maryland para una población que vive en situación de pobreza y que está pasando serias dificultades para salir adelante ante los exorbitantes precios de la leche, el pan y el combustible. Los trabajadores que sobreviven con salarios mínimos aceptarán el aumento, pero unos cuantos dólares a la semana no representan una gran ayuda.
Hoy en día, un tercio de los estadounidenses trata de llegar a fin de mes con bajos salarios. Y el número de puestos de trabajo de baja remuneración, principalmente empleos en servicios en hoteles, preparación de alimentos, cuidado de salud en el hogar y limpieza de oficinas, es cada vez mayor. En el próximo decenio, 5 millones de nuevos empleos van a pagar salarios de pobreza a menos que se haga algo.
En el área capital más de tres millones de personas tienen dificultades serias para proveer para sus familias con bajos salarios. Ya no sólo el desempleo condena a la pobreza, sino el creciente aumento de empleos de baja remuneración. Demasiadas personas tratan de compatibilizar varios trabajos, laborando más horas de las que pueden contar, y aún así, no llegar a fin de mes.
Y mientras el número de trabajadores aumenta, lo hace también el de millonarios. El año pasado marcó el quinto año consecutivo en el que el número de millonarios en nuestro país creció - ahora en 10 millones. El 1% de los hogares se lleva a casa el 21,8% de todos los ingresos - más del doble de la tasa del 9% de hace treinta años. Esta es la mayor concentración de riqueza en manos del 1% más rico desde 1928, un año antes del crack del 29.
En ningún momento de nuestra historia la disparidad entre ricos y pobres ha sido tan amplia y en ningún otro país industrializado la desigualdad está tan acentuada. La compensación de los altos ejecutivos es 400 veces mayor que la paga del trabajador americano medio. Estos niveles de desigualdad no tienen equivalente en ningún otro país industrializado. Los ejecutivos de las empresas en Inglaterra ganan la mitad que en los Estados Unidos, mientras los trabajadores peor pagados ganan salarios mayores que sus colegas americanos.
Con unas elecciones a la presidencia que pondrán el destino de nuestro país en nuevas manos, debemos exigir políticas nacionales para cambiar el rumbo de nuestra economía. Fijar el salario mínimo en un porcentaje de la renta media elevaría y luego mantendría los salarios más bajos, pegándolo así a futuros aumentos de los salarios. La ampliación del Earned Income Tax Credit - un coste que se vería compensado con el cierre de vías de escape de impuestos para los muy ricos - también ayudaría a las familias de bajos ingresos al borde de la pobreza.
.
Pero si realmente queremos tener un impacto inmediato para reducir la pobreza a gran escala, además de la acción de los gobiernos, las empresas, en particular las que se benefician de desgravaciones fiscales, deben incrementar la remuneración de los empleos que hoy son mayormente de bajos salarios. Los programas gubernamentales por sí solos no alcanzan, y los sindicatos han demostrado que pueden trabajar con las empresas para, con responsabilidad, lograr que los trabajadores de bajos salarios puedan salir de la pobreza.
En Maryland y Virginia, los trabajadores sindicalizados que perciben bajos salarios ganan un 15 por ciento más que los no están afiliados y tienen más probabilidades de obtener seguro médico pagado por el empleador y pensión (un 25 por ciento más). Pero unirse a un sindicato puede ser una tarea difícil para muchos trabajadores que temen represalias de los empleadores. La aprobación de la ley de libre elección de los empleados (Employee Free Choice Act), que crea un ambiente más neutral para que los trabajadores decidan sobre la afiliación sindical, ayudaría a los trabajadores de bajos salarios a afiliarse a un sindicato y obtener los aumentos que necesitan.
Durante mucho tiempo hemos sostenido la idea de que tener un empleo significa poder llegar a fin de mes. Sin embargo, a menos que se tomen medidas para abordar los crecientes desequilibrio de nuestra economía, podemos despertar un día en una ciudad en la que sólo habitan los acaudalados y los trabajadores pobres.
Mike Fishman
Presidente de la local 32BJ SEIU
Con más de 100,000 afiliados la local 32 BJ SEIU es la mayor unión del sector privado de la costa este.
Printer Friendly version
Spanish version
By Mike Fishman
Published: August 1, 2008
Last week’s national minimum wage bump to $6.55 an hour didn’t affect New Jersey’s lowest paid workers who were already earning the state rate of $7.15 an hour. But the extra 60 cents an hour does little for them or the 1.8 million people in New Jersey who are struggling to cover the skyrocketing prices of milk, bread and gas with low wages.
Today, nearly one-third of all Americans are trying to make ends meet on low wages. And the number of low wage jobs – primarily service jobs in hotels, food prep, home health care and office cleaning – is growing. In the next decade, 5 million new jobs will pay poverty-level wages unless something is done.
No longer is it just unemployment, but this rising tide of low-paying jobs, that accounts for some of the country’s highest poverty rates in New Jersey cities like Newark and Camden. Too many people are juggling multiple jobs, working more hours than they can count, and still not making enough to pay their bills.
At the same time, this past year marked the fifth straight year in which the number of millionaires in our country grew – now at 10 million. The top 1% of households take home 21.8% of all income - more than double the 9% rate of thirty years ago. This is the highest concentration of income in the hands of the wealthiest one percent since 1928, a year before the great stock market crash.
At no time in our history has the disparity in income been so wide and in no other industrialized country does the disparity come close. CEO compensation is more than 400 times the take-home pay of an average American worker. For an industrialized country, there is no parallel to this growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in England make half as much as those in America while the lowest-paid workers there earn a higher wage than their American counterparts.
As we look towards the upcoming election, which will put the fate of our country in new hands, we must demand national policies to change the direction of our economy. Pegging the minimum wage to a percentage of median income would raise it and then keep the lowest paid workers on pace with future increases of the rest of the workforce. Expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit – a cost that would be offset by closing tax loopholes for the very wealthy – would also help those low-income families teetering on the brink of poverty.
Aside from government action, companies, particularly those benefiting from tax breaks, must raise pay in low-wage industries if we are to make an immediate and wide scale impact on poverty. Government programs alone will fall short of the mark, and unions have shown they can work with business responsibly to bring low-wage workers out of poverty.
In New Jersey, low wage union workers make 14 percent more in wages than their non-union counterparts and are 25 percent more likely to get employer-paid health care and a pension. But joining a union can be hard for many workers who fear employer retribution. Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bi-partisan bill which would create a more neutral environment for workers to decide on union membership, would help low-wage workers join the union and get the raises they need.
We've long held to the notion that having a job means you can make ends meet. But unless steps are taken to address the growing imbalance in our economy, we could wake up one day in a city of just the very rich and the working poor.
Mike Fishman
President Local 32BJ SEIU
With more than 100,000 members, including 8,000 in New Jersey, Local 32BJ SEIU is the largest private sector union on the East Coast.
La subida del salario mínimo a $6,55 la hora no tiene ningún efecto para los habitantes de Nueva Jersey, que ya ganan un salario mínimo de $ 7,15 por hora, pero si deja a 1,8 millones de residentes que viven en hogar con bajos ingresos en dificultades ante los exorbitantes precios los alimentos y el combustible.
Un tercio de los trabajadores estadounidenses apenas llega a fin de mes. Y el número de trabajos de baja remuneración; en servicios a hoteles, preparación de alimentos, cuidado en el hogar y limpieza es cada vez mayor: 5 millones en camino.
El desempleo ya no es el único factor de exclusión social. La marea de empleos de bajos salario desborda ciudades de Nueva Jersey como Newark y Camden, que padecen unas de las tasas de pobreza más altas del país. Demasiadas personan están tratando de compatibilizar varios trabajos, trabajando más horas de las que pueden contar y no llegar a fin de mes.
Al mismo tiempo, el año pasado marcó el quinto año consecutivo en el que el número de millonarios en nuestro país creció - ahora en 10 millones. El 1% de los hogares se lleva a casa el 21,8% de todos los ingresos - más del doble de la tasa del 9% de hace treinta años. Esta es la mayor concentración de riqueza en manos del 1% más rico desde 1928, un año antes del crack del 29.
En ningún momento de nuestra historia la disparidad entre ricos y pobres ha sido tan amplia y en ningún otro país industrializado la desigualdad está tan acentuada. La compensación de los altos ejecutivos es 400 veces mayor que la paga del trabajador americano medio. Estos niveles de desigualdad no tienen equivalente en ningún otro país industrializado. Los ejecutivos de las empresas en Inglaterra ganan la mitad que en los Estados Unidos, mientras los trabajadores peor pagados ganan salarios mayores que sus colegas americanos.
Con unas elecciones a la presidencia que pondrán el destino de nuestro país en nuevas manos, debemos exigir políticas nacionales para cambiar el rumbo de nuestra economía. Fijar el salario mínimo en un porcentaje de la renta media elevaría y luego mantendría los salarios más bajos, pegándolo así a futuros aumentos de los salarios. La ampliación del Earned Income Tax Credit - un coste que se vería compensado con el cierre de vías de escape de impuestos para los muy ricos - también ayudaría a las familias de bajos ingresos al borde de la pobreza.
Pero si realmente queremos tener un impacto inmediato para reducir la pobreza a gran escala, además de la acción de los gobiernos, las empresas, en particular las que se benefician de desgravaciones fiscales, deben incrementar la remuneración de los empleos que hoy son mayormente de bajos salarios. Los programas gubernamentales por sí solos no alcanzan, y los sindicatos han demostrado que pueden trabajar con las empresas para, con responsabilidad, lograr que los trabajadores de bajos salarios puedan salir de la pobreza.
En Nueva Jersey, los trabajadores sindicalizados que perciben bajos salarios ganan un 14 por ciento más que los no están afiliados y más probabilidades de obtener seguro médico pagado por el empleador y pensión (un 25 por ciento más). Pero unirse a un sindicato puede ser una tarea difícil para muchos trabajadores que temen represalias de los empleadores. La aprobación de la ley de libre elección de los empleados (Employee Free Choice Act), que crea un ambiente más neutral para que los trabajadores decidan sobre la afiliación sindical, ayudaría a los trabajadores de bajos salarios a afiliarse a un sindicato y obtener los aumentos que necesitan.
Durante mucho tiempo hemos sostenido la idea de que tener un empleo significa poder llegar a fin de mes. Sin embargo, a menos que se tomen medidas para abordar los crecientes desequilibrio de nuestra economía, podemos despertar un día en una ciudad en la que sólo habitan los acaudalados y los trabajadores pobres.
Mike Fishman
Presidente SEIU Local 32BJ
Con más de 100,000 afiliados, entre ellos 70,000 en la ciudad de Nueva York, SEIU Local 32BJ es el mayor sindicato del sector privado en la Costa Este.
Printer Friendly version
By Mike Fishman
Published: August 1, 2008
Last week’s national minimum wage bump to $6.55 an hour didn’t help Connecticut’s lowest paid workers who were already earning the state rate of $7.65 an hour. But for the more than 700,000 Connecticut residents living in low-income households, the extra $1.10 an hour does very little, if anything at all, to cover the skyrocketing prices of milk, bread and gas.
Today, nearly one-third of all Americans are trying to make ends meet on low wages. And the number of low wage jobs – primarily service jobs in hotels, food prep, home health care and office cleaning – is growing. In the next decade, 5 million new jobs will pay poverty-level wages unless something is done.
No longer is it just unemployment, but this rising tide of low-paying jobs, that accounts for poverty rates reaching up to 30 percent in Connecticut’s largest cities. Too many people are juggling multiple jobs, working more hours than they can count, and still not making enough to pay their bills.
At the same time, this past year marked the fifth straight year in which the number of millionaires in our country grew – now at 10 million. The top 1% of households take home 21.8% of all income - more than double the 9% rate of thirty years ago. This is the highest concentration of income in the hands of the wealthiest one percent since 1928, a year before the great stock market crash.
At no time in our history has the disparity in income been so wide and in no other industrialized country does the disparity come close. CEO compensation is more than 400 times the take-home pay of an average American worker. For an industrialized country, there is no parallel to this growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in England make half as much as those in America while the lowest-paid workers there earn a higher wage than their American counterparts.
As we look towards the upcoming election, which will put the fate of our country in new hands, we must demand national policies to change the direction of our economy. Pegging the minimum wage to a percentage of median income would raise it and then keep the lowest paid workers on pace with future increases of the rest of the workforce. Expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit – a cost that would be offset by closing tax loopholes for the very wealthy – would also help those low-income families teetering on the brink of poverty.
Aside from government action, companies, particularly those benefiting from tax breaks, must raise pay in low-wage industries if we are to make an immediate and wide scale impact on poverty. Government programs alone will fall short of the mark, and unions have shown they can work with business responsibly to bring low-wage workers out of poverty.
In Connecticut, low wage union workers make 21 percent more in wages than their non-union counterparts and are 25 percent more likely to get employer-paid health care and a pension. But joining a union can be hard for many workers who fear employer retribution. Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bi-partisan bill which would create a more neutral environment for workers to decide on union membership, would help low-wage workers join the union and get the raises they need.
We've long held to the notion that having a job means you can make ends meet. But unless steps are taken to address the growing imbalance in our economy, we could wake up one day in a city of just the very rich and the working poor.
Mike Fishman
President Local 32BJ SEIU
With more than 100,000 members, including 4,400 in Connecticut, Local 32BJ SEIU is the largest private sector union on the East Coast.
La subida del salario mínimo a $6,55 la hora no tiene ningún efecto para los habitantes de Connecticut, que ya ganan un salario mínimo de $ 7,65 por hora, pero si deja a los más de 700, 000 residentes del Estado que viven en hogar con bajos ingresos en dificultades ante los exorbitantes precios los alimentos y el combustible.
Un tercio de los trabajadores estadounidenses apenas llega a fin de mes. Y el número de trabajos de baja remuneración; en servicios a hoteles, preparación de alimentos, cuidado en el hogar y limpieza es cada vez mayor: 5 millones en camino.
El desempleo ya no es el único factor de exclusión social. La marea de empleos de bajos salario desborda las grandes ciudades de Connecticut que alcanzan tasas de pobreza de hasta el 30%. Demasiadas personan están tratando de compatibilizar varios trabajos, trabajando más horas de las que pueden contar y no llegar a fin de mes.
Al mismo tiempo, el año pasado marcó el quinto año consecutivo en el que el número de millonarios en nuestro país creció - ahora en 10 millones. El 1% de los hogares se lleva a casa el 21,8% de todos los ingresos - más del doble de la tasa del 9% de hace treinta años. Esta es la mayor concentración de riqueza en manos del 1% más rico desde 1928, un año antes del crack del 29.
En ningún momento de nuestra historia la disparidad entre ricos y pobres ha sido tan amplia y en ningún otro país industrializado la desigualdad está tan acentuada. La compensación de los altos ejecutivos es 400 veces mayor que la paga del trabajador americano medio. Estos niveles de desigualdad no tienen equivalente en ningún otro país industrializado. Los ejecutivos de las empresas en Inglaterra ganan la mitad que en los Estados Unidos, mientras los trabajadores peor pagados ganan salarios mayores que sus colegas americanos.
Con unas elecciones a la presidencia que pondrán el destino de nuestro país en nuevas manos, debemos exigir políticas nacionales para cambiar el rumbo de nuestra economía. Fijar el salario mínimo en un porcentaje de la renta media elevaría y luego mantendría los salarios más bajos, pegándolo así a futuros aumentos de los salarios. La ampliación del Earned Income Tax Credit - un coste que se vería compensado con el cierre de vías de escape de impuestos para los muy ricos - también ayudaría a las familias de bajos ingresos al borde de la pobreza.
Pero si realmente queremos tener un impacto inmediato para reducir la pobreza a gran escala, además de la acción de los gobiernos, las empresas, en particular las que se benefician de desgravaciones fiscales, deben incrementar la remuneración de los empleos que hoy son mayormente de bajos salarios. Los programas gubernamentales por sí solos no alcanzan, y los sindicatos han demostrado que pueden trabajar con las empresas para, con responsabilidad, lograr que los trabajadores de bajos salarios puedan salir de la pobreza.
En Connecticut los trabajadores sindicalizados que perciben bajos salarios ganan un 21 por ciento más que los no están afiliados y más probabilidades de obtener seguro médico pagado por el empleador y pensión (un 25 por ciento más). Pero unirse a un sindicato puede ser una tarea difícil para muchos trabajadores que temen represalias de los empleadores. La aprobación de la ley de libre elección de los empleados (Employee Free Choice Act), que crea un ambiente más neutral para que los trabajadores decidan sobre la afiliación sindical, ayudaría a los trabajadores de bajos salarios a afiliarse a un sindicato y obtener los aumentos que necesitan.
Durante mucho tiempo hemos sostenido la idea de que tener un empleo significa poder llegar a fin de mes. Sin embargo, a menos que se tomen medidas para abordar los crecientes desequilibrio de nuestra economía, podemos despertar un día en una ciudad en la que sólo habitan los acaudalados y los trabajadores pobres.
Mike Fishman
Presidente SEIU Local 32BJ
Con más de 100,000 afiliados, entre ellos 4,400 en Connecticut,, SEIU Local 32BJ es el mayor sindicato del sector privado en la Costa Este.
Printer Friendly version
OP-ED
By Mike Fishman
Published: July 30, 2008
Last week’s minimum wage bump to $6.55 didn’t help New Yorkers already earning the higher, state-wide $7.15 rate or the six million low-wage working New Yorkers struggling to cover the skyrocketing prices of milk, bread and gas.
Nearly one-third of Americans are forced to make ends meet on low wages. And the number of low-wage service jobs in hotels, food prep, home health care and office cleaning is growing, with five million such jobs on the way.
Valentino Stronza, a security officer working at a Parmount-owned office building is trying to make ends meet, but his $10 an hour from Apollo Security isn't enough to pay the rent. Instead, he and his son share a bedroom in his sister's apartment. Valentino’s not alone – nearly one in four New Yorkers lives in poverty.
At the same time, CEO compensation has grown to 400 times the pay of an average worker. This was the fifth straight year in which the number of millionaires grew – now 10 million. The top 1 percent of households take home 21.8 percent of all income – twice the rate of 30 years ago – the highest concentration of income in the hands of the wealthiest 1 percent since 1928, a year before the stock market crash.
At no time in our history has the income gap been so wide and in no other city is it as great. New York City lays claim to the widest income gap in the country - with a 40% difference between the wealthiest 20% and the poorest 20%. In the U.S., CEO compensation is 400 times the take-home pay of an average American worker.
Pegging the minimum wage to median income would bring pay within range of the rest of the workforce. Expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit would help low-income families teetering on the brink of poverty.
A citywide policy requiring publicly financed development projects to pay prevailing wages and benefits would ensure that new jobs enable working families to make ends meet. At Willets Point and Greenpoint-Williamsburg, where these conditions apply, good jobs are being created.
Government programs alone will fall short of the mark. Employers must work with unions to bring low-wage workers out of poverty. In New York, low-wage union workers make 16 percent more than non-union workers. But joining a union is hard for many workers who fear employer retribution. Passing the Employee Free Choice Act would help workers who want to join a union to do so.
Unless we correct the imbalance in our economy, we’re doomed to live in a city of just the very rich and the working poor.
"A version of this column first appeared in City Limits.
La subida del salario mínimo a $6,55 la hora no ayuda a los neoyorquinos que ya ganan un salario mínimo de $ 7,15 por hora y deja a 6,1 millones de neoyorquinos en dificultades ante los exorbitantes precios los alimentos y el combustible.
Un tercio de los trabajadores estadounidenses apenas llega a fin de mes y el número de trabajos de baja remuneración, en servicios a hoteles, preparación de alimentos, cuidado en el hogar y limpieza es cada vez mayor: 5 millones en camino.
Valentino Stronza trabaja como oficial de seguridad en unas oficinas de Paramount Group. Pero su salario de $10 la hora en Apollo Security no paga la renta. Padre e hijo comparten dormitorio en la casa de la hermana. Valentino no está solo; uno de cada cuatro neoyorquinos vive en pobreza.
Al mismo tiempo la compensación de los CEOs aumenta 400 veces más que la paga del trabajador medio. Por quinto año consecutivo el número de millonarios en nuestro país creció; ahora en 10 millones. El 1% de los hogares acumula el 21,8% de los ingresos; más del doble que hace 30 años. La mayor concentración de riqueza en manos del 1% más rico desde 1928, un año antes del crack bursatil.
Nunca antes la disparidad entre ricos y pobres ha sido tan amplia y en ninguna otra ciudad es tan grande. New York tiene la mayor brecha del país entre ricos y pobres; un 40% de diferencia en entre el 20% más rico y el 20% más pobre.
Fijar el salario mínimo en un porcentaje de la renta media ajustaría los salarios bajas al resto de la fuerza de trabajo. La ampliación del Earned Income Tax Credit también ayudaría a las familias al borde de la pobreza.
Localmente, una política de estándares salariales y beneficios para los trabajadores de los edificios construidos con financiación pública crearía empleos decentes para las familias trabajadoras. En Willets Point y Greenpoint-Williamsburg estos requerimientos ya funcionan y se están creando cientos de trabajos.
Los programas gubernamentales por sí solos no alcanzan. Empleadores y sindicatos deben trabajar para que los trabajadores de bajos salarios puedan salir de la pobreza. En Nueva York los trabajadores sindicalizados de bajos salarios ganan un 16 % más que los no afiliados. Pero unirse a un sindicato es todavía una tarea difícil para quienes temen represalias de los empleadores. Aprobar la Employee Free Choice Act ayudaría a los trabajadores que desean organizarse.
A menos que enfrentemos los crecientes desequilibrio de nuestra economía, despertaremos en una ciudad en la que sólo habitan los acaudalados y los trabajadores pobres.
Mike Fishman
Presidente SEIU Local 32BJ
Una versión de esta columna se publicó en City Limits.
Printer Friendly version
America must correct its vast earnings gap, or the 'working poor' will
continue to include far too many of us.
By Mike Fishman
Published: July 28, 2008
Last week’s national minimum wage bump to $6.55 an hour didn’t affect New Yorkers who were already earning a higher $7.15 minimum set by the state. But the extra income does little for those who had been earning the previous federal minimum of $5.85 an hour – or the 6.1 million residents of New York state who are struggling to cover the skyrocketing prices of milk, bread and gas with low wages.
Today, nearly one-third of all Americans are trying to make ends meet on low wages. And the number of low-wage jobs – primarily service jobs in hotels, food prep, home health care and office cleaning – is growing. In the next decade, 5 million new jobs will pay poverty-level wages unless something is done.
Valentino Stronza, a security officer working at a Midtown office building owned by the Paramount Group, lives this struggle daily. He's doing his best to make ends meet, but earning only $10 an hour from Apollo Security isn't enough for him to provide the home he wants his son to have. To keep costs down, he and his son share a bedroom in his sister's apartment. He works overnight three days a week trying to put money aside so he and his son can move into their own place, but so far, the extra money has gone to paying off past medical expenses.
Valentino’s not alone – according to Mayor Bloomberg’s new poverty measurement, nearly one in four New Yorkers lives in poverty. Despite working hard to create better futures for their families, they are making little headway in an economy that's producing low-wage jobs like there's no tomorrow.
At the same time, this past year marked the fifth straight year in which the number of millionaires in our country grew – now at 10 million. The top 1 percent of households take home 21.8 percent of all income – more than double the 9 percent rate of 30 years ago. This is the highest concentration of income in the hands of the wealthiest 1 percent since 1928, a year before the great stock market crash.
At no time in our history has the disparity in income been so wide and in no other industrialized country does the disparity come close. CEO compensation is more than 400 times the take-home pay of an average American worker. For an industrialized country, there is no parallel to this growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in England make half as much as those in America, while the lowest-paid workers there earn a higher wage than their American counterparts.
As we look toward the upcoming election, which will put the fate of our country in new hands, we must demand national policies to change the direction of our economy. Pegging the minimum wage to a percentage of median income would raise it and then keep the lowest paid workers on pace with future increases of the rest of the workforce. Expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit – a cost that would be offset by closing tax loopholes for the very wealthy – would also help those low-income families teetering on the brink of poverty.
Locally, a citywide policy requiring publicly financed development projects to pay prevailing wages and benefits to the workers who build and maintain the sites would ensure that newly created jobs provide what New York families need to get by. At Willets Point and Greenpoint-Williamsburg developments where these provisions have already been set in motion, hundreds of good jobs will be created for working New Yorkers.
Aside from government action, companies, particularly those benefiting from tax breaks, must raise pay in low-wage industries if we are to make an immediate and wide-scale impact on poverty. Government programs alone will fall short of the mark, and unions have shown they can work with business responsibly to bring low-wage workers out of poverty.
In New York, low-wage union workers make 16 percent more in wages than their non-union counterparts and are 25 percent more likely to get employer-paid health care and a pension. But joining a union can be hard for many workers who fear employer retribution. Federal passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bipartisan bill which would create a more neutral environment for workers to decide on union membership, would help low-wage workers join a union and get the raises they need.
Americans have long held to the notion that having a job means you can make ends meet. But unless steps are taken to address the growing imbalance in our economy, we could wake up one day in a city of just the very rich and the working poor.
Mike Fishman is president of SEIU Local 32BJ, with more than 100,000 members, including 70,000 in New York City, making it the largest private sector union on the East Coast.
Printer Friendly version
Op-ed
By Mike Fishman
Published: July 28, 2008
THURSDAY'S national minimum-wage bump to $6.55 an hour won't affect Pennsylvania workers who are already earning the state rate of $7.15 an hour. But the extra 60 cents does little for them or the 1.6 million Pennsylvanians struggling to cover the skyrocketing cost of milk, bread and gas with low wages.
Today, a third of all Americans are trying to make ends meet on low wages. And the number of low-wage jobs - primarily service jobs in hotels, food prep, home health care and office cleaning - is growing. Over the next decade, 5 million new jobs will pay poverty-level wages unless something is done.
Debra Fowlkes, a life-long Philadelphia resident, lives this struggle daily. She's doing her best to make ends meet, but earning just $9 an hour as a security officer at a state welfare agency doesn't support her three children. She can't remember the last time her bills were paid-up, and despite her hard work, she's lost hope of ever catching up.
Debra's not alone - one in four Philadelphians lives in poverty. Despite working hard to create better futures for their families, they are making little headway in an economy that's producing low-wage jobs like there's no tomorrow.
At the same time, this past year marked the fifth straight one in which the number of millionaires in our country grew - now at 10 million. The top 1 percent of households take home 22 percent of all income - more than double the 9 percent of 30 years ago. This is the highest concentration of income in the hands of the wealthiest one percent since 1928, a year before the great stock market crash.
At no time in our history has the disparity in income been so wide and in no other industrialized country does it come close.
CEO compensation is more than 400 times the take-home pay of an average U.S. worker. For an industrialized country, there is no parallel to this growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in England make half as much as those in the U.S. while the lowest-paid workers there earn a higher wage than their U.S. counterparts.
As we look toward the upcoming election, which will put the fate of our country in new hands, we must demand national policies to change the direction of our economy. Pegging the minimum wage to a percentage of median income would raise it and then keep the lowest-paid workers on pace with future increases of the rest of the workforce. Expanding the earned income tax credit - a cost that would be offset by closing tax loopholes for the very wealthy - would also help those low-income families teetering on the brink of poverty.
At the state level, establishing prevailing wages and benefits for workers at state-owned buildings and facilities, as well as publicly-funded projects, would be a critical step forward in making sure work paid enough to get by. In fact, Pennsylvania is behind the curve in establishing these standards which already exist in many neighboring states.
ASIDE FROM government action, companies, particularly those benefiting from tax breaks, must raise pay in low-wage industries if we are to make an immediate and widescale impact on poverty. Government programs alone will fall short, and unions have shown they can work with business responsibly to bring low-wage workers out of poverty.
In Pennsylvania, low-wage union workers make nearly 13 percent more in wages than their non-union counterparts and are 25 percent more likely to get employer-paid health care and a pension. But joining a union can be hard for many workers who fear employer retribution. Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which creates a more neutral environment for workers to decide on union membership, would help low-wage workers join the union and get the raises they need.
We've long held to the notion that having a job means you can make ends meet. But unless steps are taken to address the growing imbalance in our economy, we could wake up one day in a city of just the very rich and the working poor. *
Mike Fishman is president of Local 32BJ of SEIU, which includes 5,000 members in the Philadelphia area. Local 32BJ SEIU is the largest private sector union on the East Coast.
Printer Friendly version
By Mike Fishman, President SEIU Local 32BJ and
George Gresham, President of 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East SEIU
Published: June 2, 2008
Today, the two million member Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the fastest growing labor union in the Americas, kicks of its Convention in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Over the next three days, nearly 2,000 member delegates from Local Unions in Canada, the United States, and Puerto Rico will meet to elect leaders, debate on issues such as health care, politics, the Iraq War and immigration and set the agenda for our union for the next four years.
This convention comes not a moment too soon. With income inequality at a record high and tax breaks for both the richest one percent and the largest corporations, Americans are eager for change. Gas prices and home prices are both heading in the wrong direction, and polls show that as many as 81 percent of all Americans believe this country is on the wrong track.
The challenges facing America today are the questions SEIU members will wrestle with in San Juan this week.
Justice for All: Building a Pro-Worker Movement
Before us, we see a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get our economy and our society back on track.
Key to seizing this moment and building a new American Dream that rewards hard work; ensures health care for all; provides for a secure retirement; and gives children from working families a chance to live better lives than those of their parents, is reinvigorating the role of the American labor movement.
Today's union members simply cannot expect to maintain and improve our living standards and working conditions if the percentage of union workers in our industries and our society continues to decline. We must renew and intensify our efforts to increase union membership and broaden our scope to prioritize the issues that make a difference in all working people's lives: healthcare, education, housing, transportation, public safety, immigration reform, and retirement security.
To that end SEIU's national leaders have committed ourselves to an ambitious new plan called "Justice for All." The plan is exactly what it sounds like.
Our union has recognized that if our members do well while all other workers are struggling, then we cannot claim victory. Not only does our mission to create a more just and humane world instruct us to look after the interests of all working people, but our pragmatism tells us that our members will face an uphill battle as long as only seven percent of the private workforce is represented by a union.
In order to deliver Justice for All, our union plans to restructure itself, redirect its resources and use its political voice to accomplish significant benefits for all working people, including:
• passing universal health care;
• passing comprehensive immigration reform that provides a path citizenship for hardworking, taxpaying immigrants;
• passing the Employee Free Choice Act, which restores the freedom of workers to have a voice on the job; and
• holding politicians accountable for the promises they make when they are courting our votes.
Fighting to Give Workers a Voice
Fighting for social and economic justice for the most vulnerable sectors of our workforce has always been part of the basic principles of the American labor movement. Raising labor standards is critical to growing and stabilizing the working and middle class.
Six years ago, SEIU launched a monumental organizing drive in support of security officers who often earn poverty-like wages while protecting multi-million dollar buildings. Since then, SEIU has brought more than 15,000 officers across the country into the union, helping them secure the fair wages and benefits they deserve.
Just last month, SEIU Local 32BJ won a first-ever union contract with thirty percent wage hikes and employer-paid health care for 1,500 security officers in Washington, DC. One should not underestimate the impact these victories have on low-income, predominantly African-American communities.
1199 SEIU has organized 60,000 new health care workers in the last seven years. In the last eight months alone, 1199 has added 24,600 newly organized members in 41 union elections. Many of these new members are in the home health care industry -- women and men who for too long got paid minimum wage with no health benefits while taking on the sometimes back-breaking work caring for seniors and disabled patients in their home.
1199's work on their behalf has secured union contracts that have led to wage increases and health benefits for thousands of homecare workers, professionalizing an industry where there is expected enormous growth in the coming years. And with these victories, we continue our fight to raise labor standards for all their low-wage workers.
Widespread change does not happen over night. And even winning on Election Day does not always do the trick. Change happens when working people band together for common causes and hold elected officials accountable for their leadership or lack thereof. It happens when all of us and those we elect to serve on our behalf realize that it is us -- the hard working men and women of America - who ultimately wield the real power to bring about change and justice for all.
Printer Friendly version
Opinion
Published: April 18, 2008
The debate in Congress over raising the number of H1-B visas for highly-skilled foreign workers reveals a self-defeating immigration policy that threatens to undermine our economy just when we need to get it back on track. America's ability to attract foreign workers, both highly skilled and low wage workers, has long fueled our competitive edge over many countries and been a source of our economic strength.
Our outdated and overly restrictive immigration quota system is cutting off the very source of labor that makes our economy strong in the first place.
We need to put the ugly politics of anti-immigrant propaganda behind us by bringing our immigration system into sync with today's economic reality.
Businesses must be allowed to meet their pressing labor demands with foreign born workers. At the same time, these same businesses must adhere to wage standards and work site protections.
Just as we must accept that there is an immediate need for highly-skilled technology experts, we must also accept the fact that low wage and often undocumented workers serve an indispensable role in our economy. We must acknowledge their contributions to our economy by integrating them into our cities and towns. In addition, we need to enhance the skill set of our workforce by strengthening our education system and investing in state-of-the-art worker training. Without improvements to education and worker training, we will remain overly dependent on temporary workers from other countries to fill our highly skilled jobs.
With an aging population that is shrinking our labor force we cannot afford to turn away the very workers we need to fuel our economic engine.
Immigrant workers bring us a just-in-the-nick-of time supply of labor to strengthen our economy.
Anti-immigrant claims that undocumented workers somehow steal jobs from U.S. citizens is baseless. The truth is these jobs do not appeal to most Americans because they pay so little. But for low wage workers just arriving in this country, undocumented or otherwise, these jobs are their best shot at the American Dream. These new immigrants contribute to the economy by purchasing their groceries from local stores, renting their apartments from landlords, eating in restaurants owned locally and even starting businesses that create jobs for other workers struggling to make ends meet. In many cases, they have tax and social security deductions taken from their paychecks. Furthermore, immigrant workers enrich our cities with a cultural diversity that most cities boast about.
For U.S. businesses to remain competitive in the global marketplace, and for our economy to regain its strength, we need to make sure our companies have the access they need to highly skilled workers and service workers.
Its time to come to grips with our flawed immigration policies by providing our economic engine with the labor it needs to fire on all cylinders.
Mike Fishman is President of Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union -- one of the largest private sector unions in the country.
Printer Friendly Version (English)
El debate en el Congreso sobre el aumento del número de visas H1-B para trabajadores extranjeros altamente calificados revela una política de inmigración contraproducente que amenaza con socavar nuestra economía, justo cuando más necesitamos enderezarla. La capacidad de los Estados Unidos para atraer trabajadores extranjeros; tanto altamente calificados como de bajos ingresos, ha impulsado durante mucho tiempo nuestra ventaja competitiva sobre muchos países y han sido una seña de identidad de nuestra fortaleza económica.
Sin embargo, un anticuado y excesivamente restrictivo sistema de inmigración está limitando la propia fuente de mano de obra que fortalece nuestra economía. Es necesario dejar a un lado la propaganda antiinmigrante y poner nuestro sistema de inmigración en sintonía con la actual realidad económica.
Las empresas deben tener la posibilidad de cumplir con sus apremiantes exigencias laborales con trabajadores extranjeros. Al mismo tiempo, esas mismas empresas deben cumplir con los estándares laborales y las normas de protección del centro de trabajo.
Así como tenemos que aceptar que hay una necesidad inmediata de expertos en tecnología, también en necesario saber que los trabajadores de bajos ingresos, a menudo indocumentados, realizan un papel indispensable en nuestra economía. Es imperante reconocer su contribución a nuestra economía mediante su integración en nuestras ciudades y pueblos, pero también debemos mejorar el conjunto de habilidades de nuestra fuerza de trabajo, fortalecer nuestro sistema educativo y aumentar la inversión en capacitación de los trabajadores. Sin mejoras en educación y capacitación, seguiremos dependiendo de los trabajadores temporales extranjeros para cubrir los puestos de trabajo de alta calificación.
Numerosos grupos anti-inmigrantes afirman que los trabajadores ilegales quitan puestos de trabajo a los americanos. Una afirmación que carece totalmente de fundamento. Estos puestos de trabajo, de salarios bajos, no llaman la atención de la mayoría de los estadounidenses; pero para los trabajadores que llegan a este país, indocumentados o no, son su mejor opción en alcanzar el sueño americano.
En el mercado global, para que las empresas de los EEUU puedan seguir siendo competitivas y que nuestra economía recupere su fuerza, tenemos que asegurarnos de que tengan acceso tanto a trabajadores altamente cualificados, como a los trabajadores de servicios.
Es hora de hacer frente a nuestras torpezas políticas en inmigración y garantizar la mano de obra necesaria para poner nuestro motor económico a todo gas.
Mike Fishman es presidente de la Local 32BJ de la Unión Internacional de Empleados de Servicio - uno de los mayores sindicatos del sector privado en EEUU.
Printer Friendly Version (Español)
By Mike Fishman
Published: August 2, 2007
La semana pasada los trabajadores menos pagados recibieron su primer aumento en más de una década. Pero en el clima económico de hoy en día, este mísero aumento no es suficiente para mantener a una persona, y menos a una familia.
Al distraer nuestra atención de los salarios estancados que se pagan a los trabajadores de servicios y otros, es una vergüenza que hayamos creado en nuestra sociedad un segmento nuevo y en constante de personas, llamado los pobres que trabajan. Casi ocho millones de pobres que trabajan, incluyendo el 16 % de las familias trabajadoras en Connecticut, luchan por pagar su alquiler, servicios públicos, víveres y el cuidado de los niños. Los gastos inesperados tales como las cuentas médicas, cuentas del gas, reparaciones del auto o del hogar pueden retrasarlos en meses o años. Lo que más preocupa es la posibilidad de una enfermedad o accidente grave repentino que puede dejar a la familia de un trabajador pobre sin ningún recurso ni esperanza. Sin un salario que les permita vivir, los trabajadores que reciben un salario bajo no tienen escapatoria de este ciclo vicioso ni tienen la posibilidad de ahorrar para la educación de sus hijos o para su propia jubilación. Esta alarmante tendencia está en aumento, y empuja la tasa de pobreza a un nivel más elevado a la vez que socava nuestros valores norteamericanos sobre el trabajo duro y la justicia.Con la productividad más elevada y la economía en crecimiento, ¿por qué los Estados Unidos de América no tiene un salario mínimo que permita a los trabajadores mantener a sus familias? Algunos economistas conservadores afirman que las “demandas del mercado” no permiten que el salario mínimo sea en realidad un salario sostenible, y que permita vivir. Alegan que la economía no puede absorber los aumentos, y que se perderán trabajos.
La verdad del asunto es que cerca de 11 millones de nuevos trabajos fueron creados después del último aumento federal del salario mínimo. Además, de acuerdo al Centro para el Progreso en los Estados Unidos, los estados que aumentaron sus propias tasas de salario mínimo han notado desde entonces un fuerte crecimiento en el empleo por parte de pequeños negocios.
En todo caso, el debate sobre la creación de trabajos parece olvidar el aspecto más importante cuando se considera el aumento astronómico en la compensación otorgada a los CEO. Nuestra economía saludable parece ser perfectamente capaz de absorber los salarios récord de los CEO así como sus bonificaciones que eclipsan los salarios de los trabajadores promedio y que ascienden a más de 400 veces la paga que llevan a sus hogares.
En un país industrializado como el nuestro, no existe ningún paralelo para la creciente división de ingresos que existe entre los trabajadores menos pagados y los más pagados. Por ejemplo, los ejecutivos de corporaciones en el Reino Unido, ganan la mitad de lo que ganan los ejecutivos norteamericanos mientras que los trabajadores menos pagados en ese país ganan ahora un salario más elevado que lo que sus contrapartes norteamericanos ganarán en el 2009.
La misma existencia de los pobres que trabajan es contraria a la creencia de nuestro país de que cualquiera que trabaje debe estar ganando lo suficiente para sobrevivir. Pequeños pasos como el aumento del salario mínimo simplemente son una curita para el problema, y de por sí no constituyen la respuesta apropiada. Si vamos a ganar lo que debería ser una guerra nacional contra la pobreza, necesitamos una legislación que garantice que todos los trabajos paguen lo que se necesita para realmente sobrevivir.
Con más de 85,000 afiliados en seis estados y en Washington, DC, Local 32BJ SEIU es la unión más grande de trabajadores de servicios a propiedades en el país.
Printer Friendly version
By Mike Fishman
Published: August 3, 2007
This week, the country's lowest-paid workers are getting their first raise in more than a decade. But in today's economic climate, this paltry bump is not enough to sustain an individual, let alone support a family. By taking our eyes off the stagnating wages paid to service and other workers, we have shamefully created a new and growing segment of people in our society called the working poor.
For Camila Hidalgo, a single mother trying to make ends meet in Northern Virginia and one of seven million working poor in the United States, the attention surrounding this week's minimum-wage increase is a slap in the face. Working hard at two cleaning jobs but earning a single-digit wage just above the minimum, she can barely cover rent and put food on the table and certainly can't afford health-care coverage for herself or her children. She prays for her family's health, not only for their wellbeing, but also because she couldn't pay for a hospital visit or medicine if anyone got sick.
Across the country, working-poor Americans like Camila are struggling to pay for their rent, utilities, groceries and child care. Unexpected expenses such as medical bills, gas bills, car or home repairs can set them back months or years. Most worrisome is the prospect of a sudden serious illness or an accident that can leave a working-poor family without any recourse or hope. Without a living wage, low-wage earners have no escape from this vicious cycle or the ability to save for their children's education or their own retirement. This disturbing trend is on the rise, pushing the poverty rate higher and undermining our American values about hard work and fairness.
With productivity up and the economy growing, why doesn't the United States have a minimum wage that enables workers to provide for their families? Some conservative economists say "market demands" won't allow for the minimum wage to actually be a sustainable, living wage. They claim the economy can't absorb the increases and that jobs will be lost. The truth of the matter is that nearly 11 million new jobs were created after the last federal minimum-wage increase. In addition, according to the Center for American Progress, states that increased their own minimum-wage rates since then have seen strong growth in small business employment.
In any case, the debate about job creation seems to miss the larger point when you consider the astronomical rise in CEO compensation. Our healthy economy seems perfectly capable of absorbing record-high CEO salaries and bonuses that dwarf the wages of the average worker - amounting to more than 400 times their take-home pay. For an industrialized country like ours, there is no parallel to the growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in the United Kingdom, for instance, make half as much as American business leaders while the lowest-paid workers there already earn a higher wage today than their American counterparts will make in 2009.
The very existence of working poor runs counter to our country's belief that anyone who has a job should be making enough to get by. Small steps like the minimum-wage increase barely provide a band-aid to the problem, and on its own, the increase is not the answer. If we are going to win what should be a national war on poverty, we need legislation ensuring all jobs pay what it takes to actually live on.
Printer Friendly version
By Mike fishman
Published: July 25, 2007
This week, the country's lowest-paid workers are getting their first raise in more than a decade. But in today's economic climate, this paltry bump is not enough to sustain an individual, let alone support a family. By taking our eyes off the stagnating wages paid to service and other workers, we have shamefully created a new and growing segment of people in our society called the working poor.
For Camila Hidalgo, a single mother trying to make ends meet in Northern Virginia and one of seven million working poor in the United States, the attention surrounding this week's minimum-wage increase is a slap in the face. Working hard at two cleaning jobs but earning a single-digit wage just above the minimum, she can barely cover rent and put food on the table and certainly can't afford health-care coverage for herself or her children. She prays for her family's health, not only for their wellbeing, but also because she couldn't pay for a hospital visit or medicine if anyone got sick.
Across the country, working-poor Americans like Camila are struggling to pay for their rent, utilities, groceries and child care. Unexpected expenses such as medical bills, gas bills, car or home repairs can set them back months or years. Most worrisome is the prospect of a sudden serious illness or an accident that can leave a working-poor family without any recourse or hope. Without a living wage, low-wage earners have no escape from this vicious cycle or the ability to save for their children's education or their own retirement. This disturbing trend is on the rise, pushing the poverty rate higher and undermining our American values about hard work and fairness.
With productivity up and the economy growing, why doesn't the United States have a minimum wage that enables workers to provide for their families? Some conservative economists say "market demands" won't allow for the minimum wage to actually be a sustainable, living wage. They claim the economy can't absorb the increases and that jobs will be lost. The truth of the matter is that nearly 11 million new jobs were created after the last federal minimum-wage increase. In addition, according to the Center for American Progress, states that increased their own minimum-wage rates since then have seen strong growth in small business employment.
In any case, the debate about job creation seems to miss the larger point when you consider the astronomical rise in CEO compensation. Our healthy economy seems perfectly capable of absorbing record-high CEO salaries and bonuses that dwarf the wages of the average worker - amounting to more than 400 times their take-home pay. For an industrialized country like ours, there is no parallel to the growing income divide between the highest- and lowest-paid workers. Corporate executives in the United Kingdom, for instance, make half as much as American business leaders while the lowest-paid workers there already earn a higher wage today than their American counterparts will make in 2009.
The very existence of working poor runs counter to our country's belief that anyone who has a job should be making enough to get by. Small steps like the minimum-wage increase barely provide a band-aid to the problem, and on its own, the increase is not the answer. If we are going to win what should be a national war on poverty, we need legislation ensuring all jobs pay what it takes to actually live on.
Mike Fishman is president of Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union.
Printer Friendly version
By Mike Fishman
Published: July 18, 2007
By failing to fix a broken immigration system, Congress has left the job of managing immigration to mayors and other local elected officials. In the absence of federal immigration reform, these local officials are taking matters into their own hands -- and with mixed results. Here in Long Island in Farmingville, day laborers have been under attack for years. Steve Levy routinely introduces anti-immigrant legislation - from a bill last fall requiring companies to file affidavits to certify their employees are not undocumented immigrants, to recent “anti-loitering” legislation that was eventually defeated by the legislature. Not surprisingly, immigrants feel intimidated in this environment. Levy’s plans, prompted by frustration with our broken immigration system, are not a solution.
Such anti-immigrant policies, coupled with raids and deportations, underscore the desperate need for immigration reform. But instead of targeting undocumented immigrants, local officials should be looking for ways to integrate them into our communities.
According to the Pew Hispanic Center, there are an estimated 650,000 undocumented immigrants in New York. In some Long Island towns, immigrants are valued. For example, Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi has long endorsed hiring sites for day laborers, which provide resources for workers and bring order to communities. Relations with immigrants in Farmingdale have been largely affirmative. That’s the kind of leadership we need in Long Island and other parts of New York.
Most Americans recognize the contributions of hard-working, tax-paying immigrants and are ready for real reform. A recent Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll reports that 63% of respondents believe undocumented immigrants already in the country should start on the path to citizenship. And in fact, since the 2006 elections, polls show healthy public support for immigration reform. Also this majority understands that helping immigrants become part of the social, economic and cultural fabric builds stronger and healthier communities. The Senate refuses to listen to the American public. And so now the burden will continue to be borne by local cities and towns, around Long Island and across the country. Immigrant workers are men and women who clean offices, homes in Long Island, take care of children, the elderly, serve our food and work in many other industries.
Printer Friendly version
Trenton Times Op-ed
By Mike Fishman
Published: July 14, 2007
By failing to fix a broken immigration system, Congress has left the job of managing immigration to mayors and other local elected officials.
In the absence of federal immigration reform, local officials are taking matters into their own hands -- with mixed results. Here in New Jersey, Morristown Mayor Donald Cresitello seeks to deputize local police officers as federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. This misguided policy will divert limited city funds away from local services, creating tension between longtime residents and newcomers. Even worse, asking local police to enforce federal immigration laws drives a wedge between police and immigrants when it comes to crime prevention. Cresitello's plan, prompted by frustration with our broken immigration system, is not a solution.
Such anti-immigrant policies, coupled with raids and deportations, underscore the desperate need for immigration reform. But instead of targeting undocumented immigrants, local officials should be looking for ways to integrate them into our communities.
According to the Pew Hispanic Center, there are an estimated 425,000 undocumented immigrants in New Jersey. And in some New Jersey towns, immigrants are valued. For example, in Hightstown, immigrants have been welcomed and even encouraged to participate in town life. Hightstown Mayor Robert Patten, who has set up a Latino advisory committee, has established an array of social services for immigrants, including free bilingual computer classes. That's the kind of leadership we need in New Jersey.
Most Americans recognize the contributions of hard-working, tax- paying immigrants and are ready for real reform. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans understand that helping immigrants become part of the social, economic and cultural fabric builds stronger and healthier communities.
One hopes that municipalities will follow the example of places like Hightstown and integrate immigrants and their families into the community with sound policies that are in line with our economic interests and humane values. Following the Morristown example will lead only to more alienation, intimidation and discrimination against immigrants in our communities and further racial and ethnic tension in our cities.
Until the president and Congress can muster the political will to fix our immigration system, New Jersey mayors are unfairly charged with the very tough job of dealing with our country's immigration crisis. Let's hope they have the wisdom and the courage to lead us down the right path.
Mike Fishman is president of Local 32BJ Service Employees International Union. With more than 85,000 members -- many of whom are immigrant workers -- in six states and Washington, D.C., including New Jersey, Local 32BJ is the largest property services union in the United States.
Printer Friendly version
By Mike Fishman
Published: July 7, 2007
The Senate’s failure to fix our badly broken immigration system means that local elected officials will continue to take immigration matters into their own hands. As seen in Morristown, NJ, Hazelton, PA, Suffolk County and countless other cities and towns, the results are often divisive, discriminatory and damaging to our communities and to immigrant families. Senate Republicans have failed immigrant workers and the American people, particularly the 12 million immigrants already here who will be further targeted and persecuted. Today’s vote is not a vote to preserve the status quo, it’s a vote that will make an already bad system worse.
Printer Friendly version
Op Ed
By Mike Fishman
Published: April 12, 2007
On the heels of House passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, Senator Kennedy has introduced the same bill in the Senate. The bill is the key to preserving a healthy middle class.
Our economic well-being depends on a stable middle class - a middle class that is being threatened by a shrinking supply of jobs with a livable wage, health care, job stability and retirement benefits. Union jobs provide these staples of middle class living, but they are being rubbed out by a union election process that unfairly favors unscrupulous employers over employees. It’s no coincidence that as these union jobs go by the wayside, the gap between the ultra rich and poor keeps widening.
There are 50 million workers today who say they’d join the union- but because of fierce employer opposition, most never get the chance. The bill aims to address this problem by creating a fair process for workers to decide on union membership, free from employer coercion. Regrettably, President Bush has promised to veto the bill, and Congressional Republicansare unlikely to stand with Democrats to override his veto.
Opponents of the bill claim the Employee Free Choice Act is ‘undemocratic’ and will result in unions “coercing” workers. In reality, the current system of secret ballot elections is ripe for bullying and intimidation - by employers not by unions. In the lead up to an election, employers often create such antagonistic and hostile environments at the workplace that workers put their well-founded concerns over employer retaliation ahead of any consideration of the pros and cons of unionization.
Typically, one out of every five workers who supports the union in an election is fired. In such cases it takes months, if not years, for the courts to order the re-instatement of those who were illegally fired.
EFCA helps make sure that workers have the opportunity to vote their conscience free from intimidation. The bill not only replaces the election process with a less confrontational alternative, it also strengthens penalties against employers who illegally harass and intimidate workers.
Anti-union ideologues, unscrupulous employers and naysayers may still cling to erroneous notions that unions are self-serving, special interest groups. But the truth is labor unions have a track record of supporting progressive legislation - from defending civil rights.By giving workers the right to choose, the Employee Free Choice Act has the potential to improve the wellbeing of our communities by safeguarding a stable middle class and strengthening our economy.
Not long ago we could boast that anyone willing to work hard could find success, but our country is rapidly becoming the land of opportunity for only a privileged few. It is therefore imperative that we muster the will to pass the Employee Free Choice Act and other legislation to help working families. If we don’t change our course, middle class families will continue to be left out.
Mike Fishman is the president of SEIU 32BJ in New York.
Printer Friendly version
By JOSEPH CROWLEY AND MIKE FISHMAN
Published: March 29, 2007
Recently the House of Representatives passed the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) which would improve the process for workers to join unions. Why should we make it easier for workers to join unions? Because 50 million American workers have said they would if they had the choice.
The truth is, fewer and fewer jobs today offer decent wages, health care, pensions or job stability. Union jobs, however, provide workers with these staples of middle class living. The problem is union jobs are becoming a rarity due to the fierce employer opposition workers often face when they try to organize a union.
EFCA reforms the process for workers to join unions so that a union would receive certification to represent a given worksite if a majority of workers sign union authorization cards.
EFCA provides a democratic alternative to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) elections, allowing workers to base their decision on what they feel is best, rather than what management wants - and during NLRB elections, employers have ample time to campaign against the unionization effort and intimidate workers.
The creation of such antagonistic and hostile environments often forces workers to forget the pros and cons of unionization and simply worry about employer retaliation. This is hardly a democratic process.
Further, penalties for breaking the law are not enough to stop employers from harassing and retaliating against pro-union workers. Although it is illegal to discriminate against workers who support the union, research shows that one out of every five workers who advocate for unions is fired.
Workers should not have to base their decisions on whether or not to join a union on fear they will be fired if they do not vote the way the boss wants. EFCA helps make sure that workers are able to vote their conscience free from intimidation, by replacing the election process with an alternative that is less confrontational and coercive.
While we are fortunate to live in a state that has strong unions and strong collective bargaining legislation, too many workers in some of the fastest growing states do not have the legal safeguards to become union members.
Considering some of the common stereotypes of labor unions - from corrupt mobsters to vestiges of the U.S. industrial era - you may be wondering, are unions really a good thing?
The 50 million workers who would join a union if they could think so, and it is clear why: Union workers earn higher wages and have better benefits, such as health care and pensions. Unions get workers on track towards a middle class life and the strength of the American economy has long been the middle class.
It is no coincidence that as the gap between the rich and poor in our country is dramatically increasing; the number of union jobs has been decreasing. The Employee Free Choice Act will help to reverse this trend.
The House passed this important act recently. Now, we urge the Senate to move quickly to pass this bill and to demonstrate that our country is committed to making the American Dream a reality again for hard working families.
Co-authored by Representative Joseph Crowley, U.S. Congressional District 7, New York State who serves on the House Ways and Means Committee, and Mike Fishman, President of SEIU Local 32BJ, the largest property services union in the country with more than 85,000 members in six states and Washington D.C.
Printer Friendly version
BY MICHAEL FISHMAN
Published: February 18, 2007
The sale of Starrett City could be a devastating blow to affordable housing in New York. Allowing the current $1.3 billion purchase of this Brooklyn development - which some 12,000 New Yorkers, 90% of whom receive some kind of rent assistance, now call home - would likely leave thousands of working families without an affordable place to live and, in the process, accelerate a trend that is squeezing middle-income New Yorkers out of the five boroughs.
That's why the governor, mayor, state attorney general, City Council speaker, Sen. Chuck Schumer - and, just Friday, the federal secretary of Housing and Urban Development - have rightly expressed concern about the deal. They understand that the new owners could opt out of the state's Mitchell-Lama affordable housing program and transform the development from the country's largest federally subsidized apartment complex to yet another site for luxury condos.
But in the end, expressions of concern are not enough. Our leaders need to step up, use the leverage they have and kill the deal.
The city's shrinking supply of affordable housing is at the heart of an affordability crisis that is permanently altering the demographic landscape of New York City. From 2002 to 2005, even as the city grew in population, the number of affordable apartments citywide plunged by more than 200,000 - or 17%. Yes, the city may be trying to spur the construction of more low- and middle- income housing - but it can't counteract such a powerful trend.
New York simply cannot thrive for long as a living, breathing 21st century metropolis if middle- and lower- income people - who in so many ways are the city's economic backbone - are priced out of housing.
And there's another reason why the Starrett City sale is particularly problematic. One of the buyers, David Bistricer, has a long and troubling record of housing infractions - with more than 8,800 open violations. According to news reports, residents of his Flatbush Gardens properties in Brooklyn are living alongside mice and roaches in apartments with broken doors, crumbling walls and cracked windows. All of this should make it hard for Bistricer to get the necessary approval from state and federal authorities to finalize the Starrett City deal.
The government has power here. It can block the deal. The question is whether it will have the will to do the job. The state, for instance, holds a $234.4 million mortgage on the complex. And the federal government, which subsidizes the housing, also must approve any sale. Finally, the mayor has said plans to build luxury housing on portions of Starrett City's 140-acre site would require zoning approval from the City Planning Commission and the City Council.
City, state and federal leaders are on the hook. Will they complain for a time and then back down, or will they do what's right?
For 30 years, Starrett City's 46 brick towers, scattered across 140 acres that are bound by Canarsie, East New York and Jamaica Bay, have stood as a symbol of our city's commitment to providing affordable housing to hardworking New Yorkers.
The government has a responsibility to preserve the complex - keeping residents' lives, and the diverse city we know and love, from turning upside down.
BY MICHAEL FISHMAN
Published: December 17, 2006
The shocking news of $16.5 billion in overall compensation for Goldman Sachs executives this year raises troubling questions that a growing number of Americans have about corporate greed - how much is enough?
Calculating the difference between CEO compensation and what millions of hardworking Americans get paid has become a tall order - one for a banker.
But while bankers are off spending their year-end windfalls, civic-minded organizations like the Economic Policy Institute get to work and crank out some telling numbers. For instance, average CEO pay in 2005 was 821 times greater than a minimum-wage earner's. In 1978, the average CEO earned 78 times more than a person working for minimum wage.
Last year, New York-based JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon made more than $22 million. In contrast, Bobby Owens, a security officer charged with standing guard at JPMorgan's offices in Metrotech Center in Brooklyn gets paid $8.43 an hour.
As one of the 1.8 million New Yorkers - or one out of every five New York City residents - living at or below the poverty line, Owens is, unfortunately, no exception.
Even more disturbing, Owens is among the ranks of the "working poor." According to Mayor Bloomberg's own poverty commission, 42% of families below the poverty line in 2005 included a full-time worker - up from 24% in 2000. The federal poverty guideline is an annual income of $15,735 for one adult with two dependents. No one can live on wages that low, especially in New York. And supporting a family on that wage is out of the question.
The ever-widening disparity between the very wealthy and the rest of us is a sour note to end this year on. But unless we turn this alarm into action, by pressing our government and business leaders to narrow the income gap, next year's holiday season could be a little short on cheer.
Fishman is president of SEIU Local 32BJ.
Printer Friendly version
By MIKE FISHMAN and WILLIAM C. THOMPSON JR.
Published: September 18, 2006
The Mayor should be congratulated for his vision and leadership in trying to transform the 45-block area, known as Hudson Yards, into a compelling, mixed-use urban community of the future replete with thousands of new jobs. Unless attention is paid to the project’s impact on the entire workforce, however, an unintended consequence of the development could be to exacerbate the disparity between high-end salaries and low wage jobs in New York City.
While the City, through projects like Hudson Yards, excels at attracting finance, media, management and other high-end jobs, all too often the service jobs created pay far too little to raise a family and get by. As the city's high end job base has grown, so has the number of service worker jobs. Yet, most workers -- whether they are building security, cleaners, restaurant or retail workers -- have been forced to endure wage stagnation and living standards squeezed by rising costs.
The growing gap in personal income – one in four jobs already pay only a poverty wage – is reaching epic proportions and creating an affordability crisis. The Mayor himself, in his State of the City address, said, “New York's future depends on our ability to make sure that middle and working class families can afford to live here.”
Moving forward, taxpayer investment in infrastructure that enables the city to capture more high-end job growth should be coupled with measures to ensure that service workers are paid enough to at least survive in New York City. Embracing this principle is the key to making an increasingly globalized economy work for all New Yorkers.
In that light, the City's Industrial Development Agency (IDA) missed a golden opportunity last month when it recently authorized a far-reaching $2 billion tax incentive program designed in part to entice developers to build out the Hudson Yards neighborhood.
In approving the measure, the IDA could have ensured that jobs created in the Hudson Yards pay family-supporting wages by requiring interested developers to commit to paying living wages to service workers as a condition for receiving considerable, IDA-approved tax breaks.
To be sure, it is promising to see things moving forward on Manhattan's Far West Side. Equally encouraging, the Javits Convention Center expansion recently got underway and plans for the Moynihan Station are being finalized. In addition, the City seems poised to soon be moving on the # 7 subway extension to 34th Street and 11th Avenue as well as the parks and other improvements that will make the Hudson Yards the world's first 21st century office district.
All of these developments will create new opportunities in the service sector, but that is just half the battle. We also must ensure these jobs allow these workers to support their families.
As the latest chapter in New York City’s historic urban re-development, Hudson Yards still presents us with a much-needed opportunity to start bridging – or at least to stem – the widening personal income gap that, left alone, threatens to exacerbate the problem of affordability that is confronting a growing number of New Yorkers.
We call on the Bloomberg administration to seize this opportunity – before it is too late – to ensure fair, livable wages for service workers at the new Hudson Yards. To turn this disturbing trend around, the City should build policy provisions into its tax incentive-based development plan that will raise the wage floor and spur investments in worker training and better opportunities.
Mike Fishman is President of SEIU Local 32BJ, the nation's largest property service workers union. William C. Thompson Jr. is New York City Comptroller
Printer Friendly version
|
