February, 2013

UFCW Pushes for Part-Time Worker Bill of Rights

Last week, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) introduced the Part-Time Worker Bill of Rights which would help eliminate the incentive for employers to drop health coverage for their part-time workers. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) penalizes employers who fail to provide health insurance to full-time workers but includes no such penalty for part-timers (defined as working less than 30 hours a week).

This loophole has driven some national employers to announce plans to reduce workers’ hours in order to avoid the penalty.  Walmart dropped part-time health coverage last year.   The Part-Time Worker Bill of Rights seeks to level the playing field and protect the millions of part-time workers in retail and other service industries.

Workers are encouraged to contact their Members of Congress this week while Senators and Representatives are in their home states and districts. You can find the full text of the bill here.

The UFCW continues to use every avenue possible—whether through the regulatory process or legislation—to strengthen the ACA and protect quality, union-negotiated health benefits. The Part-Time Worker Bill of Rights is a part of that effort.

The Minimum Wage Debate

In last week’s State of the Union Address, President Obama made it clear that raising our country’s federal minimum wage to $9.00 an hour was one of his top priorities.  Many agree with President Obama that raising the minimum wage  from the current rate of $7.25 is a necessary step to rebuilding our middle class and strengthening our economy, including members of labor unions.   Take a look at this chart:

 

The Center for Economic and Policy Research poses this question:

“Suppose the minimum wage had kept in step with productivity growth over the last 44 years. In other words, rather than just keeping purchasing power constant at the 1969 level, suppose that our lowest paid workers shared evenly in the economic growth over the intervening years.”

As the graph displays, in the past, when minimum wage was tied to productivity, workers benefited:

“This should not seem like a far-fetched idea. In the years from 1947 to 1969 the minimum wage actually did keep pace with productivity growth. (This is probably also true for the decade from when the federal minimum wage was first established in 1937 to 1947, but we don’t have good data on productivity for this period.)

As the graph shows, the minimum wage generally was increased in step with productivity over these years. This led to 170 percent increase in the real value of the minimum wage over the years from 1948 to 1968. If this pattern of wage increases for those at the bottom was supposed to stifle growth, the economy didn’t get the message. Growth averaged 4.0 percent annually from 1947 to 1969 and the unemployment rate for the year 1969 averaged less than 4.0 percent.

This changed in the 1970′s, when the real value of minimum wage declined sharply and only kept up with inflation. This major shift in policy change happened without any public debate it would seem. The Center for Economic and Policy Research notes that if “the minimum wage had kept pace with productivity growth it would be $16.54 in 2012 dollars”.

A Business Insider piece also quotes Op-Ed columnist Ezra Klein, who notes that:

a minimum wage is like a proxy labor union; sure it may have some employment effects, but it effectively raises the wage bargaining power of those workers who do manage to find employment. In the absence of such bargaining power, we can’t expect any meaningful increase in wages at the low end of the income spectrum.” 

The article also cites a study in which found that minimum wage increases had no adverse effects on employment, and actually lead to increased employment rates among single women with children. Some date also backs the idea that reasonable wage increases affect wage hikes further up the pay scale (and also decreases the wage gap), and also provide workers with motivation to be more productive.

The fact is, raising the minimum wage would raise living standards for millions of workers who are currently living at or just above the poverty line.

As for the second argument, that $9.00 an hour still is not enough to provide a decent living for millions of working class Americans, we agree for the most part.  However, not only is $9/hour a step in the right direction, it is also good for union members, who stand to seek even greater wage increases in their contracts, if they make more than the current minimum wage of $7.25.

In fact, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, “unionized food service employees have median weekly salaries that are $100 higher than non-union workers.”

Also, although the President is pushing for a $9 minimum wage, several state governments are pushing for $10 or more, as in Maryland.

$9 an hour is not a perfect solution.  It will not raise all of America out of poverty.  However, it is certainly a great stride towards providing more Americans a platform to the middle class-  something that all of America should agree we need to rebuild in order to restore our economy. As President Obama noted in his SOTU address, no American working a full-time job should be living under the poverty line and nor should, if we can help it, anyone else.

 

One Step Closer to Equality: Secretary of Defense Panetta Announces Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Partners

source: www.wina.com

At UFCW, we believe that no one should be discriminated against in the workplace, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual preference, or political affiliation.  Our union, along with many others, works hard to ensure we can all enjoy a working environment free from harassment or discrimination, and that treats everyone fairly and equally.  That is why we celebrated more than a year ago when the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was overturned.  The former policy, which required that military members not disclose or ask about sexual preference, alienated many individuals, and created a stigma surrounding homosexuality in the military.

At the time of the reversal, Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta also vowed to look into “reviewing benefits that had not previously been available to same-sex partners based on existing law and policy.” We couldn’t agree more with Panetta’s statement that “it is a matter of fundamental equity that [the military] provide similar benefits to all of those men and women in uniform who serve their country.”

This past week, Panetta announced even more good news:

“I am pleased to announce that after a thorough and deliberate review, the department will extend additional benefits to same-sex partners of service members. Taking care of our service members and honoring the sacrifices of all military families are two core values of this nation.  Extending these benefits is an appropriate next step under current law to ensure that all service members receive equal support for what they do to protect this nation.”

It is wonderful to see that the military has taken these steps on the path to equality.  However, as Panetta notes in his statement, the military cannot grant full benefits to same sex-partners because of the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law which defines marriage as a union only between man and woman, therefore denying same sex-partners the same benefits that heterosexual unions receive.

We applaud Secretary Panetta and other leaders for their dedication to ensuring fair and just treatment of the many brave members of our United States Military.  More work has to be done now to ensure that equality is fully realized and implemented.

Although the military is not unionized, being a union member has helped ensure that countless government workers, and of course workers in other leading industries such as UFCW members in retail, retail food, and meatpacking and processing, are able to work in jobs that don’t discriminate and that offer equal treatment to all of their workers.  Standing union-strong is the best way to get to a place where workers enjoy equality and good jobs that will help them follow their dreams.

For Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta’s full statement on the extension of benefits to same-sex partnerships in the military, click here.