Hard working TWU members keep American Airlines and American Eagle operations going every day - rain or shine. In spite of AMR’s bankruptcy and the company’s latest filing to abrogate AA’s labor contracts, TWU -members continue to perform as airline professionals, doing their best for our passengers every day, 24-7. Feel free to share the link with coworkers and friends – sign the pledge: isupportamericanjobs.com
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Standard-Poor-s-Congress-Endangering-Biz-Credit-by-Not-Funding-Transportation
Uncertainty over whether Congress will fund transportation infrastructure not only endangers drivers and airline passengers, but creates a credit risk for companies involved, according to a new study by Standard & Poor’s.
Last month, the Senate passed a surface transportation bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (S.1813), which AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department (TTD) President Ed Wytkind says will “boost the economy, fix our failing transportation system and put America back to work.” But because the House did not act in time, Congress was recently forced to pass yet another extension to fund such programs—the ninth such continuing resolution.
This ongoing uncertainty in funding, according to Standard & Poors, “could force states to delay projects rather than risk funding changes or political gridlock come July.”
Adding to transportation system managers’ uncertainty are numerous economists’ forecasts for prolonged weak economic growth and high fuel costs. The combination of reduced or unpredictable federal support and lower demand could result in deferred maintenance projects that would keep our nation’s transportation infrastructure in good repair. Such deferrals could hurt an entity’s credit if capital costs escalate over time, putting the system at risk. Conversely, proceeding with such projects could also hurt the credit rating if the resulting liquidity and debt levels are not already reflected in the rating.
TTD member unions were instrumental in pushing lawmakers to pass the recent funding bill, and are pushing to ensure the House does the same before the current funding expires on June 30.
The report, “Increasingly Unpredictable Federal Funding Could Stall U.S. Transportation Infrastructure Projects,” also cites as last year’s partial shutdown of the aviation industry because of congressional inaction in approving funding as the disastrous result of Congress failing to provide the certainty essential to a healthy business climate.
This can result in a domino effect of severe consequences, to the economy and to public safety. For example, Congress finally passed on Feb. 6th the Federal Aviation Administration funding bill after a record 23 short-term extensions, years of debate, and a two-week partial shutdown. During the shutdown, in August 2011, an estimated 4,000 employees were furloughed, $360 million in federal taxes went uncollected, and 219 projects across the country came to a halt in the middle of the construction season, according to ABC News and Reuters.
As usual, nearly all opponents of funding to make our roads, planes and bridges safe are Republicans—the same ones who make a lot of noise about creating healthy conditions for business to operate.
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Tax-Day-Actions-Demand-1-and-Corporations-Pay-Their-Fair-Share
Mike Hall
David Watson knows a thing or two about taxes. You don’t get to be a millionaire without learning the ins and outs of the tax system. This morning on the steps of the federal building in Sacramento, Calif., Watson—a member of the Patriotic Millionaires—told a Tax Day demonstration of union members, community, faith and other activists a couple of the lessons he’s learned.
The tax system is designed to give me breaks that I didn’t ask for and I don’t need. Our taxes [millionaires’] are historically low. We’re supposed to have a progressive tax rate in this country. We don’t.
The Sacramento action—click here to read the Twitter feed from the California Labor Federation—was just one of hundreds of “Tax Wealth Not Work,” Tax Day actions around the nation today.
Activists from AFL-CIO, Working America, Move On and other unions and progressive groups of the 99% Spring coalition demanded that the 1% and corporations pay their fair share.
Outside an Iowa Workforce Development office in Ames—one of several that Gov. Terry Branstad (R) closed last year—workers slammed Rep. Steve King (R) for his support of the Republican/Romney/Ryan budget that gives millionaires and huge corporations more tax breaks than they already get. AFSCME member Daniel Noonan says:
Regular, middle-class Iowans are getting shafted. Instead of focusing on the economy and helping unemployed Iowans, too many of our elected leaders like Representative King are taking care of their big donors… It’s outrageous and unacceptable. Iowans deserve better.
Outside a Bank of America branch in Raleigh, N.C., union activist Jeremy Sprinkle told The Progressive Pulse reporters:
We’re out here because working families are frustrated on Tax Day that they are paying their fair share and millionaires and too many corporations are not doing what they need to. We want politicians to start paying attention to what matters. That means investments in jobs. That means investments in public education. That means taking care of the middle class because the middle class made this country.
Click here for a slide show of the Raleigh actions.
In Washington, D.C., demonstrators marched outside of super-lobbyist Grover Norquist’s office and called on elected officials to reject Norquist’s anti-tax pledge to protect the 1% and called for proper funding for Medicare and Social Security, not tax cuts for millionaires.
Jack Irby, a retired member of the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco and Grain Millers (BCTGM) from Smyrna, Tenn., used a letter to the editor in The Tennessean to call for the 1% and big corporations to pay their fair share. “Every year, we grumble about filing taxes. But I know taxes keep the roads safe, the water free of pollution, and protect my community and country. We pay because we pride in our work and value our community.”
It’s time millionaires and corporations pay their fair share, too. But Congress is considering bestowing more tax giveaways to the super-wealthy with the budget by Paul Ryan and House Republicans.
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edward-wytkind/richard-branson-is-quite-_b_1413233.html
U.S. law requires that the “actual control” of U.S. airlines is in the hands of American citizens. So, why is mega-billionaire and United Kingdom citizen Richard Branson preaching the evils of unionization in a video message to the flight attendants at the supposedly U.S.-owned and -controlled Virgin America?
AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department (TTD) President Edward Wytkind explores that question today in a column on The Huffington Post, examining Branson’s role as the airline’s flight attendants seek a voice with the Transport Workers (TWU).
In 2005, British billionaire Richard Branson came to America to launch a new airline for Americans, owned by Americans and controlled by Americans. At least that was the story he was selling.
First, you have to understand that under current U.S. law, foreign interests cannot own more than 25 percent of the voting stock or 49 percent of the equity in a U.S. carrier. To further ensure this is crystal clear, the law requires the “actual control” of the airline to be in the hands of U.S. citizens. This is no small matter not only for national security purposes, but also because of its impact on U.S. airlines, safety, jobs and the collective bargaining process.
But Sir Richard doesn’t get involved in many things he can’t control, so you can imagine our skepticism at the outset. You think he would have let someone else control the introduction of his self-proclaimed ‘sexiest spaceship ever‘—Virgin Galactic?
So I have a question: If Virgin America is independent of U.K.-based Virgin Group, why is the group’s founder talking to Virgin America’s flight attendants about the evils of unionizing?
Hold that thought, I’ll get back to the video-taped evidence in a moment.
Since the end of 2005 when Virgin America first filed an application with the U.S. Department of Transportation to operate as a U.S airline, the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO and others argued that Virgin America is controlled by foreign interests, which is counter to U.S. law.
But time and time again founder and Chairman of the Virgin Group Richard Branson, who is no stranger to arguing against U.S. ownership laws and regulations, was able to convince U.S. authorities that he was not controlling the airline and was, therefore, compliant with our laws. Eventually our regulators agreed.
Therefore, we find ourselves in a place where — more than four years since it actually began flying in the fall of 2007 — Virgin America is vying for highly sought-after slots at Washington Reagan National Airport. And while it battles it out for these slots with its competitors, its compliance with foreign ownership and control laws must again be scrutinized.
This time, it is not about speculation that at some point in the future Mr. Branson might play a role in controlling the operations of the airline. This time, there is a video produced by the Virgin Group and shown to Virgin America employees of the great founder taking the time out of his busy schedule (what, no space launch that day?) to speak to them about what is supposed to be their unfettered right to vote on unionization without employer interference.
In the video, he tells flight attendants of the consequences to the company of joining a union after the Transport Workers Union filed to represent these employees. Branson asks the employees of Virgin America, a carrier in which he has sworn no control in, to think about what is at stake for the company if the TWU is elected. He then urges them to protect their “independent spirit” by rejecting the TWU because the union will take their “uniqueness away.” Actually, what is unique about these employees is that they have to sit at the table, on their own, and negotiate with a billionaire over wages and benefits without a union voice. That’s a “uniqueness” I wouldn’t cling to.
In telling Virgin America employees to “say no to the old way of flying and say no to the TWU,” Sir Richard couldn’t have been clearer — he is at the helm making sure that his (sorry, I meant Virgin America’s) employees remain non-union. Branson is taking Virgin America down this path, an airline he allegedly doesn’t control. Odd.
And now Branson’s airline has applied for two nonstop flights to San Francisco International from Reagan National. These slots are coveted by actual American-owned and controlled airlines because there are a limited number to go around from this popular stop near the nation’s Capital.
It would appear that Mr. Branson is fond of making videos these days. In a Kobe Bryant ad for Nike, which features Branson and his business success, the video ends with this message: “Attack Fast. Attack Strong. Learn the System.” It looks as though Mr. Branson and Virgin America, fully in compliance with our foreign control laws I’m sure, have learned our system well, and how to beat it.
Regulators take notice: Sir Richard is quite busy not controlling Virgin America.
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.twulocal100.org/story/introducing-mta-money-thrown-away
Hey, MTA, the jig is up! Buried in obscure financial reports (check out page 14 via the link) is a fact that should alarm and anger all transit riders: You’re paying $63 million each year for a fancy office building you don’t need. 2 Broadway costs you plenty – and you’re moving executives into it instead of staying in buildings you already own which cost you nothing. Find more at www.mtamoneythrownaway.com. Each month, we’re going to be revealing more and more ways the MTA is throwing money away. And MTA employees and members of the public who know more are free to upload documents confidentially to the website. Yes, the MTA is throwing money out the door – money that could be being used to restore service, keep fares low, and provide decent wages.
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Get-Ready-for-99-Spring-Tax-Wealth-Not-Work-Actions
This week, some 100,000 activists from unions and community, faith and other progressive groups are in 99% Spring training sessions around the country, learning how to take back the economy from the 1%. Their first big round of actions is set for Tax Day, April 17.
Click here to find a Tax Day action near you. Click here to find a training session near you.
In demonstrations around the nation, working families will raise their voices to demand that the 1% and corporations pay their fair share. The wealthiest Americans—like Mitt Romney—pay a far lower percentage of their income in taxes than do average working people—and some multibillion-dollar corporations don’t pay a cent.
Under the Romney-Paul Ryan budget, millionaires and huge corporations would be given even more tax breaks, while essential programs and services for working families, military service personnel, students, veterans, seniors and the poor would be cut
drastically and thousands of workers laid off.
An analysis of the Romney/Ryan budget by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center finds that people earning more than $1 million a year would receive $265,000 apiece in new tax cuts, on average, on top of the $129,000 they would receive from the budget’s extension of President George W. Bush’s tax cuts.
On the Tax Wealth Not Work National Day of Action, activists will demand that the 1% pay their fair share and that we overhaul the tax code to reflect the needs and values of the majority of Americans.
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.care2.com/causes/4-reasons-conservatives-hate-public-transit.html
Written by Jason Mark
Once upon a time — in a political environment that seems otherwordly compared to what we have in the United States today — the federal transportation bill was a bi-partisan endeavor. Now things are different. Congress went into spring recess last week and once again left hanging a reauthorization of the transportation bill, which expired two and a half years ago. Congress was just barely able to approve a temporary, 90-day extension of the lapsed law so that current infrastructure projects can keep moving along.
Why the impasse on something that usually wins consensus? It comes down, in part, to a disagreement over how (or even whether) the federal government should fund mass transit programs.
The transportation bill moving through the House eliminates the provision that dedicates to mass transit 20 percent of monies from the gas-tax supported Highway Trust Fund — an arrangement that has been in place since Ronald Reagan was president. It also slashes support for high-speed rail projects, cuts subsidies to Amtrak, and eliminates designated funding for bike and pedestrian infrastructure as well as the “Safe Routes to School” program. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (a former Republican Congressman) called the House measure “the worst transportation bill I’ve ever seen during 35 years of public service.”
Compare that with the Senate version, which passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support (74-22). The Senate’s two-year bill, crafted by odd bedfellows Barbara Boxer and Jim Inhofe, would largely maintain the status quo. The easiest thing would be for the House to take up the Senate version, pass it with bi-partisan numbers, and send the law to the president.
But that would rankle Speaker John Boehner’s hard-right base. Here’s how Congressman Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon, summed up the situation:
“[The House leadership’s] problem is they have about 80 or 90 people who want to kill off the federal transportation program in their caucus. Then they’re hamstrung because they’ve got 20 or 25 [who] are still rational and say, ‘Hey, if you’re going to kill off transit funding, we won’t vote for the bill.’ So if they do what the flat earth people want, then they lose the moderates, and if they do what the moderates want they lose the flat earth people.”
This legislative train wreck (sorry for the pun) raises a question that’s been nagging me for a while: Why exactly are conservative representatives so antagonistic to public transit?
Here a couple of thoughts.
It’s an urban-rural thing.
Republicans overwhelming come from rural areas. Democrats usually represent cities. (Leaving the two parties to battle it out for the swing votes in the suburbs.) Transport Politic writer Yonah Freemark sums it up: “Republicans in the House of Representatives know that very few of their constituents would benefit directly from increased spending on transit, for instance, so they propose gutting the nation’s commitment to new public transportation lines when they enter office. Starting two years ago, Democrats pushed the opposite agenda, devoting billions to urban-level projects that would have been impossible under the Bush Administration.”
I don’t know that there’s anything wrong with this. Representatives are elected to serve their constituents as well as the national interest. If their constituents live in areas with low population densities that wouldn’t be well served by buses or bike lanes, then it makes sense to prioritize spending on roads. One basic reason Republicans are against making investments in mass transit is that those projects don’t meet the needs of the people who elected them. Not surprisingly, Congressman DeFazio’s whip count of GOP supporters of the Senate legislation mostly includes Republicans who represent suburban areas that benefit from mass transit.
It’s a trade union thing.
The transportation bill has been popular in the past because it’s a surefire way of creating jobs. There’s just one hitch — when it comes to mass transit, many of those jobs are unionized. And of course Republicans don’t like unions.
In an editorial last year, the conservative Investor’s Business Daily slammed the Obama administration’s high speed rail plan as just a payoff for its union backers — and therefore something to oppose. “So who could possibly benefit from such a boondoggle? Unions, along with the politicians they vote for — in this case Obama and California Democrats, who’ll be able to trade construction jobs and other union sop for votes.”
Republican opposition to mass transit, then, is just old-fashioned power politics: The friend of my enemy is my enemy. I can’t say this is as innocent as the rural-urban constituent divide. Not when high speed rail investment is so clearly in the nation’s interest — a way to boost the economy, decrease our reliance on oil imports, and keep America competitive in the twenty-first century.
It’s all about government-bashing.
Government is good-for-nothing. That foundation of libertarian thinking has become conventional wisdom on the right. If the government does it, the dogma goes, then it must be bad. (The only exception being the maintenance of a massive military.) The folks at the Cato Institute, for example, don’t think the federal government should be involved in funding road projects and argue that “transportation markets need to be liberated from government control.”
One reason that conservatives fear mass transit programs specifically — and federal funding for road projects more broadly — is that such infrastructure projects prove that government works.
No individual can repair a bridge. No family can build a railroad. Public works projects require, well, the public. Most everyone understands this. Good roads, safe bridges, and convenient transit networks are something that people expect the government will provide. A survey by Republican pollster Frank Luntz found that 84 percent of Americans would pay 1 percent more on their taxes if the funds were targeted for infrastructure.
There’s a strong tradition of Republican leaders pushing ambitious infrastructure projects. The Interstate Highway System was build by President Eisenhower. The Hoover Dam and the Golden Gate Bridge were both initiated by President Hoover. Many Republicans today retreat from such grand public works projects if for no other reason that they prove that government is good for something.
It’s all about undercutting the very idea of the public good.
If you want a peek into the conservative id to understand Republicans’ fears of mass transit, just check out this piece written last year by Washington Post columnist George Will bashing high-speed rail projects:
“Forever seeking Archimedean levers for prying the world in directions they prefer, progressives say they embrace high-speed rail for many reasons—to improve the climate, increase competitiveness, enhance national security, reduce congestion, and rationalize land use. The length of the list of reasons, and the flimsiness of each, points to this conclusion: the real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism.
“To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.
“Time was, the progressive cry was ‘Workers of the world unite!’ or ‘Power to the people!’ Now it is less resonant: ‘All aboard!’”
Most of this is absurd. Progressivism isn’t the same as collectivism, and I don’t know anyone on the liberal-left who is determined to undercut people’s sense of “adequacy.”
But Will is, in a way, right: The car encourages people to develop an overinflated sense of autonomy while mass transit illustrates how we are all, in fact, connected to and reliant on each other.
Driving down the open road is the most American expression of freedom. Wrapped in your own little steel carapace, blasting your music, pushing past the speed limit, you can feel like the master of your universe. The delusion of grandeur (to turn Will’s phrase on its head) is perfect. Unless you remember that the road you’re driving on was built and paid for with taxes. Or until you hit the inevitable traffic jam. (Notice how car commercials always show the new car model on empty streets — a fantasy if there ever was one.)
Riding the train, the subway or the bus is, of course, an entirely different experience. First of all, you have to share space: you can’t blast your music and sing along. You have to — yes, gasp — show deference (Will’s word) to other people. Maybe that’s annoying. But it’s also the basis of civilization, learning to get along with other people.
This doesn’t “diminish individualism.” But public transit does show the power — the necessity, even — of individuals working together. Mass transit requires many people working together to make it work. The rubbing of elbows and the sharing of seats proves that we’re all connected. Public transit, you could say, is human ecology at its best.
Public transit shows that we’re all in this together. And for many Republicans — who seem bent on taking us back to a Hobbesian war-of-all-against-all — that’s reason enough to oppose it.
Reposted and excerpted from: http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Other-News/American-Rights-at-Work-Launches-Union-Made-Guide
Our friends at American Rights at Work (ARAW) have just launched a new feature to help consumers find union-made products. The Union Shop: A Guide to What’s Union-Made (click here) breaks products into sections from Apparel to Home Improvements, Sweets and Snacks and many more to help buyers use their purchasing power to support good U.S. jobs.
A recent ARAW survey found that most Americans are eager to support workers by buying union-made products, but 82 percent said they had trouble finding products that make the cut.
Every week ARAW’s Blog at Work will feature a new post profiling a union-made product or service. Check out the latest here.
You also can find union-made products at the AFL-CIO’s Union Label and Service Trades Department (UL&STD). Just click on the yellow “Search for Union Products” box on the right side of the home page here.
Other shopping links include the AFL-CIO’s Union Shop page, with links to affiliate union shopping pages; Unionmade Goods; Justice Clothing and Union-Made Clothing Discounts from Union Plus.
Next week, April 9-15, in small towns and big cities all across America, 100,000 people will come together for an unprecedented national movement-wide training. We’ll learn to tell the story of our economy and what went wrong, and we’ll learn how we can take action, make the voices of the 99% heard, and create great change in this country.
The “99% Spring” is a massive wave of grassroots action throughout the spring that will expose the 1% who broke the economy, and demonstrate how we can fix it.
It is our opportunity to maintain and broaden that change making energy, and learn how we can take action to challenge corporate power, end tax giveaways to the 1%, fight the influence of money in politics, and create an economy that works for all of us.
This movement is uniting, and it is time to for all of us to come together to shift the political landscape in America.
If you want to be on the front lines of taking the country back from the 1%, click here to find a training near you.
http://www.twulocal100.org/story/albany-lawmakers-say-zeroes-not-right-transit-workers
Influential legislators addressed a full Hart Theatre on TWU Lobby Day, saying that they believe zeroes are not enough to compensate transit workers in our new contract. Republican Marty Golden, who was a co-sponsor of last year’s MTA Lock Box bill, drew loud applause when he said that “Three zeroes doesn’t really work well, especially if you live in the New York City area… There’s a different cost of living between upstate and downstate.” Golden wasn’t the only one – half a dozen important public officials lent specific support to a better contract for TWU Local 100 including Kings County Democratic leader Vito Lopez and Assemblymen Peter Abbate, Carl Heastie, and Hakeem Jeffries.
“Asking you to take zeroes is tantamount to asking you to take a pay cut,” said Carl Heastie (D-Bronx) “You guys aren’t the reason why we had a recession. This was not your fault, so we stand with you to get a fair contract.”
The Hart Theatre event came mid-way through a day that saw TWU Local 100 President John Samuelsen first greeting members who poured out of 41 chartered buses, then making legislative visits, and then capping the day off by presenting the Union’s MTA Can Pay literature to an aide to Governor Cuomo in the capitol building.
Local 100 members walked the halls, making connections with legislators to press the message that transit workers deserve a good contract – and that means support from the Governor. Anyone trying to use the elevators at the legislative office building at mid-day met a sea of blue that crowded the cars and hallways.
Samuelsen told close to 2,000 transit workers, advocates, and members of the MTA Labor Coalition in the Hart Theatre that numbers are important. “When we come up here it has a very real impact on our ability to protect our livelihoods,” he said. He added that pressure from Local 100 and the members of the MTA Labor Coalition had been instrumental in keeping transit funding from being raided in the budget process, and that Local 100’s strong mobilization and work by our political action team should be credited with saving the 25/55 pension for new hires.
“During past lobby days we were here to support particular pieces of legislation,” he told the members. “We do have legislative priorities, but our main priority today is to deliver the message to the Governor and Legislature that it is simply unacceptable for Local 100 members to accept the three zeroes.”
The MTA is a state-created authority, with the Governor appointing the largest number of voting board members.
Samuelsen saluted the members of the TWU State Conference and MTA Labor Coalition Presidents who were also in attendance, along with representatives from the TWU International. He gave special recognition to Local 100 co-political director Curtis Tate, who was elected Chairman of the TWU State Conference, saying that “never before in the history of Local 100 has it happened, when the two people who ran against each other [in the last Local 100 election] made a seriously productive effort to put the past behind them to stop the infighting in Local 100.”
The audience left the Theatre in high spirits, rallying outside in an impressive march which headed into the park opposite the old capital building where Governor Cuomo has his offices.
Accompanied by labor leaders from the MTA Coalition and the TWU State Conference, President John Samuelsen went inside to deliver the Union’s “MTA Can Pay” literature to the Governor’s office, then rejoined the crowd outside for the traditional Local 100 group photo portrait. Buses left soon afterward carrying members back to New York City.
In states around the country anti-worker politicians are launching attacks on workers' rights and the middle class.
We are united in stopping this attack and standing up for justice.
