Warehouse workers from Wal-Mart distribution centers in metropolitan Chicago and southern California took two big steps this week toward enforcing laws on working conditions and wages, fighting retaliatory firings, and ultimately forcing Wal-Mart to live up to its responsibilities as an employer.

Working through Warehouse Workers for Justice, workers at the Elwood, Il, distibution center—reputedly Wal-Mart's largest with 3 million square feet of space—filed suit against Eclipse Advantage and Schneider Logistics for firing roughly 65 workers on December 29. In November, some of these workers had sued the two companies for violating state and federal wage and hour laws, such as not paying a minimum wage or premium pay for overtime in many cases.

The new amendment to that suit filed on February 1 claims that Schneider and Eclipse as "joint employers" failed to give the required 60-day notice of a mass layoff required by the federal WARN Act.

Although Wal-Mart owns the building, according to WWJ organizer Mark Meinster, Schneider contracts to operate the warehouse and sub-contracts with staffing agencies like Eclipse to provide part of the workforce, and Eclipse or other firms may further subcontract for supply of labor. Beyond trying to maximize its flexibility, "it's a shell game to avoid responsibility," Meinster says. 

“Wisconsin on steroids” –a sweeping set of anti-union laws even more severe than those passed in Madison last March over massive public outcry—is now on the legislative agenda in Arizona. Arizona Republicans seek to ban local unions of teachers, firefighters, police, and other public servants from collective bargaining, and would even prohibit local officials from conferring with unions. These and other proposals set a new low in proposed restrictions on union rights.

The draconian package of bills includes:

1. A ban on local officials from bargaining with unions. It would even ban state and local units of government from conferring with unions. 
2. Public employees could no longer have their dues deducted from their paychecks.
3. Enforcement of a “paycheck protection” plan making it harder for unions to get contributions for pro-labor candidates.
4. Prohibit local governments from granting release time for union activities, so that union leaders would have to use personal time to resolve issues with management.

“We consider this even worse than the [anti-public union] legislation that Gov. Walker pushed in Wisconsin, “said AFL-CIO Executive Director Rebeka Friend. She believes the new wave of legislation is aimed at preventing union members from speaking out against the privatization of public services in Arizona.

Privatization has long been a central goal of both the American Legislative Exchange Council (see here and here), a national group funded heavily by the billionaire Koch brothers that drafts and promotes state legislation, and the Arizona-based Goldwater Institute, an ALEC affiliate.

It appears as if the long and sometimes violent dispute between the International Longshore and Warehouse Workers Union and the operators of a port in Washington state is fnally coming to an end.  

On Wednesday, the Export Grain Terminal (EGT) in Longview, Wash., recognized ILWU Local 21 as the sole union representing workers at the port. EGT and ILWU are expected to negotiate a contract in the coming days to settle the dispute, which would brings to an end one of the most most high-profile and bloody labor disputes in years. The settlement also stops EGT from opening the first nonunion port on the West Coast, which ILWU agressively opposed.

Last year, EGT opened a grain terminal in Longview, Wash., using a variety of nonunion labor in skilled positions and labor provided by the Operating Engineers union in less-skilled positions. The use of nonunion and non-ILWU labor at the Port of Longview resulted in a series of confrontational showdowns between protesting union members and the facility. On one occasion last July, more than 100 union members were arrested for breaking down a fence and invading the grain terminal in an effort to shut it down.

Later, hundreds of ILWU members blocked railroad tracks to prevent goods from moving;  on another occasion unionists vandalized trains carrying grain to the port. Throughout the confrontations, more than 125 protesters were arrested.

Just as the American auto industry is bouncing back from near-death—in large part thanks to the Obama administration's aid and intervention—a new specter is haunting the industry: the rise of the Chinese auto industry and especially auto parts production.

That specter is the offspring of Chinese trade and industrial policies—many in likely violation of the World Trade organization rules—and U.S. car companies' short-term greed, abetted by inadequate, flawed U.S. policy.

Earlier this week, a group of Democratic legislators from the auto heartland--including Senators Sherrod  Brown (Ohio), Debbie Stabecow (Mich.), and Robert Casey (Pa.)--and union leaders called for the Obama administration to investigate Chinese trade violations, pointing to three new studies of the Chinese auto industry and government policy that gave credibility to their appeal.

Obama himself could benefit from calling for such investigation: It could demonstrate seriousness about his State of the Union pledge to enforce trade laws—a winning pledge especially with many voters from working-class households, whose support is critical for the president's re-election.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—For the second time in a year, workplace health and safety advocates are saying the White House is unnecessarily holding up a key workplace safety regulation that could have already saved workers’ lives if it had been implemented. For the past 11 months, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has been reviewing a rule that would limit workers’ exposure to silica dust, which is commonly found in materials used for constructions and mining. Exposure to silica can lead to silicosis, a disease that causes lung cancer and respiratory failure.

An OMB review period is supposed to be only 90 days, although some cases allow for an additional 45 day review followed by a public comment period before a regulation is published in the Federal Register. The White House, however, has held nine closed door meetings between industry groups such as the National Association of Home Builders, the American Chemistry Council and the National Industrial Sand Association. In the 11 months that the rule has been held up by the White House, a report by Public Citizen estimates that 60 people could have been saved if it were already implemented. 

Last week, 300 workplace safety advocates sent a letter to the White House protesting the delay. They wrote:

We hear much nowadays about the rich, and how rising inequality is a result of just how wealthy they have become lately. We mull over growing heaps of data that show us how the mountaintops, where the nation’s rich live, have grown so much more distant from the valleys where workers reside.

Data that measures the stunning leap in CEO pay, as noted by Isabel Sawhill in a recent article for the Brookings Institution. Where corporate execs once earned 30 times as much as the average worker, that figure has jumped to 300 today, she noted.

But down in the valley, there’s a troubling reality that deserves as much attention at the economic takeoff of the rich. It’s the economic plight of poor black and Latino youths, an economic misfortune that threatens to mark generations to come. Consider: Between 1985 and 2000, two-thirds of all black children were raised in neighborhoods with at least a 20-percent poverty rate. For white youths, in comparison, the rate was 6 percent, according to a 2009 study by Patrick Sharkey. With the numbers steadily increasing across the last decade, 38 percent of black youths were stuck in poverty in 2010, according to U.S. government figures. That’s up 8 percent from a low in 2001.

But the toll of a collapsed economy has been especially hard on Latino youths. In 2010, Latino youths faced a poverty rate just under that of black youths, 37.3 percent, according to figures from the Pew Research Center.

City has lost three-fourths of its manufacturing jobs since 1960s

MILWAUKEE—Wisconsin’s economic problems are only deepening the political crisis for Gov. Scott Walker, already the target of a massive recall campaign that gathered 1.1 signatures from Wisconsinites.

Despite Walker’s pledge to preside over the creation of 250,000 jobs by 2015, Wisconsin has lost jobs for the past six months as the rest of the country has added them, and job losses have totaled more than 35,000 since he signed his highly controversial state budget last June.

But there is a more specific economic (and social) crisis facing Milwaukee: Just 44.7 percent of African-American males are still part of the workforce, reflecting the long-term decimation and relocation of the city’s industrial based and the lingering effects of the Great Recession.

Even for African-American males in their prime working years (25 to 54), only 52 percent were in the workforce. “That took me aback,” stated Marc Levine, author of the new study illuminating the appalling level of joblessness in the city’s black community.

You wouldn’t think handling a notebook or a camera could be a hazardous line of work. But according to the latest global Press Freedom Index, abuse and oppression of reporters has made journalism an increasingly risky job in many countries. The past year has even left a notable taint on the U.S. press, despite the country's mythos as a beacon of free expression.

While the United States certainly hasn’t descended into the ranks of the most oppressive regimes, the watchdog group Reporters without Borders observes that in 2011 the political barriers and outright attacks facing reporters had led to a steep drop in the rankings—27 places down, to number 47:

In the space of two months in the United States, more than 25 [journalists] were subjected to arrests and beatings at the hands of police who were quick to issue indictments for inappropriate behaviour, public nuisance or even lack of accreditation.

The most high-profile violations of press freedom took place during the Occupy protests, as reporters were abused by police and otherwise stonewalled by authorities.

Ever-faithful to his 1% cronies, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg moved swiftly to restrict press coverage of Occupy Wall Street actions, barring journalists from Zuoccotti Park. Authorities justified the “media blackout” by insisting that the purpose was “to prevent a situation from getting worse and to protect members of the press.” The safety assurances presumably weren’t much comfort to the many reporters who got roughed up and arrested while trying to do their jobs.

Nothing says unjust extravagance and squandering of taxpayer dollars like a golden toilet.

At least the attempted delivery of one had the desired effect in Chicago this week, with the company that owns the Chicago Board of Trade and Chicago Mercantile Exchange agreeing to forgo $15 million in Tax Increment Financing (TIF) taxpayer funds designated for "blighted areas."

In 2010 the Chicago City Council had approved giving the money to the CME Group for upscale renovations at the Mercantile Exchange and CBOT headquarters. To receive that and other tax breaks, the company had promised to keep 1,750 jobs and create 638 new jobs in Chicago.

Last week, the labor and community coalition Stand Up! Chicago had tried to deliver the golden toilet—adorned with a red ribbon—to CME Group executive chairman Terrence Duffy, who reportedly refused to accept it (see video below). Duffy noted that CME had never itself signed off on the TIF deal, and the money had not been delivered or spent.

In returning the TIF funds, the company cited other tax breaks, reportedly worth $77 million, that made the TIF funds unnecessary. According to media reports, the company had threatened to pull up stakes if incentives weren’t secured.

In a move unnoticed by almost everyone, this month the corporate owner of Twinkies and Wonder Bread moved decisively to put the labor rights of thousands of its workers on trial.

A federal judge has scheduled a trial for March 5 to decide whether the managers of Hostess Brands have the right to unilaterally cancel labor contracts for some 15,000 union members working for the company, according to documents filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.

The primary targets in the trial are the Teamsters members who drive the Hostess trucks, and the bakery workers who produce the breads, cakes and snacks that have made the company famous. Currently, Hostess operates 36 industrial bakeries and hundreds of outlet stores in locations spread across 49 states.

In a statement to In These Times, Hostess spokesman Erik Halvorson all but admitted that scheduling the trial was a pressure tactic to force the unions into concessions now. The company is “committed to reaching a consensual agreement with its unions,” he said, and its courtroom maneuvers “are specifically designed to encourage good-faith negotiations so that we can reach that goal – and that’s what we continue to pursue.”