ReportWire

Tag: Ge

  • Biden calls on Congress to head off potential rail strike

    Biden calls on Congress to head off potential rail strike

    [ad_1]

    OMAHA, Neb. — President Joe Biden on Monday asked Congress to intervene and block a railroad strike before next month’s deadline in the stalled contract talks, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said lawmakers would take up legislation this week to impose the deal that unions agreed to in September.

    “Let me be clear: a rail shutdown would devastate our economy,” Biden said in a statement. “Without freight rail, many U.S. industries would shut down.”

    In a statement, Pelosi said: “We are reluctant to bypass the standard ratification process for the Tentative Agreement — but we must act to prevent a catastrophic nationwide rail strike, which would grind our economy to a halt.”

    Pelosi said the House would not change the terms of the September agreement, which would challenge the Senate to approve the House bill without changes.

    The September agreement that Biden and Pelosi are calling for is a slight improvement over what the board of arbitrators recommended in the summer. The September agreement added three unpaid days off a year for engineers and conductors to tend to medical appointments as long as they scheduled them at least 30 days in advance. The railroads also promised in September not to penalize workers who are hospitalized and to negotiate further with the unions after the contract is approved about improving the regular scheduling of days off.

    Hundreds of business groups had been urging Congress and the president to step into the deadlocked contract talk and prevent a strike.

    Both the unions and railroads have been lobbying Congress while contract talks continue. If Congress acts, it will end talks between the railroads and four rail unions that rejected their deals Biden helped broker before the original strike deadline in September. Eight other unions have approved their five-year deals with the railroads and are in the process of getting back pay for their workers for the 24% raises that are retroactive to 2020.

    If Congress does what Biden suggests and imposes terms similar to what was agreed on in September, that will end the union’s push to add paid sick time. The four unions that have rejected their deals have been pressing for the railroads to add that benefit to help address workers’ quality of life concerns, but the railroads had refused to consider that.

    Biden said that as a “a proud pro-labor president” he was reluctant to override the views of people who voted against the agreement. “But in this case — where the economic impact of a shutdown would hurt millions of other working people and families — I believe Congress must use its powers to adopt this deal.”

    Biden’s remarks and Pelosi’s statement came after a coalition of more than 400 business groups sent a letter to congressional leaders Monday urging them to step into the stalled talks because of fears about the devastating potential impact of a strike that could force many businesses to shut down if they can’t get the rail deliveries they need. Commuter railroads and Amtrak would also be affected in a strike because many of them use tracks owned by the freight railroads.

    The business groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and National Retail Federation said even a short-term strike would have a tremendous impact and the economic pain would start to be felt even before the Dec. 9 strike deadline. They said the railroads would stop hauling hazardous chemicals, fertilizers and perishable goods up to a week beforehand to keep those products from being stranded somewhere along the tracks.

    “A potential rail strike only adds to the headwinds facing the U.S. economy,” the businesses wrote. “A rail stoppage would immediately lead to supply shortages and higher prices. The cessation of Amtrak and commuter rail services would disrupt up to 7 million travelers a day. Many businesses would see their sales disrupted right in the middle of the critical holiday shopping season.”

    A similar group of businesses sent another letter to Biden last month urging him to play a more active role in resolving the contract dispute.

    On Monday, the Association of American Railroads trade group praised Biden’s action.

    “No one benefits from a rail work stoppage — not our customers, not rail employees and not the American economy,” said AAR President and CEO Ian Jefferies. “Now is the appropriate time for Congress to pass legislation to implement the agreements already ratified by eight of the twelve unions.”

    Business groups that have been pushing for Congress to settle this contract dispute praised Biden’s move.

    “The Biden administration’s endorsement of congressional intervention affirms what America’s food, beverage, household and personal care manufacturers have been saying: Freight rail operations cannot shut down and imperil the availability and affordability of consumers’ everyday essentials,” said Tom Madrecki, vice president of supply chain for the Consumer Brands Association. “The consequences to consumers if a strike were to occur are too serious, especially amid continued supply chain challenges and disruptions.”

    Clark Ballew, a spokesman for the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division, which represents track maintenance workers, said before Biden’s announcement that the union was “headed to D.C. this week to meet with lawmakers on the Hill from both parties. We have instructed our members to contact their federal lawmakers in the House and Senate for several weeks now.”

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Neil Bradley said Biden was correct in advocating for the deal already reached. “Congress must do what it has done 18 times before: intervene against a national rail strike,” Bradley said in a statement, and he called Congress enforcing the deal agreed to by railroads and union leaders the “only path to avoid crippling strike.”

    The railroads, which include Union Pacific, BNSF, Norfolk Southern, CSX and Kansas City Southern, wanted any deal to closely follow the recommendations a special board of arbitrators that Biden appointed made this summer that called for the 24% raises and $5,000 in bonuses but didn’t resolve workers’ concerns about demanding schedules that make it hard to take a day off and other working conditions. That’s what Biden is calling on Congress to impose.

    ———

    Associated Press writer Colleen Long in Washington contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sentencing hearing set for Parkland school mass murderer

    Sentencing hearing set for Parkland school mass murderer

    [ad_1]

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz’s two-day sentencing hearing begins Tuesday with the families of the 17 people he murdered getting their chance after almost five years to address him directly about the devastation he brought to their lives.

    After they and the 17 people Cruz wounded get their chance to speak, Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer on Wednesday will formally sentence him to life in prison without parole for his Feb. 14, 2018, massacre at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. She has no other option as the jury in his recently concluded penalty trial could not unanimously agree that the 24-year-old former Stoneman Douglas student deserved a death sentence.

    The families gave highly emotional statements during the trial, but were restricted about what they could tell jurors: They could only describe their loved ones and the toll the killings had on their lives. The wounded could only say what happened to them.

    They were barred from addressing Cruz directly or saying anything about him — a violation would have risked a mistrial. And the jurors were told they couldn’t consider the family statements as aggravating factors as they weighed whether Cruz should die.

    Now, the grieving and the scarred can speak directly to Cruz, if they choose.

    His attorneys say Cruz is not expected to speak. He apologized in court last year after pleading guilty to the murders and attempted murders — but families told reporters they found the apology self-serving and aimed at garnering sympathy.

    That plea set the stage for a three-month penalty trial that ended Oct. 13 with the jury voting 9-3 for a death sentence — jurors said those voting for life believed Cruz is mentally ill and should be spared. Under Florida law, a death sentence requires unanimity.

    Prosecutors had argued that Cruz planned the shooting for seven months before he slipped into a three-story classroom building, firing 140 shots with an AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle down hallways and into classrooms. He fatally shot some wounded victims after they fell. Cruz said he chose Valentine’s Day so it could never again be celebrated at Stoneman Douglas.

    Cruz’s attorneys never questioned the horror he inflicted, but focused on their belief that his birth mother’s heavy drinking during pregnancy left him brain damaged and condemned to a life of erratic and sometimes violent behavior that culminated in the massacre — the deadliest mass shooting to go to trial in U.S. history.

    Nine other people in the U.S. who fatally shot at least 17 people died during or immediately after their attacks by suicide or police gunfire. The suspect in the 2019 massacre of 23 at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, is awaiting trial.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • World leaders grieve deadly Halloween crowd surge in Seoul

    World leaders grieve deadly Halloween crowd surge in Seoul

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG — World leaders expressed sadness and condolences after at least 151 people were killed in a crowd surge Saturday night in Seoul, South Korea.

    The tragedy occurred in Seoul’s Itaewon district during Halloween festivities when a huge crowd surged into a narrow downhill alley. At least 82 others were injured in the South Korea’s deadliest accident in years.

    U.S. President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden sent their “deepest condolences” to the families of the deceased.

    “We grieve with the people of the Republic of Korea and wish for a quick recovery to all those who were injured,” said President Biden in a tweet. “The United States stands with the Republic of Korea during this tragic time.”

    Similarly, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak described the news from Seoul as “horrific” on Twitter.

    “All our thoughts are with those currently responding and all South Koreans at this very distressing time,” Sunak wrote.

    Itaewon’s international character was shaped by its proximity to a U.S. military garrison nearby. The area is still home to restaurants, bars and other businesses catering to the American community in Seoul.

    U.S. Forces Korea, which commands the sizable American military presence in the country, expressed its condolences in a Facebook post.

    “The Itaewon community has opened its arms to us for many years and is part of the reason our Alliance is so strong,” the command said, writing in English and Korean. “During this time of grief, we will be there for you just as you have been there for us.”

    Pope Francis invited the crowd in St. Peter’s Square to pray for the victims.

    “We pray the Risen Lord also for those — especially young people — who died last night in Seoul, due to the tragic consequences of a sudden crush,” Francis said after his Sunday’s Angelus prayer.

    Leaders from countries including Japan, France, China and Singapore reacted with shock and sadness over the tragedy in Seoul.

    “I’m hugely shocked and deeply saddened by the extremely tragic accident in Itaewon, Seoul, that took many precious lives, including those of young people with their future ahead of them,” Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said in a tweet.

    In France, President Emmanuel Macron — who tweeted in both French and in Korean — offered support to Seoul residents and South Korea.

    “France is with you,” he said.

    Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau echoed similar sentiments on Twitter, sending his “deepest condolences” to the people of South Korea “and wishing a fast and full recovery to those who were injured.”

    Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni tweeted: “Our thoughts are with the victims of the tragedy that occurred in Seoul and with their families. Italy is close to the Korean people at this time of great pain and deep sadness.”

    Chinese President Xi Jinping also sent his condolences to South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, expressing shock over the accident in Seoul, according to a statement by the Chinese foreign ministry.

    Hong Kong leader John Lee, in a statement on Facebook, hoped for swift recoveries for those injured in the crush.

    “I express profound sorrow over the passing of the victims, extend my deepest condolences to their families and wish for a speedy recovery to all those who were injured,” said Lee.

    Prince William and his wife Kate also sent a message of condolence. The heir to the British throne said on social media: “Catherine and I send all our love and prayers to the parents, families and loved ones of those tragically lost in Seoul yesterday evening.”

    German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said she was “heartbroken” by the tragic news from Seoul.

    “They were looking for a night of lighthearted Halloween festivities but instead found real horror and death,” said Baerbock. “My thoughts are with the victims, their friends and families, and those who still fear for their loved ones.”

    “This is a sad day for South Korea. Germany stands by their side,” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said in a tweet.

    Singapore’s President Halimah Yacob described the loss of lives as “tragic” and said it was “hard to imagine” the trauma and grief experienced by the families, loved ones and friends of those affected.

    “My thoughts and prayers are with the people of South Korea during this difficult time, and I wish a quick and full recovery to all those who are injured,” she said.

    ———

    Associated Press journalists from around the world contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • “Gainful Employment For All” Isn’t Enough To Hold Higher Education Accountable

    “Gainful Employment For All” Isn’t Enough To Hold Higher Education Accountable

    [ad_1]

    The Biden administration is likely to reinstitute the Gainful Employment (GE) rule, a federal regulation which aims to kick low-value higher education programs off federal student aid. Critics of GE point out, quite correctly, that the rule is unfair because it exempts degree programs at public and private nonprofit colleges. Some argue that Congress should apply GE to all of higher education. While this would be a step in the right direction, “GE for all” would still fall short of protecting students from low-quality higher education, particularly at the graduate level.

    How Gainful Employment tries to hold programs accountable

    As currently proposed, GE would subject higher education programs to a two-part test; programs must pass both “prongs” to continue receiving federal funding. One part compares program completers’ earnings to those of the median early-career high school diploma holder in the same state. This provision is more applicable to short-term certificate programs. As I explain in a previous post, the test unfairly penalizes some postsecondary certificate programs that provide their students with a moderately positive return on investment.

    But for the degree programs that would be newly subject to GE if Congress applied it to all programs, the second part of the test is the more relevant. To run the second part, the Department of Education estimates degree completers’ annual loan payments, assuming borrowers with bachelor’s and master’s degrees repay over 15 years. For a program to continue receiving federal funding, students’ estimated loan payments must be less than 8% of their median annual earnings.

    However, the Biden administration’s version of GE includes an “escape hatch” for high-debt programs such as master’s degrees. The Department of Education also divides estimated annual loan payments by students’ median discretionary income, which is equal to median annual income minus $18,735. If this ratio is below 20%, the program passes the test even if the “standard” payment-to-earnings ratio exceeds 8%.

    Most low-quality master’s degrees would survive “GE for all”

    Consider the master’s degree in journalism at Columbia University. My estimates of return on investment in higher education figure that students who complete this program are worse off by over $90,000, since the increase in lifetime earnings resulting from this degree is not enough to compensate students for the cost of tuition and time spent out of the labor force. This is a perfect example of a program that taxpayers should no longer fund.

    Students in Columbia’s journalism program graduate with median debt of $72,000, which translates to an annual loan payment of $6,771. With median annual earnings of $56,000, the standard payment-to-earnings ratio is 12%, greater than the 8% failing threshold. But the loan payment-to-discretionary earnings ratio is 18%, less than the 20% passing threshold for this metric. This program passes the GE rule despite the fact that the Department of Education estimates loan payments will consume 12% of students’ annual income.

    Master’s degrees are among the worst investments in higher education. Two in five master’s degrees leave their students worse off financially, according to my estimates. But thanks partially to the discretionary earnings “escape hatch” in GE, just 6% of master’s degrees would lose their federal funding if GE were applied to all programs.

    These facts suggest that an accountability agenda for federally-funded higher education programs must be more than “GE for all.”

    Policymakers should address the master’s degree bubble

    Master’s degrees are one of the most important contributors to the problems in our student loan system. Graduate degrees account for a rising share of federal student loans. (43% in 2020 versus 33% in 2010) and graduate borrowers are expected to repay a lesser share of their loan obligations than undergraduates. Moreover, enrollment in master’s degree programs is rising as universities exploit loose federal student loan subsidies to make some easy cash. Addressing the student loan crisis must include addressing graduate student lending.

    As I argue in a new report, policymakers could make two incremental changes to the GE framework to improve its power to target low-value graduate degrees. First, annual loan payments for master’s degrees should be calculated with an amortization period of 10 years, down from the current 15. This is more justified given the short duration of master’s degree programs; it would also increase estimated annual loan payments and lead more master’s degree programs to fail GE. Second, policymakers should drop the discretionary earnings “escape hatch” and require programs to prove their value on the basis of the standard payment-to-earnings ratio alone. Both of these changes would revoke federal funding for more master’s degrees programs without financial value.

    However, a bolder agenda would end the federal role in graduate student lending entirely. The argument for government control of student loans rests on the idea that 18-year-old undergraduates without credit histories would not be able to secure non-usurious education loans on the private market. But this argument does not apply to 20-something graduate students. A fully private market for graduate loans would provide more accountability for low-value master’s degrees, since private lenders would refuse to finance programs where students have little chance of paying back their loans.

    More accountability for federally-funded colleges and universities is welcome, but the Biden administration’s proposed Gainful Employment rule is flawed. As it stands now, GE would unfairly penalize trade schools while letting low-quality master’s degree programs off the hook. Policymakers should desire the opposite: we should enable students to pursue high-quality vocational programs but limit subsidies for expensive master’s degrees that feed credential inflation and confer few useful skills. “Gainful Employment for all” is rooted in laudable instincts. But the details need work.

    [ad_2]

    Preston Cooper, Contributor

    Source link

  • “Gainful Employment” Could Shut Down Good Programs—Here’s How To Fix It

    “Gainful Employment” Could Shut Down Good Programs—Here’s How To Fix It

    [ad_1]

    It has become clear that many of the colleges and universities that the federal government funds do not provide their students with a strong enough return on investment to repay their loans. Without stronger accountability for taxpayer-funded higher education, there is no hope of solving the student loan crisis for the long term. Fortunately, policymakers on both sides of the aisle are actively considering how to ensure that federal funding only flows to higher education programs with decent earnings outcomes.

    The Biden administration proposes reviving “Gainful Employment”

    Earlier this year, the Department of Education released a proposed framework for a “Gainful Employment” (GE) regulation that aims to terminate low-value programs’ access to federal grant and loan funding. Programs subject to GE—which include postsecondary certificate programs and degree programs at proprietary colleges—would have to prove two things in order to maintain access to funding. First, their graduates’ ratio of typical loan payments to median earnings must be below a certain threshold. Second, their graduates must earn more the median early-career high school diploma holder in the same state.

    It’s encouraging that the Biden administration is thinking about ways to hold taxpayer-funded programs accountable for their outcomes. But higher education accountability policy has high stakes. Programs which fail the Gainful Employment rule are extremely likely to shut down without federal funding. Even small changes to GE’s design have the capacity to reshape American higher education.

    Most criticism of GE rightly focuses on its limited scope. Only degree programs at proprietary colleges, along with certificate programs at any school, are held accountable under the rule. This leaves students who are seeking degrees at public and private nonprofit colleges unprotected, despite the fact that these students represent the vast majority of college enrollment. This double standard is the most fundamental problem with GE as proposed.

    Problems with the GE framework

    But aside from GE’s well-documented double standard problem, there are other issues with the framework that have received less attention, as I explore in a new research paper. Foremost among these is the rule’s treatment of postsecondary certificate programs enrolling mostly women.

    GE aims to measure whether a higher education program leaves its students financially better off. Thus, the rule compares the earnings of people who complete a given postsecondary education program to those of early-career high school graduates. On its face, this test seems appropriate. Why should a program receive federal funding if it cannot raise its graduates’ earnings above those of the typical high school diploma holder?

    But the comparison is not quite apples-to-apples. As Kristin Blagg points out, most people with only a high school diploma are male. But graduates of key certificate programs such as medical assisting are up to 90% female. A gender earnings gap exists within all educational strata: men typically earn more than women with the same level of education. In fact, men with only a high school diploma earn more than women with some college experience but no four-year degree. The proper counterfactual for a predominantly female certificate program is not the median high school graduate, but a predominantly female group of high school graduates.

    My organization, the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, has published an analysis of return on investment for postsecondary certificate programs. The analysis compares students’ earnings to demographically similar high school graduates rather than all high school graduates. It finds that many predominantly female programs provide their graduates with a real, albeit modest, increase in lifetime earnings. But because the women who complete these programs tend to earn less than (mostly male) early-career high school graduates, the programs are likely to fail GE and have their federal funding revoked should the rule go into effect.

    By my calculations, almost 70% of postsecondary certificate programs in medical assisting will fail GE as written, along with 60% of certificate programs in dental support services. But the majority of failed programs in both of these fields still increase their students’ lifetime earnings by a substantial margin.

    Fixing the GE rule

    GE could thus inadvertently deprive tens of thousands of lower-income women of promising pathways to upward mobility. At a time when students are increasingly skeptical of the four-year-college model, policymakers should encourage vocational programs, not shut them down. Medical assisting in particular can be a career stepping-stone to high-paying jobs such as registered nursing. Moreover, defunding 70% of medical assisting programs could have a catastrophic impact on the health care system.

    Fortunately, there’s an easy fix: lower the earnings threshold in GE to 85% of its current level. Programs would fail GE if their graduates’ earnings are below 85% of the median early-career high school diploma holder in their state. This modification would allow most certificate programs that provide real financial value for their students to continue receiving federal support. However, the threshold is still high enough to terminate truly low-value or scam programs.

    The Biden administration’s enthusiasm for higher education accountability is welcome. But with such high stakes, it’s important to get the details right. A simple modification to the proposed GE framework would dramatically improve its effectiveness as an accountability tool. An effective GE rule would also provide a starting point from which Congress could develop a more comprehensive accountability system and apply it to all programs.

    [ad_2]

    Preston Cooper, Contributor

    Source link

  • Gunfire, blasts in western Iran amid Mahsa Amini protests

    Gunfire, blasts in western Iran amid Mahsa Amini protests

    [ad_1]

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — The sound of apparent gunshots and explosions echoed early Monday through the streets of a western Iranian city, one of the hot spots of protests over the death of a 22-year-old woman. At least one man reportedly was killed by security forces in a village nearby, activists said.

    The incidents come as demonstrations rage on in cities, towns and villages across Iran over the Sept. 16 death of Mahsa Amini in the custody of the country’s morality police in Tehran.

    Iran’s government insists Amini was not mistreated, but her family says her body showed bruises and other signs of beating. Subsequent videos have shown security forces beating and shoving female protesters, including women who have torn off their mandatory headscarf, or hijab.

    From Tehran and elsewhere, online videos have emerged despite authorities disrupting the internet. Videos showed some women marching through the streets without headscarves, while others confronted authorities and lit fires in the street as the protests continue into a fourth week. The demonstrations represent one of the biggest challenges to Iran’s theocracy since the 2009 Green Movement protests.

    The violence early Monday occurred in Sanandaj, the capital of Iran’s Kurdistan province, as well as in the village of Salas Babajani near the border with Iraq, according to a Kurdish group called the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights. Amini was Kurdish and her death has been particularly felt in Iran’s Kurdish region, where demonstrations began Sept. 17 at her funeral there.

    Hengaw posted footage it described as smoke rising in one neighborhood in Sanandaj, with what sounded like rapid rifle fire echoing through the night sky. The shouts of people could be heard.

    There was no immediate word if people had been hurt in the violence. Hengaw later posted a video online of what appeared to be collected shell casings from rifles and shotguns, as well as spent tear gas canisters.

    Authorities offered no immediate explanation about the violence early Monday in Sanandaj, some 400 kilometers (250 miles) west of Tehran. Esmail Zarei Kousha, the governor of Iran’s Kurdistan province, alleged without providing evidence that unknown groups “plotted to kill young people on the streets” on Saturday, the semiofficial Fars news agency reported Monday.

    Kousha also accused these unnamed groups that day of shooting a young man in the head and killing him — an attack that activists roundly have blamed on Iranian security forces. They say Iranian forces opened fire after the man honked his car horn at them. Honking has become one of the ways activists have been expressing civil disobedience — an action that has seen riot police in other videos smashing the windshields of passing vehicles.

    In the village of Salas Babajani, some 100 kilometers (60 miles) southwest of Sanandaj, Iranian security forces repeatedly shot a 22-year-old man protesting there who later died of his wounds, Hengaw said. It said others had been wounded in the shooting.

    It remains unclear how many people have been killed in the demonstrations and the security force crackdown targeting them. State television last suggested at least 41 people had been killed in the demonstrations as of Sept. 24. In the over two weeks since, there’s been no update from Iran’s government.

    An Oslo-based group, Iran Human Rights, estimates at least 185 people have been killed. This includes an estimated 90 people killed in violence in the eastern Iranian city of Zahedan.

    The London-based group Amnesty International said security forces killed 66 people, including children, in a bloody crackdown on Sept. 30, and that more people were killed in the area in subsequent incidents. Iranian authorities have described the Zahedan violence as involving unnamed separatists, without providing details or evidence.

    Meanwhile, a prison riot has struck the city of Rasht, killing several inmates there, a prosecutor reportedly said. It wasn’t immediately clear if the riot at Lakan Prison was linked to the ongoing protests, though Rasht has seen heavy demonstrations in recent weeks since Amini’s death.

    The semiofficial Mehr news agency quoted Gilan provincial prosecutor Mehdi Fallah Miri as saying, “some prisoners died because of their wounds as the electricity was cut (at the prison) because of the damage.” He also alleged prisoners refused to allow authorities to access those wounded.

    Miri described the riot as breaking out in a wing of a prison housing death penalty inmates.

    ———

    Follow Jon Gambrell on Twitter at www.twitter.com/jongambrellAP.

    [ad_2]

    Source link