ReportWire

Tag: labor and employment

  • Schumer to host AI forum with major tech CEOs including Zuckerberg and Musk | CNN Business

    Schumer to host AI forum with major tech CEOs including Zuckerberg and Musk | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    More than a half-dozen leading tech CEOs will be among those attending a highly anticipated artificial intelligence event hosted by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer next month, according to the senator’s office.

    The September 13 event will involve Google CEO Sundar Pichai and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt; Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman; Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella; Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang; and Elon Musk, CEO of X, the company formerly known as Twitter.

    It is the first of nine sessions Schumer has said will begin this fall to discuss the hardest questions that regulations on AI will seek to address, including how to protect workers, national security and copyright and to defend against “doomsday scenarios.”

    Also attending next month’s event will be leading members of civil society, including members of groups representing workers, civil rights and art and entertainment, Schumer’s office said, adding that the bipartisan event will not be open to the press.

    The events, which Schumer has dubbed “AI Insight Forums,” are set to bring experts from the private sector together with US lawmakers to help them understand the industry before they seek to create guardrails for AI.

    Schumer has emphasized a deliberate approach to the issue, urging his colleagues to come up to speed on the basic facts of the technology rather than rush to pass legislation. Earlier this summer, Schumer held a series of closed-door senators-only briefings on AI, which included a first-ever classified briefing by US national security officials on artificial intelligence.

    The guest list for next month’s Insight Forum was first reported by Axios.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Black creators built TikTok. But Black employees say they experienced ‘toxicity and racism’ | CNN Business

    Black creators built TikTok. But Black employees say they experienced ‘toxicity and racism’ | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Nnete Matima said she was attracted to work at TikTok because of how the social media platform was “really built upon Black culture” and the work of Black creators.

    She saw and welcomed TikTok’s public pledge of support for the Black community in the wake of the 2020 police murder of George Floyd and applied to work for the company because she felt its corporate values “really resonated with me,” Matima told CNN.

    Shortly after she began working at TikTok-parent company ByteDance last year, however, she alleges she encountered “toxicity and racism” in the workplace. Her manager would refer to her as a “black snake” behind her back and set unrealistic and uneven expectations for her compared to her white peers, Matima claims. The mistreatment only got worse, she said, after she spoke up about it via human resources channels.

    Matima is one of two Black former ByteDance employees who together filed a formal complaint with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Thursday. Their complaint asks the agency to investigate alleged racial discrimination and retaliation against Black workers at the social media giant.

    Corporate America has long come under fire for racism in the workplace, especially in the wake of the racial reckoning that swept through the nation in 2020. The criticism is especially pointed for technology companies, where having employees with diverse perspectives is especially crucial because tech products have faced accusations of perpetuating racial and ethnic discrimination.

    Matima, who is based in New York City, and fellow former employee Joël Carter, who is based in Austin, Texas, alleged in the proposed class action complaint that they each faced repeated instances of discrimination at work and then faced retaliation when they raised concerns about it.

    “Rather than holding anyone accountable, TikTok denied the blatant discrimination that Ms. Matima and Mr. Carter suffered, failed to stop it from continuing, engaged in sham ‘investigations’ of their complaints, took away their work, and then terminated Ms. Matima and Mr. Carter in retaliation for complaining about race discrimination and mistreatment,” the complaint states.

    “We are asking the EEOC to investigate TikTok’s pattern or practice of retaliation against workers who complain about discrimination,” the complaint adds.

    In a statement to CNN on Thursday, a TikTok spokesperson said: “We take employee concerns very seriously, and have strong policies in place that prohibit discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in the workplace. As an organization, we have a strong record of championing diversity and inclusion.”

    TikTok skyrocketed in popularity in the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic and as of this year has amassed more than 150 million American users. As the app has become more entrenched in American culture, it has also faced mounting scrutiny from US lawmakers over perceived security concerns due to its China-based parent company’s ties to Beijing. Talks of an outright US ban of the app have simmered in Washington, DC, since the Trump era but have largely subsided in recent months as lawmakers turn their attention to the rise of generative AI out of Silicon Valley.

    Even TikTok itself has also acknowledged the important role that Black users play on the platform — and its need to support them.

    “Black creators inspire mainstream culture and continue to define what’s next — from creating viral moments and pioneering new spaces in fashion and music, to advocating for others and organizing for a better future, they have always been at the forefront of innovation,” the company said in a statement last January.

    Two years earlier, TikTok had acknowledged concerns that Black users felt “unsafe, unsupported, or suppressed” and vowed to “actively promote and protect” diversity on the platform.

    ‘Dehumanizing and demoralizing’

    Carter, who began working at TikTok in June 2021, told CNN in an interview that experience at the company was “dehumanizing” and “demoralizing.”

    Carter was initially hired as a risk analyst responsible for managing the safety of TikTok’s ad ecosystem, but was transferred to the platform’s ad policy team as a policy manager eight months later. Shortly after starting his new role, Carter alleges, he discovered that he was being significantly underpaid compared to his colleagues. He says he raised these concerns to human resources and his department leader. Carter was at the time the only Black employee on his 80-person ad policy team, the complaint states.

    Carter’s manager prevented him from attending important meetings and took credit for Carter’s work, according to the complaint. Carter alleges that in response to his complaints, his role at the company “was changed and severely diminished,” prompting him to again alert human resources that he was concerned about discrimination and retaliation.

    The complaint filed with the EEOC shares parts of Carter’s April 2022 performance evaluation, where he was given an overall score of: “Exceeds expectations.” A reviewer described Carter as “open and humble above all” and a “great teammate.” He was “happy to provide assistance or guidance whenever needed. He never had an ego and was always open to collaboration and feedback,” the reviewer added, per the complaint.

    But after Carter began raising concerns at work about racial discrimination, he alleges he was retaliated against in a performance review in April 2023.

    He was labeled as “tense” and “angry” and accused of “slamming doors” in the office in that review, the complaint states. But Carter says he never slammed a door in the office. In fact, he says, the doors at the office were hydraulic — not even capable of being slammed.

    Carter told CNN that he felt his managers were trying “to establish this narrative of me about being the ‘angry Black man.’” Carter grew emotional as he talked to CNN about the pain and “the historic significance of using that kind of inflammatory language, especially when it’s unfounded.”

    His experience at work deeply impacted his mental health, and for the first time in his life he began seeing a psychiatrist and dealing with symptoms of depression for “months on end,” he said. “It was like overwhelming feelings of hopelessness and helplessness.”

    Matima — who worked in sales for Lark, ByteDance’s workplace communication division — similarly alleges she was treated differently from the colleagues on her team “who were nearly all white,” according to the complaint. For example, Matima says she was not given adequate time to complete required onboarding courses before being asked to start her work, so she had to finish the courses during nights and weekends. By contrast, Matima’s white colleagues “were given ample time during normal work hours to complete their training before they were required to start their sales outreach,” the complaint states.

    In January 2023, the complaint alleges, Matima was told by a colleague that her manager and other colleagues “commonly referred” to her as a “black snake.”

    “This outrageous ‘black snake’ nickname was not only racially derogatory and inflammatory, but also suggested that Ms. Matima is a deceitful, untrustworthy, and sneaky person,” the complaint states.

    Matima and Carter both allege that multiple requests to switch managers were denied and that their complaints to the company’s human resources department were not adequately investigated and managed.

    Both Matima and Carter were ultimately terminated by TikTok in August.

    Now Matima says she feels a “moral obligation” to share the experiences publicly. “When there is injustice happening, it festers in the dark and the shadows,” she said. “By going public, we can inspire others who are still suffering in there to stand up and speak out.”

    Are you a current for former employee of TikTok or ByteDance and have information to share about what it’s like to work there? Learn how to reach out journalists securely: https://www.cnn.com/tips/

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • LinkedIn is cutting more than 650 jobs | CNN Business

    LinkedIn is cutting more than 650 jobs | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    LinkedIn is laying off 668 people across its engineering, product, talent and finance teams as part of a broader restructuring, the social media platform announced Monday.

    In a blog post, the social media site for professionals said it is making changes to its organizational structure and streamlining its decision making.

    “Talent changes are a difficult, but necessary and regular part of managing our business,” the company said. Microsoft bought LinkedIn in 2016.

    The company is dedicating many of its resources toward artificial intelligence. Recently, LinkedIn announced an AI-assisted candidate discovery for recruiters using the site. And in Microsoft’s most recent earnings report, LinkedIn reported its AI-powered collaborative articles are the fastest-growing traffic driver on the site.

    LinkedIn already cut 716 positions in May and shut down its jobs app in mainland China. That decision was made amid shifts in customer behavior and slower revenue growth, CEO Ryan Roslansky said in a letter to employees.

    In the wake of mass layoffs across the tech sector at the end of last year, LinkedIn enjoyed an uptick in users and “record engagement” among its 875 million members at the time, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella told analysts in last October’s earnings call.

    The company continues to grow financially. LinkedIn also announced in its most recent earnings report that it surpassed $15 billion in revenue for the first time during this fiscal year, and that its membership growth “accelerated” for the eighth quarter in a row.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • X will allow political ads again and hire for safety and election teams ahead of 2024 elections | CNN Business

    X will allow political ads again and hire for safety and election teams ahead of 2024 elections | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, is hiring for its safety and elections teams ahead of the 2024 US presidential election and will again allow political ads for the first time since 2019.

    “We’re currently expanding our safety and elections teams to focus on combating manipulation, surfacing inauthentic accounts and closely monitoring the platform for emerging threats,” the company said in a blog post Tuesday, in which it also laid out its approach to political discourse and preventing voter manipulation as campaign season ramps up.

    The announcement comes after months of changes to the platform and how it handles content moderation after Elon Musk took over the company last fall. Shortly after his takeover, Musk laid off huge swaths of the company’s staff, including many employees responsible for safety, platform manipulation and election policy. (Musk later boasted about having cut roughly 80% of the company’s staff.)

    It also follows criticism by Musk about how the platform’s previous leadership handled political discourse, including claims of censorship.

    According to X’s Tuesday blog post, the platform will continue to apply its civic integrity policy — which prohibits the use of the platform for “manipulating or interfering in elections,” including posting content that could mislead people about how, when or where to participate in civic processes such as voting — for a “limited period of time before and during an election.”

    “We’re updating this policy to make sure we strike the right balance between tackling the most harmful types of content—those that could intimidate or deceive people into surrendering their right to participate in a civic process—and not censoring political debate,” X said. The platform will add public labels to posts that violate the civic integrity policy and let users know when reach has been restricted on such content.

    The practices laid out in X’s Tuesday post are not all that different from how the platform handled misinformation related to elections under its previous leadership. Ahead of the 2022 midterms, the platform said it would label and demote, for example, false claims about how to cast a ballot or the outcomes of a race.

    X added that it is following through on a commitment to allow expanded political advertising. The company began taking steps in that direction in January, when it relaxed a ban on issue advertising and promised that further changes to political ads would be coming. Twitter initially implemented restrictions on political and issue advertising in 2019 amid concerns that politicians could seek to target users with false or misleading information.

    On Tuesday, X said promoted political posts would again be allowed and that the ads would be subject to certain policies.

    “This will include prohibiting the promotion of false or misleading content,” X said in the blog post, “including false or misleading information intended to undermine public confidence in an election, while seeking to preserve free and open political discourse.”

    The blog post added that X will create a “global advertising transparency center” that will allow users to review political ads — a capability that is required under Europe’s new Digital Services Act, a law that X and other very large tech platforms were expected to comply with as of last week.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • John King is going all over the map in 2024. What he’s learned so far | CNN Politics

    John King is going all over the map in 2024. What he’s learned so far | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appears in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    You’re more likely to read about people in the aggregate in this newsletter – how groups are affected by something the government is doing and how polls suggest those groups feel about it.

    CNN’s John King is looking at the 2024 presidential race from the other side in his new “All Over the Map” project. Building relationships with individuals in key states, he plans to chart how their opinions shift over the course of the campaign.

    He’s filed reports from Iowa and New Hampshire so far:

    I talked to King to hear what he’s learned so far. Our conversation, conducted by phone and edited for length, is below.

    WOLF: What are you finding when you talk to people out in the country?

    KING: This is how I started covering politics 106 million years ago. It’s just at this moment in the country where you have this weird combination of polarization and disaffection and a lot of people who are in the middle who would be moderate Republicans or true independents or centrist Democrats are just disgusted and they’re sitting out.

    The people who are sitting out are empowering the extremes, and they know it, but they just can’t stomach national politics. So they vote for mayor and they vote for governor and sometimes they vote for Senate and Congress, but even that pisses them off. So it’s just a weird time.

    WOLF: What I really like in these reports is the nuance of people’s opinions. They don’t fit into the buckets that we create for them here in Washington. How do you find people who will talk to you? I’ve talked to other reporters who have trouble doing that.

    KING: It can be hard sometimes. We’re doing this a number of ways. Some of these are through people I know. The fishermen in New Hampshire we found through a woman I met years ago who’s part of an advocacy group for these independent small fishermen …

    They’re interesting because they’re young, they’re Republican-leaning, they’re really hardworking, blue-collar people. People that when I started doing this – 35 years ago was my first campaign – they were Democrats.

    Michael Dukakis only won 10 states in 1988, but he won West Virginia and Iowa. Farmers and coal miners and fishermen and people who work with their hands were Democrats then. And they are more and more Republicans now.

    The idea here is to build relationships with them all the way through next November and hopefully beyond. But in the 2024 campaign context, we’re not going in to get people at a rally to say, “Are you for (former President Donald) Trump or are you for (President Joe) Biden? Are you for (former South Carolina Gov. Nikki) Haley or are you for (Florida Gov. Ron) DeSantis?”

    We care about that, but I care much more about how they got there. Have they always been there? And again, in all caps in boldface to me is the question: why?

    WOLF: You talk to a solar panel salesman who backs Trump and a commercial fisherman, who you just mentioned, who says Republicans are for the working man. What motivates people whose livelihoods are directly related to climate change to back Republicans who are largely opposed to having any government involvement with doing anything about it?

    KING: That part’s fascinating. Chris Mudd is the solar panel guy in Iowa and Andrew Konchek is one of the fishermen in New Hampshire. And to your point, our business makes the mistake – and the candidates, the politicians and the parties way too often make the mistake – of trying to put people in their lanes and in their boxes. And guess what, everybody is different. It’s a cliche, but it’s true.

    So Chris Mudd – his family has an advertising business that employs just shy of 100 people in Cedar Falls, Iowa. It’s an anchor of the community, especially in a part of the country where you’ve had a lot of economic turmoil in the last 25 years, manufacturing disappearing. These guys are heroes in their communities. They are employers.

    Then he started the spinoff solar installation business, and he admits straight up his business benefits – and quite significantly – from the Biden green energy tax credits. And yet, he says, he would take his chances without them because he thinks that money should be redirected to the border wall. That Trump should finish his border wall.

    It’s not just immigration. It’s American sovereignty and the border. And so he’s willing to take an economic hit for his business. He thinks it would survive, but he would take a hit because immigration, American security, comes first to him.

    The fisherman, on the other hand, wants to stay on the water. He came to Trump in 2016 because Trump was a newcomer, he was the insurgent. He loves the policies. In Andrew’s case, he does not like the tweets. He does not like the chaos. Prefers Trump would talk more about the future, not the past.

    But his industry is in decline. And he says Trump is for less regulation – so they won’t be regulating the fishing industry as much – and he knows Trump hates wind energy farms, and he thinks the biggest immediate threat to his job, two or three years down the road, is a plan to build all these wind turbine farms off the coast of New Hampshire and off the coast of Maine.

    And he thinks they’re gonna kill his business. So he’s for Trump because he wants to pay his mortgage.

    WOLF: You talk to another guy in New Hampshire who’s switching from Trump to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The conventional wisdom would be that Kennedy would pull from Biden’s support because he is, at least technically, a Democrat. What is happening there?

    KING: So that to me is fascinating on a couple levels. No. 1, Lucas was a Trump 2016 primary voter in New Hampshire. He quickly got turned off by the chaos. He was not for Trump in 2020. He went third party. But he’s a Republican-leaning guy who likes Trump’s policies. Does not like the Trump performance art, I’ll call it.

    You would think he’d be looking for another Republican in this campaign, but he gets all the way over to Robert Kennedy.

    A buddy of his, a crew mate, gave him a Joe Rogan podcast with Bobby Kennedy on it. And Kennedy is talking about how years ago, he helped these fishermen who were being hurt by industrial pollution when he was at the National Resources Defense Council.

    So what was he thinking here? They don’t trust politicians. Politicians promised to help them all the time, and in their view, they never do. So here’s a guy who’s running for president, who actually helped people who do what he does. Done. That’s it. Right?

    Yes, he knows there’s a lot of other controversy about Robert Kennedy. He says there’s going to be controversy about any politician. Here’s a guy who has helped people just like him.

    WOLF: You talked about a couple of people just now who don’t like the Trump noise or chaos, but CNN ‘s latest polling – we just had one in New Hampshire. Trump leads there. He leads in Iowa, according to polling there. What does your reporting on the ground suggest is behind the fact that none of these many Trump challengers have caught on?

    KING: Well, one of the issues is just that there are so many of them. The numbers are part of it, without a doubt. But a lot of these Republicans also view Trump as kind of an incumbent. And to a degree, he also benefits from the cynical effort to convince so many Republicans that he didn’t lose last time, even though we all know he did.

    If you look at our New Hampshire poll, even a lot of Republicans who support the other candidates think Trump is the strongest general election candidate. That’s helping him. I think the bigger part there is just that the base is loyal to him.

    He can be beat. Six in 10 Republicans in New Hampshire want somebody else, but there are 10 other people running and the support is fractured. Until you have a singular alternative, there’s no way to beat Trump.

    The only thing I would add to that is what several Trump voters in New Hampshire (told us). They’re planning to vote for him, make no mistake, but they say it’s not as exciting. It’s not the same as it was in 2015 and 2016, when he was new, when that hostile takeover was so dramatic and to many Republicans so exciting.

    The establishment didn’t think so, but a lot of Republican voters found it very exciting. Trump is not the new guy anymore. And in some ways, he’s the new establishment. That doesn’t mean his people aren’t loyal, but in the back of their mind, there does seem to be a little bit of, “I’m open to some change.”

    WOLF: Joe Biden didn’t win either Iowa or New Hampshire in the 2020 primaries. And for a complicated and very strange Democratic reason, he may not take part in those contests this year. His nomination is probably a foregone conclusion, but what did you hear from Democrats in those states?

    KING: I want to be a little careful here because we haven’t spent a ton of time with Democrats. The project’s going to expand over the next 13, 14 months, through the election.

    The biggest question right now is can Trump be stopped and who is the Republican nominee going to be? So that’s where we have put 75, 80% of our energy and focus. Doesn’t mean when we go into the states, we’re not meeting and talking to Democrats, but I would be more careful about taking the anecdotal reporting we get from six, eight, 10, 12 voters and projecting it out.

    I will say that a number of Democrats ask us, “Do you think there’s any chance he doesn’t run still?” Or they will share their own worries that there will be some event that will force him to not run again.

    The age thing is a nagging thought for Democrats. Age, or is he up to the job might be a better way to put it. Does he have the stamina for another term? That’s lingering.

    You don’t see any evidence that there’s anybody – no Democrat is running who has a serious chance or anything like that. We’re going get to the swing states as we go forward. I have a number of questions about whether key pieces of the Biden coalition are energized for any number of reasons.

    Sometimes you hear this age, stamina, up-to-the-job question. Other times you hear, if you talk to organizers and activists, that some of the people absolutely critical to the Democratic coalition – blue-collar Black workers, blue-collar Latino workers – are still feeling it from inflation, don’t feel like the economy’s bounced back.

    Those are things to cover as we go forward. I would not make any big sweeping findings in my reporting on the Democrats so far. I’ve got more questions than I have answers.

    WOLF: Let me tweak that a little bit. Separating you from these reporting trips, as somebody who’s covered so many presidential elections, what could be the potential effect of the president not taking part in the first two contests?

    KING: New Hampshire is very parochial. There are a lot of Democrats there who are, forgive my language, but pissed off at him. I think he could be “embarrassed” in New Hampshire.

    Now, does it have any lasting meaning? Let’s see what happens.

    The president did something, actually, that’s pretty courageous. I do not remember one cycle where there hasn’t been at least a conversation about, “Is it time to change this Iowa and New Hampshire thing?”

    The Iowa electorate is 90% White. The New Hampshire electorate is 90% White. The numbers are even higher than that if you look at the Republican electorate. They’re overwhelmingly White states. They do not reflect the diversity, both from an ethnic perspective and even an economic perspective, of the Democratic Party.

    This conversation comes up every four years in both parties. Are you gonna change it? Biden had the guts to do it. The cynic would say he did it for the reasons you mentioned – that he lost Iowa and New Hampshire, and he’s lost them before. That wasn’t the first time and so he wanted a new way. He wanted the Biden way.

    Of course that’s one of the reasons he did it. Because he has more success in South Carolina. He has a history. So he has tilted the Democratic playing field to his favor. A bad number in New Hampshire might be embarrassing, but I think they’ve actually more protected themselves than exposed themselves by doing it this way.

    My bigger question is does the way they’ve changed the Democratic (process) actually mask weaknesses? If there’s a weakness in Democratic enthusiasm, if there’s a turnout problem, they need to get a handle on that as soon as possible.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • When John Roberts wants things done, he acts. What that means for ethics rules | CNN Politics

    When John Roberts wants things done, he acts. What that means for ethics rules | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Soon after he became chief justice of the United States, John Roberts faced what he believed was a “crisis” involving the judiciary: Federal judges were underpaid.

    What Roberts did next to address the situation stands in stark contrast to the way he has tiptoed through the current controversy over the Supreme Court’s integrity.

    As he pushed for a pay raise, he arranged a meeting at the White House to win support from then-President George W. Bush. He encouraged emissaries to talk to members of Congress. And he devoted an entire year-end report to the situation.

    “I am going to discuss only one issue – in an effort to increase even more the chances that people will take notice,” Roberts wrote on January 1, 2007. “That is important because the issue has been ignored far too long and has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis that threatens to undermine the strength and independence of the federal judiciary.”

    His concern: “I am talking about the failure to raise judicial pay.”

    Today, Roberts is at the center of the controversy over the court’s lack of transparency and absence of a formal code of ethics. The justices have been inconsistent in reporting travel and gifts bestowed on them by wealthy benefactors who may be trying to influence the court.

    The 68-year-old chief justice, who will be starting his 19th term in October, has moved with little apparent urgency.

    On Thursday, the issue was again in the spotlight as Justice Clarence Thomas filed a long-awaited annual financial disclosure form that pointed up his relationship with Texas real estate billionaire Harlan Crow. Thomas acknowledged that he had traveled on private jets at Crow’s expense for Dallas events and taken a separate vacation excursion to Crow’s opulent estate in the Adirondacks.

    Thomas also reported that Crow had in 2014 bought property in Savannah, Georgia, from Thomas and his family. Thomas’ lawyer said any delays or other filing errors were “inadvertent” and described public criticism of Thomas as “political blood sport.”

    Justice Roberts wrote ‘condescending’ letter to Senate when asked to testify about ethics

    The backdrop to Thursday’s filing by Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito, both of whom had sought extensions from a May deadline, is the rising attention to the Supreme Court’s inability to monitor itself on this front. The justices’ extracurricular activities and lack of any process for resolving complaints has become as much a topic of public scrutiny as their rulings pushing the law in America to the right.

    For years, individual justices have said the court was considering its own code of conduct, as now covers lower court judges. But that consideration has never produced any public result.

    Members of Congress, advocacy groups and even some justices have looked to Roberts for leadership, to no avail.

    Roberts told an audience of lawyers in Washington, DC, in May: “I want to assure people that I am committed to making certain that we as a court adhere to the highest standards of conduct. We are continuing to look at things we can do to give practical effect to that commitment.”

    Yet when the justices left town for their summer recess in June, they were at a stalemate on whether a formal code was even necessary.

    In separate public appearances this summer, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Elena Kagan, when asked about a possible ethics code, said they didn’t want to get out ahead of Roberts on the issue.

    While Roberts has sent muted signals, he has made his resistance to congressional involvement clear.

    Roberts in April declined an invitation to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee about judicial ethics, referring to “separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence.”

    The Democratic-run Senate committee in July advanced legislation that would require a Supreme Court ethics code and a set of procedures for resolving complaints regarding their behavior. Given the tight partisan divide in the Senate and Republicans’ control of the House, the bill is unlikely to become law.

    So, much depends on the justices themselves.

    Roberts is known for formidable powers of persuasion. Before he became a US appeals court judge in 2003 and a Supreme Court justice in 2005, he was a star appellate advocate at the high court. But there are limits to his authority as chief, and the regard he engenders among individual colleagues varies.

    There may also be limits to the personal capital Roberts wants to put toward a dilemma that lies beyond the consideration of cases.

    The chief justice had made the judiciary’s pay raise a singular concern, and eventually judges and justices obtained full cost-of-living increases and higher pay.

    Unlike with judicial pay, which naturally generated support among black-robed colleagues, the ethics issue has defied consensus in Roberts’ ranks.

    Alito said in a Wall Street Journal interview published in July that he “voluntarily follows” the rules that apply to lower court judges, and he denigrated congressional efforts in this area: “I know this is a controversial view, but I’m going to say it. No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court – period.”

    Last month in Portland, Oregon, Kagan also referred to internal differences.

    “It’s not a secret for me to say that we have been discussing it,” she said, referring to a formal set of ethics rules. And it won’t be a surprise to know that the nine of us have a variety of views about this, as about most things. We’re nine free-thinking individuals.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • America’s child care problem is about to get a lot worse. Here’s why | CNN Politics

    America’s child care problem is about to get a lot worse. Here’s why | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Sarah Morgan was looking forward to enrolling her 1-year-old son Lucas at the Skagit Valley Family YMCA’s early learning center in Anacortes, Washington, this fall.

    Her older son Jameson, 5, had a wonderful experience there, learning his letters, numbers and colors, as well as social skills – all of which smoothed his transition to kindergarten this year.

    But in late August, Morgan found out that the YMCA was closing the Anacortes center.

    Like many child care providers across the nation, the YMCA has had to rethink its operations with the looming expiration of a $24 billion federal Covid-19 pandemic support program that kept many centers afloat over the past two years. The nonprofit, which received $271,000 for its early learning programs, opted to close the Anacortes location, which served 21 families, so it could funnel its resources into its three remaining centers, said its CEO Dean Snider.

    That decision has left the Morgan family scrambling to find alternate arrangements for Lucas. Child care is limited on Anacortes, an island in the northwest part of the state. The YMCA’s closest remaining centers are a 40-minute drive away, which doesn’t fit the work schedules of either her or her husband, Travus. And the nannies they interviewed asked for hourly rates that are close to what Morgan earns.

    So Morgan plans to place Lucas with an in-home provider, though she worries he won’t have the same educational opportunities that his older brother had at the YMCA.

    “It’s really sad that my next one won’t have that type of experience,” said Morgan, a social worker employed by the state. “It’s just really been devastating.”

    Nationwide, more than 70,000 child care programs are projected to close, and about 3.2 million children could lose their spots due to the end of the child care stabilization grant program on September 30, according to an analysis by The Century Foundation.

    The historic federal investment, which was part of the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act that Democrats passed in March 2021, supported more than 220,000 child care programs, affecting as many as 9.6 million children, according to the federal Administration for Children & Families. It reached more than 8 in 10 licensed child care centers, helping them hold onto workers by offering bonuses and raising wages, cover their rent, mortgage and utilities, buy personal protective equipment and other supplies, and provide mental health support.

    “We have not spent that much money on child care previously in the US,” said Julie Kashen, women’s economic justice director at The Century Foundation. “What we learned was that it worked. It kept programs open. It helped address the staffing shortages. It kept children safe and nurtured. It kept parents working.”

    Child care in America has long had issues: The costs are steep for both providers and parents, leaving it both in short supply and unaffordable for many families. Last year, the average annual price nationwide was nearly $11,000, according to Child Care Aware of America, though the rates can be much higher depending on the location.

    At the same time, the pay is low, making it hard for workers to commit to the industry and for centers to hold onto their staff. Child care workers typically earned $13.71 an hour, or $28,520 a year, in 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment remains lower than it was prior to the pandemic.

    For Carla Smith, the stabilization grants were a “miracle.”

    Smith, who founded Cornerstone Academy in Arlington, Texas, 17 years ago while nursing her newborn son, used $1.1 million in stabilization grants and other federal relief funding to rebuild after enrollment plunged in the first year of the pandemic. She was able to hire more employees and boost the wages of her teachers and administrative staff to as much as $25 an hour. That’s about double what most were earning before and enticed them to stay at the academy.

    Carla Smith founded and operates Cornerstone Academy in Arlington, Texas.

    “It kept the day care open. It kept day care workers employed, and it kept families employed,” said Smith, who now cares for 50 children ages 6 weeks to 5 years.

    Now that she won’t receive any additional federal stabilization funds, Smith is worried she might have to close her doors next summer if the church that houses the center doesn’t step in to help. She just raised tuition by up to $200 a month for most children and $600 a month for infants, prompting one family to leave and several others to pull out of the after-school program. She and the assistant director have taken five-figure pay cuts, she laid off one worker and she reduced the hours of the others.

    “The next layoff will be myself,” she said, noting that she’s already looking for other jobs so she can keep the academy operating.

    Without the stabilization grants, the Chinese-American Planning Council in New York City will have a tougher time hiring and retaining staffers who care for 180 children at six sites, said Mary Cheng, the director of childhood development services. The nearly $600,000 in funding allowed her to provide bonuses of up to $2,500 every six months between July 2021 and this summer, as well as temporarily increase the pay of the after-school staff by a dollar or two. In addition, she used the funds to buy air purifiers and cleaning supplies, as well as provide mental health support for the children and staff.

    Now, she’s looking for several teachers and assistant teachers, as well as an education director for one of the sites. But it’s hard to attract candidates when the pay she’s offering – even for the director role – is less than an entry-level public school teacher.

    Already, because of the staffing shortage, she’s had to close one classroom in a public housing development, turning away the parents of 12 children.

    But the council may have to undertake some more fundamental changes to its child care program, which has been funded by the city since it started in the 1970s. Cheng is looking to raise $500,000 in donations and grants for its preschool and after-school programs this year to cover the shortfall in federal support, far more than the $15,000 it has raised annually in the past.

    The Chinese-American Planning Council used its pandemic stabilization grants to retain and hire staff, as well as buy cleaning supplies and provide mental health services.

    And it may have to start accepting children whose parents can pay tuition for the first time.

    “Now I have to think about ‘How do I make a profit?,” said Cheng, who attended the child care program when she was little. “You have to sustain the programming that has to happen for these families. You have to think about a profit in that way because when things hit the fan like this, you’ve got to figure out ‘What can I do to make ends meet?’”

    A group of Democratic and independent senators and representatives are pushing to extend federal assistance for child care beyond September 30. They introduced the Child Care Stabilization Act, which would provide $16 billion each year for the next five years.

    “There was a child care crisis even before the pandemic – and failing to extend these critical investments from the American Rescue Plan will push child care even further out of reach for millions of families and jeopardize our strong economic recovery,” Sen. Patty Murray of Washington said in a statement. “This is an urgent economic priority at every level: Child care is what allows parents to go to work, businesses to hire workers, and it’s an investment in our kids’ futures. The child care industry holds up every sector of our economy – and Congress must act now.”

    Meanwhile, a bipartisan bill introduced in the House would enhance three existing tax credits – the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, the Employer-Provided Child Care Credit and the Dependent Care Assistance Program – to help make child care more affordable for families and to support employers in sharing the cost of care.

    However, getting any additional funding through Congress will be difficult. House GOP hardliners are determined to cut spending in the fiscal 2024 government funding bill, making it more likely the government could shut down on October 1.

    Vanessa Quarles is among the many child care providers who hope that Congress renews its support for the industry.

    Quarles, who runs Bridges Transitional Preschool & Childcare in Evansville, Indiana, cannot take in more children until she can find more workers. But she can only afford to pay up to $14 an hour, which is barely a livable wage in the area, she said. Quarles raised tuition in February and stopped offering lunch, but she fears she’ll drive away parents if she asks them to shell out any more.

    Vanessa Quarles, a child care provider, has found it hard to hire workers even though she advertises widely.

    If she received federal funding, she would be able to provide raises and bonuses to attract more employees.

    “A lot of people are having a hard time accepting the pay range of child care workers,” said Quarles, who did not receive any stabilization grants. “That’s one reason why we are not fully functioning.”

    At least 17 states invested their own money into child care this year, according to a tally by Child Care Aware. These include historic investments by Alabama, Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Vermont and Washington.

    Washington funneled more than $400 million this year into early learning, the largest investment in state history, according to Child Care Aware. It builds on the Fair Start for Kids Act, which state lawmakers passed in 2021. The effort increased the number of households eligible for assistance by raising income eligibility limits – a family of four earning as much as $5,600 a month in 2023 qualifies for monthly copays of only $165. It also bumped up the rates paid to providers for serving state-subsidized families.

    But more needs to be done to keep providers afloat, said Ryan Pricco, director of policy and advocacy at Child Care Aware of Washington. Currently, reimbursement rates are determined by a market survey, but that reflects what parents can afford, not the true cost of care.

    “Until we switch our subsidy system, and really our whole financing system, over to a cost of care model and reimburse programs that way, they’re going to continue to struggle to keep up with competitors and other low-income industries,” he said.

    The Skagit Valley Family YMCA had to close one of its early learning centers after the federal stabilization program expired.

    While the Skagit Valley Family YMCA needed the stabilization grants to bolster its child care workforce, those infusions alone are not enough to solve its financial imbalance, Snider said. Revenue from families paying full price and subsidized rates only cover the cost of staffing, not rent, food for the children and other expenses. The agency has racked up six-figure losses across its early learning centers so far this year, which is “obviously unsustainable,” Snider said.

    “Early learning is not a viable proposition right now,” he continued. “Everyone calls it necessary, but no one’s willing to put the resources in yet to make it possible.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Regulators give green light to driverless taxis in San Francisco | CNN Business

    Regulators give green light to driverless taxis in San Francisco | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    California regulators gave approval Thursday to two rival robotaxi companies, Cruise and Waymo, to operate their driverless cars 24/7 across all of San Francisco and charge passengers for their services.

    The much-anticipated vote, which followed roughly six hours of public comment both for and against driverless taxis, came amid clashes between the robotaxi companies and some residents of the hilly city. San Francisco first responders, city transportation leaders and local activists are among those who shared concerns about the technology.

    The California Public Utilities Commission regulates self-driving cars in the state and voted 3-to-1 in favor of Waymo and Cruise expanding their operations.

    That means residents and visitors to San Francisco will be able to pay a fare to ride in a driverless taxi, ushering in new automated competition to cab and ridehail drivers.

    “Today’s permit marks the true beginning of our commercial operations in San Francisco,” said Tekedra Mawakana, co-CEO of Waymo, in a press release.

    Cruise spokesperson Drew Pusateri said in a statement to CNN that the 24/7 driverless service is a “historic industry milestone” that puts Cruise “in a position to compete with traditional ridehail, and challenge an unsafe, inaccessible transportation status quo.”

    Until Thursday’s vote, Cruise and Waymo could offer only limited service to San Francisco residents.

    Cruise – a subsidiary of General Motors – could charge a fare only for overnight rides occurring between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. in select parts of the city. Waymo, owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet, could charge a fare only for rides with a human driver in the vehicle.

    Now, Cruise and Waymo can charge a fare for their driverless rides and 24/7 access to San Francisco streets as they do so.

    Cruise officials told state commissioners at a recent public hearing that it deploys about 300 vehicles at night and 100 during the day, while Waymo officials said that around 100 of its 250 vehicles are on the road at any given time.

    The autonomous ride-hailing service offered by Cruise and Waymo allows users to request a ride similar to Uber or Lyft. There is a difference, of course: The car has no driver.

    Members of the public packed the commission’s San Francisco headquarters to share their thoughts with state commissioners in one-minute increments during the meeting. Critics pointed to driverless cars freezing in traffic and blocking first responders, while advocates said they felt the cars drove more defensively than human drivers.

    Although the decision ultimately laid in the hands of state regulators, who delayed the vote twice, local officials also expressed their dissent.

    The San Francisco Police Officers Association, San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association and the San Francisco Fire Fighters Local 798 all wrote letters to the CPUC in the week leading up to the originally scheduled vote on June 29. Each expressed concerns that autonomous vehicles could impede emergency responders.

    “The time that it takes for an officer or any other public safety employee to try and interact with an autonomous vehicle is frustrating in the best-case scenario, but when they can not comprehend our demands to move to the side of the roadway and are stopped in the middle of the roadway blocking emergency response units, then it rises to another level of danger,” wrote Tracy McCray, president of the San Francisco Police Officers Association in June, “and that is unacceptable.”

    The San Francisco Fire Department has recorded 55 incidents of driverless vehicles interfering with their emergency responses in 2023 as of Wednesday, the department confirmed to CNN.

    In one incident reported by the department on Saturday, a Waymo car pulled up between a car on fire and the fire truck aiming to put it out.

    Other instances include robotaxis driving through yellow tape into the scene of a shooting, blocking firehouse driveways such that a fire truck farther away had to respond to the scene, and requiring firefighters to reroute, according to Fire Chief Jeanine Nicholson.

    “It should not be up to my people to have to move their vehicle out of the way when we’re responding to one of our 160,000 calls,” Nicholson told CNN in June.

    Robotaxi companies have often touted their safety records. Out of 3 million driverless miles, a Cruise car has not been involved in a single fatality or life-threatening injury, according to the company. In a February review of its first million driverless miles, Waymo said their cars caused no reported injuries and that 55% of all contact events were the result of a human driver hitting a stationary Waymo vehicle.

    2022 was the worst year on record for traffic fatalities in San Francisco since 2014, according to city data. Cruise said that when benchmarked against human drivers in comparable driving environments, its vehicles were involved in 54% fewer collisions overall.

    The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency said in a California Public Utilities Commission meeting on Monday that it had logged almost 600 incidents involving autonomous vehicles since the technology first launched in San Francisco. The agency said they believe this is “a fraction” of actual incidents due to what they allege is a lack of data transparency.

    Genevieve Shiroma, the dissenting commissioner in the 3-1 vote, recommended the commission delay the vote until they received a “better understanding of the safety impacts” of the vehicles.

    “First responders should not be prevented from doing their job. The fact that an injury or fatality has not occurred yet is not the end of the inquiry,” Shiroma said. “The commission needs a better explanation regarding why these events occur.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Takeaways from the second Republican presidential debate | CNN Politics

    Takeaways from the second Republican presidential debate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The second 2024 Republican presidential primary debate ended just as it began: with former President Donald Trump – who hasn’t yet appeared alongside his rivals onstage – as the party’s dominant front-runner.

    The seven GOP contenders in Wednesday night’s showdown at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California provided a handful of memorable moments, including former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley unloading what often seemed like the entire field’s pent-up frustration with entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

    “Honestly, every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber for what you say,” she said to him at one point.

    Two candidates criticized Trump’s absence, as well. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said he was “missing in action.” Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called the former president “Donald Duck” and said he “hides behind his golf clubs” rather than defending his record on stage.

    Chris Christie takes up debate time to send Trump a clear message

    The GOP field also took early shots at President Joe Biden. South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott said Biden, rather than joining the striking auto workers’ union on the picket line Tuesday in Michigan, should be on the southern border. Former Vice President Mike Pence said Biden should be “on the unemployment line.” North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum said Biden was interfering with “free markets.”

    However, what played out in the debate, hosted by Fox Business Network and Univision, is unlikely to change the trajectory of a GOP race in which Trump has remained dominant in national and early-state polling.

    And the frequently messy, hard-to-track crosstalk could have led many viewers to tune out entirely.

    Here are takeaways from the second GOP primary debate:

    Trump might have played it safe by skipping the debates and taking a running-as-an-incumbent approach to the 2024 GOP primary.

    It’s hard to see, though, how he would pay a significant price in the eyes of the party’s voters for missing Wednesday night’s messy engagement.

    Trump’s rivals took a few shots at him. DeSantis knocked him for deficit spending. Christie mocked him during the night’s early moments, calling him “Donald Duck” for skipping the debate and then in his final comments said he would vote Trump off the GOP island.

    “This guy has not only divided our party – he’s divided families all over this country. He’s divided friends all over this country,” Christie said. “He needs to be voted off the island and he needs to be taken out of this process.”

    However, Trump largely escaped serious scrutiny of his four years in the Oval Office from a field of rivals courting voters who have largely positive views of his presidency.

    “Tonight’s GOP debate was as boring and inconsequential as the first debate, and nothing that was said will change the dynamics of the primary contest,” Trump campaign senior adviser Chris LaCivita said in a statement.

    The second GOP primary debate was beset by interruptions, crosstalk and protracted squabbles between the candidates and moderators over speaking time.

    That’s tough for viewers trying to make sense of it all but even worse for these candidates as they attempted to stand out as viable alternatives to the absentee Trump.

    Further complicating the matter, some of the highest polling candidates after Trump – DeSantis and Haley – were among those least willing to dive into the muck, especially during the crucial first hour. The moderators repeatedly tried to clear the road for the Florida governor, at least in the beginning. But he was all but absent from the proceedings for the first 15 minutes.

    Ramaswamy fared somewhat better, speaking louder – and faster – than most of his rivals. But he was bogged down repeatedly when caught between his own talking points and cross-volleys of criticisms from frustrated candidates like Scott.

    The moderator group will likely get criticism for losing control of the room within the first half-hour, but even a messy debate tells voters something about the people taking part.

    All night, Scott seemed like he was looking for a fight with somebody and he finally got that when he set his sights on fellow South Carolinian Haley.

    He began his line of attack – which Haley interjected with a “Bring it” – by accusing her of spending $50,000 on curtains in a $15 million subsidized location during her time as the US ambassador to the United Nations.

    What ensued was the two Republicans going back and forth about the curtains. “Do your homework, Tim, because Obama bought those curtains,” Haley said, while Scott repeated, “Did you send them back? Did you send them back?” Haley then responded: “Did you send them back? You’re the one who works in Congress.”

    It wasn’t the most acrimonious moment of the night, but it was up there. The feuding between the two South Carolina natives seemed deep, but it’s worth remembering that about a decade ago, when Haley was governor, she appointed Scott to the Senate seat he currently holds after Republican Jim DeMint stepped down. That confidence in Scott seems to have dissolved in this presidential race.

    Confronted by his Republican competitors for the first time in earnest, DeSantis delivered an uneven performance from the center of the stage – a spot that is considerably less secure than it was heading into the first debate in Milwaukee.

    Despite rules that allowed candidates to respond if they were invoked, DeSantis let Fox slip to commercial break when Pence seemed to blame the governor for a jury decision to award a life sentence, not the death penalty, to the mass murderer in the Parkland high school shooting. (DeSantis opposed the decision and championed a law that made Florida the state with the lowest threshold to put someone on death row going forward.) Nor did he respond when Pence accused DeSantis of inflating Florida’s budget by 30% during his tenure.

    He later let Scott get the last word on Florida’s Black history curriculum standards and struggled to defend himself when Haley – accurately – pointed out that he took steps to block fracking in Florida on his second day in office.

    Before the first debate in Milwaukee, a top strategist for a pro-DeSantis super PAC told donors that “79% of the people tonight are going to watch the debate and turn it off after 19 minutes.”

    By that measure, the Florida governor managed to first speak Wednesday night just in the nick of time – 16 minutes into the debate. And when he finally spoke, he continued the sharper attacks on the GOP front-runner that he has previewed in recent weeks.

    DeSantis equated Trump’s absence in California to Biden, who DeSantis said was “completely missing in action for leadership” on the economy, blaming him for inflation and the autoworkers strike.

    “And you know who else is missing in action? Donald Trump is missing in action,” DeSantis said. “He should be on this stage tonight. He owes it to you to defend his record.”

    But DeSantis then largely pulled back from further targeting Trump – until a post-debate Fox News appearance when he challenged the former president to a one-on-one face-off.

    DeSantis ended the debate on a strong note. He took charge by rejecting moderator Dana Perino’s attempts to get the candidates to vote one of their competitors “off the island.” He ended his night forcefully dismissing a suggestion that Trump’s lead in the polls held meaning in September.

    “Polls don’t elect presidents, voters elect presidents,” he said, before pointing a finger at Trump for Republicans’ electoral underperformance in the last three elections.

    But as the super PAC strategist previously pointed out: By then, who was watching?

    In the final minutes of the debate, co-host Ilia Calderón of Univision asked Pence how he would reach out to those Latino voters who felt the Republican Party was hostile or didn’t care about them.

    “I’m incredibly proud of the tax cut and tax reform bill,” he said, referring to Republicans’ sweeping 2017 tax law. He also cited low unemployment rates for Hispanic Americans recorded during the Trump-Pence administration.

    Scott, faced with the same question, said it was important to lead by example. “My chief of staff is the only Hispanic female chief of staff in the Senate,” he said. “I hired her because she was the best, highest-qualified person we have.”

    Calderón focused much of her time on a series of policy questions that highlighted the candidates’ records on immigration and gun violence. At times, some of them struggled to respond directly.

    She asked Pence if he would work with Congress to find a permanent solution for people who were brought to the country illegally as children. The Trump-Pence administration ended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which gave those young people protected status. She repeated the question after Pence focused his answer on his work securing the border. He then talked about his time in Congress.

    “Let me tell you, I served in Congress for 12 years, although it seemed longer,” he said. “But you know, something I’ve done different than everybody on this stage is I’ve actually secured reform in Congress.”

    The candidates – and moderators – shy away from abortion talk

    It took more than a 100 minutes on Wednesday night for the first question on abortion to be asked.

    About five minutes later, the conversation had moved on. What is potentially the most potent driver (or flipper) of votes in the coming election was afforded less time than TikTok.

    Tellingly, no one onstage seemed to mind.

    Perino introduced the subject by asking DeSantis whether some Republicans were right to worry that the electoral backlash to abortion bans – or the prospect of their passage – would handicap the eventual GOP nominee.

    DeSantis, who signed a six-week ban in April, dismissed those concerns, pointing to his success in traditionally liberal parts of Florida on his way to winning a second term in 2022. Then he swiped at Trump for calling the new laws “a terrible thing and a terrible mistake.”

    Christie took a similar path, arguing that his two terms as governor of New Jersey, a traditionally blue state, showed it was possible for anti-abortion leaders to win in a environments supportive of abortion rights.

    And with that, the abortion “debate” in Simi Valley ended abruptly. No more questions and no attempts by the rest of the candidates to interject or otherwise join the chat.

    Candidates pile on Ramaswamy

    Some of the candidates onstage didn’t want to have a repeat of the first debate, in which Ramaswamy managed to stand out as a formidable debater and showman.

    Early in Wednesday’s debate, Scott went after the tech entrepreneur, saying his business record included ties to the Chinese Communist Party and money going to Hunter Biden. The visibly annoyed Ramaswamy shifted gears from praising all the other candidates onstage to defending his business record. But Scott and Ramaswamy ended up talking over each other.

    A little later on Pence began an answer with a knock on Ramaswamy, saying, “I’m glad Vivek pulled out of his business deal in China.” At another point after Ramaswamy had responded to a question about his use of TikTok, Haley jumped in, saying, “Every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber from what you say” and then going on to say, “We can’t trust you. We can’t trust you.” As Ramaswamy tried to readopt his unity tone, Scott could be heard trying to interrupt him.

    Despite the efforts of moderators to pin them down, DeSantis and Pence struggled to respond when challenged on their respective records on health care.

    Asked about the Trump administration’s failure to end the Affordable Care Act as promised, Pence opted instead to answer a previous question about mass gun violence. When Perino pushed Pence one more time to explain why Obamacare remains not just intact but popular, the former vice president once again demurred.

    Fox’s Stuart Varney similarly pressed DeSantis to explain why 2.5 million Floridians don’t have health insurance.

    DeSantis found a familiar foil for Republicans in California: inflation. Varney, though, said it didn’t explain why Florida has one of the highest uninsurance rates in the country, to which DeSantis had little response.

    “Our state’s a dynamic state,” DeSantis said, before pointing to Florida’s population boom and the low level of welfare benefits offered there.

    Haley, though, appeared ready to debate health care, arguing for transparency in prices to lessen the power of insurance companies and providers and overhauling lawsuit rules to make it harder to sue doctors.

    “How can we be the best country in the world and have the most expensive health care in the world?” Haley said.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US Coast Guard leaders long concealed a critical report about racism, hazing and sexual misconduct | CNN Politics

    US Coast Guard leaders long concealed a critical report about racism, hazing and sexual misconduct | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    For nearly a decade, US Coast Guard leaders have concealed a critical report that exposed racism, hazing, discrimination and sexual assault across the agency.

    The 2015 “Culture of Respect” study, a copy of which was obtained by CNN, documented how employees complained of a “boys will be boys” and “I got through it so can you” culture. Many said they feared they would be ostracized and retaliated against for reporting abuse and that those who did come forward often had their complaints dismissed by supervisors.

    Some of the report’s core findings mirrored those of another secret investigation into rapes and sexual assaults at the Coast Guard’s academy. The existence of that probe, which was dubbed Operation Fouled Anchor and completed in 2019, was revealed by CNN earlier this year. That investigation found that serious misconduct had been ignored and, at times, covered up by high-ranking officials, allowing alleged offenders to rise within the ranks of the Coast Guard and other military branches.

    Following CNN’s stories on the Fouled Anchor investigation and subsequent Congressional outrage, the Coast Guard’s commandant, Linda Fagan, apologized to cadets and the workforce, and acknowledged that the Coast Guard needed to be more transparent to service members, Congress and the public about such matters.

    “Trust and respect thrive in transparency but are shattered by silence,” she wrote.

    But under her watch, the Coast Guard continued to keep the report hidden from the public even though she had been asked to release it long before the Fouled Anchor controversy unfolded this summer. And although the Culture of Respect study is more than eight years old, more than a dozen current and recent Coast Guard employees and academy cadets told CNN many of the problems that were identified continue to plague the agency.

    In response to questions from CNN this week, a spokesman for Fagan said the commandant plans to make the report public next week as part of her “commitment to transparency,” alongside the findings from a 90-day internal study of sexual assault and harassment within the agency, prompted by the Fouled Anchor reporting.

    Coast Guard officials further said in a statement that the Culture of Respect report was not originally intended to be released widely to the workforce, but rather was to be used by senior leaders to inform policy decisions. Officials, however, did not explain why Fagan had not found a way to release the report sooner, particularly since alleged victims or perpetrators were not named in the report.

    The document has long been shrouded in secrecy. The copy of the report obtained by CNN states that it was to be stored in “a locked container or area offering sufficient protection against theft, compromise, inadvertent access and unauthorized disclosure.” It was to be distributed only to people on a “need to know basis” and should not be released to the public under the Freedom of Information Act, the report stated.

    The study, which was conducted internally and included interviews from nearly 300 people from across the organization, highlighted concerns that “blatant sexual harassment of women” and hazing were regularly accepted as just part of the culture. Those accused of discrimination, assault and other misconduct, were allowed to “escape accountability and instead resign, retire, or transfer,” the report found, with some offenders getting rehired by the Coast Guard in civil service positions even after being forced to retire or otherwise leave military service. “We are allowing potentially dangerous members back into society with no punishment,” stated one employee. Others said leaders brushed serious problems ‘under the rug,” and that “senior leaders care about themselves and their careers” instead of “the folks that work for them.”

    Authors of the report also noted a common concern among victims of misconduct, who said they believed coming forward would mean putting their careers on the line with little hope of their alleged perpetrators facing serious consequences. “Victims are ostracized, there is a stigma,” one person told interviewers. “No one believes them, no one helps them.”

    Even seeking mental health treatment could prove risky, they said, with one interviewee bringing up how the Coast Guard could “involuntarily discharge” employees diagnosed with a mental health condition in the wake of an assault or other traumatic experience on the job.

    Examples cited in the report reveal a culture in which service members faced pervasive assault, harassment, sexism, racism and other discrimination. In one case, multiple witnesses saw a supervisor striking a subordinate but nobody came forward to report it because of fear of retaliation.

    Improving the Coast Guard’s culture would in some cases require “fundamentally different approaches,” the report concluded. The Coast Guard said this week it had enacted or partially enacted 60 of 129 recommendations, including additional training and additional support services for victims. Nine more are in the works, according to the Coast Guard’s statement agency, and the it “found better ways to achieve the desired result” for 20 others.

    The original report had also recommended that a new review be conducted every four years, but that did not happen. The Coast Guard said other studies of the workforce culture have been conducted instead.

    Recent government data and records, meanwhile, show that dangerous and discriminatory behavior is still rarely punished at the agency.

    Almost half of female service members who reported a case of sexual harassment said the person they complained to took no action, according to a 2021 military survey. Nearly a third said they were punished for bringing up the harassment. Meanwhile, the vast majority of women who allegedly experienced “unwanted sexual contact” said they chose not to report it, often citing concerns about negative consequences or that the process wouldn’t be fair and that nothing would end up coming of their allegations.

    Instead, records show how employees found to have committed serious wrongdoing have escaped court martial proceedings or military discharge. As a result, alleged perpetrators avoided criminal records and their retirement benefits were not affected.

    A cadet at the Coast Guard Academy accused of sexual assault by two different classmates in the 2019-20 school year, for example, was kicked out of the academy but allowed to enlist in the Coast Guard to pay back the cost of the schooling he had received. Around the same time, a lieutenant commander was allowed to resign in lieu of going to trial for military crimes including sexual assault and drunk and disorderly conduct. Even when another officer was found guilty at a court martial of abusing his seniority to “obtain sexual favors with a subordinate,” he received only a letter of reprimand.

    The Coast Guard did not comment on concerns that problems remain at the agency, or the statistics or examples cited by CNN.

    The limited access to the Culture of Respect has been a topic of contention for years within the workforce and even Congress.

    Fagan was asked about the report last year by Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman in a list of questions submitted as part of Congressional testimony. She criticized the agency for not releasing it publicly, saying this was “limiting the workforce and the public’s visibility into the problems that were identified and the recommended solutions.”

    Watson Coleman also pushed Fagan, who took the helm of the Coast Guard in June of 2022, to commit to completing a new study and releasing it to the public this time, but Fagan did not directly answer the question – instead citing other recent studies.

    More recently, Fagan was asked about releasing the report while attending a faculty meeting at the Coast Guard Academy. She was there following the Fouled Anchor debacle, promising more transparency when a captain who taught at the school called upon her to release the Culture of Respect report, according to multiple people who attended the meeting.

    Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman questioned US Coast Guard Commandant Linda Fagan shortly after she became the first female head of the agency in June 2022.

    Retired Coast Guard Commander Kimberly Young-McLear, who is a Black lesbian woman, has been perhaps the most vocal in requesting that the report be released.

    Her efforts to get the report disseminated stem from her own complaints about “severe and pervasive bullying, harassing, and discriminating behavior” based on her race, gender, sexual orientation and advocacy for equal opportunity in the Coast Guard.

    After filing a whistleblower complaint in 2017, the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General found that she had indeed faced unlawful retaliation. Yet to this day, none of the accused service members from her case have faced any consequences. Young-McLear said she has never received a written apology from Coast Guard leaders despite requests from Congress, and that the years of harassment and lack of accountability have taken a significant mental toll on her.

    She said she learned about the existence of the Culture of Respect report while she worked at the Coast Guard’s academy and that she was able to read it when she attended a small summit discussing its findings in 2019. She was outraged when she saw that it exposed the same issues she had reported.

    “Had the Coast Guard actually taken the 2015 Culture of Respect report results seriously… then perhaps the years of bullying, harassment, intimidation, and retaliation I endured could have been prevented altogether,” Young-McLear said in Congressional testimony at 2021 hearing on diversity and accountability within the Coast Guard, questioning why the report still hadn’t been made public.

    In the last four years, Young-McLear said she has asked for the report to be released more than two dozen times, to various admirals and to the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Coast Guard. A handful of other academy employees have made similar pleas at faculty meetings with the school’s superintendent, she said. “We’ve been saying it until we’ve been blue in the face.”

    The Coast Guard’s secrecy and inaction, she says, speak to the very same issues the Culture of Respect report and other examinations have repeatedly raised and show that the agency has failed to hold itself to task in the same way perpetrators have been let off the hook.

    “If we don’t hold individuals and institutions accountable,” said Young-McLear, “it is providing a safe haven for abusers and allowing them to rise through the ranks.”

    Do you have information or a story to share about the Coast Guard past or present? Email melanie.hicken@cnn.com and Blake.Ellis@cnn.com.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Epic Games to lay off 16% of its workforce | CNN Business

    Epic Games to lay off 16% of its workforce | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Epic Games, the maker of Fortnite, said on Thursday that it will lay off 16% of its staff, around 830 employees, as it attempts to reverse what CEO Tim Sweeney called “unrealistic” spending.

    In a letter to employees Thursday, Sweeney said the video game company had been “spending way more money than we earn, investing in the next evolution of Epic.”

    “I had long been optimistic that we could power through this transition without layoffs, but in retrospect I see that this was unrealistic,” Sweeney said in the letter, which the company shared publicly. He added that Epic plans to divest from the online independent music platform Bandcamp, which it bought last year and which will now be acquired by the music marketplace firm Songtradr. Epic will also spin off most of its marketing division SuperAwesome into a standalone company.

    Epic’s layoffs are just the latest job cuts to hit the tech industry, which was forced to adjust after the stunning growth many companies saw during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic began to slow. Meta, Microsoft, T-Mobile, Lyft and others have all reduced their workforces earlier this year. More recently, Google parent Alphabet made its second round of layoffs of the year, eliminating several hundred recruiting jobs in September after having cut 12,000 employees in January.

    About two-thirds of Epic’s Thursday layoffs will impact employees outside the company’s “core development” teams, Sweeney said. Some laid off workers announced on LinkedIn that they had been affected, including employees working in user experience for Fortnite, production, employee engagement and recruitment.

    Laid off employees will receive a severance offer that includes six months of base pay, accelerated stock vesting and other benefits, according to Sweeney.

    “We’re cutting costs without breaking development or our core lines of businesses so we can continue to focus on our ambitious plans,” Sweeney said. “Some of our products and initiatives will land on schedule, and some may not ship when planned because they are under-resourced for the time being. We’re ok with the schedule tradeoff if it means holding on to our ability to achieve our goals.”

    The Epic layoffs also come amid the latest escalation in a protracted legal battle between the video game company and tech giant Apple. Following a yearslong back-and-forth over an antitrust lawsuit brought by Epic over Apple’s App Store payment practices, both companies have asked the US Supreme Court to review a lower court ruling in the case.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • X is ‘close to breakeven’ says CEO Linda Yaccarino | CNN Business

    X is ‘close to breakeven’ says CEO Linda Yaccarino | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    X CEO Linda Yaccarino, leader of the platform formerly known as Twitter, said the company is keeping an eye on new competitor Threads, despite the sharply slowing growth of the rival app from Meta.

    “Threads did jump in with a ton of hype and a launch pad from their Instagram users … [but] it’s dropped off dramatically,” Yaccarino told CNBC Thursday in her first interview as CEO of the company now called X.

    “But you can never, ever take your eye off any competition because they’ll continue iterating and as much as the launch has stalled, we’re keeping an eye on everything that they’re doing.”

    Still, Yaccarino said X remains largely focused on its own future as the company chases profitability, and that Threads may be looking at its past.

    “What we can see is that [Threads] may be building to what Twitter was — enter rebrand, enter X — and we’re focused on what X will be, and it’s an entirely different roadmap and vision,” she said.

    Staving off competition from Meta’s Threads and other rival platforms is just one of the things Yaccarino is now tasked with after taking over from owner Elon Musk as X’s CEO in June. In just her first two months, the company underwent a massive rebrand from Twitter to X in hopes of transforming into an “everything app” similar to China’s WeChat, and has continued to warn of challenges reviving its core advertising business. Musk, who is now the company’s chief technology officer, has also been preparing for a cage fight with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

    Yaccarino joined the company after months of turmoil caused by Musk’s takeover, including mass layoffs, controversial policy decisions and various legal battles.

    But on Thursday, she doubled down on the company’s vision and explained why it retired its highly recognized brand name.

    “The rebrand really represented a liberation from Twitter, a liberation that allows us to evolve past a legacy mindset and to reimagine how everyone … around the world is going to change how we congregate, how we transact, all in one place,” Yaccarino said, adding that users would soon be able to make video calls and payments through the platform.

    “It’s developing into this global town square that is fueled by free expression, where the public gathers in real time,” she said.

    Yaccarino said that the company is returning to growth mode after months of slashing costs through ongoing layoffs, infrastructure and office space reductions and, in some cases, allegedly holding back on paying its bills and employee severance. Twitter’s staff has shrunk from nearly 8,000 employees to just around 1,500 workers since Musk’s takeover, Yaccarino said.

    “Are we hiring? Yes,” Yaccarino said. “I get to come in and shift from this cost discipline to growth … the future is bright.”

    Threatening to stand in the way of that evolution are the company’s very real business challenges. Musk last month disclosed in a post that, due to a 50% drop in advertising revenue and a “heavy debt load,” the platform is still losing money. After Musk bought Twitter for $44 billion last October, the company’s value now stands around $15 billion, according to a May disclosure from a Fidelity fund.

    Yaccarino, a former marketing executive with NBCUniversal, was brought on to Twitter in part to help revive its advertising business. And she said on Thursday that the company is “close to breakeven.”

    “Coca Cola, Visa, State Farm is a huge partner, they’re coming back — the last bunch of weeks, continued revenue growth,” Yaccarino said.

    But maintaining the ad business has been an uphill battle for the site since Musk’s takeover. Hordes of advertisers halted spending on the platform over concerns about content moderation, mass layoffs and general uncertainty about the company’s future. Musk has also defended his own controversial tweets, telling CNBC in May, “I’ll say what I want, and if the consequence of that is losing money, so be it.”

    Yaccarino pointed to the company’s “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” policy that aims to limit the reach of so-called lawful but awful content on the platform and to protect brands from having their ads appear alongside such content. X on Tuesday rolled out additional brand safety controls for advertisers, including the ability to avoid having their ads show next to “targeted hate speech, sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, drugs.”

    “I wrap my security blanket around you, my brand and my CMO, and say your ads will only air next to content that is appropriate for you,” Yaccarino said Thursday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Watchdog agency increases its pandemic unemployment benefits fraud estimate to as much as $135 billion | CNN Politics

    Watchdog agency increases its pandemic unemployment benefits fraud estimate to as much as $135 billion | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    As much as $135 billion in fraudulent Covid-19 pandemic unemployment insurance claims were likely paid out, according to a report released Tuesday by the US Government Accountability Office.

    The whopping figure, which equates to as much as 15% of total unemployment benefits distributed during the pandemic, is a notable bump up from the $60 billion the watchdog agency had previously estimated in January.

    In comments on a draft of the GAO report, the Department of Labor said the office is likely overestimating the actual amount of fraud. However, the department’s Office of Inspector General in February said in testimony before a House committee that at least $191 billion in pandemic unemployment benefits payments could have been improper, with “a significant portion attributable to fraud.”

    The GAO pushed back on the department’s assertions in its report and stood by the methodology used.

    “Given that not all potential fraud will be investigated and adjudicated through judicial or other systems, the full extent of UI fraud during the pandemic will likely never be known with certainty,” the GAO report said. “Therefore, it is appropriate to rely on estimates, such as ours, to make more comprehensive conclusions about the extent of fraud in the UI programs during the pandemic.”

    The findings released on Tuesday shed light on the numerous schemes to steal money from a range of hastily implemented pandemic relief programs, which have drawn the attention of congressional lawmakers and prompted legislative action. Last year, President Joe Biden signed two bipartisan bills into law aimed at holding individuals who commit fraud under pandemic relief programs accountable.

    “My message to those cheats out there is this: You can’t hide. We’re going to find you. We’re going to make you pay back what you stole and hold you accountable under the law,” the president said at the time.

    The House of Representatives also passed a bill in May that would help recover fraudulent unemployment insurance benefits paid out during the pandemic. The bill, however, has not been brought to a vote in the Senate.

    Fraud within the nation’s unemployment system skyrocketed after Congress enacted a historic expansion of the program in March 2020. State unemployment agencies were overwhelmed with record numbers of claims and relaxed some requirements in an effort to get the money out the door quickly to those who had lost their jobs.

    But the enhanced payments and lax controls quickly attracted criminals from around the world. States and Congress subsequently tightened their verification requirements in an attempt to combat the fraud, particularly in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program, which allowed freelancers, gig workers and others to collect benefits for the first time.

    More than $888 billion in federal and state unemployment benefits were paid from the end of March 2020 through early September 2021, when all the pandemic enhancements ended nationwide, according to the Labor Department Office of Inspector General.

    The GAO report said the “unprecedented demand for benefits and need to quickly implement the new programs increased the risk of fraud.”

    Other pandemic relief programs were also the target of criminals. The GAO in May flagged 3.7 million recipients of Small Business Administration funds as having “warning signs consistent with potential fraud.” The SBA doled out $1 trillion to help small businesses during the pandemic through measures including the Paycheck Protection Program and Covid-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan program. More than 10 million small businesses were assisted.

    Some of the fraudulent claims have been recouped. States identified $5.3 billion in fraudulent unemployment benefits overpayments and has recovered $1.2 billion, according to the GAO.

    A Justice Department spokesperson told CNN on Tuesday that as of August 30, the department has charged more than 3,000 people for pandemic related fraud.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Going to food banks. Canceling after-school activities. How federal workers will manage a government shutdown | CNN Politics

    Going to food banks. Canceling after-school activities. How federal workers will manage a government shutdown | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The last time the federal government shut down five years ago, Jesse Santiago found himself standing in line at his local food bank, rationing medication and falling behind on his mortgage payments, which ultimately cost him his home.

    Santiago, who has worked as a Transportation Security Administration officer at Houston’s airport since 2002, likes his job and takes pride in keeping Americans safe when they fly. But he’s outraged that Congress once again is on the brink of letting the federal government shut down, throwing him and his fellow federal workers into financial and emotional chaos.

    “Imagine serving the American people only to have to beg for food,” said Santiago, who lives with his husband in Cleveland, Texas, and has started stocking up on canned beans and other nonperishable food in case this impasse drags out. “I refuse to stand in food lines again while working for the federal government.”

    Santiago is among several million federal employees who will stop being paid if lawmakers cannot agree on funding the federal agencies by the start of the coming fiscal year on October 1. Some, like Santiago, are considered essential workers and have to go to work regardless. Others will be furloughed until Congress passes a spending package, which took more than a month during the 2018-19 shutdown.

    Hundreds of people wrote to CNN to express their views about the looming shutdown. Several said they were concerned about taking trips to national parks, including a bride-to-be who is holding her wedding at one in mid-October, while many senior citizens said they were terrified they wouldn’t get their monthly Social Security checks. (In fact, Social Security payments continue during shutdowns.)

    Some charitable organizations are already offering to help federal workers get through their payless period. Earlier this week, chef Jose Andres said his World Central Kitchen restaurants in Washington, DC, would provide food to federal employees during a shutdown, as they did during the previous impasse.

    Among the hardest hit by government shutdowns are federal employees, who won’t get paid until Congress funds their agencies, and federal contractors, who don’t receive back pay. Many wrote of the toll the last shutdown – the longest on record – took on them and their concerns that they and their families will likely have to go through this again.

    For Carrie Martin, who works in the finance department of the National Institutes of Health, potentially losing her paycheck comes at a tough time. Not only is she shelling out more for groceries, rent and other essentials because of inflation, but she’ll have to start making student loan payments of a little more than $700 a month in October.

    “Not knowing when I will get my next paycheck is very stressful considering I am living paycheck to paycheck,” said Martin, who earned a master’s in health administration degree from George Washington University this spring. “Adding student loans back into my bills is making it 10 times worse.”

    Plus, she said it’s difficult to work under such uncertain conditions. She and her colleagues have been putting in extra hours preparing for the end of the current fiscal year and the start of the next one.

    “Preparing for something that may not happen takes a lot of energy out of you,” said Martin, who is also still adjusting to living on one income after her wife passed away last year.

    Other federal workers are already planning to cut back their spending.

    Nicole, a federal law enforcement officer in southern Missouri, said she won’t be able to throw a party for her 6-year-old son whose birthday is in early October. She had hoped to invite a dozen or so children since he just entered kindergarten and is starting to make friends. Instead, her son will just have cake and presents at home with his parents, grandparents and younger brother.

    “I’ll probably feel more sad than he will,” said Nicole, who did not want her last name used because of the nature of her job. “I don’t want to tap into my savings and not pay my bills.”

    Even though her husband will continue to be paid since he works in the restaurant industry, Nicole said the family will have to make sacrifices, including not signing up her older son for after-school activities, such as basketball and painting. And they’ll skip going to fall festivals in their area.

    During the last shutdown, they bought fewer groceries, reduced their cable plan and paid a decent amount of late fees on bills. Plus, they had to take out a loan from their local credit union, though at least they didn’t have to pay interest on it.

    “That was probably one of the worst things we’ve been through,” said Nicole, who still has to report to work during a shutdown.

    The stress from the 2013 impasse prompted Rob, who was a federal police officer in Washington, DC, at the time, to leave federal service. He had to work long shifts without knowing when he’d see his next paycheck.

    A decade later, Rob decided to return to the federal workforce so he could get a better-paying job than the one he has working security at a local retailer. He is currently behind on his rent and car payments and depends on food stamps to feed his family, including his 4-year-old daughter.

    Just last week, he accepted a position as a police officer at a Veterans Health Administration hospital with a tentative start date of November 5. But if the government shuts down, he fears his paperwork and medical reviews will be delayed so he’ll have to wait longer to begin the job he desperately needs.

    “This was a light at the end of the tunnel for us,” said Rob, who now lives outside of Boston and did not want his last name used for fear of losing his job offer. “I just want to work. I just want to serve my country, do my job.”

    Many federal contractors, meanwhile, are gearing up to give up their paychecks completely until Congress resolves the impasse.

    Theresa Springer of Pittsburgh is a senior consultant for a small management consulting firm that works with various federal agencies. During the last shutdown, she and her coworkers were able to take paid time off, so her income didn’t suffer even though it cost her employer hundreds of thousands of dollars. The company is making the same offer again this year, giving her around two weeks of breathing room before she stops being paid.

    Though Springer said she has the savings to get her through, she will have to watch her spending and may have to delay some purchases if there is a shutdown. Regardless, she’s irritated at lawmakers’ inability to govern and thinks they should forgo their paychecks.

    “My emergency fund is for emergencies, not for the federal government not being able to get their act together,” she said.

    The situation is also tough for small businesses that depend on federal employees, like Sue Doyle’s Home Sweet Home Cleaning Services in Columbia, Maryland. Between 10% and 20% of her clients work for the government, and many cancel their appointments during shutdowns.

    During shutdowns, Sue Doyle temporarily loses many of her clients who work for the federal government.

    Not only does that hurt her income, it cuts into the earnings of her seven employees. Doyle tries not to lay anyone off, opting instead to reduce all of their schedules. While most understand, they are frustrated because they also have bills to pay, she said.

    “A shutdown has a trickle-down consequence,” said Doyle, who is already talking to a bank about a business loan so she can cover her expenses during the impasse. “Hopefully, my employees won’t have more than one day off a week.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lyft and Uber say they will leave Minneapolis if the mayor signs a minimum wage bill for drivers | CNN Business

    Lyft and Uber say they will leave Minneapolis if the mayor signs a minimum wage bill for drivers | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Lyft and Uber threatened to stop doing business in Minneapolis after the city council adopted a new rule Thursday that would set a minimum wage for rideshare drivers.

    In a 7-5 vote, the Minneapolis City Council passed an ordinance that includes a number of rideshare worker protections, including a minimum wage for Uber and Lyft drivers. Mayor Jacob Frey has the opportunity to veto the ordinance and has until next Wednesday, August 23, to do so.

    The proposed ordinance mandates at least $1.40 per mile and $0.51 per minute within Minneapolis be paid to drivers. Minneapolis is debating the minimum wage as gig workers across the country are advocating for fair wages and job benefits. In recent years, states and cities have attempted to pass legislation regarding the growing “gig economy,” or freelance work through apps like Uber and Grubhub, but have generally met with fierce opposition.

    On Tuesday, Lyft sent a letter to the council saying “Should this proposal become law, Lyft will be forced to cease operations in the City of Minneapolis on its effective date of January 1, 2024.”

    Lyft, according to a statement sent to CNN Thursday, said the bill would be detrimental to drivers, who would ultimately earn less, “because prices could double and only the most wealthy could still afford a ride.”

    The company said the bill had been “jammed through the Council” and urged Frey to veto the bill and instead allow time for the state’s rideshare task force to complete its research.

    Uber sent an email to its drivers on Monday, urging them to contact the Mayor and City Council to ask them to oppose the move. Uber said its drivers sent over 700 emails on Thursday, but did not specify what was in those emails.

    In its email, Uber said the legislation could “greatly limit” its ability to remove unsafe drivers from the platform and increase the cost of rides.

    “If this bill were to pass, we would unfortunately have no choice but to greatly reduce service, and possibly shut down operations entirely,” Uber wrote.

    In an email to City Council on Wednesday, Frey said he was concerned about the ordinance.

    “This ordinance stands to significantly impact our city in terms of worker protections, public safety, disability rights, and transportation mode shift goals,” he said. After meeting with a broad group of stakeholders, Frey said “It is clear that we must allow more time for deliberation.”

    After the ordinance passed on Thursday, Ally Peters, spokesperson for the Office of Mayor Frey told CNN via email, “As the mayor laid out in his letter to the City Council yesterday, he supports drivers being paid more.

    In recent years, states have attempted to pass legislation regarding the growing “gig economy,” or freelance work through apps like Uber and Grubhub.

    In 2020, California passed Prop. 22, backed by more than $200 million from the most influential gig economy companies. The controversial ballot measure allows the companies to treat drivers as independent contractors rather as employees. Though it was a major win for the likes of Uber and Lyft, it did include a minimum earnings guarantee (though it doesn’t include the time a driver spends waiting for a gig).

    In June, New York City announced a new minimum pay-rate for app food delivery workers amid the rise in use of services like Uber Eats and DoorDash since the pandemic. Uber and other food delivery apps sued the city in July, maintaining that the law would hurt delivery workers more than help them.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Who is Laphonza Butler, California’s next senator? | CNN Politics

    Who is Laphonza Butler, California’s next senator? | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Laphonza Butler, the woman selected by California Gov. Gavin Newsom to succeed the late Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, is a longtime union leader and abortion rights advocate, who also will be the first out Black lesbian to enter Congress.

    The appointment fulfills Newsom’s pledge to appoint a Black woman who had not announced plans to run for the seat, and in Butler, he picked someone with deep ties to several critical Democratic constituencies in the Golden State.

    Butler will also be the sole Black woman serving in the Senate and only the third in US history. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Monday the incoming senator would be sworn in this week.

    “I am humbled by the Governor’s trust,” Butler said in a statement Monday. “Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s leadership and legacy are immeasurable. I will do my best to honor her by devoting my time and energy to serving the people of California and the people of this great nation.”

    Butler previously made history in 2021 by becoming the first woman of color to lead EMILY’s List, an organization dedicated to electing Democratic women who support abortion rights.

    In the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election, Butler worked at SCRB Strategies – a California-based political strategy firm now known as Bearstar Strategies – where she served as a senior adviser on then-Sen. Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, according to EMILY’s List. She also served as an adviser on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, according to Butler’s LinkedIn page.

    Butler previously held multiple roles at the Service Employees International Union, most recently serving as president of SEIU Local 2015 for nearly a decade. SEIU Local 2015 represents California’s long-term care workers and is the largest labor union in the state, the governor’s office said. Prior to joining EMILY’s List, Butler was a director at Airbnb.

    Butler, who has a long history working in California politics, moved to Maryland in 2021 around the time she was chosen to lead EMILY’s List, public records show. She was registered to vote in Maryland in 2022, according to public records.

    Responding to questions about Butler’s residency, Newsom’s office said Monday she had re-registered to vote in California ahead of her Senate appointment.

    EMILY’s List board chair Rebecca Haile called Butler “a groundbreaking leader who has done terrific work” over her two years leading the group.

    “EMILYs List was created to get more Democratic pro-choice women in government and I am thrilled to see my friend put that into action by taking on this role,” Haile said in a statement.

    Butler, a Mississippi native, attended Jackson State University, according to EMILY’s List. She has served as a member of the University of California Board of Regents and as a board member of the National Children’s Defense Fund. She and her wife, Neneki, have a daughter, Nylah, Newsom’s office said.

    Newsom was under intense pressure within California to choose a Black woman to succeed Harris when she was elected to the vice presidency. He instead appointed Alex Padilla, then California’s secretary of state, who became the first Latino senator from the state.

    This year, many – including members of the Congressional Black Caucus – had urged Newsom to appoint Rep. Barbara Lee in case Feinstein’s seat became vacant. Lee filed to run for the seat after Feinstein announced earlier this year that she would not seek reelection in 2024, but Newsom said last month he would not appoint any of the candidates currently seeking the office. His office said Monday there were no conditions placed on Butler’s appointment and any decision to seek a full term next year would be her own.

    Newsom has described Butler as “an advocate for women and girls, a second-generation fighter for working people, and a trusted adviser to Vice President Harris,” who will “carry the baton left by Senator Feinstein.”

    “As we mourn the enormous loss of Senator Feinstein, the very freedoms she fought for – reproductive freedom, equal protection, and safety from gun violence – have never been under greater assault,” Newsom said in his announcement. “Laphonza will carry the baton left by Senator Feinstein, continue to break glass ceilings, and fight for all Californians in Washington D.C.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Biden makes false claims about the debt and deficit in jobs speech | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Biden makes false claims about the debt and deficit in jobs speech | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    During a Friday speech about the September jobs report, President Joe Biden delivered a rapid-fire series of three false or misleading claims – falsely saying that he has cut the debt, falsely crediting a tax policy that didn’t take effect until 2023 for improving the budget situation in 2021 and 2022, and misleadingly saying that he has presided over an “actual surplus.”

    At a separate moment of the speech, Biden used outdated figures to boast of setting record lows in the unemployment rates for African Americans, Hispanics and people with disabilities. While the rates for these three groups hit record lows earlier in his presidency, he didn’t acknowledge that they have all since increased to non-record levels – and, in fact, are now higher than they were during parts of Donald Trump’s presidency.

    Here’s a fact check.

    Biden said in the Friday speech that Republicans want to “cut taxes for the very wealthy and big corporations,” which would add to the deficit. That’s fair game.

    But then he added: “I was able to cut the federal debt by $1.7 trillion over the first two-and-a – two years. Well remember what we talked about. Those 50 corporations that made $40 billion, weren’t paying a penny in taxes? Well guess what – we made them pay 30%. Uh, 15% in taxes – 15%. Nowhere near what they should pay. And guess what? We were able to pay for everything, and we end up with an actual surplus.”

    Facts First: Biden’s claims were thoroughly inaccurate. First, he has not cut the federal debt, which has increased by more than $5.7 trillion during his presidency so far after rising about $7.8 trillion during Trump’s full four-year tenure; it is the budget deficit (the one-year difference between spending and revenues), not the national debt (the accumulation of federal borrowing plus interest owed), that fell by $1.7 trillion over his first two fiscal years in office. Second, Biden’s 15% corporate minimum tax on certain large profitable corporations did not take effect until the first day of 2023, so it could not possibly have been responsible for the deficit reduction in fiscal 2021 and 2022. Third, there is no “actual surplus”; the federal government continues to run a budget deficit well over $1 trillion.

    CNN has previously debunked Biden’s false claims about supposedly having cut the “debt” and about the new corporate minimum tax supposedly being responsible for deficit reduction in 2021 and 2022. The White House, which declined to comment on the record for this article, has corrected previous official transcripts when Biden has claimed that the debt fell by $1.7 trillion, acknowledging that he should have said deficit.

    As for Biden’s vague additional claim that “we end up with an actual surplus,” a White House official said Friday that the president was referring to how the particular law in which the new minimum tax was contained, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, is projected to reduce the deficit. But Biden did not explain this unusual-at-best use of “surplus” – and since he had just been talking about the overall budget picture, he certainly made it sound like he was claiming to have presided over a surplus in the overall budget. He has not done so.

    Matthew Gardner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a liberal think tank, said in response to the White House explanation: “Well he didn’t say ‘budget surplus’ I suppose. But in federal budget conversations, the word surplus has a very specific meaning. It doesn’t mean ‘additional,’ it means revenues exceed spending.” He noted earlier Friday that there hasn’t been a federal budget surplus since 2001.

    It’s worth noting, as we have before, that Biden’s Friday comments would be missing key context even if he had not inaccurately replaced the word “deficit” with “debt.” It’s highly questionable how much credit Biden himself deserves for the decline in the deficit in 2021 and 2022. Independent analysts say it occurred largely because emergency Covid-19 relief spending from fiscal 2020 expired as scheduled – and that Biden’s own new laws and executive actions have significantly added to current and projected future deficits. In addition, the 2023 deficit is widely expected to be higher than the 2022 deficit.

    More on the corporate minimum tax

    When Biden spoke Friday about “those 50 corporations that made $40 billion, weren’t paying a penny in taxes,” he was referring, as he has in the past, to an Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy analysis published in 2021 that listed 55 companies the think tank found had paid no federal corporate income taxes in their most recent fiscal year.

    But it was imprecise, at best, for Biden to say Friday that we made “them” pay 15% in taxes. That’s because the new 15% minimum tax applies only to companies that have an average annual financial statement income of $1 billion or more – there are lots of nuances involved; you can read more details here – and only 14 of the 55 companies on the think tank’s list reported having US pre-tax income of at least $1 billion. In other words, some large and profitable companies will not be hit with the tax.

    The federal government’s nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation projected last year that the tax would shrink deficits by about $222 billion through 2031, with positive impacts beginning in 2023. Gardner said Friday that he fully expects the tax to play a role in reducing deficits going forward, but he said its deficit-reducing impact “might be lower than expected” in 2023 because the Treasury Department – which has been the subject of intense lobbying from corporations that could be affected – has taken so long to implement the details of the law that the Internal Revenue Service ended up waiving penalties on companies that don’t make estimated tax payments on it this year.

    Regardless, Gardner said, “The minimum tax did not reduce the deficit at all in fiscal years 2021 or 2022 because it didn’t exist during those years.”

    Early in the Friday speech, Biden boasted of statistics from the September jobs report that was released earlier in the day. But then he said, “We’ve achieved a 70-year low in unemployment rate for women, record lows in unemployment for African Americans and Hispanic workers, and people with disabilities – folks who’ve been left behind in previous recoveries and left behind for too long.”

    Facts First: Three of these four Biden unemployment boasts are misleading because they are out of date. Only his claim about a 70-year low for women’s unemployment remains current. While the unemployment rates for African Americans, Hispanics and people with disabilities did fall to record lows earlier in Biden’s presidency, they have since increased – to rates higher than the rates during various periods of the Trump administration.

    Women: The seasonally adjusted women’s unemployment rate was 3.4% in September. That’s a tick upward from the 3.3% rate during two previous months of 2023, but it’s still tied – with two months of the Trump administration – for the lowest for this group since 1953, 70 years ago.

    African Americans: The seasonally adjusted Black or African American unemployment rate was 5.7% in September, up from the record low of 4.7% in April. The current 5.7% rate is higher than this group’s rates during four months of 2019, under Trump.

    Hispanics: The seasonally adjusted Hispanic unemployment rate was 4.6% in September, up from the record low of 3.9% from September 2022. The current 4.6% rate is higher than this group’s rates for every month from April 2019 through February 2020 under Trump, plus a smattering of prior Trump-era months.

    People with disabilities: The unemployment rate for people with disabilities, ages 16 and up, was 7.3% in September, up from a record low of 5.0% in December 2022. (The figures only go back to 2008, so the record was for a period of less than two decades.) The current 7.3% rate is higher than this group’s rates during eight months of the Trump presidency, seven of them in 2019.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Google is laying off hundreds in its recruitment division | CNN Business

    Google is laying off hundreds in its recruitment division | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Google confirmed it will lay off hundreds of staff members who helped recruit and hire employees, as Silicon Valley continues its cost-cutting efforts.

    The latest cuts come after Google parent Alphabet in January eliminated 12,000 jobs, or about 6% of its workforce, across the company as it grappled with economic uncertainty that hit the company’s bottom line last year, especially its core advertising business.

    During Google’s July earnings call, CEO Sundar Pichai said the company was continuing to slow its “expense growth and pace of hiring.”

    “We continue to invest in top engineering and technical talent while also meaningfully slowing the pace of our overall hiring,” Google spokesperson Courtenay Mencini said in a statement Wednesday, adding that the workload for recruiters has declined as hiring slows. “To ensure we operate efficiently, we’ve made the hard decision to reduce the size of our recruiting team.”

    The layoffs were earlier reported by Semafor and CNBC.

    The cuts will affect a few hundred members of Google’s recruiting organization globally; most of the team will remain and continue hiring for critical roles such as top engineering talent, according to Google. The company did not specify the exact number of layoffs in the department.

    Google also said the recruiting cuts are not part of any wider layoffs, and that affected employees will be supported with severance offers and other benefits.

    Some Google recruiters for the company’s cloud, user experience, software engineering and other teams posted on LinkedIn, noting they had been affected by the layoffs.

    “My heart is heavy for everyone that was impacted alongside me, and I know better days are ahead for all of us as much as today doesn’t feel like it,” one affected Google recruiter wrote.

    Alphabet grew its workforce by more than 50,000 employees starting in 2021 as booming demand for its services during the pandemic boosted profits. But last year, the company’s core digital ad business slowed as fears of an economic downturn or a recession caused advertisers to pull back their spending.

    This year, the company has emphasized its efforts to cut costs as it works to stabilize its business. Google in July said its profits had grown nearly 15% year-over-year in the quarter ended in June, as the company’s Search and YouTube ads businesses continued to recover.

    As of the end of 2022, Alphabet had 190,234 employees, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. By the end of June, its headcount had fallen to 181,798, according to its most recent filing.

    A wide range of other tech companies also made major layoffs this year as they attempt to cut costs amid economic challenges, including Meta, Microsoft and, more recently, T-Mobile.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Stellantis to put second battery plant in town where EVs threaten current jobs | CNN Business

    Stellantis to put second battery plant in town where EVs threaten current jobs | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Stellantis and Samsung plan to build a second EV battery plant in Kokomo, Indiana, a town where many current Stellantis workers see such plants as a threat to their current jobs.

    EV battery plants are a critical part of the plans of traditional automakers to transition from gasoline-powered cars to electric vehicles in coming decades. But they could be a threat to existing jobs building engines and transmissions, which are not needed in an EV. Stellantis has four plants in Kokomo alone building engines and transmissions, employing more than 5,000 hourly workers between them.

    Stellantis, which builds cars under the Jeep, Ram, Dodge and Chrysler brands, along with unionized rivals General Motors and Ford, are now in the fourth week of a strike by the United Auto Workers union, and the future of jobs building EVs are a central issue in the strike.

    While the four Kokomo plants are not on strike, the union is on strike at Stellantis’ assembly complex in Toledo, Ohio, as well as at 20 parts and distribution centers spread across 14 states.

    All the automakers are in the process of building EV battery plants, and all of them are using joint ventures with battery manufacturers such as Samsung to build and run the plants. They have all insisted that will make the employees of the plants employees of the joint ventures, not the automakers themselves. And the pay at US EV battery plants that have opened so far is a fraction of what UAW members get when working for the automakers.

    UAW President Shawn Fain announced Friday that GM had agreed to a key union demand that employees at its EV battery plants will be part of the company’s national master labor agreement with the UAW. GM has not confirmed that agreement, and details of how much those workers would be paid and if they’ll be considered GM employees or covered in the agreement as employees of separate companies is not yet known.

    But Fain hailed that agreement as a major win for the union and said it would now press Ford and Stellantis to agree to similar terms if they want to end the strike.

    Samsung and Stellantis announced plans for its latest battery plant in the wake of that announcement.

    The two companies announced Wednesday that they are investing more than $3.2 billion to build the new plant, which will open in early 2027 and have an annual capacity of 34 gigawatt hours. Its opening will bring about 1,400 new jobs to Kokomo, located an hour north of Indianapolis.

    StarPlus Energy, the joint venture formed by Samsung and Stellantis, previously chose Kokomo for its first gigafactory that’s currently under construction and scheduled to open in 2025.

    In total, the two factories will produce 67 gigawatt hours annually. “Indiana’s economy is on a roll,” said Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb in a press release, adding that the second plant means the companies are doubling their capital investment and the amount of new jobs being created.

    The factories will help Stellantis meet its goal for battery electric passenger cars to make up 100% of its sales in Europe, and 50% of its sales in the US, by 2030. Stellantis announced in 2021 an “aggressive” investment of $35 billion for electric vehicle production and needs 400 gigawatt hours annually to meet its 2030 goal.

    Stellantis was created in 2021 through the merger of Fiat Chrysler and PSA Group, maker of Peugeot, Citroën, Opel and Vauxhall cars in Europe. Shares rose nearly 2% in premarket trading.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Call to arms: Thousands of Revolutionary War stories are waiting to be told. A new project asks the public to help uncover them | CNN

    Call to arms: Thousands of Revolutionary War stories are waiting to be told. A new project asks the public to help uncover them | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The National Park Service and US National Archives and Records Administration are calling on Americans to help reveal the untold stories of the United States’ first veterans to commemorate the upcoming 250th anniversary of American independence.

    The Revolutionary War Pension Files Transcription Project aims to transcribe approximately 2.3 million original documents that correspond with more than 83,000 individual soldiers. The information spans 150 years, from wartime records to 20th century inquiries made by veterans’ descendants.

    The goal of the project is to unearth personal stories from the battlefield and home front, using information included in federal pension applications from Revolutionary War veterans and their widows, according to the National Park Service. And they need the public’s help to do it.

    “We’re asking the public in the next three years, as we lead up to the 250th anniversary of the United States, to help us transcribe the pension files to be able to unlock these stories of our first veterans,” Suzanne Isaacs, community manager for the National Archives Catalog, said.

    While the Continental Army issued signed discharge papers, veterans who served in the militia had to give oral testimonies and provide witnesses to corroborate their stories. As a result, thousands of court records have yet to be digitally transcribed in the National Archives Catalog.

    These verbal attestations were an opportunity for veterans to tell their stories in vivid detail. When pension acts were put in place in the early 19th century, many veterans were elderly and illiterate, so they gave detailed accounts in hopes of recording their life stories.

    However, relying on oral testimonies also allowed for embellished tales that were difficult to disprove.

    For example, William Shoemaker testified that he spent 18 months as a prisoner of war to receive pension pay. Historian Todd Braisted discovered, more than two centuries later, that Shoemaker joined a loyalist unit and was captive for only two months.

    When requirements for pension pay loosened in the 1830s, widows who were married before the conclusion of the war became eligible to apply. To receive funds, widows had to give oral testimonies about their husbands’ service and provide proof of their marriage.

    That means the National Archives files also include documents such as marriage licenses, wartime letters and soldiers’ diaries.

    Judith Lines applied for widow’s pension in 1837 using one of the rarest kinds of documents – a correspondence from her husband written during his service under Gen. George Washington. John Lines’ 1781 note is the only known preserved letter penned by a Black Continental soldier.

    With the help of volunteer archivists, these rare, firsthand stories from the Revolutionary War will be more accessible to the public and archived in the National Archives. Volunteers can register for a free account with the National Archives Catalog. No prior experience is required.

    “This project is a way to help make accessible the records of our first veterans, the veterans of the Revolutionary War,” Isaacs said.

    The veterans and their families might never have imagined that their accounts of the war and its effects on their lives could be so readily available to the nation. The documents included in this project offer a personal perspective that, before now, was largely unknown.

    [ad_2]

    Source link