By Michelle Chen

– Back in the days before modern feminism, a young woman looking for work might typically be advised, politely, to “learn a trade,” with the implication that she wasn’t bound for college or an elite career, but a humbler job as, say, a secretary or seamstress. Such a phrase might sound condescending today. Yet working in a trade might still be sound career goal for a woman, if she gets the right kind of job—in a union.

According to a new paper on women and unionization by progressive think tank the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), “Even after controlling for factors such as age, race, industry, educational attainment and state of residence, the data show a substantial boost in pay and benefits for female workers in unions relative to their non-union counterparts. The effect is particularly strong for women with lower levels of formal education.”

In other words, all other things being equal, unions are good for working women, yielding higher wages and better job benefits. Specifically, “unionized women workers on average make 12.9 percent more than their non-union counterparts, are 36.8 percent more likely to have employer-provided health insurance and 53.4 percent more likely to have participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan.”

Of course, unions are good for men, too. Across the unionized workforce—which includes higher-paying, male-dominated sectors like construction—men actually see a bigger wage boost from union membership than women do. But for women, who still face a gendered pay gap, the gains that unions provide can be critical. CEPR notes, “All else equal, being in a union raises a woman’s pay as much as a full year of college does.”

The study concludes, “Considering the great boost to pay and benefits that unions bring, it’s important that anyone who cares about the well-being of women workers also care about unions.”

Even though it materially enhances many aspects of their working lives, the value of union membership for women tends to get overlooked. Media narratives and neoliberal feminist advice tracts like Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In tend to stress higher education, networking and climbing the corporate ladder as ways for women to get ahead. But the report’s findings suggest that “good union work”—an idea that’s culturally more associated with rough-hewn longshoremen than single moms—may be an overlooked path to social advancement for women.

This doesn’t mean young women should ditch their textbooks and put on a hard hat. Contrary to stereotypes, unions and professional careers that require an education go hand in hand. Public sector professions with high concentrations of women, such as teachers, have strong rates of unionization—which is part of the reason women’s share of the union workforce has grown since the 1980s, despite a decline in the overall unionization rate.

According to CEPR, the union advantage helps even professionals with college degrees, such as teachers and nurses. Among women with bachelor’s and post-graduate degrees, union wages are about 13 and 10 percent more than their non-union counterparts, respectively.

Still, the biggest boost, nearly 15 percent, is for those with just a high school-level education. And the fact is that not every young woman will go to college. National Public Radio recently reported that in a national poll, 40 percent of parents expressed concern that students who are not college-bound are not adequately prepared “to enter the job market when they leave school.” For parents of girls, the rate of concern was even higher, about 50 percent. For women who don’t go to college, out of choice or necessity, getting a union job can dramatically change their long-term prospects in a precarious and sharply unequal economic landscape.

Clearly, all students should be able to pursue whatever path they desire, whether it’s a college degree or jumping straight into the job market from high school. But for those who are off the college track, especially girls, a union track may be their best, and perhaps only, hope for a sustainable career. And even those who do go to college may not find a “high skill” professional job right after graduation—just ask the ever-growing surplus army of unpaid interns across the country.

And here’s where modern feminism and labor and the struggles of working-class communities converge. For the girl who is shut out of the corporate bourgeois have-it-all vision of the Lean In class of women, a different kind of feminism is needed. The labor movement and the feminist movement are more closely entwined than you’d think from looking at the mainstream models of female empowerment, which feature power suits, MBAs and ruthless individualism, not collective bargaining, picket lines and organizing drives. Faced with evidence that good union jobs in skilled trades can greatly improve the prospects of young women, feminists ought to recognize that when unions penetrate and mobilize marginalized service sectors, they are shielding some of the poorest women against corporate greed and neoliberal social policy.

Throughout the recession and the anemic “recovery,” masses of women have been sucked into fast food and retail jobs. Paradoxically, even as organized labor is skewing toward women—they will comprise a majority of union workers by 2023—women workers in dead-end, non-union jobs are disproportionately impacted by the economic crisis. Those trends are now entwining to drive change, however, as women workers fuel grassroots organizing campaigns for fast-food and Walmart workers, demanding a living wage and a union representation in jobs dominated by women.

According to Nicole Woo, CEPR’s director of domestic policy, for the most marginalized groups of workers, “skills and education will get workers only so far. The larger context of growing inequality, of which the drop in unionization is a big factor, prevents large swaths of the workforce from achieving economic security.” The CEPR’s data shows that “even those workers who do everything right—getting more education and skills—[often] still find themselves with low wages and lacking benefits.”

Whether they’re soldering on an assembly line or educating the next generation of young professionals or rallying in the street for a decent contract, union women are everywhere, and it’s high time that they are recognized for what they, and their unions, deliver to the economy.

Source: http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/16023/women_and_the_union_wage_premium/

– The Philadelphia Council AFL-CIO’s Annual Conference, February 2-4 2014 in Atlantic City, will feature lively discussions, workshops, and appearances by two speakers with well-deserved, national reputations as experts and leaders.

A discussion of the 2014 electoral landscape in Pennsylvania with Dr. Terry Madonna, the Director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College. Dr Madonna is a leading expert on Pennsylvania politics and elections, and is one of the most experienced and insightful pollsters in the Commonwealth.
The newly elected Executive Vice President of the AFL-CIO, Tefere Gebre, will join us to share his vision of the future of labor and the labor movement and to hear from us about the work on the ground in Philadelphia. As the former Executive Director of the Orange County (CA) Central Labor Council, Gebre is the first National AFL-CIO Executive Officer to come from the ranks of the local labor movement.

Other likely topics on the agenda at the conference are:

an update on progress towards implementation of resolutions passed at the National AFL-CIO Convention in September;
a possible visit from a high-ranking US Department of Labor official to discuss DOL’s plans to put workers’ rights first again;
time for conversation with your brothers and sisters from over 100 affiliates who make up the Philadelphia Council AFL-CIO.

The Conference will start with a welcome reception on the evening of Sunday, February 2, and run through noon, Tuesday February 4th. Please fill out and return the downloadable registration form by clicking the link below this story, and if you’re planning to stay overnight Sunday or Monday, please contact the Sheraton Convention Center in Atlantic City to make reservations. Registering for the Conference will not automatically reserve you a hotel room! Our room block at the Sheraton closes on January 15, so make your reservations now!

Source: http://www.pa.aflcio.org/philaflcio/index.cfm?action=article&articleID=1fd65ff0-cdc8-4dc2-b724-3f548cefb5a2

By Michelle Chen

– Any working parent will tell you that raising a family might as well be another full-time job—one that comes with no vacation days or health benefits. But millions of Americans don’t get days off from their regular job, either, even for the sake of their health or their family’s.

According to the National Partnership for Women and Families (NPWF), just 12 percent of American workers can take paid leave time to tend to an illness in their household, and only about 40 percent can get time off for themselves through employer-sponsored disability coverage. This gap affects about two-fifths of the private sector workforce, or 40 million people—a vast deficit compared to many other industrialized countries, where paid leave is routine.

Now, though, some lawmakers are recognizing that taking a few weeks off to deal with a health challenge shouldn’t hurt your paycheck. Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) have sponsored legislation to establish a nationwide paid family leave insurance program that would partially protect the wages of workers who take time off for the medical needs of themselves or their families.

Financed by small contributions from payroll checks and employers, the program would allow workers to “take time for their own serious health condition, including pregnancy and childbirth recovery; the serious health condition of a child, parent, spouse or domestic partner; the birth or adoption of a child; and/or for particular military caregiving and leave purposes,” according to a briefing by NPWF, who is one of the groups campaigning for the bill, known as the Family And Medical Insurance Leave Act (FAMILY) Act.

The proposed weekly benefits would generally range from $580 to $4,000, depending on income. Like Social Security taxes, the insurance would require a small payroll deduction from the employee and would enable workers to earn as much as two-thirds of their regular weekly earnings for 12 weeks. After the first year, the payment rate would increase based on the average national wage. Overall, advocates say, the federal program would help provide stability for many low-income and precariously employed people by covering workers in any size workplace at any income level, including part-timers.

With the state of current legislation, activists point out, even workers with some insurance coverage may experience extreme hardship when a child’s illness destabilizes a family. In a testimony gathered by the New York State Paid Family Leave Coalition, a mother named Devorah from Rosendale, N.Y. recalled the hardships she faced when her daughter was born premature with a severe medical condition and continued to suffer from long-term medical problems in later years. Though her family had some insurance protection, Devorah said, “By the time we walked out of the hospital with our baby, we had spent an additional $30,000 out of pocket.” In her daughter’s first years, she went on:

There were times when … we didn’t pay our bills. We didn’t pay the gas company or the oil company or the phone company. If there was a choice between prescription drugs and groceries, we bought prescription drugs. If there was a choice between groceries and the phone bill, we went without a phone. … And it’s taken us six years to dig our way out of the financial hole that this dumped us into.

The FAMILY legislation is modeled after similar landmark family leave insurance laws in California and New Jersey, which provide benefits that cover partial weekly earnings on a short-term basis. In addition, policies enabling workers to take paid leave time to tend to family health needs have been emerging at the local level all over the country. In recent years, New York City, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Seattle and Portland lawmakers have all passed paid sick days legislation, often braving fierce opposition from the business lobby.

The paid leave insurance act would complement laws like these, which focus on short-term medical needs like a bout of the flu, by allowing financial protection for long-term medical needs in a self-financed system. As Vicki Shabo, NPWF director of work and family programs, tells In These Times via email:

It is reasonable to expect employers to provide a basic amount of paid sick time for routine illnesses or health needs, but providing a significant level of wage replacement or full wage replacement for an extended period of time may not be feasible for some employers. Requiring employers to bear the full cost of an extended family leave could also dissuade employers from hiring women, who would be more expensive to hire and retain.

The insurance, administered through the Social Security Administration, would not completely replace a worker’s wages during her time off, but it would be a major step toward broadening access to compensated leave time—and, in turn, improving gender and age equity in the workplace. According to NPFW, “In the year following a birth, new mothers who take paid leave are more likely than those who take no paid leave to stay in the workforce and 54 percent more likely to report wage increases.” Older workers and family caregivers tending to elders would also benefit from extended time off for medical issues that come with aging.

In addition, expanding access to paid leave would help narrow racial divides. Surveys indicate that Latina and black women are less likely than whites to have access to paid sick days or parental leave, with many of them working in precarious service sector jobs that with less access to healthcare in general.

And for many parents, it’s one less thing to be concerned about in a baby’s first few months. In New Jersey, which recently instituted its own statewide leave insurance program, one mother testified for advocacy campaign New Jersey Time to Care, “When I had my first son, I was only able to take a few months off.” But after she got paid leave for her second child, she continued, “I was able to take longer time off and bond with him for what I felt was a more substantial amount of time … and not have to worry about the financial impact of staying home without pay.”

Having one parent at home also makes it easier to manage clinic visits and preventive care, ultimately minimizing a child’s time away from school for health issues. A policy analysis by the California-based think tank Human Impact Partners found that parental leave leads to better health outcomes that can “improve a child’s brain development, social development and overall well-being.”

But workers aren’t the only people stand to gain from the insurance. Their bosses would benefit, too, because employees will be more likely to stick with a company in the long run if they can occasionally leave work when necessary. Under California’s program, NPWF reports, “workers in low-wage, high-turnover industries are much more likely to return to their jobs after using the program.” And there will be public health benefits for consumers when low-paid cooks, servers and hotel cleaners aren’t pressured to go to work with the sniffles.

Paid family leave insurance won’t overcome all the obstacles that workers face when coping with a medical challenge. For the most vulnerable groups, however, paid time off for care will be time well spent.

Source: http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/15998/is_paid_leave_coming_to_washington/

– During the Holiday Season, it’s common for us to reflect on how difficult this time of year is for families in poverty, and even engage in charitable acts of kindness. While this is a tradition that will—and certainly should—continue this year, 2013 is also the year that a special emphasis has been placed on the issue of poverty in our city and across the nation.

We’ve always known that economically disadvantaged children face more challenges in school than their more affluent peers. The new narrative entering the discussion is just how many children face this reality.

The poverty rate in Philadelphia is around 28 percent, but the reality of being poor is not confined to those who live in the city. The Inquirer’s Al Lubrano just reported on how the effects of a struggling economy can be seen even in the nearby suburbs.

Last week, USA Today published a sobering opinion piece outlining the impact that poverty has on public school students. The piece cites a new study from the Southern Education Foundation that reveals nearly half of the nation’s public school students live in poverty. The New York Times has published a truly eye-opening five-part series chronicling the life of Dasani, one of 22,000 homeless children struggling to learn and survive in New York City.

These stories shining a light on the faces of poverty represent disturbing accounts of an increasingly grim phenomenon. It’s distressing to read and hear the growing problem of poverty, how much it is costing us, and how it will impact the future of too many children. If there’s a silver lining, it’s that there is an increasing awareness that poverty is not “someone else’s problem,” or an excuse for lower academic achievement. It is something that we have to face and fight as a city, a community and a country.

All of this underscores the need for Pennsylvania to implement a fair funding formula for education. The research clearly indicates that schools and districts with high poverty populations need more resources in order to close the social and academic learning gaps that exist between poor and wealthier children. Moreover, schools are the one place many of our poorest children can go to get hot meals, healthcare, counseling and much-needed stability and constancy in their lives.

This is not asking for a handout. It is recognizing that there is a dire long-term cost to the current practice of slashing education budgets, and to cutting school programs and services like nurses and guidance counselors. We can no longer afford to place our most vulnerable children—and our city’s future—at risk.

Poverty is quickly becoming the biggest threat to the lives of our children and the security of our nation. It won’t be solved by solely individuals donating to charities at Christmastime. It’s time for city, state and federal legislators to embrace the idea that helping poor families must be more than a holiday tradition.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/notes/philadelphia-federation-of-teachers/jerry-jordans-blog-fighting-poverty-tis-more-than-just-a-season/734601619903251

– AFSCME District Council 33 is hosting a Food for Families Holiday Food Drive from now through January 8, 2014. Help them help families in need this holiday season! Please bring NON-perishable items to the Drop Boxes on the main floor and the 4th floor of the DC 33 Offices located at: 3001 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104

HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS INCLUDE: Canned or shelf-stable tuna, Macaroni & Cheese, Canned pasta, Canned beef stew, Creamy peanut butter, Canned chili, Jelly, Canned green beans, Canned corn, Canned fruit, Breakfast Cereal and Hot Cereal

Help a Family in Need This Holiday Season with AFSCME District Council 33!

Source: http://www.afscme33.org/index.cfm?action=article&articleID=f6774120-e45e-48fc-9846-803343fe4a9b