Click here to view this media SodexoUSA has filed a RICO lawsuit against the SEIU , claiming it is using strongarm tactics to force the company to unionize. According to their corporate website , they allege that SEIU is trying to force workers to replace other unions with theirs. The complaint alleges that the SEIU, in face to face meetings, threatened Sodexo USA’s executives that it would harm Sodexo USA’s business unless they gave in to the union, and then carried out its threats through egregious behavior, including: throwing plastic roaches onto food being served by Sodexo USA at a high profile event; scaring hospital patients by insinuating that Sodexo USA food contained bugs, rat droppings, mold and flies; lying to interfere with Sodexo USA business and sneaking into elementary schools to avoid security; violating lobbying laws to steer business away from Sodexo USA, even at the risk of costing Sodexo USA employees their jobs; and harassing Sodexo USA employees by threatening to accuse them of wrongdoing. Ordinarily this wouldn’t garner much of my attention, but given the multi-pronged attacks on the SEIU by every right-winger in the land, I decided to look closer at SodexoUSA and their executives in particular to see if there were any relationships or donations to Republican governors. Since their business is privatized food services to hospitals and other concerns, it seemed like something to investigate. They’re not all that transparent on corporate governance, but in the process of looking, I found this nugget : Sodexho Alliance is a holding company. Through its subsidiaries, Co. is engaged in two main activities: the Food and Facilities Management Services and the Service Vouchers and Cards. The Food and Facilities Management Services segment provides food services and facilities management services to businesses and industries, armed forces, correctional services, healthcare services, seniors, school and colleges and remote sites. The Service Vouchers and Cards segment offers 2 products for companies and governments. The first one plays a role in the motivation of employees and the second one supports public authorities in implementing and monitoring their social aid programs. Remember Susie’s article last week about Minnesota’s plan to issue state-approved cards to people on public assistance? Makes me wonder whether or not one of their approved vendors is this company, or whether they’re positioning themselves to bid on these state contracts. I don’t know. I haven’t been able to find anything. Yet. But it seems strange to me that this company with what appears to be a history of antagonism with unions is going full-tilt hard-hit with the RICO lawsuit. They’ve got a history of controversy, especially around their unionized workers. In April, 2010, 200 workers walked off the job at the University of Pittsburgh, along with workers on 5 other campuses. “Sodexo doesn’t respect us. I can’t afford to put my kids on the company insurance, but I don’t want to keep them on state insurance,” says Danielle Rue, a Sodexo worker whose children rely on state-provided health care. “How can a company that made a billion dollars force me and my kids onto welfare? When we tried to stand up for ourselves, they violated our rights. They do it to non-union workers, too. ” Sodexo food service workers who belong to a union are not the only ones supporting the UPitt food service workers who are taking a stand. Other union workers have pledged their solidarity. “Our union and others are going to support striking SEIU Sodexo workers,” said Bill Cagney of International Union of Operating Engineers Local 95, who represents workers at the university. “Pitt is a responsible employer. But when the big multinational companies like Sodexo come into Pittsburgh and refuse to follow the law or provide family sustaining jobs, labor will stand together.” There was also a walkout in Ohio , where workers alleged Sodexo was blocking their right to unionize. Danny Glover was arrested while protesting outside their corporate headquarters in Maryland last year. This is the private side of the war on unions waged in conjunction with the public side in state legislatures. The end goal is the same: union-busting, union defunding, maximize corporate profits, and spend lots of money litigating cases against them. When is union organizing racketeering? When you’re a multinational company with lots of profits waiting to be taken out of the mouths of employees. In a somewhat ironic twist, Sodexo’s philanthropic bent is toward ending world hunger . You’ve got to wonder if paying their employees a decent working wage and providing health insurance might be one step toward that goal.
Continue reading …A reality TV collaboration between the action star and Arizona sheriff would be hilarious – if real law and order was not involved There are some news events that are simply beyond parody – when a current trend loses the plot so badly that you can do nothing but gasp in stunned amazement. But the invasion of ever more extreme reality television shows into modern American culture should be immune to this phenomenon. After all, this is a medium defined by demented Z-list wannabes trapped in an arms race of outrageousness designed to grab their 15 minutes of fame. In a post-Jersey Shore world surely nothing could emerge from reality TV that could actually shock? Well, not until now. This week, a bizarre incident unfolded in Phoenix , Arizona, involving 115 roosters, an out-of-control sheriff, several tanks, a Swat team, a suspected cockfighter, a bomb robot and – like a muscular, suntanned cherry on top of the whole pile – faded action star Steven Seagal. The setup was simple enough. Police suspected local man Jesus Sanchez Llovera, 43, of running an illegal cockfighting ring (the huge flock of roosters on his property no doubt being the clinching clue). So they decided to arrest him. While he was at home. Alone. Unarmed. With no police record of owning any weapons. Still, that should have been simple enough. A lone squad car, maybe two, could have done it. But things are rarely that simple with the sheriff of Maricopa County: the notoriously headline hungry figure of Joe Arpaio . For Arpaio’s department is working with Seagal, who is shooting a reality TV show and has signed up as a police volunteer. The show is called Lawman . So, instead of pulling up outside Llovera’s house and knocking on his door, Arpaio assembled a mini-army of police deputies, two armoured vehicles, a fully-armed Swat team and the bomb robot. They descended on Llovera’s house and smashed his windows, knocked down his gate with one of the tanks and arrested him. Seagal, dressed in combat fatigues and sunglasses and sporting a gun on his hip, was riding in one of the police tanks. Seagal’s film crew taped the whole thing. No doubt, after heavy editing, it will make for a few dramatic moments of television. The reasons to be stunned and shocked at this barely need describing and should appall anyone of any political background (which would be a rare thing in as polarised a state as Arizona). First off is the cost: across America, cities are slashing policing to the bone to cope with severe budget cuts. Yet, in Arizona, the needs of an ageing action star’s reality show resulted in a raid that some lawyers estimate would have cost thousands of dollars. Second, it has emerged that Seagal has a contract with the sheriff’s department that allows him free reign to go along on any arrests the sheriff makes. In a country notoriously – and often admirably – obsessed with individual freedoms and constitutional rights, why has so much privilege in the realm of law and order been granted to a reality TV star? Finally, there is the horrific blending of policing and entertainment that this incident represents. The two should be kept utterly apart. Here, they are not only mixed, but it appears that reality TV has the upper hand, calling the shots. Arpaio, for his part, denies staging the whole thing for Seagal and his show. What about Seagal’s thoughts? In his low, grumbling monotone, he explained to one local TV reporter the reasoning for his presence on the raid. “Animal cruelty is one of my pet peeves,” he said. That’s nice. But keeping idiotic reality TV shows away from the operation of a police force and the administration of justice is one of mine. Reality TV Arizona Animal welfare United States US television Paul Harris guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Poly Styrene, the punk upstart from X-Ray Spex, is promoting a new album – and fighting cancer Poly Styrene had just finished working with celebrated producer Youth on her first album of commercial pop since leaving X-Ray Spex in 1979, when she began to feel a slight pain in her back. Styrene, a feminist punk hero acknowledged by everyone from Beth
Continue reading …• EU bailout closer after José Sócrates loses crucial vote • Political limbo will put pressure on Portuguese bonds Portuguese prime minister José Sócrates has said he has submitted his resignation to the president after parliament rejected his minority Socialist government’s latest austerity measures. The loss of the vote “has taken away from the government all conditions to govern,” Sócrates said. It brings the country closer to needing a bailout. Sócrates is said he tendered his resignation to President Aníbal Cavaco Silva tonight, leaving the country in a political limbo that would place further pressure on Portugal’s record-level bond yields. Sócrates had said before the vote that he would resign if the measures to cut spending and increase taxes – designed to see off a bailout similar to those taken by Greece and Ireland – were rejected. The measures had aroused the fury of trade unions, and railway engineers walked off the job in the morning, causing widespread travel disruption. Political turmoil in Lisbon set nerves jangling in the eurozone just as it was revealed that EU leaders would postpone making a decision on a new €440bn bailout fund. A draft version of the deal to be agreed after two days of talks on Thursday and Friday delays a final decision until June, according to reports. An election in Portugal will take at least 55 days to organise. That raised additional fears that Sócrates – who would head a caretaker administration with limited powers until then – will be unable to head off a full collapse in market confidence. “My worry is the period of inaction before a new government takes over,” said Silvio Peruzzo, an economist at RBS in London. The main opposition centre-right Social Democratic Party, led by Pedro Passos Coelho, has been ahead in recent opinion polls. The Social Democrats also favour debt control. Portugal’s benchmark 10-year bond yield had risen to 7.77% before the debate on Wednesday, while five-year bonds hit a euro lifetime high of 8.2%. Economists see borrowing costs above 7% as unsustainable and say Portugal will have to resort to the rescue mechanism. Analysts suggested the failure to agree on measures would push Portugal closer to a bailout. “It seems more and more likely that Portugal will need some kind of support,” Charles Diebel, head of market strategy at Lloyds bank, said before the debate. News of the delay in putting together the €440bn eurozone rescue fund, coupled with concern about Portugal, could lead to another spell of instability on bond markets. “I fear that Monday could be Black Monday for markets,” one EU financial source told Reuters, emphasising that EU policymakers still had a long way to go to draft all the necessary documents. Portugal’s national debt stands at 83% of GDP. The budget deficit hit 9.3% of GDP in 2009, but was lowered to 7.3% in 2010 and Sócrates had wanted it to remain at 4.6% by the end of this year. Even before Wednesday’s events, Portugal’s economy had been expected to shrink by 1.3% this year. European debt crisis Europe Portugal European banks Giles Tremlett guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …• EU bailout closer after José Sócrates loses crucial vote • Political limbo will put pressure on Portuguese bonds Portuguese prime minister José Sócrates has said he has submitted his resignation to the president after parliament rejected his minority Socialist government’s latest austerity measures. The loss of the vote “has taken away from the government all conditions to govern,” Sócrates said. It brings the country closer to needing a bailout. Sócrates is said he tendered his resignation to President Aníbal Cavaco Silva tonight, leaving the country in a political limbo that would place further pressure on Portugal’s record-level bond yields. Sócrates had said before the vote that he would resign if the measures to cut spending and increase taxes – designed to see off a bailout similar to those taken by Greece and Ireland – were rejected. The measures had aroused the fury of trade unions, and railway engineers walked off the job in the morning, causing widespread travel disruption. Political turmoil in Lisbon set nerves jangling in the eurozone just as it was revealed that EU leaders would postpone making a decision on a new €440bn bailout fund. A draft version of the deal to be agreed after two days of talks on Thursday and Friday delays a final decision until June, according to reports. An election in Portugal will take at least 55 days to organise. That raised additional fears that Sócrates – who would head a caretaker administration with limited powers until then – will be unable to head off a full collapse in market confidence. “My worry is the period of inaction before a new government takes over,” said Silvio Peruzzo, an economist at RBS in London. The main opposition centre-right Social Democratic Party, led by Pedro Passos Coelho, has been ahead in recent opinion polls. The Social Democrats also favour debt control. Portugal’s benchmark 10-year bond yield had risen to 7.77% before the debate on Wednesday, while five-year bonds hit a euro lifetime high of 8.2%. Economists see borrowing costs above 7% as unsustainable and say Portugal will have to resort to the rescue mechanism. Analysts suggested the failure to agree on measures would push Portugal closer to a bailout. “It seems more and more likely that Portugal will need some kind of support,” Charles Diebel, head of market strategy at Lloyds bank, said before the debate. News of the delay in putting together the €440bn eurozone rescue fund, coupled with concern about Portugal, could lead to another spell of instability on bond markets. “I fear that Monday could be Black Monday for markets,” one EU financial source told Reuters, emphasising that EU policymakers still had a long way to go to draft all the necessary documents. Portugal’s national debt stands at 83% of GDP. The budget deficit hit 9.3% of GDP in 2009, but was lowered to 7.3% in 2010 and Sócrates had wanted it to remain at 4.6% by the end of this year. Even before Wednesday’s events, Portugal’s economy had been expected to shrink by 1.3% this year. European debt crisis Europe Portugal European banks Giles Tremlett guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …George Osborne bowed to growing concern with instant 1p fuel duty cut for ‘Ford Focus’ voters and tax raids on banks George Osborne has bowed to growing concern over the biggest squeeze in living standards since the second world war with an instant cut in fuel duty, but had his claim to be delivering a budget for growth undermined by the ominous prospect of lower growth, rising unemployment and higher borrowing. While insisting the government was sticking to its austerity plan despite a gloomier outlook for the economy, the chancellor levied a surprise £2bn windfall tax on North Sea oil companies to finance a populist 1p a litre reduction in the price at the pumps as the unexpected finale of a reform package focused on reversing Britain’s economic decline. The chancellor said he was “putting fuel in the tank of the British economy” by liberalising Britain’s planning laws, scrapping red tape, simplifying the tax system and creating a Green Investment Bank to fund the expansion of environmental companies. But he was forced to admit that growth this year would be just 1.7% – lower than the 2.1% expected – while 200,000 fewer jobs would be created during this parliament. Figures from the independent Office for Budget Responsibility showed slower growth would result in £45bn extra borrowing between now and 2015. The downgrades were denounced by Labour as the first solid proof that the government’s medicine of an unprecedented deficit reduction programme was hurting, but not working. Ed Miliband, the opposition leader, accused Osborne of “Del Boy economics”, pointing out that he had put 3p on the price of fuel through the January increase in VAT. Osborne said the government’s determination to stick to its deficit reduction plan meant there was no room for an overall budget giveaway but announced an increase in the bank levy, a crackdown on tax avoidance and a tougher regime for North Sea oil and gas producers. They would fund a bigger than planned 2p cut in corporation tax, an increase in the number of apprentices and help for first-time buyers as well as scrapping the inflation-busting increase in fuel prices that Labour had pencilled in for next week. The Treasury claimed the package meant fuel would be 6p a litre cheaper from April – a saving of £3 on filling up a Ford Focus. If January’s VAT increase were taken into account, the reduced cost of filling the same car would be £1.50, officials said. Ending the fuel duty escalator, agreed late in the budget process along with the extra 1p cut in corporation tax, caused friction among members of the cabinet worried by its impact on the government’s climate change targets. The measures also attracted criticism from environmental groups. Signalling his keenness to scrap the 50% top rate of income tax, Osborne also pleased his Liberal Democrat coalition allies by saying the tax-free personal allowance would be raised by £630 to £8,105 from next April – a cut in tax bills of £48 a year on average in real terms. However, the chancellor also announced that from April 2012 direct tax allowances would be raised in line with the CPI, a move that would raise an extra £1bn for the exchequer by the end of this parliament. The chancellor said he was trying to create a “Britain carried aloft by the march of the maker”. He added: “This is how we will create jobs and support families. “Last year’s emergency budget was about rescuing the nation’s finances, and paying for the mistakes of the past,” he went on. “Today’s budget is about reforming the nation’s economy, so that we have enduring growth and jobs in the future. And it’s about doing what we can to help families with the cost of living and the high oil price.” Miliband countered: “One fact says it all and he couldn’t bring himself to say it: growth down last year, this year and next year. It’s the same old Tories. It’s hurting, but it isn’t working. Every time he comes to this house his growth forecast is downgraded.” He added: “It didn’t happen by chance, it happened by choice. His choice – and it’s the wrong choice – to go too far and too fast.” This was not “by chance” but because of “wrong” policies, Miliband said. Osborne admitted that higher inflation, leading to higher welfare payments and debt interest payments, did mean higher borrowing, but said the OBR regarded this as cyclical. It would melt away as growth picked up in future years, he said. The OBR said it still expected the government to meet its fiscal target a year earlier than the goal of 2015-16. This would leave the coalition government free to cut taxes or raise benefits in the runup to a 2015 general election. The chancellor unveiled a series of measures aimed at boosting enterprise – including a further cut to corporation tax, which will go down by two percentage points rather than one in April. He also promised to reduce capital gains tax for entrepreneurs selling shares. With spending cuts likely to hit hardest in the poorest regions of Britain, the chancellor more than doubled the number of planned enterprise zones – from 10 to 21. These areas will benefit from looser planning laws. Changes to the planning system will make it more difficult for local people to block “sustainable development” and easier for builders to convert commercial property into housing. His measures on tax avoidance and non-domiciles – they will have to pay a £50,000 charge if they have lived in the UK for 12 years – were met with disappointment, however. The former Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Lord Oakeshott said the measures against non-domiciles were a flea bite and would leave them “laughing all the way to the Cayman Islands”. Businesses were pleased by the larger than expected cut in corporation tax. However, the TUC general secretary, Brendan Barber said it had been “a no-change budget”. “The chancellor has been forced to reveal the evidence that his policies aren’t working but has not had the courage to change them,” he said. Budget George Osborne Budget 2011 Economic policy Larry Elliott Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …George Osborne bowed to growing concern with instant 1p fuel duty cut for ‘Ford Focus’ voters and tax raids on banks George Osborne has bowed to growing concern over the biggest squeeze in living standards since the second world war with an instant cut in fuel duty, but had his claim to be delivering a budget for growth undermined by the ominous prospect of lower growth, rising unemployment and higher borrowing. While insisting the government was sticking to its austerity plan despite a gloomier outlook for the economy, the chancellor levied a surprise £2bn windfall tax on North Sea oil companies to finance a populist 1p a litre reduction in the price at the pumps as the unexpected finale of a reform package focused on reversing Britain’s economic decline. The chancellor said he was “putting fuel in the tank of the British economy” by liberalising Britain’s planning laws, scrapping red tape, simplifying the tax system and creating a Green Investment Bank to fund the expansion of environmental companies. But he was forced to admit that growth this year would be just 1.7% – lower than the 2.1% expected – while 200,000 fewer jobs would be created during this parliament. Figures from the independent Office for Budget Responsibility showed slower growth would result in £45bn extra borrowing between now and 2015. The downgrades were denounced by Labour as the first solid proof that the government’s medicine of an unprecedented deficit reduction programme was hurting, but not working. Ed Miliband, the opposition leader, accused Osborne of “Del Boy economics”, pointing out that he had put 3p on the price of fuel through the January increase in VAT. Osborne said the government’s determination to stick to its deficit reduction plan meant there was no room for an overall budget giveaway but announced an increase in the bank levy, a crackdown on tax avoidance and a tougher regime for North Sea oil and gas producers. They would fund a bigger than planned 2p cut in corporation tax, an increase in the number of apprentices and help for first-time buyers as well as scrapping the inflation-busting increase in fuel prices that Labour had pencilled in for next week. The Treasury claimed the package meant fuel would be 6p a litre cheaper from April – a saving of £3 on filling up a Ford Focus. If January’s VAT increase were taken into account, the reduced cost of filling the same car would be £1.50, officials said. Ending the fuel duty escalator, agreed late in the budget process along with the extra 1p cut in corporation tax, caused friction among members of the cabinet worried by its impact on the government’s climate change targets. The measures also attracted criticism from environmental groups. Signalling his keenness to scrap the 50% top rate of income tax, Osborne also pleased his Liberal Democrat coalition allies by saying the tax-free personal allowance would be raised by £630 to £8,105 from next April – a cut in tax bills of £48 a year on average in real terms. However, the chancellor also announced that from April 2012 direct tax allowances would be raised in line with the CPI, a move that would raise an extra £1bn for the exchequer by the end of this parliament. The chancellor said he was trying to create a “Britain carried aloft by the march of the maker”. He added: “This is how we will create jobs and support families. “Last year’s emergency budget was about rescuing the nation’s finances, and paying for the mistakes of the past,” he went on. “Today’s budget is about reforming the nation’s economy, so that we have enduring growth and jobs in the future. And it’s about doing what we can to help families with the cost of living and the high oil price.” Miliband countered: “One fact says it all and he couldn’t bring himself to say it: growth down last year, this year and next year. It’s the same old Tories. It’s hurting, but it isn’t working. Every time he comes to this house his growth forecast is downgraded.” He added: “It didn’t happen by chance, it happened by choice. His choice – and it’s the wrong choice – to go too far and too fast.” This was not “by chance” but because of “wrong” policies, Miliband said. Osborne admitted that higher inflation, leading to higher welfare payments and debt interest payments, did mean higher borrowing, but said the OBR regarded this as cyclical. It would melt away as growth picked up in future years, he said. The OBR said it still expected the government to meet its fiscal target a year earlier than the goal of 2015-16. This would leave the coalition government free to cut taxes or raise benefits in the runup to a 2015 general election. The chancellor unveiled a series of measures aimed at boosting enterprise – including a further cut to corporation tax, which will go down by two percentage points rather than one in April. He also promised to reduce capital gains tax for entrepreneurs selling shares. With spending cuts likely to hit hardest in the poorest regions of Britain, the chancellor more than doubled the number of planned enterprise zones – from 10 to 21. These areas will benefit from looser planning laws. Changes to the planning system will make it more difficult for local people to block “sustainable development” and easier for builders to convert commercial property into housing. His measures on tax avoidance and non-domiciles – they will have to pay a £50,000 charge if they have lived in the UK for 12 years – were met with disappointment, however. The former Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Lord Oakeshott said the measures against non-domiciles were a flea bite and would leave them “laughing all the way to the Cayman Islands”. Businesses were pleased by the larger than expected cut in corporation tax. However, the TUC general secretary, Brendan Barber said it had been “a no-change budget”. “The chancellor has been forced to reveal the evidence that his policies aren’t working but has not had the courage to change them,” he said. Budget George Osborne Budget 2011 Economic policy Larry Elliott Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Of course you knew that no matter what President Obama did in regards to Libya, right-wingers were going to slam him for it — damned if he did, damned if he didn’t. But few have been quite as naked in their two-faced hypocrisy as Newt Gingrich. Via George Zornick at ThinkProgress , here’s Gingrich giving Greta Van Susteren his prescription for dealing with Libya two weeks ago, on March 7: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. Communicate to the Libyan military that Gadhafi is gone, and that the sooner they switched sides the more likely they were to survive. Provide help to the rebels to replace him. I mean, the idea that we’re confused about a man who has been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is. They were very quick to jump on Mubarak, who was their ally for 30 years, and they’re confused about getting rid of Gadhafi. This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with. … We don’t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening. Then there he was last night on Fox News with Sean Hannity: HANNITY: So, did he make a mistake by not seeking Congress’ authorization, and do you view that as a violation of the War Powers Act? GINGRICH: Well, no, the War Powers Act technically gives him 45 days. But it’s a violation of common sense. And then he went on Today this morning with Matt Lauer and actually said he wouldn’t have intervened: GINGRICH: The standard [Obama] has fallen back to of humanitarian intervention could apply to Sudan, to North Korea, to Zimbabwe, to Syria this week, to Yemen, to Bahrain. … The Arab League wanted us to do something. The minute we did something, the Arab League began criticizing us doing it. I think that two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a lot. I think that the problems we have in Pakistan, Egypt — go around the region. We could get engaged by this standard in all sorts of places. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces. Of course, what else do you expect from Newt Gingrich? If nothing else, we can always count on him to explore new depths in naked hypocrisy.
Continue reading …