• Roosevelt Reacts: NLRB Holds McDonald's Accountable for Labor Violations

    Jul 30, 2014
    Yesterday, the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board ruled that McDonald's is a joint employer for the workers at its franchises, meaning that the corporation could be held liable for any labor and wage violations that occur at its individual restaurants.

    The decision, says Roosevelt Institute President and CEO Felicia Wong...

    Yesterday, the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board ruled that McDonald's is a joint employer for the workers at its franchises, meaning that the corporation could be held liable for any labor and wage violations that occur at its individual restaurants.

    The decision, says Roosevelt Institute President and CEO Felicia Wong, "rightly recognizes that, in today's changing and more fragmented workplace, workers still need the support and protections afforded by the law. Fast food workers are fighting for a wage that will allow them to care for their families and act as strong community members. This is an essential foundation for economic growth that benefits us all."

    Adds Roosevelt Institute Senior Fellow Richard Kirsch, "The common sense ruling that McDonald's is as much one company in the way it treats its workers as it is when it makes a Big Mac is a major step toward holding the biggest corporations in the country accountable for creating jobs that boost the economy instead of busting it."

    Read more about what the Future of Work Initiative is doing to promote policies that empower American workers and secure prosperity for all.

    Image via Shutterstock

    Share This

  • Frank Levy: Through Innovation, People Will Live Longer and Earn Less

    Jul 30, 2014

    The Next American Economy project brought together 30 experts from various disciplines to envision tomorrow's economic and political challenges and develop today's solutions. Their assignment: be bold, and leave the conventional wisdom -- and their own opinions -- behind. In today's video, economist Frank Levy foretells tech and health care trends resulting in longer lifespans and lower earning potential.

    The Next American Economy project brought together 30 experts from various disciplines to envision tomorrow's economic and political challenges and develop today's solutions. Their assignment: be bold, and leave the conventional wisdom -- and their own opinions -- behind. In today's video, economist Frank Levy foretells tech and health care trends resulting in longer lifespans and lower earning potential.

    MIT professor Frank Levy speculates that in the next 25 years, health innovation will improve life spans while tech innovation reduces earning potential for many Americans, resulting in longer lives but no additional income. Add in the increasingly destructive consequences of climate change, and the middle class dream will become further and further out of reach. Triggered by resentment and fear, a new anti-technology movement will rise up with a bumper sticker slogan: "Another Luddite for Jobs."

    Share This

  • Rob Atkinson: After the End of the Innovation Era

    Jul 29, 2014

    The Next American Economy project brought together 30 experts from various disciplines to envision tomorrow's economic and political challenges and develop today's solutions. Their assignment: be bold, and leave the conventional wisdom -- and their own opinions -- behind. In today's video, Rob Atkinson speculates that concerns about technological unemployment are misplaced, and that the real challenge will be continued innovation.

    The Next American Economy project brought together 30 experts from various disciplines to envision tomorrow's economic and political challenges and develop today's solutions. Their assignment: be bold, and leave the conventional wisdom -- and their own opinions -- behind. In today's video, Rob Atkinson speculates that concerns about technological unemployment are misplaced, and that the real challenge will be continued innovation.

    Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, forecasts the end of exponential technological growth. The end of Moore's law and decline in R&D investment (due to reduced government spending and increased short-termism in the private sector) will lead to a reduction in innovation and a lag in productivity, Atkinson says.

    For more, see "Are Robots Taking Our Jobs, or Making Them?" by Atkinson and Ben Miller.

    Share This

  • Two Tiers of College Tuition? Not on This Campus

    Jul 28, 2014Mohanned Abdelhameed

    A two-tiered pricing system would create dramatic inequality of access to a college education.

    A college education is believed to help those that sacrifice and pursue their education achieve a better life. However, the graduating class of 2014 is the most indebted class in history. Students will graduate this year owing an average of $33,000 for their hard earned education. This problem grows worse as students currently face rising levels of tuition at all institutions.

    A two-tiered pricing system would create dramatic inequality of access to a college education.

    A college education is believed to help those that sacrifice and pursue their education achieve a better life. However, the graduating class of 2014 is the most indebted class in history. Students will graduate this year owing an average of $33,000 for their hard earned education. This problem grows worse as students currently face rising levels of tuition at all institutions.

    My school, San Bernardino Valley Community College, looked at a different type of tuition increase by volunteering as one of five colleges to pilot a two-tiered pricing system, which effectively gives an advantage to higher income students. Assembly Bill AB955 set up a pilot program of five schools to offer classes at higher prices during intermissions from the standard academic schedule, making students who want to finish school faster pay more out of pocket for their degree. Assembly Member Das Williams, who proposed the bill, argued in The Daily Californian that “at the start of the fall 2012 semester, more than 500,000 students were left on waiting lists and effectively turned away at community colleges throughout the state due to lack of availability.” If the pilot is successful, then the program will open to all colleges state wide.

    My school volunteered to participate in this pilot, because following the 2008 recession, budget cuts had forced the school to cut many classes. The administration needed a way to accommodate students that couldn’t get classes they needed in order to transfer or graduate. Many administrators were for the program because they believed they could make more space by offering classes in summer and winter sessions to students that would have to pay up to 300 percent more per unit. For instance, our normal tuition is $46 a unit, but in order to take the classes offered by this program students would have to pay an additional $230 non-resident tuition fee and a $19 capital outlay fee, totaling $295 per unit. Since most classes are three units, a class under this pricing model would cost $885 as opposed to the usual price of $138.

    Many students were opposed to this legislation. A student protest staged on November 14, 2013 at a meeting of the San Bernardino Community College District Board paused the offering of such a two-tiered pricing scheme for this summer, and the future of the program will be decided at a later date. A huge group of students spoke out against our school's participation by organizing and using our voices to tell our college board we wouldn’t allow our school to be privatized. There was no evidence for the assemblyman's conclusions. He claimed students would prefer the opportunity to finish faster at a higher cost, as opposed to waiting and using needed financial aid to finish their classes. There are almost 15,000 students attending San Bernardino Valley Community College, and 67 percent of the student body receives financial assistance. It is unlikely that students will be willing or able to pay out of pocket for their education, when these higher-priced classes aren't covered by financial aid.

    Students also opposed the bill because the argument that students could transfer out faster was untrue. Under the usual model of one low tuition rate for all units, many students take classes year round. With the two-tier pricing model, students that can’t afford to pay the grossly inflated price of units in winter and summer would be limited to classes in fall and spring, essentially making poorer students stay at a community college longer than their wealthier peers. Students were also concerned about how students paying full-price for these more expensive units would affect financial aid. There were also concerns that when policy makers saw students paying the higher prices, financial assistance given to other students would be at risk of defunding, ending access for those less fortunate.

    Access to college is meant to be a vehicle to success for those willing to work hard for it. This program would be asking students that have very little to pay more for school in the long run. Students' passion against this new law can be a great benefit for implementing change. There is always a beginning of a movement but what actually makes it a movement is the consistency to keep coming back and addressing the issues. The students at my school understand that the effort they showed can be a force. We can have a bright future by fighting for future students, who deserve the same chance those before us received. It would be a shame to stand idly by while students lose their opportunity for an education and a better life.

    Mohanned Abdelhameed is the Vice President of the Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network chapter at San Bernardino Valley Community College, where he is studying political economics.

    Photo by Amerique via Creative Commons license.

    Share This