"It looks like a fight is about to erupt on behalf of all working people."
That's not a quote from the Communist Manifesto. It's the tagline for the Transport Workers Union's battle with SEPTA for a "fair" contract. I saw it on the back of the Metro this morning when I took the train to work from Suburban Station.
People are lucky to have jobs right now. Yet the union is asking for a 4 percent wage increase each year for the next four years. Oh, and they don't want to contribute more than 1 percent of their wages to health care costs.
Sorry, TWU, but you're not going to get a lot of sympathy from the vast majority of this city's workers. Many of us are working at will and have few protections. Many of us work hard to show our employers that we're worth what we're paid.
For an extended rant, check on my Philadelphia Weekly opinion piece on the strike threat.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
In which Joel rolls his eyes at allegations of racism
I have apparently pissed off at least one reader with my Philadelphia Weekly feature on SEPTA subway cashiers.
I found that SEPTA is spending $19 million per year to keep 346 employees on board as cashiers after they have been "medically disqualified" by the authority's medical office. There is no formal job description and no mechanism for holding them accountable.
The position seems redundant to me, but I'm not favor of laying off 346 people. I am in favor of making them provide something of value to the city.
Yes, I'm white. Yes, that's about how much I make per year. But how this logically leads to the conclusion that I'm a jealous racist is baffling to me.
I doubt that Adamma Ince, Philadelphia Weekly's African-American editor, would tolerate veiled bigotry. I doubt that my biracial fiancee would tolerate it either.
I have no problem with unions per se. Some of the most important advances in the workplace have been spurred by labor negotiations. But I believe that people should be rewarded for developing their talents and striving to realize their potential.
I know this might be seen as heresy coming from a liberal progressive. Good. Stereotypes of any kind --
racial or otherwise -- are reductive and toxic.
I won't apologize for wanting people to transcend mediocrity.
“seems to me a white writer making less than 30 k a year is jealous
that an uneducated (probably minority) cashier is making
a hell of a lot more. maybe you should have majored in accounting”
that an uneducated (probably minority) cashier is making
a hell of a lot more. maybe you should have majored in accounting”
I found that SEPTA is spending $19 million per year to keep 346 employees on board as cashiers after they have been "medically disqualified" by the authority's medical office. There is no formal job description and no mechanism for holding them accountable.
The position seems redundant to me, but I'm not favor of laying off 346 people. I am in favor of making them provide something of value to the city.
Yes, I'm white. Yes, that's about how much I make per year. But how this logically leads to the conclusion that I'm a jealous racist is baffling to me.
I doubt that Adamma Ince, Philadelphia Weekly's African-American editor, would tolerate veiled bigotry. I doubt that my biracial fiancee would tolerate it either.
I have no problem with unions per se. Some of the most important advances in the workplace have been spurred by labor negotiations. But I believe that people should be rewarded for developing their talents and striving to realize their potential.
I know this might be seen as heresy coming from a liberal progressive. Good. Stereotypes of any kind --
racial or otherwise -- are reductive and toxic.
I won't apologize for wanting people to transcend mediocrity.
Monday, October 19, 2009
A grammar lesson for the Streets Department
Shame on the person who authorized the posting of grammatically incorrect landmark signs on Columbus Boulevard.
Granted, it could make sense to have a "Veteran's Memorial" honoring one veteran or a "Mummer's Museum" celebrating the drunken antics of one garishly dressed banjo player -- but not in this situation.
Yes, Virginia, there is a Grammar Clause.
In this case, there is no need for an apostrophe at all. Both Mummers and Veterans are purely descriptive terms, so there is no need for a possessive (thus: Mummers Museum and Veterans Memorial).
And that's if those are proper names. Otherwise, it would be Mummers museum and Veterans memorial.
A common example of this rule: It is grammatically correct to write "Eagles head coach Andy Reid" in news stories.
I'd love to know who signed off on this costly, embarrassing mistake.
Granted, it could make sense to have a "Veteran's Memorial" honoring one veteran or a "Mummer's Museum" celebrating the drunken antics of one garishly dressed banjo player -- but not in this situation.
Yes, Virginia, there is a Grammar Clause.
In this case, there is no need for an apostrophe at all. Both Mummers and Veterans are purely descriptive terms, so there is no need for a possessive (thus: Mummers Museum and Veterans Memorial).
And that's if those are proper names. Otherwise, it would be Mummers museum and Veterans memorial.
A common example of this rule: It is grammatically correct to write "Eagles head coach Andy Reid" in news stories.
I'd love to know who signed off on this costly, embarrassing mistake.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Might want to get out your budget comb
At a time when the EPA is stepping up enforcement of the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water acts, the Pennsylvania state legislature has undermined state environmental safeguards with its 2009-10 budget.
State funding for environmental protection has been reduced 27 percent -- from $219.55 million to $160.76 million.
Brilliant.
But here's the best part: Pennsylvania's appropriations for "Safe Water" and "Storm Water Management" have been zeroed out for a combined loss of $13.07 million.
Have I mentioned that Charles Duhigg of the New York Times has exposed grave water-regulation failures by the EPA?
In a Sept. 13 cover story, Duhigg wrote: "In the last five years alone, chemical factories, manufacturing plants and other workplaces have violated water pollution laws more than half a million times. The violations range from failing to report emissions to dumping toxins at concentrations regulators say might contribute to cancer, birth defects and other illnesses.
"However, the vast majority of those polluters have escaped punishment. State officials have repeatedly ignored obvious illegal dumping, and the Environmental Protection Agency, which can prosecute polluters when states fail to act, has often declined to intervene."
The good news is that you can check for polluters near you with the Times' interactive database .
Good hunting.
State funding for environmental protection has been reduced 27 percent -- from $219.55 million to $160.76 million.
Brilliant.
But here's the best part: Pennsylvania's appropriations for "Safe Water" and "Storm Water Management" have been zeroed out for a combined loss of $13.07 million.
Have I mentioned that Charles Duhigg of the New York Times has exposed grave water-regulation failures by the EPA?
In a Sept. 13 cover story, Duhigg wrote: "In the last five years alone, chemical factories, manufacturing plants and other workplaces have violated water pollution laws more than half a million times. The violations range from failing to report emissions to dumping toxins at concentrations regulators say might contribute to cancer, birth defects and other illnesses.
"However, the vast majority of those polluters have escaped punishment. State officials have repeatedly ignored obvious illegal dumping, and the Environmental Protection Agency, which can prosecute polluters when states fail to act, has often declined to intervene."
The good news is that you can check for polluters near you with the Times' interactive database .
Good hunting.
Again, the financial burden of "Green City, Clean Waters" is understated
On WHYY's Radio Times yesterday, Howard Neukrug, director of the city's Office of Watersheds, spoke with Marty Moss-Coane for nearly an hour about the Water Department's $1.6 billion proposal to manage the city's stormwater with green infrastructure (e.g., street trees, porous pavement and rain barrels).
I give Neukrug credit for admitting that the proposal is "pricey," but I was disappointed with Moss-Coane for not pushing Neukrug to clarify the financial impact. She noted that the EPA considered the financial burden high and suggested that water bills might go up $8 a month, citing an anonymous source.
Neukrug could have corrected her, but he didn't.
He could have told listeners that their water bills will increase 230 percent over the next 20 years -- from $400 per year to $1,321. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that outstrips the inflation rate.)
He could have noted that the poorest 20 percent of the city's population -- a population the size of Pittsburgh, Pa. -- would be spending between 3.5 and 7 percent of their median household income on water fees. (Perhaps the fees should be income-sensitive for the city's poor.)
I'm not pulling these numbers out of thin air, kids. I got them from the Water Department's own proposal.
I have to confess that there is something elegant and compelling about PWD's stormwater solution, and I would probably endorse it if Neukrug could point to strong scientific evidence that his plan will work. So far, he hasn't.
I understand the need to control the message, but Philadelphia is not a wealthy city. And it's constituency is far broader than the young progressives who are infatuated with the PWD proposal.
The Water Department needs to do a better job of reaching out to the city's working class. It did not ask survey takers to identify income during the public outreach portion of the project. And it can't claim "overwhelming public support" when less than 1 percent of the city's population has indicated support in the survey or by signing a petition.
By the way, almost 84 percent of the 437 people who listed their race in the survey identified themselves as Caucasian. Less than 5 percent identified themselves as African-American.
The city is 43.8 percent black and 42.7 percent white, according to a 2007 U.S. Census survey.
Neukrug also failed to mention that the EPA can fine the Water Department $37,500 for each day of noncompliance after the 20-year window closes. That would have made his case stronger.
Facts are cumbersome, but they're important.
WHYY owes their listeners the facts they didn't get yesterday.
I give Neukrug credit for admitting that the proposal is "pricey," but I was disappointed with Moss-Coane for not pushing Neukrug to clarify the financial impact. She noted that the EPA considered the financial burden high and suggested that water bills might go up $8 a month, citing an anonymous source.
Neukrug could have corrected her, but he didn't.
He could have told listeners that their water bills will increase 230 percent over the next 20 years -- from $400 per year to $1,321. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that outstrips the inflation rate.)
He could have noted that the poorest 20 percent of the city's population -- a population the size of Pittsburgh, Pa. -- would be spending between 3.5 and 7 percent of their median household income on water fees. (Perhaps the fees should be income-sensitive for the city's poor.)
I'm not pulling these numbers out of thin air, kids. I got them from the Water Department's own proposal.
I have to confess that there is something elegant and compelling about PWD's stormwater solution, and I would probably endorse it if Neukrug could point to strong scientific evidence that his plan will work. So far, he hasn't.
I understand the need to control the message, but Philadelphia is not a wealthy city. And it's constituency is far broader than the young progressives who are infatuated with the PWD proposal.
The Water Department needs to do a better job of reaching out to the city's working class. It did not ask survey takers to identify income during the public outreach portion of the project. And it can't claim "overwhelming public support" when less than 1 percent of the city's population has indicated support in the survey or by signing a petition.
By the way, almost 84 percent of the 437 people who listed their race in the survey identified themselves as Caucasian. Less than 5 percent identified themselves as African-American.
The city is 43.8 percent black and 42.7 percent white, according to a 2007 U.S. Census survey.
Neukrug also failed to mention that the EPA can fine the Water Department $37,500 for each day of noncompliance after the 20-year window closes. That would have made his case stronger.
Facts are cumbersome, but they're important.
WHYY owes their listeners the facts they didn't get yesterday.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Easing down the roads
Kudos to the Center for Public Integrity for making it easy to follow the transportation lobby's money. (Note: Total dollar amounts may reflect lobbying on multiple issues because -- surprise, surprise -- lobbyists aren't required to itemize how much money has been allotted for each issue.) Some of the big spenders so far this year include:
- The City of Philadelphia, which has paid two firms -- American Continental Group and Borski Associates -- a total of $70,000 to whisper sweet somethings into the ears of federal legislators over the first two quarters of fiscal year 2009. (Um, I thought the city was broke.)
- SEPTA, which has paid three firms --Duane Morris Government Affairs, Blank Rome Government Relations LLC and American Continental Group -- a total of $130,000 for the same. (Um, I thought they were broke, too.)
- The Center City Collaborative, a local real-estate trade group, which has given $100,000 to Duane Morris Government Affairs.
The only big surprise on the list was Chestnut Hill College, which paid $20,000 to Mary E. Shields Government Relations LLC.
The Philadelphia press has written much about the college's plans to undergo a massive, $500 million expansion.
We know that CHC, a Catholic institution, wants a zoning variance for an Institutional Development District, which would allow the college to move ahead with consecutive construction projects without getting zoning variances at each step. We also know that the college's two campuses are bisected by Germantown Avenue, and that the college lies in a historic district.
Still, it's not clear why the college would be lobbying on transportation issues.
Perhaps that will come out at a public confession.
The Philadelphia press has written much about the college's plans to undergo a massive, $500 million expansion.
We know that CHC, a Catholic institution, wants a zoning variance for an Institutional Development District, which would allow the college to move ahead with consecutive construction projects without getting zoning variances at each step. We also know that the college's two campuses are bisected by Germantown Avenue, and that the college lies in a historic district.
Still, it's not clear why the college would be lobbying on transportation issues.
Perhaps that will come out at a public confession.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
