More than a decade after it sparked massive protests in the state capital, a Wisconsin judge on Monday struck down a controversial law that effectively ended public sector collective bargaining in the state.
In his final judgement, Dane County Circuit Judge Jacob Frost crossed out 85 sections of the 2011 law known as Act 10, which was championed by then-Republican Gov. Scott Walker. Frost’s ruling restored the union rights of teachers, sanitation workers, nurses, and other public sector employees.
“When we announced our intention to protest today, our management attempted to stop us in multiple ways. We want to say to Amazon—you could not stop us today, you cannot stop us in the future,” said one union leader.
Amazon workers in Bad Hersfeld, Germany participate in a demonstration as part of the “Make Amazon Pay” campaign. Photo: UNI Global Union/X
Amazon workers and their allies are participating in a series of global actions aimed at holding the online retailer “accountable for labor abuses, environmental degradation, and threats to democracy,” according to the labor group UNI Global Union.
Dubbed “Make Amazon Pay,” the campaign is set to last from November 29 to December 2 and will include strikes and protests across six continents, according to the group—and is timed to disrupt Black Friday (or “Make Amazon Pay Day”) and Cyber Monday, two of the busiest online shopping days of the year.
The DOL pick has sparked debates about how much she will actually “do right by workers” and whether “Teamsters president Sean O’Brien and Donald Trump are effectively dividing the labor movement.”
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, center, poses for a photo with Congresswoman Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.) and International Brotherhood of Teamsters general president Sean O’Brien. Photo: Sean O’Brien/X
Amid a flurry of Friday night announcements about key roles in the next Trump administration, one stood out to union leaders and other advocates for working people: Congresswoman Lori Chavez-DeRemer, an Oregon Republican, for labor secretary.
Chavez-DeRemer, who lost her reelection bid to Democrat Janelle Bynum earlier this month, “has built a pro-labor record in Congress, including as one of only three Republicans to co-sponsor the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act and one of eight Republicans to co-sponsor the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act,” said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler in a statement.
“The fact that Trump is railing against the PRESS Act tells us everything we need to know: He wants no shackles when it comes to attacking, intimidating, silencing the press,” warned one legal expert.
Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Glendale, AZ on August 23, 2024. Photo: Gage Skidmore/flickr/CC
Journalists and press freedom advocates this week responded to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s attack on a proposed federal shield law with renewed calls for the Senate to pass the House-approved bill before he returns to office in January.
“REPUBLICANS MUST KILL THIS BILL!” Trump said on his social media platform Wednesday, responding to a new “PBS News Hour” segment in which Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), discussed the proposal’s importance.
“Today’s decision better protects workers’ freedom to make their own choices in exercising their rights,” said the chair of the National Labor Relations Board.
In a decision that advocates say will likely be reversed during the second administration of Republican U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, the National Labor Relations Board on Wednesday ruled that employers cannot force workers to attend anti-union speeches.
The NLRB’s 3-1 decision in Amazon.com Services, LLC means that workers will no longer have to take part in so-called “captive audience meetings,” which employers often use as a union-busting tool and a form of coercion. The agency explained that such meetings violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act “because they have a reasonable tendency to interfere with and coerce employees.”
Argentine president Javier Milei. Photo: Mídia NINJA/CC
As the world absorbs the shockwave of Donald Trump’s win in the US presidential election, the playbook for his second term, designed by a handful of right-wing extremists, is already underway in Argentina.
Project 2025 is set out in a nearly 900-page ‘Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise’, produced by the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing US think tank, as a ready reckoner for the incoming Trump administration. It details authoritarian tactics that exist in various parts of the world, from attacking public education to dismantling policies to tackle climate change to restricting the rights of women, LGBTIQ+ people, migrants, workers and Black people. But if there is one country already trying some of Project 2025’s most extreme policies to weaken the state and render the enjoyment of rights obsolete, it is Argentina.
With the recent deployment of the US’s most advanced anti-missile system to Israel, manned by American troops, it looks ever more likely that the US is preparing for war with Iran. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu may be planning an ‘October surprise’ in order to sway the upcoming presidential election in favour of Donald Trump. In such circumstances it seems sensible to hold off speculating on the future of America and the world until after the November election.
But this is also a special moment of high anxiety. We face what may be a definitive turning point in modern history. Personally, I feel my entire political life is on the block. It’s a strange sensation; one that combines a feeling of vindication that I’ve been right all along even as I sense the axe blade of modern fascism above my neck about to sever any hope for a progressive future.
Musk’s latest attempt to aid Donald Trump “appears to veer smack dab into violating federal law against paying people to register and vote,” said Public Citizen.
Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk may be able to “throw his money around in an attempt to directly influence the outcome of this election,” as one legal expert said of his latest ploy to help Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, but consumer advocacy watchdog Public Citizen on Wednesday said Musk has crossed a legal line in recent days by offering voters direct cash payments in exchange for signing a petition.
The group filed a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) over Musk’s pledge to award a randomly selected registered voter in a swing state with $1 million each day until Election Day, if they sign a petition in favor of the First and Second Amendments.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated that Republican nominee Donald Trump’s campaign proposals “would dramatically worsen Social Security’s finances.”
Republican nominee Donald Trump’s claim that he wants to “fight for and protect Social Security” was called into further question Monday after a conservative think tank released an analysis projecting that the former president’s economic proposals and mass deportation plan would significantly damage the New Deal program’s finances.
The new analysis from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) specifically focuses on Trump’s proposals to end taxes on tips, Social Security benefits, and overtime pay; implement sweeping tariffs on imports; and launch what he’s described as the “largest domestic deportation operation in American history.”
The think tank projected that, if enacted, Trump’s agenda would “increase Social Security’s 10-year cash shortfall by $2.3 trillion through FY 2035” and “lead to a 33% across-the-board benefit cut in 2035, up from the 23% [the Congressional Budget Office] projects under current law.”
Trump’s plans would also “increase Social Security’s annual shortfall by roughly 50% in FY 2035” and “advance insolvency by three years, from FY 2034 to FY 2031.”
“Trump has said he would close Social Security’s long-term shortfall by increasing drilling for oil and natural gas and by growing the economy,” the analysis notes. “However, we’ve shown that increased energy exploration is unlikely to have a meaningful effect on Social Security—even if the gains were deposited into the trust fund. We’ve also shown that it would require unrealistically fast economic growth to close Social Security’s existing long-term funding gap.”
Social Security Works (SSW), a progressive advocacy group that supports expanding the New Deal program, highlighted CRFB’s analysis in a social media post on Monday, writing, “Donald Trump plans to slash $2.3 TRILLION from Social Security while giving massive tax handouts to Wall Street billionaires.” (The Social Security Works Political Action Committee has endorsed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris for the presidency.)
SHAMEFUL: Donald Trump's plans to slash Social Security by $2.3 TRILLION!
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare—which endorsed Harris in July—said it is “not surprising that Donald Trump’s ill-conceived plans would devastate the financial health of Social Security and lead to huge benefit cuts.”
“Trump’s plans are of a piece with his overall recklessness with Social Security. He suspended the payroll tax that funds the program during Covid—and hoped it would be eliminated,” said Richtman. “His White House budgets would have slashed Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) by billions of dollars. He said earlier this year that he was ‘open’ to ‘cutting entitlements,’ then tried to walk it back. He once called Social Security a ‘Ponzi Scheme.’ Time and again, Trump has chosen political expediency without considering—or caring about—the consequences. Despite his posturing, Donald Trump is no friend to Social Security or American seniors.”
In a footnote of its analysis, CRFB states that Harris’ proposals thus far “would not have large effects on Social Security trust fund solvency.”
The Harris campaign quickly seized on CRFB’s findings. Joseph Costello, a spokesperson for the Harris campaign, said in a statement Monday that “Donald Trump’s agenda poses an imminent threat to Social Security, and seniors could have their benefits cut by a third.”
“This is yet another reason that Americans simply cannot afford the risk of another Trump term, where he would pursue unchecked power to use his Project 2025 agenda to hurt the American people,” said Costello. “Vice President Harris is committed to protecting Social Security benefits and is the only candidate who will actually fight for seniors, not just pay them lip service on the campaign trail.”
According to the latest report from Social Security’s Board of Trustees, the program is currently positioned to fully pay all benefits and administrative costs until 2035. Thereafter, even if Congress does nothing to shore up the program, it would be able to pay 83% of scheduled benefits.
To bring in more revenue and ensure Social Security’s solvency through the end of the century, progressives in Congress have called for raising or scrapping the payroll tax cap, which allows the rich to stop contributing to the program just weeks into each year while ordinary Americans pay in year-round.
The Harris campaign has broadly signaled support for that approach, saying in its economic policy platform that the Democratic nominee would “shore up Social Security and Medicare so that these essential programs will stay solvent in the long run by making corporations and the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share in taxes.”
This work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
Lilly Ledbetter speaks during the second day of the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado. Photo: Qqqqqq/Wikimedia Commons/CC
Labor unions and women’s advocacy groups on Monday paid tribute to Lilly Ledbetter, the former Goodyear employee whose fight for equal pay made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress, after her death at the age of 86—with economic justice advocates hailing Ledbetter as “an icon.”
“Lilly Ledbetter simply wanted to be paid the same as her male Goodyear co-workers,” said the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) on social media. But to workers who have benefited from the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, added the union, “she was a true hero.”
