Coming Internet fight promises a Web of intrigue
CT@Work
By Leo Canty
Published: Thursday, October 29, 2009 12:07 PM EDT

The sides are lining up in the corners of the ring for the big contest: Tel-Com Giants in one corner, Internet Heavyweights in the other. But they’re not the only ones in this fight. Congress, consumers, labor, business and Net-nerds are also staking their spots on the mat, making their presence and preferences known.

There’s a lot at stake for the winners and losers in this battle over the future of the Internet for America.

Are you ready for this rumble?

Most Internet users know how to punch the keys to check e-mail, do some e-shopping or engage in other forms of e-browsing or business. The ubiquitous Net is always there on your laptop, desktop, or portable portal waiting for your command to do something. And we’re commanding in increasing numbers.What we’ve been overlooking lately is what it takes to provide that access and who really owns it.

There are also issues about the complex system and type of infrastructure needed to provide that access.And let’s not forget all the politics that will ultimately surround the call on who will win or lose.“Net Neutrality” is the promoter of the big fight. The argument, in an overly simplified description, is: Should the Internet be a free, open, accessible information highway for the use and benefit of anyone that gets on it? Or should it be managed and controlled allowing for restricted access — as determined by that free market that has done so well for us of late?

The FCC has begun drafting the rules and answering those questions as it moves to define “Net Neutrality.” It’s about time.

Many nations are way ahead of us on the issues of Internet access rules and expansion. We have more users but we’re falling behind rapidly in penetration, especially with high- speed broadband. We are way behind No. 1 e-nation South Korea, and Estonia is a few pegs above us.

We are collectively in another contest outside the ring, inside the global marketplace. Technology, fast and available, boosts nations in this competitive environment. Wide-open, unrestricted paths make it easier to achieve better economic outcomes. Jobs, education, health care, government services, social connections, services for the disabled, safety, and security can all be enhanced with fewer controls and restrictions on Net access, along with a faster, expanded system.

Understandably the Tel-Com Giants have an issue in their desire to restrict the flow. The current Internet infrastructure — that stuff we’re ignoring — is limited now and may not be able to handle a big expansion of volume. Capacity is an issue.

Net Neutrality opponents shout that argument from their corner. More likely, they’re less able to boost big, fast profits without more control of the supply as demand increases. It’s about money. Lots of money.

The real question is: Should a bunch of Tel-Coms make a ton of money, or should a ton of companies make a bunch of money? Access restrictions could also hamper free speech and grow our technology divide. It’s a big issue that we’ll hear a lot more about soon.

The Tel-Com Giants can’t foot the bill for a big Net expansion, especially if they can’t monopolize profit-boosting outcomes. So why don’t we all invest in the program and get a jump on nations like South Korea and Estonia. Other countries are investing in their Net structures, they see the potential for a great return with jobs and enhanced lives.

Ding! A winner!

And here’s some information about a winning plan for us. The Communications Workers of America is focused on the Internet, speed and broadband jobs expansion, and people all across America. Punch those keys for www.speedmatters.org and find out about the Net stuff CWA has been paying attention to while we were e-mailing and browsing.

Our nation can’t afford to get knocked out of the ring in the global economic bout because we’re too slow. Americans surely don’t want to be left out of the loop when it comes to Internet-access rules.

Let’s hope the FCC and Congress makes us all winners in this fight.

Leo Canty is a labor and political activist. He lives in Windsor.

JournalInquirer.com

In tough times like these, chicken is better than pork
CT@Work
By Leo Canty

Published: Thursday, October 22, 2009 12:04 PM EDT

My dad’s birthday is today. If he were alive we’d be celebrating his 101st. His generation was indelibly marked by tumultuous times, most significantly the Great Depression. My father survived the struggle, but his stories of suffering and want resonated. He never wanted to see an economic disaster affect the lives of future generations the way the Depression affected his. But now we’re coming close.

Bread lines were commonplace in Depression times. Wall Street’s greed and corruption forced mass numbers of unfortunate victims — working families like yours and mine — into a struggle to survive. More than 13 million people lost their jobs. No paychecks; no government safety net. The lifeline to survival was a long line and wait for a loaf of bread from the local charity so the family didn’t starve that day. It was a shameful and scary experience for too many proud Americans.

This month unemployment put 15 million jobless workers in the struggle to get food on the table. Government assistance programs shrunk the woes of the Great Depression but, sadly, America is increasingly the land of the shredded safety net and the growing Wall Street bonus program. Charitable organizations are still left to pick up the slack.

In communities like Manchester, dedicated food resources are available for people in need. But this recession has sent more people hunting for help, straining food inventories.Dale Doll, the food services director for the Manchester Area Conferences of Churches, runs a successful food pantry as one of the services MACC provides. Midday hot meals, the food pantry, and counseling are all part of the program. Its food assistance volume has jumped as much as 49 percent at certain times during the last year as MACC’s 800 to 900 monthly clients increased to about 1,700.

As the lingering budget battle raged at the Capitol, MACC made the news as the legislature added a $150,000 appropriation for the food bank ($75,000 each year of the biennium).

A food-fight then broke out between Gov. Jodi Rell and the legislature, as they flung rhubarb pies at each other over the issue. The governor’s attempt to line-item veto what she labeled “pork” failed. MACC received $75,000 this year and more hungry people are being helped.

Doll appreciates the funding. So does the community that needs the help. But she maintains a light-hearted attitude about the drama. When asked her about it she said, “We don’t have much pork here; chicken is better.”

Doll gets it. The community gets it. Citizens understand that bad times need good deeds, so that attitude has helped stock MACC’s pantry shelves.

The governor and her pork-slicing pals should visit MACC to get a closer look at real need.

But food alone cannot manage the crisis of need for those sinking in the current economic crisis.

The MACC staff works with people who have never had to manage their food or make a plan on how to eat healthy with no resources. They are coached in new survival skills, and shown where to go for services they never thought they’d need. More staff, more counseling, and more survival knowledge imparted help more people for longer stretches of bad times. But that takes more resources.Hats off to the staff and volunteers. They are the ones witnessing the psychological, social, and economic damage being done to innocent people.

Losing a job and not being able to provide for one’s family is a debilitating experience. The first time people come to MACC they are often humbled but still hopeful that will be their last visit. But, when they come back the second or third or fourth time, drained spirits become obvious to the staff. Support and encouragement for the weary become more important than food.

Those scenes boiled out of the cauldron of the Great Depression. Stories I heard from my dad and Dale Doll. Thank goodness we have the strong shoulders of staff and volunteers at work at MACC and in numerous pantries around Connecticut. It’s good to know there’s someone who wants to help and really cares in times like these.

Maybe the governor could work on internalizing the issue a bit. She could always maintain her stance on no pork for food banks and still help out. Doll would rather have a chicken in every pot anyway.

Leo Canty is a labor and political activist. He lives in Windsor

JournalInquirer.com

Why are there so many bad bosses out there?
CT@Work
By Leo Canty
Published: Thursday, October 15, 2009 1:07 PM EDT

Friday is National Bosses Day. Let me do my part by giving a big cheer for bosses on their special day. If it weren’t for a lot of them we probably wouldn’t have as many labor laws, labor departments, unions, and bad-boss Web sites.

Among America’s massive army of bosses, there are plenty who use their power appropriately to motivate, encourage, and support their charges in thoughtful and productive ways. They’re the ones you will see all over the place tomorrow — at lunches and happy hours laughing it up with their staffs. They get to enjoy their fawning moments and expressions of gratitude then.
No need for me to do it here.

I want to send cheers to the ones that probably won’t be getting lunch or doses of flattery. Here’s to the bosses whose knuckles drag along the ground as they visit your duty station regularly to remind you who is the boss. They’re whip crackers, constantly pushing for more output with less reward. Let’s give a shout out to those sociopaths that love to make you shudder in your boots, fear for your job, and keep that knot in your stomach nice and tight well after you punch out. They ratchet up workplace tension to ulcer-producing levels and have you asking yourself every day if you’re going back tomorrow.

Bad bosses are common, and chasing ways to deal with them commonplace. Do a “bad bosses” Google search and up comes 19.9 million Web references. There are scads of horror stories and even more sites offering consolation and advice. Canmybossdothat.com, in particular, offers some interesting assistance on ways to relieve bad boss afflictions.

What do you do if you have a bad boss? Quit?

Unfortunately, jobs in downturns can seem more valuable than sanity. If you leave, where do you go? The unemployment rate’s trending up toward 10 percent. Sure, go tell the bank, utilities, car dealer, and grocer, “My boss is a heartless, primal jerk, so I quit my job. Can I just, like, skip my payments for a while till I find a nice boss?”

Nope.

If you’re among the oppressed who can’t quit, rest assured you are not alone. A poll conducted by Lake Research for Working America (www.workingamerica.org) suggests that more than 50 million workers say they feel so pressed by the economy they’d rather suck it up and stay than quit because of a bad boss.

In the 150 million-member American work force, that means at least one out of every three workers won’t be lunching on burger-bites with the higher-ups Friday. They’ll more likely head out to TGIF happy hours with co-workers to beef about their bosses instead.

In times such as these, we all wish workers and bosses would bond in a more supportive and united all-in-this-together mode. But it’s not working that way. The bad times seem to be transforming way too many bosses into “dysfunctional, disrespectful, dishonest, demonic dictators,” as one Web site puts it.

The sad part about it all is that productivity is not enhanced with primal behavior and work force whippings. It is reduced. Yet too many of those in charge, or almost in charge, still harbor the belief they can intimidate, threaten, abuse, or disrespect people to get the job done.

Think about it. There is no rocket science here. Most humans need support, coaching, feedback, encouragement, and sometimes a simple “please” and “thank you” to make things work better. Some employers have even figured out that improving wages and benefits works wonders for morale and production.

Go figure.

Leo Canty is a labor and political activist. He lives in Windsor.

JournalInquirer.com

Benefits need protection too
CT@Work
By Leo Canty
Published October 8, 2009

Has the bad economy got you working harder with longer hours and more on-the-job-stress for the same or less pay? Do you go home every day wondering if you’ll have a job tomorrow, even though you’re now doing two jobs? Has your paid time off, bonuses, 401(k) matches, medical benefits, access to the nap room or the company Mercedes been shrunk or lost?

Wait a minute – nap room, Mercedes?

Well, if this happened to you – you’re not alone.

The captains of business and industry are chasing the crown in the competition to steal the title “King of Slicing and Dicing” away from Ron Popeil. Yesiree – wearing their scheme-cooking aprons and sharpening up their wage and benefit Chop-O-Matics, they are hard at work making sure American workers are working harder for less. The free market rules!

The Society for Human Resource Management, recently surveyed 522 human resource professionals regarding 274 benefits that companies offer. The results showed what we already know: benefits are being dropped or frozen in most places. The economic slump is taking its toll on the items most people covet as just reward for their hard work.

That slice-and-dice approach to boost profits is everywhere and that’s not a good thing. Employee morale and productivity are very much tied to how well one is treated at work. While the Chop-O-Matic approach may work for the accountants and next quarter’s returns, the effect and impact on both the company and the workers morale is breeding some tough long term productivity challenges.

The bitter irony is that while the fortunes of the workforce are diminishing, the bosses are getting a boost. According to the AFL-CIO’s Executive Paywatch site, while the economy was tanking last year, CEO benefits (just benefits) grew to $336,248 on average. The bosses, in other words, get well rewarded while gutting their companies, workers and even shareholder gains. Seems to be just a bit out of balance.

So why does this happen? Because we let it. It’s quick, easy and legal.

But there are ways to better balance the workplace economy. Jobs, wages and benefits can be more stable, less stressful and boost morale and productivity. A unionized workplace certainly makes a difference, adding workforce benefit security while preventing wild grabs for profit boosting benefit slashing. Granted, nap rooms or the company Mercedes are not in union contracts; but working family necessities like health care plans, retirement security, paid time off and other benefits are and can be better protected.

Laws can also be enacted to shield people from the dire consequences of unrestrained free-market thinking. Real enforceable rules can uphold fundamental workers’ rights and basic human needs without subverting capitalism but rather by tempering its gangster instincts. Weak labor law in our country has exacerbated, not improved, the wage and wealth gap and has left our benefit structure way too vulnerable to corporate piracy.

Sharan Burrow, the highest-ranking union leader in the world, has some insight about the global workforce. She will offer her thoughts in this and future columns. Sharan is President of the global union body, the International Trade Union Confederation has 307 national affiliates representing 168 million workers in 154 countries and territories. Her view of workers, labor laws and unions peeks through a much larger lens than ours.

Sharan points out that in her country, Australia, and many European countries legally guaranteed health benefits, vacation and sick time, pensions and other benefits make them immune from employer slicing and dicing. What these laws may not cover, strong union contracts can. Does that hamper the free market? Nope. Many of those countries are in the same top wage tiers as America. Difference is, the wage gaps are smaller and hard work brings guaranteed just rewards that can’t be stolen.

A few of these solutions might be worth a look if we can just get out of our collective Chop-O-Matic box. Real action is needed to make our system more balanced. But then again – maybe the status quo isn’t that bad. Hey, if any boss can set up nap rooms or let staff use the company Mercedes, maybe that’ll catch on and a wave of corporate generosity can swell across America boosting benefits for all workers.

Hmmm. Corporate generosity or laws and contracts? It’s hard to figure out which is better.

Leo Canty is a labor and political activist. He lives in Windsor.
Send me your comments at unionleo@aol.com or
discuss the issues at www.ctatwork.blogspot.com

JournalInquirer.com
We need a governor who does something
CT@Work
By Leo Canty
Published: Thursday, October 1, 2009 12:11 PM EDT

“If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.” It’s an old adage of unknown origin which, when Googled, gets attributed to Alexander Hamilton, Ginger Rogers, Malcolm X, and Dr. Phil. I can’t quite find a connection among them but I do have a connection for us: We’ve been duped.

If you look at the polls most of the public really thinks Gov. Jodi Rell stands for something. She stands for smaller government. She stands for lower taxes. She looks out for those in need. The governor wants people to have jobs and health care, and kids to get a good education.
No wonder Rell’s so popular. She stands for all the right things.

But a closer look tells us that when all is said and done, the governor has said more and done less.

This year, as Connecticut stared down the barrel of a $9 billion deficit, Rell stood for balancing the budget without raising taxes. She knew she couldn’t do that. So she stood strong, all right — first with a fabricated budget that was a couple billion short, then with vetoes and blustery fights that mostly protected the suffering wealthy.

In September she huffed and puffed and allowed the long-delayed budget package to pass without her signature but with a sternly issued threat to wield her line-item veto pen. The line-item act was all bluster and bluffing.But it was classic Rell. She stands up for the elderly and the poor, then in that budget labels as “pork” programs that reduce the more than $100 million in costs associated with injuries suffered by the elderly and provide funding for a local food bank that spends every dime it gets in starvation prevention. “Pork?”

Here’s more classic Rell: Her strong stand this year against raising taxes was projected as if she had a philosophical commitment to the cause etched in her bones. Yet in 2007 she was the one who proposed the half- percent income tax increase across the board.Rell stands for smaller government as she attempts to reduce the rolls of public-service workers that grew under her watch and that of her mentor, John Rowland. Her proposal to lower the numbers fostered a retirement incentive that she knew would save a few bucks now but shift greater costs to the pension plan and actually expand the cost of government without elevating public services.

She stands for jobs and wants our state to grow and get people to work. Prior to the economic collapse, Connecticut already ranked near the bottom in job creation.The recently released economic development strategic plan is loaded with references about the necessity and desire to make our state a jobs magnet, but there’s nothing in the “how to” section to back up the “we stand for” claim.

Rell stood squarely in opposition to same-sex marriage. Then, when a bill was passed, she became the only governor to sign off on civil unions without a court order.

She’s a staunch advocate for early childhood education in a state that’s an early childhood laggard when compared to most others.

How about truck safety? Transportation? Smart growth? Property tax reform? The list is huge — and bereft of accomplishment.

There’s a pattern here: Our governor stands for everything and falls short on the doing part.

This technique is not new. It’s a page out of the cynical Rowland playbook: If you can fool most of the people most of the time your poll numbers stay high, no one asks questions, and you get re-elected. Rell may not be headed to jail like her predecessor, but you get the idea.

Rell’s Betty Crocker act worked for a while. But now, five years into her game, the poll numbers aren’t standing up as people are asking questions about her leadership and why Connecticut is falling further behind.Jobs, education, health care, our overall quality of life — all of it is suffering under the rudderless leadership of the Good Ship Jodi-pop.

Our economic future and our children’s lives are hanging in the balance. Maybe it’s time for a governor who actually stands for doing something.As the ever-quotable Dr. Phil would say, “It’s time to get real.”

Leo Canty is a labor and political activist. He lives in Windsor