Op-Ed In the Rutland Herald and Times Argus newspapers, December 2002
By James Haslam
When workers organize to collectively bargain fair wages, benefits, and safe working conditions they are exercising a basic and important human right. They are struggling for dignity and justice at work, but also in the local community.
“Working conditions are living conditions. Healthy and safe workplaces that compensate fairly, raise the standard of living in our communities,” says Dan Brush, President of GCIU 745c, the union at Capital City Press in Barre. “The effects of poverty, such as crime, domestic violence, and untreated illness, are devastating to a healthy community. I strongly believe that unions make communities better places to live.”
The connections between people organizing unions and the benefits to greater society are endless. Unions struggled for many benefits we now take for granted, such as the eight-hour-day, the minimum wage, social security, the end of child labor and the public school system. In Vermont, we have some more recent examples.
In August of 2000, over a hundred nursing home workers organized a union at Berlin Health & Rehabilitation Center (BH&RC) for livable wages and working conditions, but also for the ability to provide proper care. In doing so they created a public debate about proper staffing, and shed light on industry-wide problems. So the state agencies investigated, and because of those members, regulatory steps have begun to assure proper staffing in Vermont’s nursing homes. Quality care also united over a thousand Registered Nurses at Fletcher Allen Health Care (FAHC) to form a union in October. We’re all better off now that nurses have a voice with management.
But organizing isn’t easy. The laws, which supposedly protect our right to organize, are weak and poorly enforced. Employers harass, misinform and intimidate to create confusion to scare their employees from organizing. It’s a $300-million a year industry consulting corporations to use these coercive tactics. Some of the biggest national union-busting firms have been involved in local organizing campaigns. BH&RC hired Jackson & Lewis out of Connecticut (who are holding a seminar on “How to Stay Union-free” for healthcare employers throughout Vermont and New Hampshire on December 12th in White River Junction at Hotel Coolidge where dozens of community members plan to protest this activity in our community). FAHC hired Adams, Haskell, Nash & Sheridan from Kentucky. Both corporations waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on these union-busters whose sole job to thwart workers from organizing. To succeed despite these obstacles, workers need support from the community.
“The community support we got made a tremendous difference,” says Jennifer Henry, RN at Fletcher Allen. “Knowing so many people were behind us went a long way saying what we were doing was right and we could win.” [On October 3 & 4, the RN’s voted almost 2-to-1 to form a union despite the expensive campaign waged against them.]
Unionized workers bargain for the whole job market. For instance, the wage increases and benefits the Burlington nurses negotiate will positively affect other healthcare workers throughout Vermont. With their ability to negotiate, manufacturing unions raise the bar for the rest in the industry. And don’t believe the myth that by forming a union and bargaining forces corporations to relocate out of Vermont. That’s just a fear tactic from employers who want to retain the power to dictate everything. Statistically, non-union plants move more often than union plants.
“We are the absolute last people who want to see our plant move,” says Bob South, President of UE Local 234, the union at Fairbanks Scales in St. Johnsbury. “If the company is hurting financially, we invite them to open the books so we can be part of the discussion of how to keep things running, and still get treated fairly. We pray that they stay, but if they leave, we’re better off having a union to negotiate the terms of a severance package.”
In our system, unions are the best way to fight for economic justice and safe working conditions. And as wealth disparity continues to grow, it becomes harder to find good jobs in Vermont and more difficult to support families. We have to fight back as a community.
Recently the religious community has gotten involved in labor struggles, many issuing teachings on the topic like the following from the Roman Catholic Church:
“The Church fully supports the rights of workers to form unions or other associations to secure their rights to fair wages and working conditions. This is a specific application of the more general right to associate…No one may deny the right to organize without attacking human dignity itself. Therefore, we firmly oppose organized efforts, such as those regrettably seen in this country, to break existing unions or prevent workers from organizing.”
The community makes a difference. Just because laws that protect workers are inadequate, it doesn’t mean we have to tolerate intimidating corporate behavior. If neighbors, friends and congregations stand together with workers we can make union-busting campaigns unacceptable. We can hold corporations accountable to the values we hold dear - democracy, freedom and equality. Labor struggles are community struggles and we all need to get involved.
James Haslam is the director of the Vermont Workers’ Center, a community organization committed to fighting for workers’ rights. With questions or comments contact 802-229-0009 or info [at] workerscenter [dot] org
Labor Struggles Are Community Struggles
Workers' Center Director Receives Top Labor Award
VT AFL-CIO Press Release, October 9, 2002
Burlington - At the Vermont State Labor Council AFL-CIO Convention Saturday, September 14th James Haslam was awarded the Lena Brown Labor Award, Vermont's top labor award. Haslam is the Executive Director of the Vermont Workers' Center. Past recipients of this prestigious award include longtime labor supporter and Ludlow state legislator John Murphy and current US Congressman Bernard Sanders.
"James has brought a lot of energy and a tremendous amount of commitment to the struggle for justice for the working people of Vermont," said Ron Pickering, President of the State Federation of Labor. "The work that he and so many other great worker activists are doing at the Vermont Workers' Center has really made a huge impact on the labor movement in this state. Whether it's educating people on economic issues effecting Vermonters, encouraging solidarity amongst all different types of workers throughout the state or fighting the abuses of workers, the Workers' Center has made a crucial difference in many of our lives."
The Lena Brown Labor Award was established to honor the person that has gone above and beyond in their commitment to workers in this state. It is named in honor of Lena Brown, who signed the original charter for the State Labor Council and committed her life to the labor movement in Vermont.
The Vermont Workers' Center was established in 1996 and has an office in Montpelier. It is a non-profit community organization committed to fighting for workers' rights and economic justice. The Vermont Workers' Center is a coalition of labor and community organizations and they are part of a national workers' rights campaign called Jobs with Justice. The work of the organization is mostly done by volunteers, who are comprised of union and non-union Vermonters who work together in the struggle for fairness and justice. They operate the Vermont Workers' Rights Hotline, which is toll-free 866-229-0009.
The Struggle
A poem dedicated to the Steering Committee of the Vermont Workers' Center and performed at the 2nd Annual Burlington Labor Day Weekend Parade & Picnic at Battery Park August 31, 2002.
By James Haslam
All these plant closings keep going down.
Town after town,
These Corporations just ain't foolin' around.
Can you hear the sound, of that last closing bell ringing?
'Cause the fat woman has been singing
Farewell to Kimberly-Clark, Book Press, Ethan Allen, Stanley Tools
And many more that are going down because of these free trade rules.
Stanley Tools, who played Vermonters like fools.
We made them money for 96 years!
Shaftsbury was Stanley's most profitable plant in the Northern Hemisphere,
But they go to China and leave us in tears.
Folks be poaching deers to put food on the table,
And now the strong and the able
Have no means
As a result of these free market schemes
These nightmares that were American Dreams
The Many struggle for bread, but you betcha the Few got their cream.
Doesn't it steam ya, that last year IBM's CEO Sam Palmisano had $70 million dollar payoff
And now they're talking about yet another IBM layoff.
Friends this is way-off
We try to form unions, our own organizations
And we are met with brutalization
Corporations are against civilization.
So let's ask the question
Why - is our economy run as a private tyranny
When we are suppose to live in a Democracy?
We can still all remember that word, right?
Democracy?
When it works for you
And it works for me
It works for us
And we means we.
'Cause if we keep letting the golfing crowd do the math
They'll have us all working in retail sales, as cashiers or as waitstaff
And I don't think we want that to be our epitaph
Because as we feel the wrath of Corporate power
And folks are trying to get by on $6.25 an hour.
In this shower of injustice, this tidal wave of greed
When Corporate profits come before human need..
We can read the writing on the wall
We're struggling now, and even if our victories are small
We're beginning to learn that an injury to one IS and injury to all.
We're beginning to understand that Solidarity is more than just a word, and we can feel it in our bones.
And as this movement grows, we go out on the streets, knock on doors, pickup phones..
And no matter our skin tones, sexual preferences, gender or religion
Together, workers united, damn! We can win!
Vermont's Workers Need to Protect Their Rights
August 2002
By Dawn Stanger, Vermont Workers Center Steering Committee Member
It's only natural for employers to seek concessions from workers. Improvements in working conditions, wages, benefits and Vermont's environment -- all undermine profits.
The only way this system becomes accountable is when workers struggle to get their fair share. We cannot sit back and accept what we're "given." Our profit-seeking system, by its very nature, demands that employers manipulate accounting and throw money into politics, corrupting our "democracy" and getting special favors.
If workers don't struggle against it, the system spits them out, as Enroners and IBMers now see. In a capitalist economy, the people who run it are first and foremost trying to get rich and things like the rights of workers just get in the way.
Historically, there has been only one way for workers to increase their rights and gain power -- uniting and acting together. As workers, when we have the ability to make collective, democratic decisions and act in all of our interests, we can make improvements for all of us.
Bosses call unions "third parties," insinuating outside forces, but unions are really a second party. When we're organized, we have the right to sit down and bargain our conditions, not have them imposed on us. Unions are democratic, and union members have a voice in how they run their organization and they often argue about what is the best thing for them to do. And this is the sort of thing everybody deserves, to have democratic rights in all aspects of our lives.
CEO pay is now a ridiculous 600 times the average worker's pay in the United States. Income and wealth disparity between the rich and the rest of us is the worst it's ever been. Our health-care, with 44 million Americans uncovered and sky-rocketing rates, has hit rock-bottom. If workers' concerns were addressed in politics, we'd already have universal health care like all the other civilized nations do. When corporate excess reaches the present level, and people mistakenly believe that the stock market reflects workers' goals, we've got big trouble.
We're the Vermonters getting laid off and struggling to get by. Rich people might go on fewer vacations, but workers have to make tough choices between things such as clothes for our kids, medication, food and heat. But the fact is we do have to worry about those things, while the rich are still getting richer.
For years there has been an attack on our living standards -- the top 5 percent are ripping us off. They're avoiding taxes, moving companies to other countries, and cheating us out of our old-age money. We need to get over those stupid barriers between workers, white-collar, blue-collar stuff, union, non-union, and get our act together. Employers play hardball and our team has gotten soft.
I write as a member of the Vermont Workers' Center. I load trucks for a living. I've become militant with good reason. I've spoken to hundreds of Vermonters on our Workers' Rights Hotline. There is little fairness in a system manipulated by transnational corporations.
The Workers Center and Vermont's labor unions will not tolerate this disparity in our communities and we are groups of workers fighting back
We invite all workers in Vermont to come celebrate the fact that we all trudge off to work each day, dependably, all year long, to earn a living, making the economic wheels of our state turn. Gathering at 11 a.m. Saturday we're parading from H.O. Wheeler in Burlington's North End to Battery Park, then throwing a free picnic for all who join us.
Vermont's workers need to take back our state from the bosses. Let's start by taking back Labor Day Weekend for workers.
Dawn Stanger is a Teamster who lives in Underhill and is a steering committee member of the Vermont Workers' Center. For more information about the Labor March and Picnic, call 863-2345, Ext. 8. For the Vermont Workers' Rights Hotline, call toll-free (866) 229-0009.
Free Trade Is Bad For Everybody
(That is, except Executives and Shareholders of Mega Corporations)
Op-Ed in Rutland Herald, August 2002
by James Haslam
On August 6th the Rutland Herald ran an editorial "Back On Track" which began "President Bush signed legislation Tuesday giving him authority to negotiate international trade agreements without interference from Congress." The editorial went on to say that, "Because of the benefits that free trade brings to the economies of both the United States and its trading partners, it is good for the president to have that authority. " The people who would most agree with that opinion are the heads of multinational corporations. However, for the majority of people in Vermont, and in the US, and the rest of the world - the "free trade" agreements like NAFTA and Free Trade Area of the Americas are almost entirely destructive.
"Free trade" policies simply allow corporations to freely access cheaper labor markets. Manufacturing facilities are moved to poorer nations - which have miniscule wages, often terrible working conditions and far fewer environmental regulations. Often these conditions result from direct interference by the US government, international financial institutions (such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund) and/or the multinational corporations themselves.
The idea that President Bush will be able to solely negotiate international free trade agreements - is downright terrifying. What the editorial calls "interference from Congress" is basically the way our country's Constitution is meant to work. Through our elected representatives we have some degree of democratic control on major policies. What Bush and this paper are supporting is almost completely undemocratic.
In Vermont we are fortunate to have a representative in Washington who actually acts in the interest of the majority of Vermonters - working people. Rep. Bernie Sanders has consistently stood up for working Vermonters, and that's a big deal.
Congressman Sanders recently released a report "The Real Cost of 'Free Trade'", which includes statistics that promoters of free trade policies downplay, if not ignore. For instance, the net loss of jobs as a result of these "free trade" policies from 1994-2000 totaled over 6,000 jobs in Vermont and over 3 million nationally. Ask the folks who feel free trade firsthand what they think of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Families devastated by layoffs at Shaftsbury's Stanley Tools, Bennington's Johnson Controls, Orleans' Ethan Allen, Newport's Bogner, St. Johnsbury's Sheftex, and Springfield's Fair-Rite Products, Cone Blanchard, and Fellows Corporation - just to name a few.
Many of these jobs were high paying blue-collar jobs, and as they leave Vermont they are being replaced with low-wage, often part-time service sector jobs. According to a report by the Vermont Department of Employment and Training the three fastest growing occupational titles through 2005 will be waiters/waitresses, retail sales and cashiers. In addition to being low-paying, these positions unfortunately also often come without any benefits. Is this the future free trade offers Vermont?
What we need are trade policies that that make sense for people and the environment. The way they are currently crafted is solely for corporate stockholder profits. The editorial rightfully pointed out the devastating results of "doctrinaire loyalty to the tenets of free trade" in Russia and Argentina. But it also stated "Bush has carried out several shamefully political acts of protectionism". Confusingly enough, it says on one hand Bush supports free trade, which is somehow good unless left completely "free", but on the other hand Bush is wrong for handpicking corporations to protect.
But let's be clear, the corporations that basically run our country have never really wanted "free trade". What they have wanted is to make as much money as possible, whatever the costs. Sometimes this means opening foreign labor and natural resource markets to corporate exploitation under the guise of "free trade", no matter the effect on the populations at home or abroad. But in other instances, making as much money as possible means going completely against free trade policies, for example, by having major domestic industries such as aerospace, computer technology and pharmaceuticals, be highly subsidized by the public while profits go to private shareholders.
The editorial called for something they termed "free trade-plus", which puts some fetters on corporations by including some sort of basic labor and environmental standards. Others call this crazy idea - "fair trade". And fair trade is exactly what Rep. Sanders has been fighting for. The good news is that Vermonters and millions of people around the world are joining him in the struggle to change our economy from one focused on corporate profit, to one that puts people first.
James Haslam is the Director of the Vermont Workers' Center, a community organization committed to fighting for workers' rights. With questions or comments contact 802-229-0009 or info [at] workerscenter [dot] org.
Three commentaries on the state budget crisis
Three commentaries by Workers' Center Steering Committee member Dawn Stanger on the state budget crisis. An Op-ed from the Burlington Free Press, a "That's the Way I See It" commentary from WNCS, and a statement from a February 28, 2002 rally against State Budget Cuts. All February 2002.
Op-ed in the Burlington Free Press
I just read about this 'new' proposal to avoid state service cuts by taxing the rich more than the rest of us. Every time someone raises the idea of progressive taxes, the argument is immediately countered with, "the government's doesn't have the right to ask more from the rich." I gotta ask, What kind of patriotism is it, that the rich don't feel an obligation to pay more? Weren't they raised right? Us workers were asked to spend like crazy after 9/11 (even as we were getting laid off with the highest-ever level of personal debt). And this government is our government; it has whatever rights we give it, at least in theory. Listen, is it unfair to tax childless people for schools? Many think so, but not me, though I have no kids. All of us benefit when we have smart kids in our communities. I'm willing to pay because it keeps crime down, invigorates life in my town, and, it's just....well....ethical. I was raised to do my part to better society. Often, Vermonters who use state services don't get paid enough at work or have healthcare coverage. What the state gives them is really a subsidy of sorts for their employers who won't pay livable wages. I heard Bernie Sanders' talk at the AFL-CIO's C.O.P.E. Conference last Sunday, and he urged all union members to be more active, and to bring into our discussions the question of just what our country's economic 'values' really should be. CEO pay is 531 times the average worker's pay. Hourly wages have dropped for decades. Most of us realize corporations have manipulated our government by lobbying, but we don't know the half of it. Bernie said there are 600 lobbyists in Washington to cover 535 reps. ENRON didn't pay a cent in taxes, and somehow still received refunds. 40% of Bush's tax cuts will go to the top 1%, those of us lucky enough to earn more than $350,000 a year. I think everybody better take a long, hard look our democracy lately. It's a damned auction. I want government to curb the excesses of big money. The state should tax capital gains at a higher rate than earned income. After all, how many hours do you have to work a week to earn interest. Does the work ethic only apply to welfare recipients?
Look, I make $20,000 a year loading trucks, and when ENRON pays less tax than me the system is messed up. And ENRON'S nasty policies were not just theirs, there's cut-throat atmospheres in many businesses. It's encouraged. Dog eat dog capitalism. I was disgusted to see a flag draped across ENRON's headquarters on t.v. Corporations have sneakily shifted their share of our country's taxes to us over the last few decades. 1% of Americans now have more wealth than the other 90% of us. And the top dogs run the show. There's money all over our politicians, buying "access", favorable legislation, privatization, deregulation. And you know, Argentina was following our free market policies when her citizens decided they could no longer 'go along' with the system crushing them and rose up. In the 1890's, the excesses of robber barons energized U.S. citizens to reign in excessive wealth. Then, with fairer policies, our country rose up together, rich and poor both gaining. But recently, we lost our way again. We need the government's help more than ever now, since the new wealth is multi-national. I say, tax the hell out of the rich. Rescind the budget cuts. Raise the level of services for the recession and the layoffs. We allow these monied interests to drape themselves in our flag. Tell me again there's no class war. Time for the rich to pony up. Workers want bread, but we want roses too.
Well, we'll see how this goes...
"That's the Way I See It"
Is it a new idea to tax the rich more than other Vermonters? No. But.... isn't it a good idea?
The President wanted us to shop like crazy after 9/11, while workers were getting laid off with the highest-ever level of personal debt. Now Vermont is cutting state services because of the recession. Why can't we seem to understand that capitalism is cyclical, and save for downturns? After all, who benefited from that boom? Not us workers. Just what are Vermont's economic 'values'?
The idea of cutting state services when they're most needed is just plain stupid. Vermonters often don't get paid enough or have health insurance from their jobs. The state really subsidizes employers who won't pay livable wages. Over the last decades, corporations have shifted their tax burden to us. 1% of Americans now have more wealth than the bottom 40%. CEOs make, on average, 531 times what workers make. 40% of Bush's tax cuts go to those who earn more than $350,000 a year.
I think we all better take a long, hard look at our democracy. We need our government to control these wealthy interests, not to pander to them.
Listen, I load trucks for a living. When ENRON pays less tax than me, something's rotten. Cutthroat, dog-eat-dog practices have become part of our business culture, not just at Enron, but worldwide. Rich people just buy favorable legislation now- privatization, deregulation, all those "ations" that screw the rest of us. We've seen "trickle down" scams before and we're just not gonna buy it again.
Listen; is it fair to tax childless Vermonters for schools? I believe it is, though I don't have any kids. Education lessens crime, kids invigorate my town, and, it's just, well... ethical. It's a public good. What kind of patriotism is it, that the rich don't feel an obligation to pay more? I say tax capital gains at a higher rate than earned income, not lower. After all, how many hours do you work to earn interest? Does the work ethic only apply to welfare recipients?
You can tell me again and again there's no class war in the U.S..... I'll still say it's time for the rich to pony up. You know, Argentina was following U.S. economic policies when her citizens decided they could no longer 'go along' with the economic system crushing them. I say tax the rich, rescind any budget cuts, and raise the level of services during hard times. We must all rise together. Workers want bread, but we still want roses too.
I'm Dawn Stanger with the Vermont Worker's Center, and that's the way I see it.
Statement by Dawn Stanger
Spokesperson, Vermont Workers' Center
At Rally Against State Budget Cuts, February 28, 2002
The state is talking about cutting health care programs, education, and assistance for disabled Vermonters. We already under-fund things like childcare, adult education, and employment training.
Let's be clear: cutting state services when they're most needed is just plain stupid. Vermonters often don't get paid enough or have health insurance from their jobs as it is. And the state wants to make things worse?!!!
The state budget cuts are an attack on the majority of Vermonters. They are an attack on working Vermonters. Over the last decade, the rich have profited from tax cuts while regular Vermonters have seen their real wages go down. How did the state respond to this situation?
Instead of planning for harder times, the State gave away its surplus to the rich in two separate tax cuts. I think we all better take a long, hard look at our democracy. We need a government which serves the majority, not the rich.
Listen, I load trucks for a living. When ENRON pays less tax than me, something's rotten.
The solution to our budget problems is NOT laying off state employees. It is NOT more short staffing for state workers. It is NOT wage cuts for state employees.
Instead, we need to use rainy day funds. We need to reverse the state income tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. We need to have a more progressive income tax. We need to tax stocks and bonds the same we way we tax paychecks.
You can tell me again and again there's no class war in Vermont..... but there is. It's a war by the rich and state government on working people. I say tax the rich, take back the budget cuts, and keep our badly needed public services during hard times. We must all rise together.
Proposed Cuts Will Hurt All Vermonters
Op-Ed in Burlington Free Press, February 2002
By Tenaya Lafore, Vermont Workers Center Steering Committee Member
In his Jan. 22 budget speech, Gov. Howard Dean proposed major cuts to health care and other essential public programs. In doing so, the governor threatened to rob Vermonters of basic services, but claimed to make these recommendations for their sake.
In attempting to justify his slash-and-burn approach, he said that, "While we are sympathetic to the plight of those who will receive fewer state services, we must also do our best to help people who have lost their jobs get through these tough times." Dean implies that one group of vulnerable Vermonters -- those why rely on state assistance -- must pay for the economic security of another, laid-off workers.
He gives the false impression that Vermonters who utilize public services have no choice but to fight each other for their piece of a shrinking pie. Worse, it leads one to think that cuts will somehow help unemployed workers who are struggling to support their families. Finally, he directs attention away from the real and growing division in Vermont between the few who are profiting off the economy and the majority who are not.
The perception that budget cuts will only impact a small number of Vermonters is just not true. Whether they be Vermonters who rely on some form of state assistance, have been recently laid off or have school-aged kids, "those who will receive fewer state services" are just about everyone.
The most publicized cuts impact health care and education. But dozens of other already under-funded programs are being reduced, including public transportation, employment and training, child care, housing and community mental health. Extreme short-staffing levels, layoffs and possible wage cuts in many agencies mean compromised quality of services. They also threaten the safety and livelihood of thousands of public and publicly-funded workers.
Vermonters' property taxes will likely rise to pay the cost of services the state no longer supports, and of course this cost will be passed down to renters as well. All of this means Vermonters are being asked to pay for a budget "crisis" that could have been avoided and can be solved in other ways.
While legislators argue over which services to cut, the truth is that there is plenty of money to fund all needed programs. Two examples: By instituting a more progressive tax structure, like the "Snelling" tax of 1990 which taxed the wealthy at higher rates, the state itself has estimated that $130 million would be raised in 2002. In addition, by taxing stock market profits and other capital gains at the same rate as wages -- wages are currently taxed at a higher rate -- more than $25 million more would be available.
Because most new sources of revenue won't be available until next year, the state can and should use the Rainy Day Fund now. Only half of this fund is needed to reverse all cuts for this year. As recently reported, many other states are turning to the Rainy Day Fund to make it through the recession (Burlington Free Press, Feb. 5).
Do proposals like the ones described above place an unfair burden on the rich? Consider that for the past decade, the wealthy have benefited from tax cuts and preferential treatment for stocks and other unearned income while regular Vermonters have seen their real wages go down. For example, when the tax rate was decreased from 25 percent to 24 percent of the federal rate in 1999, the top 9 percent of Vermont households received over half of the $15 million in lost state revenue. This budget "crisis" didn't just happen -- the state spent the past decade giving away its surplus instead of planning for harder times. To balance the budget on the backs of families already suffering from the current recession, when the state has the option of using the Rainy Day Fund and raising revenue through fairer taxation, is inexcusable. Vermonters have the right to expect better leadership than that. There is no question that reversing the cuts and fully funding public programs is both feasible and necessary. The only question is whether or not legislators will choose to protect the economic security of all Vermonters.
Don't Balance the Budget on the Backs of Vermont Workers!
Vermont Workers' Center Statement on Budget Cuts, January 2002
We view the state budget cuts as an attack on the majority of Vermonters. There is no excuse for balancing the budget on the backs of those who are already suffering from the current recession when the State has the option of using the Rainy Day Fund and raising revenue through fairer taxation.
For the past decade, the rich have profited from tax cuts and preferential treatment for stocks and other unearned income while regular Vermonters have seen their real wages go down. Instead of planning for harder times, the State gave away its surplus to those who didn't need it in two separate tax cuts.
Now that harder times are here and Vermont is facing a deficit, the State has cut and threatens more cuts to programs that working people in our state rely on. The cuts most directly impact access to health care, education, and assistance for disabled Vermonters. Currently under-funded services in dozens of other areas, including employment and training, childcare, and adult education, are also being reduced. The cuts threaten the safety and livelihood of public and publicly-funded employees through extreme short-staffing levels, as well as potential layoffs and/or wage cuts. Most Vermonters' property taxes will likely rise to pay the cost of necessary services the State no longer supports. All of this means that Vermonters are now being asked to pay out of their own empty pockets for a budget crisis that could have been avoided, a budget crisis that can be solved in other ways.
We stand against any budget cuts to make up for the budget shortfall. There is plenty of money to pay for all needed public services, and Vermonters should not be forced to pay for bad fiscal decisions made by the State in the past. Instead, the State should take one or more of the following actions:
1. Tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income. Vermont is one of only three states that taxes capital gains (stocks, bonds, etc.) at a lower rate than earned income. Just taxing income that people don't work for at the same rate as income people work for would bring in $25 million/year.
2. Re-institute a more progressive income tax. The State should be increasing taxes on the rich who can afford paying more instead of workers who are most affected by the recession and face job loss throughout the state. During the last recession in 1991, Governor Richard Snelling instituted a progressive income tax that fell mostly on the wealthy. If the State were to institute the same tax structure now, the State of Vermont's Joint Fiscal Office itself estimates that $130 million would be raised.
3. Reverse state income tax cuts for wealthy and corporations. In 1999, Vermont decreased the state income tax from 25% to 24% of the federal tax rate. Well over half of the $15 million saved went to the top 9% of Vermont households, while 65% of households got only 14% of the money. Reversing this cut would bring in $19 million next year.
4. Use the Rainy Day Fund. Because the above actions would bring in revenue next year, money in reserve should be used this year. The State would need to use only half of the Rainy Day Fund to prevent all cuts to public programs.
We call on the Legislature to immediately reverse all budget cuts and fully fund public programs.
For-Profit Nursing Homes
By Tanya Waters, RN, Vermont Workers Steering Committee Member
For-profit nursing homes have always had their critics, those that say that it is fundamentally wrong for corporations to make profits from the sick and dying. While in Vermont we do not have any for-profit hospitals, two-thirds of our nursing homes are operated with the goal of making a profit. This year a study came out that confirms these critics' fears about for-profit nursing homes.
According to a joint study by Harvard University and the University of California in San Francisco, for-profit nursing homes are much more likely than their non-profit counterparts to be cited for deficient quality. The study showed that the quality of care was particularly poor at facilities that are part of nursing home chains. Virtually every nursing home in the country was analyzed as part of this study, which found that for-profit nursing homes were cited for deficient care 46.5% more frequently than non-profit nursing homes. Nursing homes that are part of for-profit chains were found to be even worse, and were cited for more "severe problems."
This report cites exactly the types of conditions reported by the workers at Berlin Health & Rehabilitation Center (BH&RC), in Berlin Vermont. BH&RC is part of a for-profit nursing home chain called CPL Subacute. CPL Subacute is the largest for-profit nursing home chain in Vermont and is owned by CPL Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT), the largest for-profit nursing home chain in Canada. REIT's are corporations that make their money by acquiring "income-producing properties." Unfortunately, in the minds of these profit-focused investors, nursing homes get included with the likes of shopping malls.
"When for-profit chains understaff their facilities and underpay their workers, the chain makes money but quality suffers," said Steffie Woolhandler, MD, MPH, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-author of the study. "The quality of care largely determines quality of life. Nursing homes care for many people too frail, sick and powerless to choose or even protest their care. It is unwise to entrust such vulnerable patients to profit-seeking firms."
In August of 2000, the nursing home workers at BH&RC organized a union so they could have a stronger voice in their workplace and therefore administer better care to the residents. Nursing homes often pay poverty wages to their primary care givers, Licensed Nurses' Aides (LNAs). This reality results in LNA turnover as high as 80-90% a year, which not only negatively effects care-giving, but severely limits the crucial human relationships which naturally form between the staff and residents. In another effort to lower costs and increase profits, nursing homes such as BH&RC are often critically understaffed.
In addition to the emotional nature of their roles, LNA's have one of the toughest physical jobs in health care. They dress, bathe, move and feed residents. Essentially, they take care of all the daily needs of people who aren't capable of caring for themselves. When staffing is low, workers don't have the time or resources to do their jobs. This situation greatly increases the chance that residents will develop bed sores, experience dangerous levels of dehydration or simply become lonely.
The sad irony of private nursing homes is that they are almost entirely publicly financed. Usually, over 80% of their revenue comes from taxpayer pockets, primarily Medicaid and Medicare. We are paying these companies to provide substandard care.
The fundamental problem with corporations running in nursing homes for profit is declared on CPL REIT's website directed to stockholders: "CPL REIT has two growth mandates: find and acquire the right investment properties, then operate them profitably." Clearly CPL-REIT and Berlin Health & Rehabilitation Center have forgotten that heir primary focus should be on caring for their residents, and providing their employees with all the tools that they need to do so.