A Free Ride to Religious Groups in Secular Times?
by Martin Marty, guest contributor from Sightings
Those who observe United States Supreme Court decisions on “church and state” are dealing with what many call the most important “religious liberty” case in decades, at least since the 1940s. Like so many cases, this one had a parochial start.
The details are familiar, and we need not rehearse them all. Let it come to focus on the fact that a Lutheran parochial school teacher had been dealt what to her was a manifest injustice. She countered by seeking to pursue her case in court. Doing so, claimed the church, was counter to church teachings, so it fired her.
Had she been a simply secular employee in a simply secular post, the usual standards for administering justice would have applied. But the church named her a “minister,” and argued for a “ministerial exception” to secular standards. The Supreme Court decision left the teacher out in the judicial cold and left many citizen justice-advocates heated up.
So we add a “ministerial exception” to a national vocabulary and code which makes another exception in religious matters, alongside “tax exemption for the churches.” Such a tax exemption practice is so widely appreciated that few think of its rationales and practices. Try getting elected to Congress on a platform which would question and even abolish such tax exemption.
Is exemption just? Clearly, it is privileging religion, and many court decisions recognize and affirm this. Once again: is it just? Is it just to the significant percentage of the population which disfavors religion, ignores or disdains its institutions, yet pays higher taxes than if church properties were taxed. Never mind. Without such an exception, religious institutions would not thrive or always survive. So it is regarded, not always with clear rationales, as a public good.
Does this mean that the church, which is supposed to be prophetic, has to mute critical roles and support religious institutions even when they have, in the eyes of their critics, malign purposes and malignant practices? Yes. Being uncritical is a price religious institutions pay for the goods they derive for their prosperity in a free republic and letting the institutions go free from taxing is the price it pays when it can only wink at religions damaging the public good, as many of them do.
“With liberty and justice for all…” is an ascription in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, one that sets up a difficult balancing act. The founders, among them James Madison and others who quoted Montesquieu, were nervous. They quoted him: granting privileges to religion, as America does, has many upsides, but it can also contribute to downsides. If you want to destroy religion, Montesquieu had advised, give it favor. By granting “tax exemption” and now “ministerial exceptions,” the citizenry and its courts (unanimously in this case of the Supreme Court) are giving favors unmatched by policies of European nations which have or until recently had “established churches.”
These years one hears from some cultural and political factions the gross generalization that religion in general and Christianity in particular are being discriminated against and are suffering from the actions, policies, and expressions of secular society. Cases like the current one counter evidences. There are many assaults on faiths, including Christianity, in the culture at large. But the generally free ride given religious institutions even in a “secular time” should inspire thought: With all its contradictions, the United States remains a wonderful place in which religions can prosper. They do well when they serve the common good freely and openly.
This essay is reprinted with permission of Sightings from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.
Well Hot Damn
My post is spreading like Wild Fire!!! Thanks y’all I really appriciate reblogging it! I think it is stupid how they even have time to propose a bill like this do to our economic troubles let alone do you realize how many kids would get out of the Agricultual fields if this was passed? Our most demanding field in the U.S in in Agriculture taking away livestock and crops from kids will effect jobs in 15 years and what would become of FFA or 4-H? I’m sorry but when I start a family, they are helping me with my livestock, when they are old enough to drive, they will have permission to drive the farm truck and the tractor. Enough Said!
More Info and how to bitch them out:
*Go here -> http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=WHD-2011-0001-0001
*Read the proposed legislation.
*Post your comment by 11:59pm tonight.
Let’s save the future of agriculture.
Venezuela’s new labor law “first in transition to socialism”
peoplesworld.orgIn what Venezuela’s government described as the “first law in the transition to socialism,” President Hugo Chavez has signed into law new comprehensive labor legislation. Hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans marched through the streets of Caracas on May 1, International Workers’ Day, to commemorate the signing of the historic document.
“The triumph of the people, of the workers, has never come about without a long process of resistance, of struggle, suffering even. This law, which I will have the honor of signing … is the product of a long process of struggle,” said President Chavez.
The legislation reduces the work week to 40 hours and seeks to abolish private sub-contracted labor in the country, which the state views as an exploitative practice and relic of neoliberal policies of the 1990s.
Women’s rights groups hailed the law as a big step forward for gender equity in the workplace by increasing post-natal maternity leave from 12 to 25 weeks and protecting new parents from dismissal for up to two years after the child’s birth.
One of the greatest victories cited by workers’ collectives is the reinstatement of specific workers’ rights dismantled by the Rafael Caldera administration under pressure from the International Monetary Fund and corporate interests in 1997.
Along with the reestablishment of the retirement bonus - a worker’s last monthly wage multiplied by their years of service - the new law requires that employers compensate workers who are unfairly dismissed, by an amount double their retirement bonus.
A government agency will be established to monitor employers’ compliance with the new law, which will be implemented in 12 months. Workers will now have the option of having their retirement processed in a private bank, a public bank, or the new state-owned national retirement fund.
Earlier this year, Chavez announced a 32.5 percent increase in the monthly minimum wage, to be carried out in two phases. The first phase took effect on May 1 with an increase from 1,548 bolivares ($360) to 1,780 bolivares ($413.90). On September, it will increase another 15 percent to 2,047 bolivares ($476).
Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro called the labor law “an instrument for constructing the highest stage of socialism,” and contrasted it with the anti-worker laws that are being enacted in Spain where a quarter of the labor market is unemployed.
Venezuelan lawmakers began discussing labor reform nearly nine years ago, but it only gained momentum when Chavez promised to address the issue last November after receiving calls from workers’ groups to “revolutionize” current labor laws.
“We are re-affirming our willingness to … move on from capitalist relations of production, which condemn workers to exploitation, to socialist relations of production, which allow us to construct a new order of labor in freedom, solidarity and participation, with absolutely no exploitation,” said Pedro Eusse, general secretary of the Venezuelan Communist Party.
The government used grassroots institutions established by the Chavez administration over the past decade to collect input from a large cross-section of society. During the five-month consultation process with communal councils, trade unions, and political parties, the government received 19,000 proposals, 90 percent of them from workers themselves.
According to International Consulting Services, an international polling agency, over 80 percent of Venezuelans hold a positive view of the law, compared to 13 percent who do not. The new law replaces the original labor law that was enacted in 1936 amid rising tension between workers and foreign companies, an event which sparked the nation’s labor movement.
Some organizations have emphasized that the struggle continues and called on people to remain combative. Questions remain about the role of the informal sector, the strengthening of socialist workers’ councils, and the transfer of decision-making over management and production to workers.
From: People’s World
by: Pedro Conceicao
Iowa company president cited for widespread abuse of disabled workers | The Des Moines Register
desmoinesregister.com[O]ver the decades, Henry’s sent 1,500 mentally disabled men to labor camps in seven states, including Iowa camps in Spirit Lake, Ellsworth and Atalissa…. President Kenneth Henry, 72, of Proctor, Texas, also denied allegations that the workers — whom he repeatedly referred to as “the boys,” although most were in their 40s, 50s and 60s — were routinely abused or neglected.
===
This is actually common practice, and generally speaking, completely legal. It is estimated that there are currently just shy of half a million disabled workers in the U.S. who are currently being payed below the minimum wage and prohibited from forming unions. The “impaired worker” exemption to labor law was codified in FDR’s 1935 National Labor Relations Act and has never been overturned.
Child labor in America: Not a thing of the past - CNBC
cnbc.com
From Florida to Washington, California to North Carolina, children across the country have been working the fields, harvesting cucumbers, onions, grapes, and even tobacco.
One advocacy group, the Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs (AFOP), which partners with non-profit community programs nationwide, estimates as many as 500,000 children are laboring in U.S. fields. It said poverty is the root cause of the problem.
Venezuelans Celebrate May Day after Passing of Far-Reaching Labor Law
venezuelanalysis.comMay 1st 2012 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – Following the passing of the new labour law yesterday, Venezuelans celebrated May Day en masse today, many catching buses to Caracas for the main march, others joining the smaller marches in cities and towns around the country.
Many people held up placards saying, “The new labour law = respect for the worker” and “The labour law is social justice”. Highlights of the law include a small reduction in the working week, the outlawing of outsourcing, and longer paternity and maternity leave.
“We’re marching to tell the whole world that in Venezuela we march for the happiness that this revolution is giving us,” said minister for indigenous peoples, Nicia Maldonando
“This new [labour] law is something that not only the workers of Venezuela deserve, but those of all Latin America and the world deserve it,” said Vargas mayor, Alexis Toledo.
“Today [May Day] is a day of struggle for workers in a large part of the world, but here in our country it is a day of celebration,” Toledo said.
Taking Medical Leave? You Should Know This
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), passed in 1993, provides relief for employees who need time off because of a serious health condition (whether their own or that of a family member). It allows workers to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid time off – in addition to other eligible leave – during any 12-month period.
The rules governing the use of FMLA leave are fairly straightforward. From the Department of Labor:
- “… you must first work for a covered employer. Generally, private employers with at least 50 employees are covered by the law… Government agencies and elementary and secondary schools are covered by the FMLA, regardless of the number of employees…
- … you must have worked for your employer for at least 12 months. You do not have to have worked for 12 months in a row (so seasonal work counts)…
- … you must have worked for the employer for at least 1250 hours in the 12 months before you take leave…
- … you must work at a location where the employer has at least 50 employees within 75 miles of your worksite.”
But as is often the case, how the rules are applied – and sometimes even if they are applied at all – can mean the difference between keeping and losing your job.
For your reference, here are a few additional “rules” you should know when considering FMLA leave:
1. If you’re abusing your leave, your employer can probably fire you (even if they can’t prove it):
“One employer attempted to address the problem [of FMLA abuse] by hiring a private investigator to follow suspected FMLA abusers. When the investigator reported that an employee was abusing his leave, the employee was fired. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals determined in Scruggs v. Carrier Corporation that the employer’s ‘honest suspicion’ was enough to allow the employer to terminate the employee and to shield it from FMLA liability.” (Foley & Lardner)
2. You may be able to keep your second job while on FMLA leave from your first:
“Several years ago a client’s full-time employee had to take leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act for stress. While he was on leave, somebody reliable saw him working in the men’s department at a local shopping center. The company was ready to fire him for fraudulent FMLA leave… The company investigated, and sure enough — it turned out that the store job was part time, much less ‘stressful’ than the employee’s regular job, and completely within his restrictions.” (Constangy, Brooks & Smith)
3. You might be eligible for a lighter workload while you’re taking FMLA leave:
“When an employee takes FMLA leave, is an employer obligated to adjust its performance standards so as to avoid penalizing the employee? According to a recent federal court decision, the answer is Yes… Particularly troublesome to the court was evidence that: 1) the company terminated Jeff for not meeting sales expectations, even though he was absent a number of days for FMLA-protected treatment…” (Franczek Radelet)
4. You don’t need to wait a year to schedule future FMLA leave:
“’The determination of whether an employee has worked for the employer for … a total of at least 12 months must be made as of the date the FMLA leave is to start.’ If the surgery is scheduled to take place before the employee has completed a year of service, he is not eligible for FMLA leave and not protected from termination. On the other hand, if he has scheduled his surgery for after his one-year anniversary with the company, then he will be eligible for FMLA leave at the time his expected absence begins — and the FMLA applies.” (Foley & Lardner)
5. If you’re too new to get FMLA leave but your employer grants it, you might be eligible after all:
“The county apparently assumed she was eligible and ‘granted’ her FMLA leave and provided paperwork indicating that she qualified for FMLA leave. She was later terminated for attendance and sued for FMLA retaliation (punishing an employee for requesting or taking FMLA leave)… [T]he court allowed her retaliation claim to go forward because the county had led her to believe that she was eligible and could have the time off that she had requested.” (Constangy, Brooks & Smith)
6. It’s your employer’s responsibility to determine when time off becomes FMLA leave:
“The Lichtenstein case follows a growing line of cases that seems to put the onus on employers to ask the questions necessary to determine whether the FMLA is applicable… Keep in mind: employees are not required to specifically state ‘FMLA’ as a reason for their absence; rather, the FMLA puts the responsibility on employers to decide whether FMLA is in play, and to inquire further if there is any ambiguity in the leave request.” (Franczek Radelet)
7. Employers can apply FMLA leave to run concurrently with worker’s comp leave:
“Any leave taken under the Family and Medical Leave Act may be run concurrently with workers’ compensation leave. In other words, if you are going to be out for a week with a work comp injury, that time should count against your 12 week FMLA allotment. Just like any other leave, you need to let them know that they are on Family and Medical Leave, how much leave they have and how the leave process works.” (Davis Brown)
—-
Read the updates:
• Honest Suspicion of FMLA Abuse Shields Employer - Foley & Lardner LLP
• When Can An Employer Fire An Employee For Medical Leave Fraud? - Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLP
• Employee’s FMLA Leave Requires an Employer to Adjust Performance Standards - Franczek Radelet P.C.
• FMLA Protects Employees Who Request Leave Before They Are Eligible - Foley & Lardner LLP
• Lewd Conduct, Lactation Accommodation, And Other Steaming Hot Employment Law News! - Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLP
• When Has an Employee Provided Sufficient Notice of the Need for FMLA Leave? - Franczek Radelet P.C.
• As they say on Project Runway - Make it Work (for you): The Intersection of Work Comp and the Family and Medical Leave Act - Davis, Brown, Koehn, Shors & Roberts, P.C.
• Department of Labor’s “Family and Medical Leave Act Employee Guide”
—-
Related reading:
• Failing to Follow Call-in Procedures Dooms Employee’s FMLA Claim - Franczek Radelet P.C.
• Miscalculating Eligibility for FMLA Leave Can Be A Costly Mistake - Akerman Senterfitt
• Employee Terminated Before Becoming Eligible for FMLA Leave May Have a Cause of Action Under the FMLA - Poyner Spruill LLP
• Second Circuit Determines Teacher Who Worked 1,247 is Eligible under the Family and Medical Leave Act - Cullen and Dykman LLP
• No FMLA Violation for Firing Employee Who Abused Leave – FordHarrison
• Employees Must Be Given Clear, Actual Notice of FMLA Policies – Littler
• Employer Best Practices for Analyzing Whether Leave Beyond FMLA is an “Undue Hardship” under the ADA - Franczek Radelet P.C.
• Your Employer Can Fire You for Taking Medical Leave - Lawyers.com
• Using “Rolling” Method to Calculate FMLA Leave Almost Always the Best Choice for Employers - Franczek Radelet P.C.
—-
Follow @FMLA_Laws on Twitter»
The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Centennial - March 25th
facebook.com
“The blaze in the Greenwich Village factory, at Washington Place and Greene Street, brought to light the sweatshop conditions that were prevalent at the time; many of the garment workers who died were immigrants, and most were women.”- @NYTimes
A tale of two systems: German Automakers and German Labor Law vs. American Automakers and US Labor Law.
remappingdebate.orgA great article comparing US and German automakers. In Germany union density is higher, wages are higher, production is higher, and profits are higher. In Germany, companies are mandated to deal with workers (union or not) in “works councils” over various issues related to work life. The article also goes on to talk about how Germany automakers act completely different when operating in the “right to work” (for less) South, and take advantage of the US ideals on labor law by completely ignoring it.
The article also talks about how German automakers would probably not be as cooperative in Germany if the government allowed them to run all over workers.
This is a clear distinction between a big business country, and a country that has some aspects of democratic socialism. The government has a constitutional amendment that creates workers councils where workers and management work out issues in the workplace. The law also backs up unions from being busted by big companies. Because of these workers councils, strikes are rare.
Simply put, this is government actually looking out for the working class, and extending democracy into the work place. Councils like those in Germany are the type of thing that paves the way for workers democracy, and in turn, paves the way for socialism.
——
On a side note, when I was talking to my cousin about how Germany had curbed massive unemployment during the worldwide recession by having some cut to 1/2 time or 3/4 time rather than a chunk of people being unemployed. His response was “well that’s because they’re socialist”. This of course was a negative by his views. I don’t think Germany and Europe are truly socialist (social democratic is the better term), but they do have laws that help protect workers unlike the US where the law is weak and workers are crushed by corporate behemoths.
The fact that there is a constitutional law that mandates workers councils is pretty fucking awesome. Ich liebe Deutschland!
Click the title link for the article.
This is really frustrating.
All information is about “filing a charge,” rather than filing a complaint. It’s disheartening to think:
- That no one expects anyone who isn’t directly being discriminated against during the hiring process to complain about discrimination.
- That there’s no system in place to handle such complaints.
What. The. Fuck.
Here’s what I’m reading, if you’re interested in taking a gander. I’m about to call the New York office and see if I can get more answers over the phone. Edit: Just kidding, the only number listed on the New York EEOC website is the same listed for the national office (1-800-669-4000) and it’s been busy every time I’ve tried so far.
Congress exempt from several federal labor laws - Boston.com
boston.com
Congress is exempt from:
—The Freedom of Information Act.
—Investigatory subpoenas to obtain information for safety and health probes.
—Protections against retaliation for whistleblowers.
—Having to post notices of worker rights in offices.
—Prosecution for retaliating against employees who report safety and health hazards.
—Having to train employees about workplace rights and legal remedies.
—Record-keeping requirements for workplace injuries and illnesses.
Slavery In America: Court Won’t Allow Private Prison Labor Lawsuit After Permanent Damage To Both Of Prisoner's Arms
salon.comMore @ SalonWASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court won’t allow employees at a privately run federal prison to be sued by an inmate in federal court despite his complaint that their neglect left him with two permanently damaged arms.
The high court ruled 8-1 Tuesday to throw out the federal lawsuit by inmate Richard Lee Pollard against employees of the GEO Group, formerly known as Wackenhut Corrections Corp. Pollard wanted to sue for his treatment after he fell and fractured both of his elbows at the privately run Taft Correctional Institution in Taft, Calif.
Pollard said GEO officials put him in a metal restraint that caused him pain, and refused to provide him with a splint, making his injuries worse and causing permanent impairment. He sued in federal court for money, claiming GEO officials had violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment…
The NLRB Unleashes Massive Rats on Unsuspecting Employers
reidkellypc.comDo you find massive rat balloons to be intimidating and/or coercive when you try to enter a business that has one outside it? The NLRB doesnt. In fact, they say its just symbolic speech. They also say employers who are not in a fight with a union have to learn to cope with the big rats, some as big as 16 feet tall! Read more on the jump by clicking this article’s heading.
