United Public Workers for Action

2 days ago

IAM Apple workers in Maryland vote to authorize work stoppage
If workers actually strike, it would be the first walkout by employees of the company’s more than 270 U.S. retail locations.
www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/05/12/apple-workers-strike-union-maryland/
Unionized employees at an Apple Store in Towson, Md., have voted to authorize a strike amid union accusations that the tech giant isn’t bargaining in good faith in negotiations over its first union contract.
Get a curated selection of 10 of our best stories in your inbox every weekend.

If workers actually strike, it would be the first work stoppage by employees of the company’s more than 270 U.S. retail locations.
The workers’ vote, which concluded late Saturday, allows the union to stage a walkout at any time, although it has not announced a strike date, according to the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM). The union represents some 100 Apple employees at the store in Towson Town Center, a mall in the Baltimore suburbs. In 2022 it became the first Apple retail store in the country to vote to unionize.
Contract negotiations at the Towson store, which began in January 2023, have yielded tentative agreements on 25 issues, including grievance claims, retirement benefits and severance, according to the union.
Advertisement
Despite these gains, however, talks have stalled over key financial matters, such as pay, overtime and scheduling, a union official told The Washington Post on Sunday.
The union has also accused Apple of illegally withholding benefits from union members given to workers at nonunion stores. Those and other issues prompted it to file multiple federal charges against Apple for allegedly violating labor laws.
Apple and the union will return to the bargaining table on May 21 for contract negotiations, the union said.
“This vote today is the first step in demonstrating our solidarity and sends a clear message to Apple,” the union’s negotiating committee said in a statement Saturday. “As discussions with Apple management continue, we remain committed to securing tangible improvements that benefit all employees.”
Advertisement
A spokeswoman for Apple said in a statement Sunday that the company works hard to offer “an excellent experience for our retail team members and empower them to deliver exceptional service for our customers.” The company will “engage with the union representing our team in Towson respectfully and in good faith,” she added.
So far, only one other Apple retail location in the country has voted to unionize, in Oklahoma City.
Apple employees at another store, in Short Hills, N.J., took a different tack on Saturday, voting against unionizing with the Communications Workers of America (CWA). The union has alleged in charges filed with the National Labor Relations Board that the company engaged in illegal anti-union behavior during the campaign.
Meanwhile, the NLRB has accused Apple of cracking down on labor organizing elsewhere in the United States. In a ruling earlier this month, the agency affirmed complaints that Apple illegally interrogated staff members at its World Trade Center store in Manhattan about their union campaign and confiscated union materials from a break room in 2022.
Advertisement
In a separate case, federal regulators accused Apple last year of illegally firing, disciplining and threatening a corporate employee in Cupertino, Calif., for organizing to improve working conditions. An administrative-law judge has yet to rule on the case.
Labor activism at Apple comes amid an ongoing organizing wave across industries, as workers have increasingly banded together to demand higher pay and better benefits since the onset of the pandemic. More than 10,000 Starbucks workers have voted to unionize since late 2021. The Teamsters scored big wins for 340,000 UPS employees by threatening a massive work stoppage last summer, while the Big Three autoworkers, Hollywood actors and writers, and Kaiser health workershave secured better wages and working conditions by walking off the job.

Amazon, REI and Trader Joe’s workers have also held their first successful unionization votes, but so far none of those workers have secured a first union contract, with labor leaders accusing companies of stalling and refusing to bargain in good faith.
Advertisement
Petitions for union elections were up 35 percent between Oct. 1 and March 31 compared with the same period the previous year, the NLRB announced last month. And American support for unions has soared to 67 percent, after hitting a record low during the Great Recession, according to Gallup polling.
This week, more than 5,000 Mercedes-Benz workers in Alabama will vote in another high-stakes union election, coming after thousands of Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, Tenn., voted in favor of joining the United Auto Workers in a historic election last month, making the facility the first foreign-auto plant in the South to unionize. … See MoreSee Less

Apple workers in Maryland vote to authorize work stoppage

www.washingtonpost.com

If workers actually strike, it would be the first walkout by employees of Apple’s more than 270 U.S. retail locations.

United Public Workers for Action

3 days ago

The Anti-Union Lobby’s Newest Weapon
Now armed with cynical antisemitism allegations, the corporate-backed effort to destroy unions is ramping up.

jewishcurrents.org/the-anti-union-lobbys-newest-weapon-foxx-israel-palestine

Jeff Schuhrke
May 10, 2024

Republican Rep. Virginia Foxx at a House Education and Workforce Committee Hearing on December 5th, 2023.
Sipa USA / Alamy Stock Photo

ON APRIL 11TH, two public defenders in New York City filed a lawsuitagainst their union, the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys (ALAA), claiming that a pro-Palestine resolution it had adopted last December was antisemitic. They demanded an extraordinary recompense: the right to opt out of paying the ALAA for the cost of negotiating better working conditions on their behalf. Like other private sector employees at unionized workplaces in New York, the public defenders who filed the suit—who are employed by the nonprofit Legal Aid Society—can already opt out of becoming dues-paying members of their union (and, indeed, had already done so). But as union-represented workers, they are still required under labor law to pay their fair share of “agency fees” to the ALAA to cover the cost of representation. These fees ensure that unions have the necessary resources to negotiate and enforce contracts, and restrict “free riding,” i.e. workers’ ability to benefit from a union without contributing to it. In their lawsuit, however, the plaintiffs cited their union’s pro-Palestine position as a reason that they should not be compelled to pay such fees, with one of them saying he “shouldn’t have to financially support an organization that adopts antisemitic resolutions, sides with terrorist organizations, and advocates for the destruction of Israel.” (The actual resolution, which was approved by 65% of voting ALAA members and strongly backed by 122 Jewish members, calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, an end to Israeli apartheid, and support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctionsmovement.)
Fair share fees of the kind the lawsuit targets are so important to the financial health of unions that pro-business groups have regularly attacked them for decades in order to weaken workers’ collective power. This attack has largely taken place through deceptively named “right-to-work” laws, which ban the mandatory collection of agency fees for private sector unions in 26 states. In 2018, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority further expanded this war on fair share fees through the Janus v. AFSCMEcase. One of the most consequential assaults on organized labor in recent years, the decision effectively imposed “right-to-work” on the nation’s entire public sector. The majority justified the decision by arguing that since the government is the employer that public sector unions aim to influence, a financial contribution to such a union is a form of political speech. Under this argument, public sector unions were accused of effectively compelling workers’ speech, in violation of the First Amendment, by requiring the payment of fair share fees. But while it was dressed up in the language of free speech rights, Janus was clearly intended to undermine and bankrupt public sector unions. Within a year, the ruling naturally led to the virtual disappearance of agency-fee payers in public sector unions, weakening those unions in the process.
Private sector workplaces in more union-friendly states like New York have thus far remained outside the purview of this particular anti-union strategy, but the recent lawsuit against the ALAA aims to change this. Filed by the Liberty Justice Center, one of the right-wing law firms behind the Januscase, the suit is an attempt to use the union’s pro-Palestine position as a justification to extend Janus to private organizations that receive government funding. The suit argues that since the plaintiffs’ employer is contracted by New York City to provide legal counsel to indigent defendants, Janus should apply to its staff. This is not the first effort by anti-union groups to broaden the scope of Janus. In recent years, other such lawsuits—such as one demanding that public sector unions reimburse the agency fees non-members paid prior to Janus, and another seeking to prevent unions from limiting when free riders can opt out—have been rejected by the Supreme Court, but not before forcing unions to expend significant resources on unnecessary litigation. There is a chance that the new Liberty Justice Center lawsuit will go the same way, being dismissed in court while nevertheless costing the ALAA time and money. However, if the case makes it to the Supreme Court, it is conceivable that the conservative majority could rule that Janus is applicable in cases where a private sector worker’s job duties are entirely government-funded. With an estimated 80% of all nonprofit revenues in the US coming from government sources, such a decision could have major ramifications for the tens of thousands of workers who have been rapidly unionizing in recent years at nonprofit cultural institutions, advocacy groups, and social service organizations.
In addition to posing a threat to a large swathe of the labor movement, the case against the ALAA signals the development of a new anti-union effort, in which opponents of organized labor are justifying their right-wing crusade by claiming that they are battling antisemitism. This strategy is also on display in another recent lawsuit that is now moving through the courts, involving the Professional Staff Congress (PSC), a union representing about 30,000 faculty and staff at the City University of New York (CUNY). In June 2021, shortly after the conclusion of Israel’s 11-day military offensive, which killed at least 260 Palestinians in Gaza, the PSC’s delegate assembly passed a resolution condemning “the massacre of Palestinians by the Israeli state” and encouraging the union’s campus chapters to consider adopting the strategy of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement. The following January, the Fairness Center—an anti-union law firm based in Pennsylvania—responded by filing a lawsuit on behalf of six full-time CUNY professors accusing the union of antisemitism. The six professors are represented by the PSC in bargaining, but they are not union members, and thanks to Janus, they also do not pay any agency fees. In this situation, the Fairness Center lawsuit’s proposed remedy has been to ask that the plaintiffs be excluded from the PSC bargaining unit altogether. “Our clients, most of whom are Jewish, should not be forced to associate with a union that engages in hateful, anti-Israel rhetoric and political activity,” Fairness Center president Nathan McGrath told the conservative news site The Washington Free Beacon.
By demanding that workers at a unionized shop be allowed to sever all ties with their union, this lawsuit poses a direct challenge to the long-held notion of exclusive representation, a central right of unions to represent all workers in a given bargaining unit, whether they are members or not. In the absence of exclusive representation, bosses could potentially pit workers against each other in negotiations, undermining the whole concept of collective bargaining. The targeting of this long-standing union prerogative, in other words, constitutes another attack on organized labor’s very foundations.
The Fairness Center’s case has so far failed to hold up in court. In November 2022, a district judge dismissed the lawsuit based on a 40-year-old Supreme Court precedent upholding exclusive representation. This past March, an appellate court dismissed the suit on the same grounds. The Fairness Center now plans to file an appeal with the Supreme Court, though it is uncertain whether the justices will agree to hear the case. But however it fares in court, the Fairness Center lawsuit—alongside the Liberty Justice Center’s complaint against the ALAA—signals the development of a novel strategy to undermine unions. In recent years, and especially in the past months, supporters of Israel have been indiscriminately and irresponsiblyhurling accusations of antisemitism at the growing Palestine solidarity movement, with many Democratic politicians, liberal commentators, and campus administrators getting on board, or, indeed, leading the charge. Anti-union groups are aiming to exploit this hysteria to their own advantage, using weaponized concerns about “Jewish safety” as a potentially effective cudgel in their ongoing attack on organized labor.

THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME right-wing forces have justified attacks on unions by pointing to worker opposition to US foreign policy. In the late 1940s, when Communist trade unionists stood against the emerging Cold War, corporate executives made the convenient argument that curbing the strength of organized labor was vital to national security. In light of the assumed threat posed by the Soviet Union, employers and business groups decried strikes by US workers as unpatriotic and labeled criticisms of capitalism as treasonous. As General Electric CEO Charles E. Wilson put it in 1946, ​“the problems of the United States can be captiously summed up in two words: Russia abroad, Labor at home.” The Red Scare that this rhetoric helped instigate soon aided Republicans in passing the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, which outlawed militant tactics like sit-down strikes and secondary boycotts, required union officers to sign legal affidavits swearing they were not Communists, and authorized states to adopt “right-to-work” legislation. In addition to passing this sweeping anti-union legislation, anti-Communist zealots in Congress used the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) to subpoena and grill suspected leftists from the labor movement, higher education, Hollywood, and government agencies. These public interrogations leveraged the threat of arrest and career destruction to demand that people identify other “subversives” and served to demobilize much of the organized left for years to come.
Labor leaders were complicit in these catastrophic losses for the left. Despite the obvious dangers that the Red Scare posed for organized workers, liberal union officials of the time, including Philip Murray and Walter Reuther, did not fight back against the anti-Communist hysteria. Instead, they abetted it by undemocratically expelling 11 leftist-led unions from the Congress of Industrial Organizations between 1949 and 1950. Not only did this controversial purge severely weaken the labor movement—with union density in decline ever since—it also further emboldened HUAC and Republicans like Senator Joseph McCarthy to launch a full-scale witch hunt against progressives in the early 1950s.
Today, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, chaired by Rep. Virginia Foxx, seems to be following in HUAC’s footsteps, using the hysteria that greets any criticism of Israel to resurrect the spirit of McCarthyism. An anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ, anti-immigrant Republican who once said that unions shouldn’t legally exist, Foxx now presents herselfas a crusader against antisemitism in order to attack two of the right’s traditional foes: academia and organized labor. Foxx’s committee has made headlines in recent months for questioning the presidents of prestigiousuniversities over Palestine solidarity activism on campus, and the congresswoman is trying to reenact the spectacle with unions, as well. In January, she wrote to the ALAA seeking documents related to the membership vote on the Palestine solidarity resolution, which she called a “deplorable” example of “union bosses [being] purposely divisive and combative toward their membership.” But unlike university administrators, the union is standing its ground by refusing to cooperate with Foxx’s committee. In response, she served a subpoena on the ALAA in March and is now threatening to charge the union’s officers with contempt of Congress.
The rising moral panic around antisemitism is giving new ammunition not only to demagogic politicians, but also to the well-organized, corporate-funded lobby that has long worked behind the scenes to undo all the gains of the New Deal and annihilate the labor movement. Both the Liberty Justice Center and the Fairness Center are members of the State Policy Network (SPN), a web of right-wing think tanks and law firms in all 50 states that work hand-in-hand with the notorious lobbying group the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). The Center for Media and Democracy, a progressive watchdog organization, calls SPN “the tip of the spear of a far-right, nationally funded policy agenda in the states that undergirds extremists in the Republican Party.” Indeed, the SPN is financed by Donors Trust—a private foundation bankrolling libertarian organizations that has been described as the “dark money ATM of the conservative movement”—and has received donations from mega-corporations like Microsoft, AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, Philip Morris, Facebook, and GlaxoSmithKline. Using this funding, the SPN has been successfullyprivatizing public schools, denying climate change, cutting taxes on the wealthy, blocking healthcare reform, and chipping away at the strength of organized labor for over three decades. In 2017, SPN president Tracie Sharp outlined the network’s plan to “defund and defang” public sector unions in order to “deal a major blow to the left’s ability to control government at the state and national levels.” One year later, the SPN-affiliated Liberty Justice Center helped win the Janus decision. Now armed with the cynical weaponization of antisemitism—which is proving to be a frighteningly effective instrument of repression—the SPN’s relentless, corporate-backed quest to destroy unions could potentially become unstoppable.

IF HISTORY IS ANY GUIDE, it is urgent that the US labor movement vigorously fight back against the ongoing wave of anti-Palestine repression—or risk serious setbacks. The consequences of the original McCarthyism continue to be felt in the present day, with unions struggling to grow in the face of the limitations that the Taft-Hartley Act imposes on organizing and striking. Despite this, some present-day union leaders may be setting themselves up to repeat the mistakes of their ’50s predecessors by refusing to stand up for the left flank of their movement. Leaders in major unions like the Teamsters and SAG-AFTRA have failed to join the rest of the labor movement in even calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. Others, like Rich Gulla—president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU)-affiliated State Employees’ Association in New Hampshire—have been even more explicit in disavowing Palestine activism, with Gulla recently saying that his union is “focused on New Hampshire issues and not foreign policy.” But the anti-labor, anti-Palestine right will not be banished by some union officials’ attempts to ignore Israel’s genocidal war. Instead, there is every reason to think that hyper-conservative groups will continue leveraging the claim that Palestine solidarity is antisemitic to boost their union-busting strategy—which means that unions must stand up for Palestine not simply to fulfill the principles of solidarity or to defend their members’ right to free speech, but ultimately to protect workers’ right to a union.
Many union members—and some union leaders—understand these interconnections, and have responded to recent attacks by doubling down on their pro-Palestine stances. For instance, when Foxx’s committee decriedthe “depravity” of Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) last October after multiple Twitter accounts affiliated with the baristas’ union expressed solidarity with Palestinians, SBWU and its members stood firm in the face of a coordinated smear campaign. When Starbucks management joined the right in calling on SBWU’s parent unions—Workers United and the SEIU—to denounce SBWU members, and then sued SBWU on spurious grounds, the union responded by counter-suing the coffee giant. Further, SBWU reiterated its position by posting a Palestine solidarity messagecondemning “the occupation, displacement, state violence, apartheid, and threats of genocide Palestinians face.” Meanwhile, pro-Palestine activists around the globe launched a boycott of Starbucks to protest the company’s attack on the union, leading to a massive drop in revenues in Muslim-majority countries like Turkey and Malaysia. As a likely result of this global consumer pressure, in late February, Starbucks agreed to a framework for negotiations with SBWU on first contracts at its over 400 unionized stores.
So far, the ALAA has also refused to be cowed by either the Liberty Justice Center or Foxx’s modern-day HUAC. “ALAA stands behind our resolution and the democratic processes that led to its overwhelming passage,” saidLeah Duncan, the ALAA’s financial secretary-treasurer. “Our membership will not be intimidated into abandoning our core principles, including advancing the interests of working people worldwide, by this blatant attack on organized labor.” And as the crackdown on Palestine solidarity intensifies on college campuses—with students and faculty getting beaten, arrested, suspended, expelled, and banned from campus—academic worker unions have likewise been steadfast, defending protesters by filing grievances and unfair labor practice charges against university administrations. United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 4811, which represents 48,000 graduate student workers and postdocs across the University of California system, plans to hold a strike authorization vote starting May 13th to protest the repression faced by its members, and to support the demand that the university divest from companies profiting off of Israel’s war on Palestinians. Many other unions of university workers have also been organizing and speaking out in support of the campus protests, and on May 1st, 300 rank-and-file members of the PSC at CUNY held a “May Day sickout for Palestine”—a one-day wildcat strike in solidarity with student protesters and the Palestinian people.
Such worker militancy has pushed US labor leaders to overcome their longstanding hesitation to associate with the Palestine solidarity movement. For instance, the UAW president has denounced the violent crackdowns on student and faculty protesters at university campuses, and officials from the union have spoken up in support of the ALAA, which is a UAW-affiliated local. The leadership of the SEIU, the second largest union in the country, has also condemned the repression at universities and expressed solidarity with those protesting “the horrors and injustice Palestinians are facing.” These statements demonstrate the kind of clarity that organized labor will need if it is to counter the growing power of the right, responding to the fusing of anti-union tactics with anti-Palestinian arguments by demonstrating unequivocal support for workers who are fighting for Palestine—and for the cause of Palestinian freedom itself. … See MoreSee Less

The Anti-Union Lobby’s Newest Weapon

jewishcurrents.org

Now armed with cynical antisemitism allegations, the corporate-backed effort to destroy unions is ramping up.

United Public Workers for Action

3 days ago

Norfolk Southern Pulling Out of the Station After Proxy Fight, Leaving Activist Ancora in the Dust
www.railwayage.com/freight/class-i/norfolk-southern-pulling-out-of-the-station-after-proxy-fight-…

May 10, 2024 Class I
Written by Jeffrey Alan Sonnenfeld and Steven Tian

As we predicted last month, shareholders resoundingly rejected an attempt by activist investor Ancora to take control of Norfolk Southern’s board and fire CEO Alan Shaw at Norfolk Southern’s annual meeting this week, a dramatic and decisive finale to one of the most hostile, hard-fought proxy fights in recent memory. Based on our decades of corporate governance expertise across thousands of proxy fights, here’s what we believe went wrong for Ancora’s highly-hyped activist campaign, with Ancora squandering a good hand through its own self-inflicted missteps as we see it, and what it all means for Norfolk Southern’s promising future and the path forward.

What Went Wrong for Ancora: Squandering a Good Hand Through Self-Inflicted Missteps
Despite Ancora’s best efforts to weave some positive spin from winning three board seats on a 13-person board, this week’s outcome was a disappointment for Ancora by almost any definition, including their own. As Ancora activism leader Jim Chadwick confidently declared on CNBC last month, Ancora was gunning for nothing less than control of the board, putting up seven Ancora-backed nominees, and waged an all-out war to fire the CEO, Alan Shaw, whom Chadwick identified as “the problem” and attacked in deeply personal terms. But Ancora massively under-delivered, with analysts calling the outcome “a major surprise” in light of the lofty expectations Ancora had set.

Ironically, the result Ancora achieved, three board seats, was virtually the same settlement as what Norfolk Southern offered to Ancora several months ago, so Ancora could have accomplished largely the same result while saving themselves time, expense, and reputational harm had they merely accepted the settlement instead of going through the wringer for naught. The proxy fight likely cost Ancora tens of millions of dollars, not to mention tens of millions for Norfolk Southern as well – funds which could have better gone toward the East Palestine community, the railroad workforce, or improving Norfolk Southern’s efficiency.

But even more important, with only three board seats, Ancora has very little anchoring on the new Norfolk Southern board. And after such a hostile battle, even these Ancora-backed directors know it will be futile to push for Ancora’s full agenda on the board, and are already rumored to be rushing to distance themselves from Ancora—a savvy move if these directors wish to forge productive, constructive relations with their new colleagues.

But Ancora’s abject miss was far from pre-ordained; indeed, were it not for a series of self-inflicted missteps, it is conceivable that Ancora could have ended up with a far more favorable outcome. For years, many analysts identified Norfolk Southern as a ripe target for activists, especially in the wake of four prominent instances over the last decade where activist investors successfully replaced a Class I rail CEO, followed by dramatic operational improvements. Had Ancora stuck to its substantive case for change, it might well have struck a chord.

Instead, we heard privately from several large Norfolk Southern shareholders that Ancora’s increasing reliance on over-the-top, “vicious” ad hominem smear campaigns rubbed many the wrong way.

Ancora’s nasty, intensely personal locker-room style taunts seemingly knew no bounds as its campaign dragged on, ranging from dropping opposition research dumps targeting individualNorfolk Southern board members under the guise of SEC filings to mudslinging new Norfolk Southern employees publicly and privately. We experienced a dose of Ancora’s lame intimidation tactics ourselves after we published an objective analysis of the proxy fight in Fortune, though we quickly swatted away Ancora’s amateurish dirty tricks and laughably false claims with a definitive SEC filing correcting Ancora’s defamatory innuendo with real facts.

Ancora’s aggressive tactics seemingly backfired badly on them, even amongst those inclined to be natural allies. Perhaps it is no coincidence that fellow activists such as EdgePoint Investment Group, which holds a 2% stake in Norfolk Southern, abruptly severed cooperation with Ancora after initially entering into a cooperation agreement; while several big railroad names rumored to be involved with initial discussions, such as respected former Kansas City Southern CEO Pat Ottensmeyer, rushed to distance themselves as Ancora became increasingly nasty. Even Ancora’s own nominees were rumored to be uncomfortable with Ancora’s “nasty rhetoric”; and one highly qualified Ancora nominee even withdrew herself from consideration on the eve of the vote, an extremely rare occurrence. Between Ancora’s tragicomic belligerence, its lack of any rail expertise, its small ownership stake of merely 0.15% of NS as of the end of 2023, as well as its own undistinguished investment track record of underperformance as we revealed earlier, it could be said that Ancora squandered a good hand through its own mistakes.

The opportunity remains for Ancora to be a constructive, influential voice in driving value at Norfolk Southern—which would be a win for all involved and which we would celebrate eagerly—if only they could stop shooting themselves in the foot. Unfortunately for them, even after their defeat in the proxy contest, Ancora still does not seem to realize that the more they resort to wild, desperate ad hominem thrashing, the more they squander their own credibility in the eyes of many key stakeholders.

For example, during his allotted time slot at the Norfolk Southern Annual Meeting, Ancora activism leader Jim Chadwick inexplicably ranted against the largest shareholders of Norfolk Southern: “For the passive investors, if anything should go wrong here and there’s another derailment and people die, this is on you … You gave us literally no support … What happens at Norfolk Southern now is on your firms and your conscience.”

With this reckless slash-and-burn style, no wonder some Wall Street analysts are beginning to treat Ancora as an inconsequential gadfly: in a fresh note after the vote, TD Cowen analyst and Railway Age Wall Street Contributing Editor Jason Seidl wrote poignantly, “We believe Ancora will continue to advocate for its CEO and COO candidates, but to little avail.” Every observer should hope that Ancora can re-establish the credibility and trust needed to help drive Norfolk Southern forward as constructive partners, but the ball is in Ancora’s court, and they face a steep climb.

In response, Ancora would surely deny they are even mildly disappointed over the result, while pledging to continue their campaign against Alan Shaw, as they did in their press release after the votes were announced – but as Railway Age Editor-in-Chief William C. Vantuono insightfully alluded to, the before-and-after difference in Ancora’s definition of success speaks for itself.

NS Pulling Out of the Station at Long Last
Now that the proxy fight is finally behind Norfolk Southern, NS leadership can finally return their full focus towards running the company—a much better use of their time than defending themselves against malicious personal attacks and false innuendo. And after having listened intensely to shareholder feedback, making rapid adjustments in real time during the proxy fight, their mandate is clear: Shareholders have made it clear they are expecting greater operational efficiency and productivity from Norfolk Southern, in addition to continued safety improvements and driving volume and top-line revenue growth.

At the same time, shareholders clearly recognize and appreciate the ongoing, genuine improvements that are taking place at Norfolk Southern, which have accelerated since Alan Shaw’s appointment as CEO in 2022, as we documented in our earlier research slide deck.

Norfolk Southern President and CEO Alan Shaw. NS photo
Between the East Palestine derailment and the proxy fight, few new CEOs in any industry have navigated a more eventful first two years than Shaw, yet he has handled crisis after crisis with aplomb and skill, not to mention personal integrity and admirable strength of character. Shaw, new COO John Orr and the rest of NS’s crisis-tested leadership team are well positioned to continue driving productivity: During the past year, Norfolk Southern’s average train velocity has increased by 25% while reducing average dwell time by 33%, en route to a sub 60% operating ratio (OR) within three years’ time, while growing crucial intermodal volume.

Several key operating metrics have shown marked improvement since John Orr’s appointment as COO March 20. NS photo.
Unlike the activist’s COO candidate, who pledged to strip Norfolk Southern “down to the studs” raising concerns among key regulators such as powerful Surface Transportation Board Chair Marty Oberman (who retired May 10), Shaw is driving productivity growth while bringing along key stakeholders as partners on the train ride, ranging from regulators to labor unions to customers.

Shaw will report to a newly reconstituted Board with many fresh voices—but one which could prove less ungovernable than some cynics expect. Since the three Ancora-backed Board members represent less than a quarter of Board votes, their voice will be inconsequential if they stridently push for Ancora’s full agenda. More important, the three individual Ancora-backed members who won—Gil Lamphere, Sameh Fahmy and William Clyburn—are highly experienced and qualified in their own right and widely respected by all, while some of the more controversial and mercenary Ancora nominees lost their elections.

On many other boards, ranging from Pepsi to Disney, we have seen activist-backed board members grow and evolve to become supportive of the wisdom of management in time, as they engage constructively as productive board members and earn the respect of board colleagues. For example, former Heinz CEO Bill Johnson joined the PepsiCo board in 2015 as Nelson Peltz’s voice but became instantly very supportive of CEO Indra Nooyi and her leadership team. Similarly, Carolyn Everson, the widely admired and accomplished former President of Instacart, joined the Disney Board at the recommendation of activist Dan Loeb of Third Point, and improbably became one of Disney CEO Bob Iger’s most outspoken defenders during the recent Disney proxy fight with Nelson Peltz after having won the respect and trust of her board colleagues and key shareholders alike.

Already, Lamphere, Fahmy and Clyburn are rumored to be distancing themselves from Ancora’s excesses—and they ought to be commended for seeking to represent all shareholders, not only the idiosyncratic whims of a small 0.15% shareholder whose vision has already been roundly rejected by the shareholder base. The Board will need to elect a new Chair in the next few weeks as the first major order of business, which will offer revealing insights into whether this new Board can work constructively together.

Regardless, even though the proxy fight is now over, there is every reason to think that Norfolk Southern management and its Board will continue to operate under heightened scrutiny moving forward, and the public narrative will soon shift to how to measure the progress Norfolk Southern is making. As we see it, the Norfolk Southern Board should be careful to continue benchmarking the progress of management against its own stated goals, and avoid the pitfalls and pressure cooker of artificial false comparisons promoted by some naïve outside commentators. In particular, while it is an indisputable fact that Norfolk Southern trails its nearest peer competitor, CSX, in many operating metrics, it is unrealistic to think Norfolk Southern can close the margin gap with CSX overnight.

Such a comparison also ignores recent history—especially as CSX was essentially torn down to the studs in 2017 by the late Hunter Harrison, who juiced CSX’s margins unsustainably while setting off transportation crises across the nation, and CSX’s network is only now being rebuilt by CEO Joe Heinrichs and his leadership team. Norfolk Southern should continue making progress on its own path and on its own timeline, and bringing all its stakeholders along for the ride, without falling into the trap of trying to be CSX or any other railroad.

Ancora tried to railroad shareholders but failed. As Norfolk Southern finally pulls out of the station, leaving its proxy fight and activist detractors shouting on the side to the tracks, the future is promising, and there is every reason to think that Alan Shaw will continue this remarkable turnaround saga of a great American company.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (left) is the Lester Crown Professor in Management Practice and Founder and President of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute at the Yale School of Management. Steven Tian is Director of Research at the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute and a former quantitative investment analyst with the Rockefeller Family Office. … See MoreSee Less

Norfolk Southern Pulling Out of the Station After Proxy Fight, Leaving Activist Ancora in the Dust – Railway Age

www.railwayage.com

As we predicted last month, shareholders resoundingly rejected an attempt by activist investor Ancora to take control of Norfolk Southern’s board and fire CEO Alan Shaw at Norfolk Southern’s annua…

United Public Workers for Action

4 days ago

California’s unfunded pension liabilities are ballooning out of control. Here’s the fix
Privatizers Attack CA Defined Pension Benefits
www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/california-pension-liability-401k-19419143.php

By Francois Melese
May 10, 2024

The California Public Employees’s Retirement System has a pension debt of nearly half a trillion dollars and is only 72% funded.
The California Public Employees’s Retirement System has a pension debt of nearly half a trillion dollars and is only 72% funded.
Max Whittaker/Getty Images 2009
As California struggles to address its alarming budget deficit, big bills are coming due for retirement past benefits promised city, county and state workers.
Choking on unfunded pension and health care liabilities, cities like Carmel-by-the-Sea pay their pensioners more than active employees. While the average annual earnings of Carmel’s 99 workers are around $85,000, its 108 pensioners collect nearly $95,000 per year. Carmel’s combined pension and health care promises add up to nearly $100 million. This includes over $30 million in unfunded liabilities. Though this looks good in comparison to the nearby Monterey County city of Pacific Grove’s $66 million in unfunded liabilities, it still demands attention.
Sadly, San Jose faces $4 billion in unfunded pension and health care liabilities. San Francisco faces a staggering $7 billion. California’s total unfunded pension liabilitiesare an eye-watering $250 billion. At the heart of California’s pension crisis are “defined benefit” retirement programs.

To fix its pension problems California should follow the lead of the federal government and private sector and shift from defined benefit programs to defined contribution, or 401(k)-type plans. Under defined benefit programs, cities and unions negotiate future pension and health care promises and then set aside funds to cover those liabilities. Much like Social Security, employees contribute a fraction of their paychecks to the retirement system. Unlike Social Security, where employers contribute 6.2% of wages, cities deposit an average of over 25% of their payrolls into California’s public pension funds.
The nation’s largest pension fund, the California Public Employee Retirement System, known as CalPERS, manages pooled assets of roughly 75% of California municipalities. San Jose has two similar retirement funds, the Police and Fire Department Retirement Plan and the Federated City Employees’ Retirement System. San Francisco relies on its San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System. Regrettably, the CalPERS fund is bleeding red ink. Its pension debt of nearly half a trillion dollars is only 72% funded. More than $150 billion of CalPERS over $600 billion in pension promises remain unfunded.
Historically, a major risk for retirement funds is investment returns fail to meet pension and health care obligations. Budget holes faced by Carmel, Pacific Grove, San Jose, San Francisco and other cities, counties and special districts are partly the result of over-optimistic pension fund forecasts and overly generous taxpayer-guaranteed pension promises.
Remarkably, the average retirement benefit distributed by California’s public pension funds is nearly five times greater than comparable Social Security benefits. Furthermore, the California Rule gives retirees a legal right to public pension benefits even if a city can no longer afford them. Exploding pension costs are priority obligations, forcing municipalities strapped for cash to boost taxes or sacrifice funding for infrastructure, maintenance and public safety, or they have to dip into their financial reserves. City services suffer and future taxpayers are left on the hook. Unfunded liabilities compound a city’s problems by sinking its credit worthiness. This can raise borrowing costs at precisely the time a city needs to issue bonds to meet pension obligations.
The pension crisis is not the fault of California’s public employees. Voters, taxpayers and state and local officials all failed to notice the revolution taking place in retirement benefits. The federal government and most private companies determined decades ago that defined benefit programs were unsustainable. They depend on complex and easily manipulated economic, demographic and actuarial variables. Consequently, a complete picture of pension and health care promises is often hidden until it’s too late. The result is unfunded liabilities.

Today, the federal government and most major companies have largely transitioned away from defined benefit programs to defined contribution plans. These plans clearly define periodic pension contributions that are deposited in their employee’s individual retirement accounts, typically matching a fraction of their savings. The cumulative value of an employee’s pension upon retirement is simply a function of their saving decisions, employer contributions and investment returns. This eliminates the risk of unfunded pension liabilities.
To avoid insolvency and turn unfunded liabilities into a historical footnote, municipalities must gradually shift from defined benefit programs to defined contribution plans. But because these 401(k)-type plans transfer investment risks from employers to employees, public unions are likely to resist. Fortunately, these objections can be overcome (and cities assured of retaining valued employees) by offering higher wages, and/or more generous matching. The major benefit is revealing the true cost of public services.
Although adjustments to employee benefits are politically sensitive and can provoke labor disputes, cities are at a breaking point. The remaining challenge is the near impossibility of a city escaping its liability without making large payments to CalPERS, the Police and Fire Department Retirement Plan, the Federated City Employees’ Retirement System and the San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System. This suggests the only way to implement the transition may be through a state referendum that requires Sacramento to secure all municipal pension obligations. The dual benefit would be to encourage state officials to modify future benefits to better align with Social Security and to facilitate the transition from defined benefit programs to defined contribution plans.
Francois Melese is a professor emeritus of economics at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. He consults for Crediture.com, a local startup that focuses on community impact lending, and serves as a board member of the California Arts & Sciences Institute.
May 10, 2024
Francois Melese … See MoreSee Less

California’s unfunded pension liabilities are ballooning out of control. Here’s the fix

www.sfchronicle.com

The average retirement benefit distributed by California’s public pension funds is nearly five times greater than comparable Social Security benefits.

United Public Workers for Action

4 days ago

Gavin Newsom threatens Half Moon Bay with legal action over ‘egregious’ farmworker housing delay but covered up crimes at the farm labor camp.
Newsom didn’t immediately announce any plans to investigate or respond, which drew criticism. Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, a former state lawmaker who now leads the California Labor Federation, pointed to state laws intended to help ensure farmworkers are paid at least minimum wage, currently $16 an hour.
“If he’s hearing firsthand that these workers are being paid subminimum wage … why is that not being investigated?” she told the Chronicle at the time. “There is a crime going on right in front of the governor.”
www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/newsom-half-moon-bay-19447621.php

By Sophia Bollag
Updated May 9, 2024 2:32 p.m.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, shown speaking about the mass shooting in Half Moon Bay in January 2023, has threatened legal action against the city for delaying a plan to build farmworker housing.
Gov. Gavin Newsom, shown speaking about the mass shooting in Half Moon Bay in January 2023, has threatened legal action against the city for delaying a plan to build farmworker housing.
Stephen Lam/The Chronicle 2023
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday threatened potential legal action against Half Moon Bay after officials stalled a project to build farmworker housing in the aftermath of a mass shooting that exposed poor living conditions at local farms.
Photos taken by a San Mateo County supervisor after the 2023 shooting depicted uninsulated, one-room storage sheds with no running water where workers were apparently living. County officials soon found that neither mushroom farm where workers were shot had proper registration to house laborers on their premises.
In response, two nonprofits proposed a five-story, 40-unit building to house senior farmworkers in downtown Half Moon Bay. The city’s planning commissioners discussed the project at two public meetings last month, but each time put off voting. Although most members of the public who spoke at the meetings said they supported the project, commissioners raised concerns that the building would be too tall, increase traffic and parking competition and look out of place.
The commissioners will have a third opportunity to vote next week. This time, Newsom said, state regulators will be watching.
“This delay is egregious,” Newsom said in a statement. “The state’s Housing Accountability Unit is reviewing the city’s actions and will take all necessary steps to hold Half Moon Bay accountable if the project does not move forward as state law requires.”
Newsom didn’t specify which laws the city may be violating.
“Affordable housing, especially for farmworkers, is a dire need” and a “top priority” for the city, City Clerk Jessica Blair wrote in an email to the Chronicle. “We’re excited to see this project get to the permit review level which will help ensure this is the best project for the community. The City has no further comment at this time.”
Newsom started the Housing Accountability Unit to pressure cities and counties to approve more housing as the state struggles with a housing shortage and sky-high rents, sometimes through legal action.

The unit has secured various concessions and judgments against local governments across the state who state regulators say failed to follow housing laws. It has sued over individual proposals, such as Anaheim’s rejection of a transitional housing project for recently homeless women, and over broad violations of state housing law, such as its lawsuit last year against Huntington Beach after the city failed to approve a compliant housing plan. The unit also began an unprecedented review of San Francisco’s housing approval process, which last year found the city’s process violates multiple laws and is the most drawn-out in California.
Newsom met with farmworkers and other community members after the shooting, which killed seven people.
“Some of you should see where these folks are living, the conditions they’re in. Living in shipping containers, making $9 an hour,” he told reporters after meeting with the workers. “No health care, no support services.”
Newsom didn’t immediately announce any plans to investigate or respond, which drew criticism. Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, a former state lawmaker who now leads the California Labor Federation, pointed to state laws intended to help ensure farmworkers are paid at least minimum wage, currently $16 an hour.
“If he’s hearing firsthand that these workers are being paid subminimum wage … why is that not being investigated?” she told the Chronicle at the time. “There is a crime going on right in front of the governor.”
Shortly afterward, his office announced that state regulators would investigate the farms. The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health ultimately fined one, California Terra Garden, $113,800 for 22 violations, including failure to immediately notify employees of an active shooter threat and instruct them to seek shelter. It fined the other, Concord Farms, $51,700 for 19 violations, including that it failed to address previous incidents of workplace violence. A spokesperson for Newsom did not respond to a question about whether the state found any wage violations at either farm.
Reach Sophia Bollag: sophia.bollag@sfchronicle.com; Twitter: @SophiaBollag … See MoreSee Less

Gavin Newsom threatens Half Moon Bay with legal action over ‘egregious’ farmworker housing delay

www.sfchronicle.com

Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened legal action against Half Moon Bay after officials stalled a project to build farmworker housing in aftermath of a mass shooting.

United Public Workers for Action

6 days ago

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz shares the playbook he thinks Trump will use to stay in power if he wins a 2nd term
www.businessinsider.com/how-trump-will-stay-in-power-second-term-emergency-stiglitz-2024-5
William Edwards May 9, 2024, 2:30 AM PDT

Joseph Stiglitz during of Laurea Honoris Causa Joseph Stiglitz on the Festival della Tecnologia on November 07, 2019 in Turin, Italy
Joseph Stiglitz. Stefano Guidi/Getty Images for Polito di Torino
Joseph Stiglitz says if Donald Trump wins a second term, he could attempt to extend his rule.
Trump, who's leading in preelection polls, has a history of challenging election results.
Stiglitz says Trump would likely declare a state of emergency this time to put off elections.

If former President Donald Trump wins a second term in the November election, expect him to try to stay in power beyond his allotted four years, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says.

"The way he admires Putin, and Xi, and North Korea's leader, Orbán, Bolsonaro — all these guys who are among the most despicable leaders in the world — leads one to think that he would like to" stay in power if elected again, Stiglitz told Business Insider in April.

"The only question is: Are our institutions strong enough to stop him?" he added.

Right now, a second Trump term is a strong possibility. Trump is sitting pretty in preelection polls, carrying a 1.2% lead over President Joe Biden as of Monday, according to a polling average from RealClearPolitics.

Trump famously tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election, going as far as asking Georgia's secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, to find him more than 11,000 votes, alleging voting machines were rigged, and urging Vice President Mike Pence not to certify the Electoral College vote in the Senate on January 6, 2021, the day rioters entered the Capitol and interrupted election proceedings.

But if Trump attempted to stay in power during a second term, it may look a little different from 2020 given that Trump would not be eligible to run for reelection in 2028.

One path he could take is trying to get rid of term limits. But Stiglitz said that this was unlikely because he would have to get three-fourths of the states to vote for a constitutional amendment approving a repeal of the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidents to two terms.

"When I look at how hard it is to make a constitutional amendment that would repeal the prohibition against more than two terms, it would seem almost impossible," Stiglitz said.

Instead, Trump is more likely to declare a state of emergency, Stiglitz said, in an attempt to delay or cancel elections.

"If we had a Republican Senate and Congress, and he declared a state of emergency, and this extreme Supreme Court, who would stop him? That's the question. And that's why I'm worried," Stiglitz said.

"Let's be clear that you can always find grounds for a state of emergency," he added. "You could always start a war and say, 'They started it.' You can always use the pretense of some demonstration, and in a good democratic society, they should be demonstrating about something going wrong. But you can use that as a pretense. So I do think it's not an exaggeration to say that's clearly not beyond the plausible or the possible."

It's unclear how realistic such a scenario would be. The executive branch has no power to move the date of elections, according to the National Constitution Center. Rather, Congress and the states hold this authority.

Changing an election date via Congress would need the approval of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and the two chambers would have to come up with a new election date, per the National Constitution Center.

As for states delaying federal elections, different states place this authority with different figures, from governors to elections chiefs, according to a Congressional Research Service report from 2020. However, who has authority on election postponements can be murky. For example, some in Ohio in 2020 argued that the secretary of state should not have been able to change the primary-election date over COVID-19, the CRS report said, and that the state's Legislature solely had this power.

Despite the regulations, an election postponement could also come down to the people in power and their appetite for upholding the processes in place. For example, Pence insisted in 2021 that he did not have the authority to overturn the election results. But it's unclear how things would have played out under a vice president more willing to carry out Trump's wishes.

Stiglitz's comments came amid the release of his new book, "The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society." In the book, he criticizes neoliberal policies of lower taxes and deregulation that started under President Ronald Reagan and continued under subsequent administrations. It also argues that these policies have grown wealth inequality and fueled the populist movement that lifted Trump to the presidency in 2016. … See MoreSee Less

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz shares the playbook he thinks Trump will use to stay in power if he wins a 2nd term

www.businessinsider.com

“The only question is: Are our institutions strong enough to stop him?” Joseph Stiglitz said.

United Public Workers for Action

1 week ago

Eleven rail labor groups maintain their support for Norfolk Southern management
www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/eleven-rail-labor-groups-maintain-their-support-for-nor…
By Bill Stephens | April 26, 2024

An activist investor’s proxy fight has split the rank-and-file, with engineers and maintenance-of-way unions urging management change and the other unions pledging support for CEO Alan Shaw

Crew member walks across front of locomotive as another train passes on adjacent track.jpeg
After performing a roll-by inspection, a Norfolk Southern conductor boards his train at Besco, Pa. Chase Gunnoe
WASHINGTON — Well, you can bet there will be interesting discussions going on in Norfolk Southern locomotive cabs today.

Just hours after the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen reversed course and said it would back activist investor Ancora Holdings in its bid to oust Norfolk Southern management, the SMART-TD union that represents conductors said it continues to stand by NS CEO Alan Shaw.

And minutes after the conductors’ union issued its statement, the other 10 labor unions that represent NS workers chimed in and affirmed their support for current management.

But the proxy contest has created a split in the ranks. The BLET and Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes, which announced its support for Ancora yesterday, represent 41.5% of Norfolk Southern’s unionized workforce, according to NS employment data. The other 11 unions represent 58.5% of the railroad’s craft workers, including conductors, shop workers, dispatchers, signal workers, clerks, and yardmasters.

“In our view, Ancora’s business plan to reduce Norfolk Southern’s operating ratio while improving safety and service is not only unrealistic but runs contrary to their stated intent,” the 11 unions said in a statement. “Railway labor unions, shippers and federal regulators have all warned that Ancora’s plans will jeopardize the safety and service improvements that Norfolk Southern has made since the 2023 derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. We further believe that Ancora’s plans for increasing profits are nothing more than short-term cost-cutting to artificially lower the operating ratio – all at the expense of its customers, long-term investors and ultimately the U.S. economy. For these reasons alone, we believe that Ancora’s proposed strategy is not ‘fit for purpose,’ and we therefore urge shareholders not to support the Ancora director nominees.”

Ancora has proposed a majority slate for the board of directors and wants to name former UPS executive Jim Barber Jr. as CEO and former CSX operations boss Jamie Boychuk as chief operating officer. They would implement a full-blown implementation of the low-cost Precision Scheduled Railroading operating model and ultimately target a 57% operating ratio.

Shaw advocates an operational resilience strategy that balances service, productivity, and growth with safety at its core. The railroad relies on a Precision Scheduled Railroading operating plan, Shaw says, and aims for a sub-60% operating ratio. But Shaw’s plan would take a year longer to reach its operating ratio goals.

“CEO Alan Shaw and his management team have focused on creating a resilient carrier. They have made a conscious effort to diverge from the operating ratio-obsessed mentality that has degraded rail service and safety since 2017, and have made safety, employees, and customers their priority,” the union said in a statement.

“The recent announcements by the BMWED and BLET unions that they are willing to roll the dice with a group wanting to re-implement an operating mode that contributed to a national supply-chain crisis and puts safety and employee well-being at risk is puzzling,” SMART-TD said.

The unions backing NS include the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Rail Division; Transportation Communications Union; Brotherhood of Railway Carmen; International Brotherhood of Boilermakers; Brotherhood of Railway Signalmen; American Train Dispatchers Association; SMART-TD; SMART-Mechanical Mechanical; National Conference of Firemen & Oilers; and the Transport Workers Union.

The proxy contest is headed toward a May 9 shareholder vote at the railroad’s annual meeting. … See MoreSee Less

Eleven rail labor groups maintain their support for Norfolk Southern management – Trains

www.trains.com

WASHINGTON — Well, you can bet there will be interesting discussions going on in Norfolk Southern locomotive cabs today. Just hours after the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen reverse…

United Public Workers for Action

2 weeks ago

At least 40 LA Metro bus routes faced delays as drivers angered by violence stage a sick-out
www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-03/metro-braces-for-bus-line-delays-amid-threat-of-drive…

Three people standing on a sidewalk, waiting to board an orange bus
Recent assaults prompted Metro bus drivers in Los Angeles County to call in sick, delaying service on at least 19 routes. (Raul Roa / Burbank Leader)
Rachel Uranga..jpeg
By Rachel Uranga

May 3, 2024 11:07 AM PT

Dozens of Metro bus routes were delayed Friday after hundreds of drivers held a sick-out in protest of the rising number of assaults on operators.

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority said as of midday Friday that about 360 operators had called out sick — about 10% of drivers — forcing the agency to redeploy instructors, field supervisors and those watching from control rooms to the driver’s seat.

Unionized train and bus operators have criticized Metro for failing to respond forcefully enough to violence on the system. Drivers have been the target of several recent attacks, including one in Willowbrook where a man stabbed a bus driver while passengers watched.

Last year, the agency logged 168 assaults, a slight increase from the previous year. The assaults included being spat on and stabbed.

“We understand the sick-out affected a small percentage of bus riders,” John Ellis, who represents six union locals, said in a statement. The representative of 5,000 Metro bus and train operators for the International Assn. of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers told passengers that the union recognizes their “anguish” and that “Metro sees your frustration,” adding: “We will continue these stepping stones of safety.”

Metro declares emergency over attacks on bus operators

Ellis has been working with Metro’s Chief Executive Stephanie Wiggins to install protective barriers and has been advocating for the agency to create its own police force. He says he believes that working “hand in hand” with Metro leadership will improve security.

Others aren’t so sure. The action was not organized by the union, but it raises questions about deep, brewing frustration within its ranks. Drivers have expressed outrage on social media about attacks, and many worry privately about their safety day in and out.

In February, there was an attack nearly every other day — 12 in all — according to a Metro report. In one instance, a driver was punched after asking a passenger at Western Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard to stand behind a yellow safety line.

A longtime bus driver who wasn’t authorized to speak to the media said Metro just wants the buses moving, while drivers are worried about not making it home.

The driver said workers are concerned the new protective barriers are not bulletproof.

“Metro doesn’t care about its drivers,” the person said. “We are all expendable.”

Metro warned on Friday of at least 40 bus routes affected by the staff shortage, including Line 53, which runs from downtown Los Angeles to Dominguez Hills; Line 251, from Eagle Rock to Lynwood; Line 115, from Playa del Rey to Norwalk; Line 246, from Willowbrook to San Pedro; and Line 720, from Santa Monica to downtown Los Angeles.

In private Facebook groups, several employees commented Friday that there were fewer workers than usual.

One Metro official said that some drivers offered to come in on their days off. And the agency pleaded with drivers to go to work for the thousands of riders who rely on them daily.

LOS ANGELES, CA – MAY 20: A man rides an escalator down into the METRO Red Line tunnel at North Hollywood Station on Thursday, May 20, 2021 in Los Angeles, CA. (Brian van der Brug / {credit

Metro board ponders facial recognition, other security measures after subway killing

“Transit riders throughout Los Angeles County depend on the Metro bus and rail network every day to reach critical destinations including work, school, and medical facilities, and to care for their friends and family members,” agency spokesperson Dave Sotero said in an emailed statement. “We appeal to our operators to reconsider the impact their plan to call in sick will have on some of the most vulnerable people in the county.”

Sotero said the agency had taken several steps to increase security, including adding more security personnel on buses to deter assaults and creating barriers to protect drivers. Those barriers were approved last month and are set to be installed in buses over the coming year.

The agency is also “working on longer term plans, which include the addition of even more dedicated transit security bus riding teams,” he said.

“Bus operators are the face of Metro to more than 80% of Metro riders,” Sotero said. “We understand their and their families’ fear in the face of the senseless assaults some have experienced primarily resulting from the twin crises of untreated mental illness and drug addiction. We share their frustration.”

‘Help me, help me’: Metro bus driver stabbed, reviving fears about safety

Metro’s executive board has been grappling with issues of policing on its system for years. Whereas social justice activists are calling for the board to decrease the number of armed officers, employees are worried there isn’t enough security. The cost of contracting with law enforcement has been ballooning, and Metro has been considering whether to create its own police force.

Last month, after the bus driver was stabbed and another bus was hijacked, the board asked its staff to look into the possibility of securing gates at train stations and using facial recognition technology.

One driver who did go to work Friday said he hadn’t heard anything about the sick-out, although he did notice there were a few people out.

When asked whether he was worried about his security, he replied: “We all are.”

Times staff writer Colleen Shalby contributed to this report. … See MoreSee Less

At least 40 Metro bus routes faced delays as drivers angered by violence stage a sick-out

www.latimes.com

About 360 Los Angeles County Metro bus drivers called in sick Friday to protest unsafe work conditions after several assaults, delaying service on at least 40 routes.

United Public Workers for Action

2 weeks ago

AIPAC IS SECRETLY INTERVENING IN PORTLAND’S CONGRESSIONAL RACE TO TAKE DOWN SUSHEELA JAYAPAL, SOURCES SAY
theintercept.com/2024/05/03/portland-aipac-susheela-jayapal-maxine-dexter/
The pro-Israel group is funneling money through a “pro-science” PAC, according to two members of Congress.
RyanGrim-headshot4-120×120.jpg
Ryan Grim
May 3 2024, 5:11 p.m.

IN APRIL, A super PAC ostensibly committed to supporting “pro-science” candidates began dropping eye-popping sums of money on a Portland, Oregon, congressional race. 314 Action Fund, which is not known for spending big in congressional primaries, has spent $1.7 million in support of a single candidate in the 3rd Congressional District’s open Democratic primary, according to federal filings. That sum is equal to what the political action committee spent on independent expenditures supporting or opposing candidates during the entire 2022 election cycle.

314 Action Fund, which describes itself as helping to elect “Democrats with a background in science to public office,” is throwing its weight behind Maxine Dexter, a state representative and local doctor. The news outlet Jewish Insider floated Dexter as a potentially pro-Israel candidate before she entered the race.

By waiting until April to launch its spending blitz, 314 Action is able to delay disclosure of its donors until May 20. The election is scheduled for May 21, but ballots have already begun arriving to voters by mail. In other words, the identity of the donor or donors won’t be documented in campaign finance reports until it’s too late.

What is publicly known, however, is that former Multnomah County Commissioner Susheela Jayapal, the sister of Rep. Pramila Jayapal, was considered the candidate to beat before the sudden influx of money last month.

And what The Intercept can reveal is that Susheela Jayapal is being targeted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, which is secretly funneling money into the race by washing it through 314 Action, according to two Democratic members of Congress familiar with the arrangement.

The pro-Israel community telegraphed its intent to target Jayapal early on, primarily for suspicion that her politics on Israel–Palestine may align with her younger sister’s, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who called for a ceasefire early in the current war on Gaza.

On December 5, a story landed in Jewish Insider, which closely tracks congressional primaries, headlined “Jayapal sister’s congressional candidacy alarming Portland Jewish leaders.” The article noted that “local pro-Israel advocates … have yet to coalesce behind a viable candidate,” and it named Dexter as a possibility. Given the politics of Portland and the surrounding area, the pro-Israel community had little chance of nominating a candidate unapologetically and unconditionally supportive of Israel’s war effort, but Dexter had potential. Dexter launched her campaign later that same day.

The last-minute spending in the race is enormous: on track to climb north of $3 million in a short period of time in an inexpensive media market. On Friday, a brand-new super PAC got involved with nearly $1 million worth of negative ads against Jayapal.

Some of the money directed to 314 Action — close to a million dollars by early April — had come from a single Los Angeles-based AIPAC donor, according to the members of Congress, who asked for anonymity to preserve professional and political relationships. The plan was openly discussed at a recent AIPAC fundraiser in Los Angeles, as well as a fundraiser in the Pacific Northwest, said the members of Congress, who learned about it from colleagues in attendance or were themselves in attendance.

AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has not spent any money on the race. AIPAC did not respond to requests for comment.

Jayapal and Eddy Morales, another candidate in the race, held a joint press conference Thursday to decry the lack of transparency and call on Dexter and 314 Action to open up about the identity of the donors. News cameras that were expected to attend, however, were instead covering a police crackdown at Portland State University, where students have been protesting against the war in Gaza and occupying the library.

Morales and Jayapal issued a joint statement following the press event, saying, “Maxine Dexter claims to be for transparency in politics, but she and 314 Action are engaged in a dishonest and cynical ploy to obscure the donors propping up her campaign until just one day before the primary. At a time when MAGA Republican mega-donors are interfering in Democratic primaries across the country, particularly against qualified candidates of color, voters deserve to know who is trying to buy this seat for a centrist candidate who doesn’t even live in the district.”

Dexter’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment. In a statement posted online, Dexter said she was “deeply disappointed to see a new dark money group enter this race to disparage one of my opponents.”

314 Action’s website states that it is “committed to transparency: although not required by law, we voluntarily disclose all our donors over $250 in a two year election cycle.” 314 Action did not respond to multiple requests to disclose its recent donors.

Maxine Dexter is running for Congress in Oregon's Third Congressional District.
Maxine Dexter, a candidate for Congress in Oregon’s 3rd Congressional District. Photo: Courtesy of Maxine for Congress
JAYAPAL LAUNCHED HER campaign in early November after Rep. Earl Blumenauer announced his retirement. As of December, pro-Israel groups had yet to coalesce behind a single candidate to oppose her, giving Jayapal a significant advantage, Jewish Insider warned at the time. “While the elder Jayapal, 61, had no discernible history of public engagement on Middle East policy until recently, her approach to the war between Israel and Hamas suggests there is little distance between the two siblings on such matters,” reported JI. “A pro-Israel leader in Portland, who asked to remain anonymous to protect his privacy, said there is growing concern among other like-minded local activists that Jayapal’s Middle East policy positions ‘will not differ that much from her sister.’”

The same article elevated Dexter as an alternative for pro-Israel voters to coalesce around, though she had yet to formally announce a bid. JI reported that Dexter “has been characterized as a pragmatic progressive but does not appear to have issued any statements on Middle East policy” and that she had told JI that “she has received ‘strong encouragement’ to run.”

Sharon Meieran, described by JI as the lone Jewish member of the Multnomah County Commission, told the outlet she was “excited about her potential candidacy.”

“I can’t speak to her views on Israel, but I was impressed that she attended an event hosted by Congregation Beth Israel in Portland last night to learn about the Zioness movement,” Meieran told JI. “The focus was on intersectional identities and how standing up for social justice and Zionism are not mutually exclusive, but rather are inextricably linked. Showing up and being willing to listen and learn matters, now more than ever, and Maxine walks that walk.”

DEIR AL-BALAH, GAZA – NOVEMBER 7: Civil defense teams and citizens continue search and rescue operations after an airstrike hits the building belonging to the Maslah family during the 32nd day of Israeli attacks in Deir Al-Balah, Gaza on November 7, 2023. (Photo by Ashraf Amra/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Read Our Complete Coverage
Israel’s War on Gaza
Organizations supportive of Palestinians rights have since unsuccessfully tried to extract more from Dexter on her position. Last month, a coalition of local groups — Jewish Voice for Peace Portland, Healthcare Workers for Palestine Portland, Jewish-Palestinian Alliance of Oregon, American Council for Palestine, and Portland Democratic Socialists of America — organized a forum on the conflict and invited all the candidates. Dexter’s campaign manager responded that Dexter was busy that evening and couldn’t attend. The group offered to move the date, asking him to offer any available date. He declined. “Between her commitments at the hospital and the number of existing scheduled events, she is not able to add an additional forum at this time,” her campaign manager responded in an email provided to The Intercept.

The coalition asked if she would instead fill out a questionnaire laying out her positions. Her campaign manager stopped responding. Jayapal did respond to the questionnaire, saying she supports putting conditions on military aid to Israel, supports an immediate ceasefire, and would reject money from AIPAC or its affiliates.

ON THURSDAY, CAMPAIGNS in the district were informed by consultants who buy television ads that a brand-new political action committee, this one with the practically satirical name “Voters for Responsive Government,” had purchased nearly $1 million worth of airtime. There is no prior record of the PAC existing. It was registered on April 1. Had it been registered one day earlier, the PAC would be required to disclose its donors by now. Instead, it can withhold that information until May 20.

On Friday, the PAC went live with a website. The “About” page links to its Federal Election Commission filing, listing Los Angeles as the city where it was registered and attorney Cary Davidson as its treasurer. The PAC and Davidson did not respond to a request for comment.

“Voters for Responsive Government” launched with two negative ads targeting Jayapal on Friday. Neither ad mentions Israel or Gaza; one of them literally accuses Jayapal of abusing and starving cats and dogs, with a heartrending image of a suffering puppy and kitty. The attack ads set the new PAC’s strategy apart from 314 Action, which has so far spent only on positive ads boosting Dexter, apparently unwilling to be the vehicle for attack ads against a popular Democrat.

314 Action Fund’s largest disclosed contribution this cycle came from Ray Rothrock, who donated $500,000 on February 15. Rothrock, a venture capitalist, has said that the investment he’s “most proud of” has been in Check Point Software, an Israeli cybersecurity company where he serves as a board director. He was also an early investor in Toka, a startup geared toward fighting “terror and crime” that is backed by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. (Rothrock did not respond to a request for comment.)

At the end of March, 314 Action Fund reported having just $1.4 million in cash on hand, meaning new contributions were required to cover the spending underway now.

Join Our Newsletter
Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you.

I'm in
Relying on “pro-science” or vaguely named, brand-new PACs in order to obscure a donor’s true agenda blows a gaping hole in campaign finance law, which is based on the idea that donors should be able to give and speak freely, but voters have a right to know where the money is coming from, and on whose behalf they are speaking.

AIPAC previously pulled such a maneuver in Manhattan during the 2022 cycle, routing at least $400,000 through a super PAC called New York Progressive, attacking Yuh-Line Niou in a successful effort to elect Dan Goldman, now a member of Congress. Only after the race was over did AIPAC claim credit for the spending.

Pramila Jayapal, meanwhile, has a week to learn whether AIPAC will be successful in recruiting a challenger to her. Multiple local elected officials already turned down such entreaties, relaying the recruitment effort to Jayapal’s campaign or its allies, according to a campaign spokesperson. A recent field poll in Seattle, where Jayapal is an incumbent, tested Jayapal’s popularity as well as potential messages that could be used against her, such as the claim that she is “too extreme” or “out of touch.” According to local Democrats in Washington’s 46th District, one tested message in the poll asked if it bothered voters that Jayapal opposed President Joe Biden sometimes on principle from a progressive direction.

After learning of the recruitment drive, the Jayapal campaign put its own poll in the field. The survey found her with a 69-19 percent favorability rating. When told Jayapal supported a ceasefire in Gaza, 40 percent of Democrats said they were much more likely to support her, and another 29 percent said they’d be more likely. Just 7 percent said that calling for a ceasefire made them less likely to support her.

In Oregon’s 5th Congressional District, Democratic Majority for Israel, an AIPAC-aligned group, has endorsed Janelle Bynum but has not spent on her behalf. Instead, 314 Action Fund has spent $180,000 supporting her. The link to science is even more tenuous with Bynum than it is with Dexter. Bynum previously studied to be an engineer, though is now a McDonald’s franchise owner. … See MoreSee Less

AIPAC Is Secretly Intervening in Portland’s Congressional Race to Take Down Susheela Jayapal, Sources Say

theintercept.com

The pro-Israel group is funneling money to Susheela Jayapal’s opponent Maxine Dexter through a “pro-science” PAC, according to two members of Congress.