PHOENIX, Ariz. - It is often said that a mother's time with her infant is precious, but close to half of moms employed outside the home in Arizona and nationwide cut it short so they can get back to the daily grind. A new report from the U.S. Census Bureau finds that 51 percent of working women who had their first child between 2006 and 2008 received paid leave, compared with 42 percent in previous years.

Cindy Anderson, an associate professor of sociology at Ohio University, points out that while that is an increase, in order to stay home longer most women must implement leave strategies.

"They have to plan ahead so they can cobble together vacation days, sick days, maternity leave - if they have any - and maybe short-term disability. Most companies are not offering maternity leave."

According to the report, trends over the last 30 years indicate that women are working later into their pregnancy and returning more rapidly after having their first child. Anderson says the reasons many women choose to spend more time in the workforce are career-oriented and out of economic necessity.

"At the same time that women have been working more, we've seen a need for dual-earner families, where both the women and men earn money just to be able to maintain a reasonable economic level for their family."

The Family Medical Leave Act allows a new mom or dad to stay home for up to 12 weeks. However, Anderson points out, that is unpaid time and only applies to companies with more than 50 employees. She says better policies are needed to support families.

"Definitely, the state and the federal government, too, need to look at the way we value children, motherhood, parenting and family leave."

Access to paid leave varies with age, hours worked and education level, according to the report. Less well-educated mothers are nearly four times more likely than college graduates to lack maternity benefits. Unlike most countries, the United States has no federal policy on paid parental leave, and past efforts to pass a paid-family-leave law have been unsuccessful.

The report is available at www.census.gov.




get more stories like this via email

The nation's billionaires have doubled their wealth over the past seven years, while working people in West Virginia and elsewhere continue to face economic struggles.

The collective fortune of America's more than eight hundred billionaires hit a record $5.8 trillion in April, according to a new report by Americans for Tax Fairness.

Gary Zuckett, executive director of the Citizen Action Education Fund, said the Mountain State is just beginning to see the ramifications of a deep income tax cut that was passed last year by state lawmakers.

He said the lack of funding has made it difficult to address steadily worsening problems.

"Like the child-care crisis in West Virginia, the corrections crisis - our prisons have been in the state of emergency for the last three or four years," said Zuckett. "There's a lot of things that we need to be using our tax money for, besides giving it to the rich in income tax cuts."

America's billionaires now own more than 50% more wealth than does the entire bottom half of the nation's households.

Under the current tax code, however, the staggering wealth gains made by the richest are unlikely to ever be taxed.

Trump-era tax benefits for the wealthy enacted in 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025.

Zuckett explains that the laws cut the top income-tax rate from more than 39% to 37%, and cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%.

"The mom and pop grocery stores and the people working in Walmart, everyday working people," said Zuckett, "pay taxes on every dollar that they earn, but the system is rigged to benefit people at the top."

According to the report, if the wealthiest Americans were taxed at the rate of average Americans, the nation would have new potential tax revenue of roughly $120 billion each year, which could help pay for more affordable and accessible health care.





get more stories like this via email

Michigan legislators are tackling predatory lending practices, aiming to set standards for payday loans and maximum interest rates.

In Kent County alone, with a payday loan volume of $60 million, the House Insurance and Financial Services Committee discussed Senate Bill 632, sponsored by Sen. Sarah Anthony, D-Lansing, which seeks to cap annual interest rates at 36% compared to current rates reaching nearly 400%.

The bill has passed the Senate and is part of a legislative effort including House Bill 5290, sponsored by Rep. Abraham Aiyash, D-Hamtramck.

Dallas Lenear, founder and executive director of Project GREEN, a grassroots economic empowerment network, highlighted concerns about the exploitative nature of these loans.

"Payday loans inevitably are designed in a fashion that is unaffordable for the majority of people who use those loans," Lenear contended.

Lenear pointed out many other states have already capped their interest rate or totally outlawed payday loans because of the financial damage they can cause their citizens and argued it is time for Michigan to do better.

Lenear noted while the payday loan industry believes it offers hope to borrowers in times of need, a study by project GREEN found 78% of respondents said payday loans either prolonged or worsened their financial situation.

"If they've had any experience with it, they'll start to shake their head and they'll say those things are terrible and I was caught in the trap and I would never use those things again. I'd use it out of desperation," Lenear reported.

Advocacy groups such as the Michigan League for Public Policy and the Michigan Catholic Conference testified in support of the bills, to end the predatory practices.

A case before the U.S. Supreme Court could have implications for the country's growing labor movement. Justices will hear oral arguments in Starbucks versus McKinney today to determine if the bar should be raised for the National Labor Relations Board when it seeks to impose court-ordered injunctions on companies.

David Groves, communications director with the Washington State Labor Council, said the Supreme Court could further undermine the power of the NLRB, the independent federal agency that protects employees' rights.

"We already have weak labor laws in this country that have such minor penalties for breaking union organizing laws that companies routinely do it, and this is another opportunity for them to weaken labor laws even further," he argued.

The case involves Starbucks' firing of seven employees in Memphis during their union campaign in 2021. The coffee company says it rehired the workers and denies wrongdoing. If the justices rule in favor of Starbucks, it could make it harder for the NLRB to seek court orders.

Groves said the law states that workers have a right to organize unions in their workplace without coercion or retaliation from their employers.

"That's all fine and good but if the penalty's not significant enough, then they'll just go ahead and break that law and consider it the cost of doing business if they have to pay a fine two years down the road," he explained.

Groves said his and other labor organizations support the passage of the Protecting the Right to Organize or PRO Act in Congress, which would strengthen labor laws, including providing greater authority to the NLRB.


get more stories like this via email