Seattle, WA - In Washington and across the country, far more men have lost jobs than women, and it's a situation that has reversed the role of "breadwinner," even in the most traditional families. The main reason is that jobs filled mostly by men are in some of the hardest-hit industries, like manufacturing and construction. Those two categories alone have shed 54-thousand Washington jobs in the past year.

Marilyn Watkins, policy director for the Economic Opportunity Institute, says the result is two very different unemployment rates.

"Men in Washington State had an unemployment rate of 10.8 percent in June - and for women, it was 7.3 percent. That's a big difference. Two years ago, there was virtually no difference and of course, it was quite a bit lower then, about four and a half percent."

One concern about this trend, says Watkins, is that women's average monthly pay in Washington is only 64 percent of men's, so in many families, the person still working is likely to be the one bringing in less income.

"Of course, most families are dependent on all adults in the family bringing home some income. So, anybody's job loss is gonna hurt. But unfortunately, what we're seeing is, it's the higher-paid worker who typically is losing their job, in our economy right now."

Watkins believes women make less than men, partly because they are more likely to work part-time or in lower-paying industries that offer fewer benefits, although she says pay discrimination is still a factor. She predicts it will take the state at least two years to recover from the current recession.

EOI released a report, Washington's Working Women - Not Equal Yet, in March. Find it online at .






get more stories like this via email

A New York City music school's faculty is back in the classroom after a weeklong strike.

The Manhattan School of Music's Precollege Program faculty walked off the job after lengthy union negotiations broke down. The teachers have been working without a union contract since last August. While the union has made concessions, it said the school has been reluctant to compromise.

Adam Kent, president of the Manhattan School of Music Precollege Faculty Union, said they were forced to strike because the school was not taking the union seriously.

"We gave them over three weeks. We asked them if they wanted to reconsider their last proposal and they spelled it out that, no, they wouldn't be making any new proposals," Kent recounted. "We gave them two days notice when we actually declared the strike, and their first response was to try to line up 'scabs.'"

He noted the union is heading back to the bargaining table with the hope of getting a cost of living increase aligned with other schools, such as the Mannes School of Music and Juilliard. In a statement, the Manhattan School called the union's actions "disruptive to student learning" and argued they have had little or no availability to negotiate. Students, parents and other union members have joined the faculty's picket line.

While this was the first strike, Kent said he cannot say whether it will be the last. He cautioned there could be another, longer strike if the pattern of bargaining continues. He added recent comments from the school's attorney regarding the union's National Labor Relations Board case against the school make him leery about what lies ahead.

"The attorney made a comment to us, 'Good luck with your board,' in the context of the eviscerating of all of these federal agencies under the new administration, and we were really chilled by that," Kent acknowledged. "We really saw it as part of this idea of people claiming impunity and taking advantage of the current political climate."

Throughout negotiations, there have been questions about how much money is available for faculty raises. The school has continuously said there are not enough funds for a pay raise, but tax filing data show the school's president and executives received large pay increases last year. Other data indicate the school's tuition has risen 58% since 2014.


get more stories like this via email

Whether it's pressure from inflation or health-care costs eating away at savings, a reliable "nest egg" is still up in the air for many Americans.

There are calls to bring more certainty and retirement simplicity to the table for workers. Pensions offered to public employees are seen as more stable because they're not shaken by movements in the financial markets.

In recent polling from the National Institute on Retirement Security, 86% of Americans say all workers, including the private sector, should have a retirement plan that is more pension-driven.

Dan Doonan, executive director of the National Institute on Retirement Security, says retirement coverage is still too spotty for non-wealthy workers, leaving them on their own to put away savings.

"In general, we're just asking way too much of individuals to get all this right. And saving during the middle years of your life to provide income throughout retirement, it really is a challenging endeavor," he explained.

He added the good news is that more states, including Minnesota, are setting up programs that enroll private-sector workers in an IRA-style plan.

The goal is to step in when a company can't or won't offer retirement perks. Experts say they're easy for states to operate and benefit small businesses because they don't have to contribute. But for the workers, the IRAs typically have lower contribution limits, meaning the retirement savings might not stretch as far.

Just like state and local governments, Doonan said a more simplified network of retirement programs around the country can help companies in the private sector avoid staff turnover.

"As they do move in that direction, I think what you'll see is more loyalty in return to the company. So, there are some benefits for private employers, especially employers who value retention," he continued.

Congress has taken its own steps by adopting policies such as the Secure 2.0 Act, which updates federal rules dealing with retirement plans in hopes of boosting access. Doonan said those reforms could steer more people toward savings accounts similar to pensions. But he warns rising health care costs for older populations still could put a damper on things. And partisan divides remain in Congress over the future of Social Security.


get more stories like this via email

A recent round of employee cuts at the Environmental Protection Agency and other efforts by President Donald Trump's administration to follow through on the president's campaign promise to reduce the size of the federal government have prompted concern among government employees.

In Iowa, the cuts will have an effect on a number of employees.

Charlie Wishman, president of the Iowa AFL-CIO, said the cuts or job reclassifications threaten veterans' services employees, civil servants who work at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, just across Iowa's western border, programs that help people access Social Security benefits, or work in government security jobs in Des Moines. He said all the moves are not being made based on facts.

"Beyond that, it's a real problem to transform the professional civil service into an army of political appointees that are just loyal to one person and not to the mission to the American public or to what their job is actually supposed to be," asserted,

The American Federation of Government Employees marched in Washington, D.C., on Monday to rally against, among a host of measures, House Resolution 201, which would recalculate the way federal agencies evaluate employee performance and calculate their pay. The administration said it is making good on President Trump's campaign pledge to reduce the size of the federal government.

Wishman acknowledged while the looming job cuts across Iowa and the country create uncertainty among government employees, there is a bright spot.

"People understand that the way for them to fight back is collectively," emphasized. "AFGE has seen their numbers of new members jump by thousands since the president got his pen out and started writing executive orders, some of which aren't even legal."

A federal judge late last week ordered a temporary hold on Trump's order to effectively dismantle
the U.S. Agency for International Development, saying the affected employees would suffer "irreparable harm" from layoffs with no notice.