10 HAMODIA

24 SHEVAT 5773

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2013

Ed-Op

207 Foster Ave. Brooklyn, NY 11230 T. 718.853.9094 F. 718.853.9103

Founded in 1950. Founding editor Rabbi Y. L. Levin, ztl

Published Monday-Friday (except for the week of Pesach and the week of Sukkos). Hamodia does not assume responsibility for the kashrus or reliability of any product or establishment advertised on its pages. We reserve the right to reject, edit or correctly classify any advertisement for any reason. Acceptance of an ad does not guarantee its publication. We shall not be held liable for non-publication of any submitted advertisement. Due to the divrei Torah contained herein, the paper should be treated appropriately when being discarded. All rights reserved. Reproduction by any means without written permission from the publisher is prohibited.

EDITORIAL

Give the Jobless a Fair Chance

Unemployed need not apply. Thats becoming the disgraceful message of many employers who have a large pool of employed candidates to choose from to job applicants. Employers are sifting out rsums of candidates who have lost their jobs, subjecting the jobless to a ruthless Catch22: How does someone out of work get a job if you must have a job to get a job? Although officially the Great Recession ended in 2009, that news has been of little cheer to the millions still unemployed after the economy cratered in 2007. Fridays dismal job numbers only reinforced the bitter truth that the halting economic upswing has been mostly a jobless recovery GDP growth without the usual parallel growth in jobs. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment inched up to 7.9 percent last month. The rate is around 14 percent if the number of those who have given up looking for work and the number of underemployed is factored in, and the long-term unemployed those out of work for longer than six months is at a staggering 4.7 million. For the unemployed, the recession is still going strong. In order to get back on their feet, the unemployed, and particularly, the longterm unemployed, need a level playing field, not one where they will be unfairly discriminated against. Thats why we fully support the New York City Councils passing of a bill to prohibit discrimination against the jobless. The Council overwhelmingly passed the bill by a margin of 44-4. The measure amounts to the toughest in the nation. While New Jersey and Oregon have passed legislation against employers who exclude applicants in ads, and in Washington, D.C., applicants have recourse to file a complaint with the citys Office of Human Rights, the Councils bill will grant job seekers who suspect discrimination the right to sue employers in court. Mayor Bloomberg has threatened to veto the bill, criticizing it as one of the most misguided pieces of legislation and predicting that a rash of lawsuits would be devastating to small business. Thats a disappointing stance from the mayor and flies in the face of the citys long-standing tradition to have total intolerance to discrimination of any kind. The New York City Human Rights law, one the most comprehensive anywhere, protects New Yorkers from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations based on race, color, creed, age, national origin, alienage or citizenship status, gender and marital status. Even those who have been arrested or convicted of a crime are protected from job and housing discrimination. Why should those thrown out of work have less legal protection in the job market than those who robbed a bank? But of course government shouldnt only intervene against jobless discrimination with the strong arm of the law. The best and most effective way to end discrimination against the jobless is to provide training thats better aligned with the skills employers need. If the unemployed show up to interviews with fresh and desired skill sets, it would be more difficult for employers to find a reason to turn them down. Despite the poor job recovery, there are numerous job opportunities for highly-skilled technical workers. The U.S. will grant 65,000 H1-B visas in 2013 to foreign workers in the engineering, science and computer programming fields. Another 20,000 will be issued to those possessing masters or doctorate degrees, who are able to fill more advanced roles. That means companies are importing foreign labor because we dont or the perception is that we dont have the expertise here in the U.S. to fill those positions. New York City has to also sweeten the pot for companies who fill a H1-B slot with an unemployed worker. The incentive could be in the form of tax breaks or by giving companies an advantage in bidding for government projects. Corporations with either headquarters or a large presence in New York are filling open job positions with H1-B labor. IBM, Deloitte, Microsoft, Google and even the New York City public school system and Columbia University are only some of the companies that have hundreds if not thousands of positions staffed with workers holding H1-B visas. Its in the economic interest of New York City to hire as many indigenous workers as possible: Lower unemployment will reduce the budget of social service agencies that are now providing assistance to the unemployed. Besides, foreign workers tend to ship a lot of their income back home, while New Yorkers will spend it right here at home. The mayor should not fret so much about the debatable devastating impact of a law thats only as fair as other anti-discriminatory laws, but rather on the truly devastating blow such discrimination has on New York Citys unemployed. No study that we know of has correlated an adverse effect on the profit margin of businesses that have to uphold a law against racial or religious discrimination. If small businesses weigh their hiring decisions solely on competence, they will not have to fear being dragged into courts. Workers should be judged by the positive contributions they can bring to the workplace and not by a misfortune brought on by events beyond their control.

OPINION

Why Union Membership Is Declining

BY JAMES SHERK The Heritage Foundation (MCT) Would you want to work for an employer who ignores your contributions? What about one who only promotes on seniority? The answer to these questions explains why union membership keeps falling: unions have not adapted to the modern workplace. Collective bargaining means one contract covers everyone. Such contracts do not reflect individual contributions. Instead, unionized companies typically base promotions and raises on seniority, not merit. Unions designed this system for the industrial economy of the 1930s. Todays knowledge economy looks quite different. Machines and computers automated many of the rote tasks of the industrial age. Most employers today value employees for their skills and abilities human resources instead of seeing them as interchangeable cogs on the assembly line. Employees also expect to be rewarded for what they bring to the table.

wage increases. The Teamsters derided it as a bosses pet bill. This attitude alienates many potential union members.

Without being able to offer higher pay, unions have to sell workers on the value of collective bargaining itself.
In the past, unions offset such concerns by negotiating higher pay for everyone. In todays competitive economy, they no longer can. If unions raise labor costs, consumers can shop elsewhere. Unions that insist on uncompetitive wages wind up like Hostesss Bakery Union with unemployed union members. Consequently, studies find unions do not raise pay at most newly organized companies. Without being able to offer higher pay, unions have to sell workers on the value of collective bargaining itself. But that has proven difficult. The government already requires employers to provide employment protections like safety standards protections and overtime rates. Polls show that most workers feel their employer respects them. Unsurprisingly, polls also show that only 1 in 10 non-union workers want to join a union. This makes it difficult for unions to organize enough new members to replace those lost to bankruptcy. Union membership has steadily declined over the past two generations. Today, just 11.2 percent of employees belong to unions, fewer than when President Roosevelt signed the National Labor Relations Act in 1935. The private sector figures are even lower just 1 in 15 private employees hold union cards. Unions only remain strong in the one sector of the economy that faces no competition: the government. Government unions do not have to organize new members to replace those lost in bankruptcy. The government does not go out of business. Unions do not need to persuade new
Continued on page 13

Unionized companies typically base promotions and raises on seniority, not merit.
Collective contracts make that challenging, especially when unions fight against individual recognition. In 2011, Giant Eagle grocery stores gave several employees in Edinboro, Pa., raises. United Food and Commercial Workers Local 23 promptly sued, arguing their contract prevented the company from awarding individual pay increases. The courts agreed and ordered Giant Eagle to rescind the raises. Local 23 wanted everyone to make the same amount, no matter how good they were at their job. Many unions share this attitude. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) introduced legislation to allow unionized employers to give performance-based raises. These pay increases would come on top of union wages. Unions nonetheless denounced the proposal. SEIU President Mary Kay Henry objected that the bill would allow arbitrary

The opinions expressed on this page are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Hamodia.