Labor and Jobs

More stories

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Affirmative Action Ruling May Upend Diversity Hiring Policies, Too

    by

    The Supreme Court decision on college admissions could lead companies to alter recruitment and promotion practices to pre-empt legal challenges.As a legal matter, the Supreme Court’s rejection of race-conscious admissions in higher education does not in itself impede employers from pursuing diversity in the workplace.That, at least, is the conclusion of lawyers, diversity experts and political activists across the spectrum — from conservatives who say robust affirmative action programs are already illegal to liberals who argue that they are on firm legal ground.But many experts argue that as a practical matter, the ruling will discourage corporations from putting in place ambitious diversity policies in hiring and promotion — or prompt them to rein in existing policies — by encouraging lawsuits under the existing legal standard.After the decision on Thursday affecting college admissions, law firms encouraged companies to review their diversity policies.“I do worry about corporate counsels who see their main job as keeping organizations from getting sued — I do worry about hyper-compliance,” said Alvin B. Tillery Jr., director of the Center for the Study of Diversity and Democracy at Northwestern University, who advises employers on diversity policies.Programs to foster the hiring and promotion of African Americans and other minority workers have been prominent in corporate America in recent years, especially in the reckoning over race after the 2020 murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer.Even before the ruling in the college cases, corporations were feeling legal pressure over their diversity efforts. Over the past two years, a lawyer representing a free-market group has sent letters to American Airlines, McDonald’s and many other corporations demanding that they undo hiring policies that the group says are illegal.The free-market group, the National Center for Public Policy Research, acknowledged that the outcome on Thursday did not bear directly on its fight against affirmative-action in corporate America. “Today’s decision is not relevant; it dealt with a special carve-out for education,” said Scott Shepard, a fellow at the center.Mr. Shepard claimed victory nonetheless, arguing that the ruling would help deter employers who might be tempted overstep the law. “It couldn’t be clearer after the decision that fudging it at the edges” is not allowed, he said.(American Airlines and McDonald’s did not respond to requests for comment about their hiring and promotion policies.)Charlotte A. Burrows, who was designated chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by President Biden, was also quick to declare that nothing had changed. She said the decision “does not address employer efforts to foster diverse and inclusive work forces or to engage the talents of all qualified workers, regardless of their background.”Some companies in the cross hairs of conservative groups underscored the point. “Novartis’s D.E.I. programs are narrowly tailored, fair, equitable and comply with existing law,” the drugmaker said in a statement, referring to diversity, equity and inclusion. Novartis, too, has received a letter from a lawyer representing Mr. Shepard’s group, demanding that it change its policy on hiring law firms.The Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action was largely silent on employment-related questions.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesBeyond government contractors, affirmative action policies in the private sector are largely voluntary and governed by state and federal civil rights law. These laws prohibit employers from basing hiring or promotion decisions on a characteristic like race or gender, whether in favor of a candidate or against.The exception, said Jason Schwartz, a partner at the law firm Gibson Dunn, is that companies can take race into account if members of a racial minority were previously excluded from a job category — say, an investment bank recruiting Black bankers after it excluded Black people from such jobs for decades. In some cases, employers can also take into account the historical exclusion of a minority group from an industry — like Black and Latino people in the software industry.In principle, the logic of the Supreme Court’s ruling on college admissions could threaten some of these programs, like those intended to address industrywide discrimination. But even here, the legal case may be a stretch because the way employers typically make decisions about hiring and promotion differs from the way colleges make admissions decisions.“What seems to bother the court is that the admissions programs at issue treated race as a plus without regard to the individual student,” Pauline Kim, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes in employment law, said in an email. But “employment decisions are more often individualized decisions,” focusing on the fit between a candidate and a job, she said.The more meaningful effect of the court’s decision is likely to be greater pressure on policies that were already on questionable legal ground. Those could include leadership acceleration programs or internship programs that are open only to members of underrepresented minority groups.Many companies may also find themselves vulnerable over policies that comply with civil rights law on paper but violate it in practice, said Mike Delikat, a partner at Orrick who specializes in employment law. For example, a company’s policy may encourage recruiters to seek a more diverse pool of candidates, from which hiring decisions are made without regard to race. But if recruiters carry out the policy in a way that effectively creates a racial quota, he said, that is illegal.“The devil is in the details,” Mr. Delikat said. “Were they interpreting that to mean, ‘Come back with 25 percent of the internship class that has to be from an underrepresented group, and if not you get dinged as a bad recruiter’?”The college admissions cases before the Supreme Court were largely silent on these employment-related questions. Nonetheless, Mr. Delikat said, his firm has been counseling clients ever since the court agreed to hear the cases that they should ensure that their policies are airtight because an increase in litigation is likely.That is partly because of the growing attack from the political right on corporate policies aimed at diversity in hiring and other social and environmental goals.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida has signed legislation to limit diversity training in the workplace.Haiyun Jiang for The New York TimesGov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who is seeking the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has deplored “the woke mind virus” and proclaimed Florida “the state where woke goes to die.” The state has enacted legislation to limit diversity training in the workplace and has restricted state pension funds from basing investments on “woke environmental, social and corporate governance” considerations.Conservative legal groups have also mobilized on this front. A group run by Stephen Miller, a White House adviser in the Trump administration, contended in letters to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that the diversity and inclusion policies of several large companies were illegal and asked the commission to investigate. (Mr. Miller’s group did not respond to a request for comment about those cases.)The National Center for Public Policy Research, which is challenging corporate diversity policies, has sued Starbucks directors and officers after they refused to undo the company’s diversity and inclusion policies in response to a letter demanding that they do so. (Starbucks did not respond to a request for comment for this article, but its directors told the group that it was “not in the best interest of Starbucks to accept the demand and retract the policies.”)Mr. Shepard, the fellow at the center, said more lawsuits were “reasonably likely” if other companies did not accede to demands to rein in their diversity and inclusion policies.One modest way to do so, said David Lopez, a former general counsel for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is to design policies that are race neutral but nonetheless likely to promote diversity — such as giving weight to whether a candidate has overcome significant obstacles.Mr. Lopez noted that, in the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. argued that a university could take into account the effect on a candidate of having overcome racial discrimination, as long as the school didn’t consider the candidate’s race per se.But Dr. Tillery of Northwestern said making such changes to business diversity programs could be an overreaction to the ruling. While the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 generally precludes basing individual hiring and promotion decisions explicitly on race, it allows employers to remove obstacles that prevent companies from having a more diverse work force. Examples include training managers and recruiters to ensure that they aren’t unconsciously discriminating against racial minorities, or advertising jobs on certain campuses to increase the universe of potential applicants.In the end, companies appear to face a greater threat of litigation over discrimination against members of minority groups than from litigation over discrimination against white people. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, there were about 2,350 charges of that latter form of discrimination in employment in 2021, among about 21,000 race-based charges overall.“There’s an inherent interest in picking your poison,” Dr. Tillery said. “Is it a lawsuit from Stephen Miller’s right-wing group that doesn’t live in the real world? Or is it a lawsuit from someone who says you’re discriminating against your work force and can tweet about how sexist or racist you are?”He added, “I’ll take the Stephen Miller poison any day.”J. Edward Moreno More

  • 100 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Inflation Has Eased, but Economists Are Still Worried

    by

    Inflation has come down from its 2022 heights, but economists are worried about its stubbornness.Inflation is beginning to abate meaningfully for American consumers. Gas is cheaper, eggs cost roughly half as much as they did in January and prices are no longer climbing as rapidly across a wide array of products.But at least one person has yet to express relief: Jerome H. Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve.The Fed has spent the past 15 months locked in an aggressive war against inflation, raising interest rates above 5 percent in an attempt to get price increases back down to a more normal pace. Last week its officials announced that they were skipping a rate increase in June, giving themselves more time to see how the already enacted changes are playing out across the economy.But Mr. Powell emphasized that it was too early to declare victory in the battle against rapid price increases.The reason: While less expensive gas and slower grocery price adjustments have helped overall inflation to fall from its four-decade peak last summer, food and fuel costs tend to jump around a lot. That obscures underlying trends. And a measure of “core” inflation that strips out food and fuel is showing surprising staying power, as a range of purchases from dental care and hairstyling to education and car insurance continue to climb quickly in price.Last week, Fed officials sharply marked up their forecast of how high core inflation would be at the end of 2023. They now see it at 3.9 percent, higher than the 3.6 percent they predicted in March and nearly twice their 2 percent inflation target.The economic picture, in short, is playing out on something of a split screen. While the steepest price increases appear to be over for consumers — a relief for many, and a development that President Biden and his advisers have celebrated — Fed policymakers and many outside economists see continued reasons for concern. Between the subtle signs that inflation could stick around and the surprising resilience of the American economy, they believe that central bankers might need to do more to cool growth and rein in demand to prevent unusually elevated price increases from becoming permanent.“Big picture: We are making progress, but the progress is slower than expected,” said Kristin J. Forbes, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist and a former Bank of England policymaker. “Inflation is somewhat more stubborn than we had hoped.”A fresh Consumer Price Index inflation report last week showed that inflation continued to moderate sharply on an overall basis in May. That measure helps to feed into the Fed’s preferred measure, the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, which it uses to define its 2 percent target. The fresh P.C.E. figures will be released on June 30.White House officials, who have spent months on the defensive about the role that pandemic spending under Mr. Biden played in stoking demand and price increases, have greeted the recent cooling in inflation enthusiastically.“We have seen a very large reduction in inflation, by more than 50 percent,” Lael Brainard, the director of the White House National Economic Council, said in an interview. She added that the current trajectory on inflation offered reasons for optimism that it could return back to normal fairly quickly as the economy slowed, and expressed hope that crushing it would not necessarily require a big jump in unemployment — something that has historically accompanied the Fed’s campaigns to wrangle inflation.“The employment picture is very sustainable,” she said.But many economists are less sanguine. That’s partly because most of the factors that have helped inflation to fall so far have been widely anticipated, sort of the low-hanging fruit of disinflation.Supply chains were roiled by the pandemic and have since healed, allowing goods price increases to slow. A pop in oil prices tied to the war in Ukraine has faded.And there may be more to come: Rents jumped starting in 2021 as people moved out on their own or relocated amid the pandemic. They have since cooled as landlords found that renter demand was not strong enough to bear ever-higher prices, and the moderation is slowly feeding into official inflation data.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Year-over-year percentage change in the Personal Consumption Expenditures index
    Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesWhat linger are relatively rapid price increases in services outside of housing. That’s a broad category, and it includes purchases that tend to be labor-intensive, like hospital care, school tuition and sports tickets. Those prices tend to rise when wages climb, both because employers try to cover their higher costs and because consumers who are earning more have the ability to pay more without pulling back.“The big action is behind us,” said Olivier Blanchard, a former International Monetary Fund chief economist who is now at the Peterson Institute. “What remains is the pressure on wages.”

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Year-over-year percent change in the Personal Consumption Expenditures index by category
    Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesDuring a news conference last week, Mr. Powell said that in the measure of inflation that excluded food and energy “you just aren’t seeing a lot of progress,” emphasizing that “getting wage inflation back to a level that is sustainable” could be an important part of lowering the remaining price increases.There are early signs that a labor market slowdown is underway. The Employment Cost Index measure of wages, which the Fed watches closely, is climbing much more rapidly than before the pandemic but has slowed from its mid-2022 peak. A measure of average hourly earnings has come down even more notably. And jobless claims have climbed in recent weeks.But hiring has remained robust, and the unemployment rate low — which is why economists are trying to figure out if the economy is cooling enough to guarantee that inflation will return fully to normal.Cylus Scarbrough, 42, has witnessed both features of today’s economy: fast wage growth and rapid inflation. Mr. Scarbrough works as an analyst for a homebuilder in Sacramento, and he said his skills were in such high demand that he could rapidly get a new job if he wanted. He got a 33 percent raise when he joined the company two years ago, and his pay has climbed more since.Cylus Scarbrough of Sacramento said he felt inflation was not eating into his budget the way it had before. “I don’t think about it every day,” he said.Rozette Halvorson for The New York TimesEven so, he’s racking up credit card debt because of higher inflation and because he and his family spend more than they used to before the pandemic. They have gone to Disneyland twice in the past six months and eat out more regularly.“It’s something about: You only live once,” he explained.He said he felt OK about spending beyond his budget, because he bought a house just at the start of the pandemic and now has about $100,000 in equity. In fact, he is not even worrying about inflation as much these days — it was much more salient to him when gas prices were rising quickly.“That was the time when I really felt like inflation was eating into our budget,” Mr. Scarbrough said. “I feel more comfortable with it now. I don’t think about it every day.”Fed officials are not yet comfortable, and they may do more to tame price increases. Officials predicted last week that they would raise interest rates to 5.6 percent this year, making two more quarter-point rate moves that would push rates to their highest level since 2000.Investors doubt that will happen. Given the recent cooling in inflation and signs that the job market is beginning to crack, they expect one more rate increase in July — and then outright rate cuts by early next year. But if that bet is wrong, the next phase of the fight against inflation could be the more painful one.As higher borrowing costs prod consumers and firms to pull back, they are expected to translate into less hiring and fewer job opportunities for people like Mr. Scarbrough. The slowdown might leave some people out of work altogether.Fed policymakers estimated that joblessness will jump to 4.5 percent by the end of next year — up somewhat from 3.7 percent now, but historically pretty low. But Mr. Blanchard thinks that the jobless rate might need to rise by one percentage point “and probably more.”Jason Furman, a Harvard economist, said he thought the unemployment rate could go even higher. While it is not his forecast, he said that in a bad scenario it was “possible” that it would take something like 10 percent unemployment for inflation to return totally to normal. That’s how high joblessness jumped at the worst point in the 2009 recession, and inflation came down by about two percentage points, he noted.In any case, Mr. Furman cautioned against jumping to early conclusions about the path ahead for inflation based on progress so far.“People have been so crazily premature to keep declaring victory on inflation,” he said. More

  • 100 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    UPS Workers Authorize Teamsters Union to Call Strike

    by

    A walkout is possible after the contract for more than 325,000 workers expires this summer. Negotiations began in April but have yet to resolve pay.United Parcel Service workers have authorized their union, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, to call a strike as soon as Aug. 1, after the current contract expires, the Teamsters announced Friday.The Teamsters represent more than 325,000 UPS employees in the United States, where the company has nearly 450,000 employees overall. The union said 97 percent had voted in favor of strike authorization.Many unions hold such votes to create leverage at the bargaining table, but a much smaller percentage end up following through. “The results do not mean a strike is imminent and do not impact our current business operations in any way,” UPS said in a statement, adding that it was “confident that we will reach an agreement.”A UPS strike could have significant economic fallout. The company handles about one-quarter of the tens of millions of parcels shipped each day in the United States, according to the Pitney Bowes Parcel Shipping Index. And while UPS’s competition has grown in recent years, rivals would be hard-pressed to replace that lost capacity quickly, leaving some customers in the lurch and others facing higher costs.“What happens when you try to stuff 25 percent more food into a stomach that’s 90 percent full?” said Alan Amling, a fellow at the University of Tennessee’s Global Supply Chain Institute and a former UPS executive.The two sides have reached tentative agreements on a number of issues since they began negotiating a national contract in April, most recently on heat safety, including a requirement for air conditioning in new trucks beginning in January and additional fans and venting for existing trucks.But the negotiators have yet to tackle pay increases, which the Teamsters say are overdue amid the company’s strong pandemic-era performance. The company’s adjusted net income increased by more than 70 percent from 2019 to last year.The union has also focused on revisiting pay disparities for a category of driver who typically works on weekends.The UPS chief executive, Carol Tomé, who started in that position in 2020, said on a recent earnings call that UPS was aligned with the union on “several key issues.” She added that outsiders should not put too much stock in the “great deal of noise” that was likely to arise during the negotiation.Looming over the talks is the political standing of the Teamsters’ leader, Sean O’Brien, who during his campaign for the union’s presidency in 2021 repeatedly accused his predecessor, James P. Hoffa, of being overly conciliatory toward employers.Mr. O’Brien complained that Mr. Hoffa had essentially forced a concessionary contract onto UPS workers in 2018 after union members voted down the deal. He criticized his opponent for the presidency, a Hoffa-aligned candidate, for being unlikely to strike.“You already conceded that in your 25-year career, you only struck six times, so UPS knows you’re not going to strike,” Mr. O’Brien said at a candidates’ debate.Mr. O’Brien has largely maintained his aggressive stance on UPS since taking over as president last year. Speaking in October to activists with Teamsters for a Democratic Union, a reformist group that backed his candidacy, Mr. O’Brien vowed that “this UPS agreement is going to be the defining moment in organized labor.”Compensation for UPS drivers is generally higher than pay at the company’s competitors. UPS said that the average full-time delivery driver with four years’ experience makes $42 an hour, and that part-time workers who sort packages make $20 an hour on average after 30 days.The groups receive the same benefits package, which includes health care and pension contributions and is worth about $50,000 a year for full-time drivers, the company says.Beyond overall pay levels, the union has said it wants to eliminate a category of driver created under the 2018 contract.The company said the category was intended for hybrid workers who performed jobs like sorting packages on some days while driving on other days, especially Saturdays, to address the growing demand for weekend delivery.But the Teamsters said these workers never followed the hybrid arrangement and simply drove full time from Tuesday to Saturday, for less pay than other full-time drivers. The company says that the weekend drivers make about 87 percent of the base pay of regular full-time drivers, and that some employees have worked under a hybrid arrangement.In the event of a strike, deliveries to consumers, such as e-commerce orders, would probably be among the first to be disrupted. But experts said the supply chain could suffer, too. Some suppliers would struggle to quickly ship goods like automotive parts to manufacturers, potentially causing production slowdowns.Even a short strike could take a toll on UPS. Many customers long relied exclusively on the company, but that started to change after the Teamsters last went on strike in 1997, Mr. Amling said. After that strike, which lasted just over two weeks, more customers began to work with multiple carriers. The consequences were masked by gains from the rise of e-commerce and fewer competitors to choose from, but the company may not be so fortunate today.Niraj Chokshi More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    West Coast Dockworkers Reach Contract Deal With Port Operators

    by

    After a year of prolonged negotiations that have led to delays and declines in cargo, the two sides agreed to a new contract with help from the Biden administration.After a year of contract negotiations that resulted in numerous delays and a decline in the movement of cargo at ports along the West Coast, union dockworkers and port operators have reached a tentative deal set to last for six years.In a joint statement released late Wednesday, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and the Pacific Maritime Association announced a tentative agreement on a new contract that covers 22,000 workers at 29 ports from San Diego to Seattle, some of the busiest in the world.Details about the agreement, which is expected to be formally ratified by both sides, were not immediately released.President Biden, who stepped in last year to urge a swift resolution, released a statement congratulating both parties for reaching an agreement “after a long and sometimes acrimonious negotiation.”“As I have always said, collective bargaining works,” Mr. Biden said. “Above all I congratulate the port workers, who have served heroically through the pandemic and the countless challenges it brought and will finally get the pay, benefits, and quality of life they deserve.”Mr. Biden also thanked Julie Su, the acting U.S. labor secretary, for assistance in finalizing the deal.The outcome on Wednesday somewhat mirrored past negotiations between the two sides. In 2015, as negotiations went on for nine months, officials in the Obama administration intervened amid work slowdowns and increased congestion at ports.The protracted negotiations between the union and the Pacific Maritime Association, which represents the shipping terminals, have focused on disagreements over wages and the expanding role of automation.In recent weeks the Longshore and Warehouse Union, or the I.L.W.U., has staged a series of work slowdowns at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which in recent months have lost sizable business to ports along the Gulf and East Coasts. Cargo processing at the Port of Los Angeles, a key entry point for shipments from Asia, was down roughly 40 percent in February, compared with the year before.Recently, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote a letter to Mr. Biden urging the administration to intervene immediately in the negotiations and appoint an independent mediator to help the two parties reach an agreement.Matthew Shay, president of the National Retail Federation, said the ongoing delays and disruptions have had a negative impact on retailers and other stakeholders who rely on the West Coast ports for business operations.“As we enter the all-important peak shipping season for holiday merchandise, retailers need a seamless flow of containers through the ports and to their distribution centers,” Mr. Shay said.On Wednesday, Gene Seroka, head of the Port of Los Angeles, said in a statement that the tentative agreement between the I.L.W.U. and the Pacific Maritime “brings the stability and confidence that customers have been seeking.”Matt Schrap, chief executive of the Harbor Trucking Association, a trade group for transportation companies serving West Coast ports, said his organization is eager for cargo traffic to return to normal soon.“We need the certainty,” he said. “This has been a long, hard process.” More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Generative A.I. Can Add $4.4 Trillion in Value to Global Economy, Study Says

    by

    The report from McKinsey comes as a debate rages over the potential economic effects of A.I.-powered chatbots on labor and the economy.“Generative artificial intelligence” is set to add up to $4.4 trillion of value to the global economy annually, according to a report from McKinsey Global Institute, in what is one of the rosier predictions about the economic effects of the rapidly evolving technology.Generative A.I., which includes chatbots such as ChatGPT that can generate text in response to prompts, can potentially boost productivity by saving 60 to 70 percent of workers’ time through automation of their work, according to the 68-page report, which was published early Wednesday. Half of all work will be automated between 2030 and 2060, the report said.McKinsey had previously predicted that A.I. would automate half of all work between 2035 and 2075, but the power of generative A.I. tools — which exploded onto the tech scene late last year — accelerated the company’s forecast.“Generative A.I. has the potential to change the anatomy of work, augmenting the capabilities of individual workers by automating some of their individual activities,” the report said.McKinsey’s report is one of the few so far to quantify the long-term impact of generative A.I. on the economy. The report arrives as Silicon Valley has been gripped by a fervor over generative A.I. tools like ChatGPT and Google’s Bard, with tech companies and venture capitalists investing billions of dollars in the technology.The tools — some of which can also generate images and video, and carry on a conversation — have started a debate over how they will affect jobs and the world economy. Some experts have predicted that the A.I. will displace people from their work, while others have said the tools can augment individual productivity.Last week, Goldman Sachs released a report warning that A.I. could lead to worker disruption and that some companies would benefit more from the technology than others. In April, a Stanford researcher and researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology released a study showing that generative A.I. could boost the productivity of inexperienced call center operators by 35 percent.Any conclusions about the technology’s effects may be premature. David Autor, a professor of economics at M.I.T. cautioned that generative A.I. was “not going to be as miraculous as people claim.”“We are really, really in the early stage,” he added.For the most part, economic studies of generative A.I. do not take into account other risks from the technology, such as whether it might spread misinformation and eventually escape the realm of human control.The vast majority of generative A.I.’s economic value will most likely come from helping workers automate tasks in customer operations, sales, software engineering, and research and development, according to McKinsey’s report. Generative A.I. can create “superpowers” for high-skilled workers, said Lareina Yee, a McKinsey partner and an author of the report, because the technology can summarize and edit content.“The most profound change we are going to see is the change to people, and that’s going to require far more innovation and leadership than the technology,” she said.The report also outlined challenges that industry leaders and regulators would need to address with A.I., including concerns that the content generated by the tools can be misleading and inaccurate.Ms. Yee acknowledged that the report was making prognostications about A.I.’s effects, but that “if you could capture even a third” of what the technology’s potential is, “it is pretty remarkable over the next five to 10 years.” More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Labor Board, Reversing Trump-Era Ruling, Widens Definition of Employee

    by

    The National Labor Relations Board, with a Democratic majority, restored a standard that counts more workers as employees rather than contractors.Labor regulators issued a ruling on Tuesday that makes it more likely for workers to be considered employees rather than contractors under federal law.Overturning a ruling issued when the board was under Republican control, the decision effectively increases the number of workers — like drivers, construction workers or janitors — who have a federally protected right to unionize or take other collective action, such as protesting unsafe working conditions.The ruling ensures that “workers who seek to organize or exercise their rights under the National Labor Relations Act are not improperly excluded from its protections,” said a statement by Lauren McFerran, the Democratic chairman of the labor board, which voted 3 to 1 along party lines to broaden the standard.Determining whether a worker is an employee or a contractor has long depended on several variables, including the potential employer’s control over the work and provision of tools and equipment.In 2019, when the board was controlled by appointees of President Donald J. Trump, it elevated one consideration — workers’ chances to make more money based on their business savvy, often described as “entrepreneurial opportunity” — above the others. It concluded that such opportunities should be a key tiebreaker when some factors pointed to contractor status and others indicated employment.In its decision in 2019, the board said that a ruling during the Obama administration had improperly subordinated the question of moneymaking opportunities.That 2019 ruling appeared to be a victory for gig companies like Uber and Lyft, whose supporters have argued that ride-share drivers should be considered contractors in part because of the opportunities they have for potential profit — say, by determining which neighborhoods to work in.The latest decision returned the board to the standard laid out in the Obama era, explicitly rejecting the elevation of entrepreneurial opportunity above other factors.The turnabout was criticized on Tuesday by businesses that rely heavily on contractors. In a statement, Evan Armstrong, chair of the Coalition for Workforce Innovation, which represents companies like Uber and Lyft as well as industry trade groups, said that the ruling “decreases clarity and threatens the flexible independent model that benefits workers, consumers, entrepreneurs, businesses and the overall economy.”Some labor experts, however, say it is not clear that gig companies like Uber and Lyft, which set the prices that passengers pay, provide drivers with enough bona fide entrepreneurial opportunity to qualify them as contractors even under the old standard.In his dissent, Marvin E. Kaplan, the board’s lone Republican member, made a version of this argument, concluding that the workers in the case before the board — wig, hair and makeup stylists who work with the Atlanta Opera — “have little opportunity for economic gain or, conversely, risk of loss.”As a result, he agreed with the board’s majority that the stylists should be considered employees who have the right to unionize.But Mr. Kaplan wrote that the lack of entrepreneurial opportunities meant that the stylists should have been considered employees even under the Trump-era standard, and that there was no need to alter it. More

  • 150 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    As the Fed Meets, It Shares an Inflation Problem With the World

    by

    Inflation is stubborn across a range of economies. Given its staying power, investors expect the Fed to pause rate moves only temporarily.The Federal Reserve on Wednesday is expected to stop raising interest rates for the first time in 11 policy meetings. But investors are betting that the pause will not last.The pattern of stopping and then restarting rate increases is becoming well-established around the world. The Reserve Bank of Australia paused its own campaign earlier this year only to raise rates again twice, including last week. The Bank of Canada had left rates unchanged for four months before raising them again in a surprise move on June 7.That’s because inflation is proving stubborn. Across a range of economies, from Melbourne to Munich to Miami, it has been hard to stamp out. Many central banks are contending with price increases that are only moderating slowly, propped up by higher service costs, which include things like concert tickets, rent and hotel rooms.“Everyone has a kind of similar problem,” said William English, a former Fed staff member who is now at Yale University, noting that policymakers in Britain and the eurozone are facing inflation problems that have a lot in common with the Fed’s. The European Central Bank’s policymakers also meet this week, and they are expected to continue raising rates.Policy may be tougher to predict in the months ahead as officials try to judge whether interest rates are high enough to ensure that their economies slow enough to restrain price increases.“We’re into the period where we’re kind of groping a bit,” Mr. English said. “It’s going to be a period of considerable uncertainty.”

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Central bank policy rates
    Source: FactSetBy The New York TimesThe Fed has already raised rates sharply over the past 15 months, to just above 5 percent as of May, and those higher interest rates are trickling through the economy. In recent speeches, Fed officials have hinted that they could soon “skip” a rate increase to give themselves time to assess the effects of their changes so far, and investors are betting that Fed officials will hold policy steady at their meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday before lifting rates one more time in July. But those forecasts are uncertain: Traders typically have a fairly clear idea of what the Fed might do heading into its meetings, but this time markets see a small but real chance that U.S. central bankers will raise rates this week.The doubt partly owes to the fact that the Fed will receive an important inflation reading, the Consumer Price Index, on Tuesday. But it also reflects what a fraught time this is for economic policy in the United States and around the world.This is the worst inflationary episode in America and many of its peer economies since the 1970s and 1980s, so it has been a long time since the world’s policymakers contended with the issue. And while inflation has been fading, it has also demonstrated staying power.In the United States and elsewhere, inflation started in goods like cars and furniture but has moved into services like airfares, education and haircuts. That’s concerning because price increases for services tend to be driven by broad economic trends rather than one-off supply problems, and can be more lasting.“Services price inflation is proving persistent here and overseas,” Philip Lowe, the governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, said in a speech explaining the central bank’s surprise move last week.Fed officials have been fretting that today’s price increases could prove sticky.Wage gains remain fairly rapid, which could limit how quickly prices fall as employers try to cover climbing labor bills. And while slowing rent increases should cool overall inflation, some economists have questioned whether that will be enough to steadily lower inflation.“A rebound in the housing market is raising questions about how sustained those lower rent increases will be,” Christopher Waller, a Fed governor who often favors higher interest rates, said in a recent speech.At the same time, central bankers want to avoid plunging the economy into a recession that is more painful than necessary.That is why the Fed may hit pause this week. Officials are aware that monetary policy takes months or years to have its full effect. And recent bank turmoil could further slow down lending and spending, a situation officials are still monitoring.“Anecdotally, it’s not really that bad — but we don’t have even enough survey data,” said Yelena Shulyatyeva, senior U.S. economist at BNP Paribas. For more evidence, she will be watching a Dallas Fed bank survey this month.Still, after Australia and Canada increased rates last week, investors asked: Could this mean that the Fed, too, would be more aggressive than expected?“It is a mistake to make simplistic comparisons,” Krishna Guha, head of the global policy and central bank strategy team at Evercore ISI, said, noting that the Fed still seemed likely to pause in June while teeing up a possible move in July. While the rate increases abroad underscored that inflation is proving sticky globally, he said, that’s no surprise.“We know that inflation has been frustratingly slow to come down,” he said. More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Economy’s Staying Power Poses Big Questions for the Fed

    by

    The Federal Reserve has been trying to slow growth without tanking it. Now, officials must ask if inflation can cool amid signs of resilience.Employers are hiring rapidly. Home prices are rising nationally after months of decline. Consumer spending climbed more than expected in a recent data release.America’s economy is not experiencing the drastic slowdown that many analysts had expected in light of the Federal Reserve’s 15-month, often aggressive campaign to hit the brakes on growth and bring rapid inflation under control. And that surprising resilience could be either good or bad news.The economy’s staying power could mean that the Fed will be able to wrangle inflation gently, slowing down price increases without tipping America into any sort of recession. But if companies can continue raising their prices without losing customers amid solid demand, it could keep inflation too hot — forcing consumers to pay more for hotels, food and child care and forcing the Fed to do even more to restrain growth.Policymakers may need time to figure out which scenario is more likely, so that they can avoid either overreacting and causing unnecessary economic pain or underreacting and allowing rapid inflation to become permanent.Given that, investors have been betting that Fed officials will skip a rate increase at their meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday before lifting them again in July, proceeding cautiously while emphasizing that pausing does not mean quitting — and that they remain determined to bring prices under control. But even that expectation is increasingly shaky: Markets have spent this week nudging up the probability that the Fed might raise rates at this month’s meeting.In short, the mixed economic signals could make Fed policy discussions fraught in the months ahead. Here’s where things stand.Interest rates are much higher.Interest rates are above 5 percent, their highest level since 2007.

    Source: Federal ReserveBy The New York TimesAfter sharply adjusting policy over the past 15 months, key officials including Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, and Philip Jefferson, President Biden’s pick to be the next Fed vice chair, have hinted that central bankers could pause to allow themselves time to judge how the increases are affecting the economy.But that assessment remains a complex one. Even some parts of the economy that typically slow when the Fed raises rates are demonstrating a surprising ability to withstand today’s interest rates.“It’s a very complicated, convoluted picture depending on which data points you are looking at,” said Matthew Luzzetti, chief U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank, noting that overall growth figures like gross domestic product have slowed — but other key numbers are holding up.House prices are wiggling.Higher interest rates can take months or even years to have their full effect, but they should theoretically work pretty quickly to begin to slow down the car and housing markets, both of which revolve around big purchases made with borrowed cash.That story has been complicated this time. Car buying has slowed since the Fed started raising rates, but the auto market has been so undersupplied in recent years — thanks in large part to pandemic-tied supply chain problems — that the cool-down has been a bumpy one. Housing has also perplexed some economists.

    Note: Data is seasonally adjusted.Source: S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller Index, via
    S&P Global IntelligenceBy The New York TimesThe housing market weakened markedly last year as mortgage rates soared. But rates have recently stabilized, and home prices have ticked back up amid low inventory. House prices do not count directly in inflation, but their turnaround is a sign that it’s taking a lot to sustainably cool a hot economy.Job signals are confusing.Fed officials are also watching for signs that their rate increases are trickling through the economy to slow the job market: As it costs more to fund expansions and as consumer demand slows, companies should pull back on hiring. Amid less competition for workers, wage growth should moderate and unemployment should rise.Some signs suggest that the chain reaction has begun. Initial claims for unemployment insurance jumped to the highest level since October 2021 last week, a report on Thursday showed. People are also working fewer hours per week at private employers, which suggests bosses aren’t trying to eke so much out of existing staff.

    Notes: Data is seasonally adjusted and includes hours worked by full- and part-time private sector employees.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesBut other signals have been more halting. Job openings had come down, but edged back up in April. Wages have been climbing less swiftly for lower-income workers, but gains remain abnormally rapid. The jobless rate climbed to 3.7 percent in May from 3.4 percent, but even that was still well shy of the 4.5 percent that Fed officials expected it to hit by the end of 2023 in their latest economic forecasts. Officials will release fresh projections next week.

    Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesAnd by some measures, the labor market is still chugging. Hiring remains particularly strong.“Everyone talks as if the economy moves in one straight line,” said Nela Richardson, chief economist at ADP. “In actuality, it’s lumpy.”Price increases are stubborn.Still, inflation itself may be the biggest wild card that could shape the Fed’s plans this month and over this summer. Officials forecast in March that annual inflation as measured by the Personal Consumption Expenditures index would retreat to 3.3 percent by the end of the year.That pullback is gradually happening. Inflation stood at 4.4 percent as of April, down from 7 percent last summer but still more than double the Fed’s 2 percent goal.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Year-over-year percentage change in the Personal Consumption Expenditures index
    Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesOfficials will receive a related and more up-to-date inflation reading for May — the Consumer Price Index — on the first day of their meeting next week.Economists expect substantial cooling, which could give officials confidence in pausing rates. But if those forecasts are foiled, it could make for an even more heated debate about what comes next. More