danocampo.bsky.social
Labor & employment law, gig workers, economics & finance. Long-suffering Spurs fan. Here to learn something new
56 posts
353 followers
732 following
Prolific Poster
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Because nobody’s paying attention and everybody knows who Cuomo is
comment in response to
post
Or you can read my attempt to summarize where the law of arbitration has gotten to and what it's done to low-wage workers across the country: www.nelp.org/insights-res...
comment in response to
post
Anyway, everybody should listen to the excellent @daveyseligman.bsky.social talking about forced arb, price-fixing at Uber, and much more on the Computer Says Maybe podcast with @alixdunn.com: www.saysmaybe.com/podcast/work...
comment in response to
post
It's just another way that corporate power, abetted by a captured Supreme Court, has stacked the deck against workers and has degraded the condition of American jobs--leaving people poorer, more precarious, and less safe.
comment in response to
post
Is Uber misclassifying its delivery drivers by calling them independent contractors? Are fast-food franchises systematically stealing pay from their minimum wage workers? Who knows! Courts won't give you an answer as long as there's an arbitration clause.
comment in response to
post
It means employers can break the law without ever running the risk of being sued. It also means that companies can pioneer illegal new business models without a court ever stopping them.
comment in response to
post
Sorry stupid question maybe but can ICE charge citizens with non-immigration criminal offenses?
comment in response to
post
I assume because of Byrd rule implications?
comment in response to
post
Is this the fermented soy bean one? If not, you need to get a hold of one of those asap
comment in response to
post
And to have the President, the Attorney General, the Secretary of State, and multiple other top-ranking officials blatantly misrepresenting the contents of that order to the press. The Supreme Court is now effectively in an information war with the government
comment in response to
post
It also turns the NLRB into even more of a political circus. Every new presidential administration will bring a brand new slate of 5 Board members committed to totally opposed political agendas. Does the Constitution really require us to run our government this way?
comment in response to
post
In the long term, this continues the bizarre assault on congressional limitations on the Presidential removal power. If NLRB Board members are no longer protected from termination except for cause, then who is? FTC Commissioners? FEC Commissioners? The Fed chair?
comment in response to
post
The short term consequence is that, for now, the Board goes back to having no quorum, meaning it can’t do anything—great news for employers committed to breaking labor law.
comment in response to
post
I guess I’m still confused, though. Presumably some portion of the endowment is in liquid assets that could be sold to cover an emergency cash flow problem (like if the federal government cuts off your funding). I know that sows the seeds of future cash flow problems, but still possible in a pinch
comment in response to
post
Ugh yeah I’ve had to work until now but wondering whether I should head over. Glad you made it though!
comment in response to
post
Is this still going on?
comment in response to
post
As an alumnus I think this will forever change the way I think about Columbia as an institution. This is an existential threat to academic freedom and a watershed moment, and the university is capitulating
comment in response to
post
Gravy on mash sauce on pasta thanks
comment in response to
post
Those 18 are: Alsobrooks, Booker, Cortez Masto, Fetterman, Gallego, Gillibrand, Heinrich, Kim, Kaine, Lujan, Ossof, Padilla, Rosen, Schatz, Schiff, Schumer, Warner, and Warnock
comment in response to
post
He just clearly has no grasp of the facts here