Monthly Archives: January 2004

Bush Labor Dept. Explains to Employers How to Avoid Paying Overtime

You'd think the Labor department was about helping workers, at least in an election year. But not this one. The Dept. is preparing new rules which will no longer require that employers pay millions of higher-paid employees overtime; in the future, however, 1.3 million low-paid employees (paid under $22.1K per year) who are not covered by the current overtime requirement will have to get time and half if they work over 40 hours. In a combination of chutzpah and political ham-handedness, the Bush Labor department is explaining to employers how, they can evade this new rule in order to keep down their lowest-paid workers' pay packets: they could, for example, cut hourly wages, so that with the overtime the total pay remains the same.

The AP story explaining this was in the Miami Herald, but doesn't seem to have made either the NYT or the Washington Post. It contains the most bald-faced denials of reality by a press spokesman, one Ed Frank, I've seen for a long time: Despite publishing instructions on how to avoid paying workers extra for overtime, “We're not saying anybody should do any of this.” Right. We're just explaining their options to them very carefully. Let's nominate Mr. Frank for a Ron Ziegler Award. [Sadly, Tammy McCutchen can't be included among the nominees, because she's an administrator, not a press secretary. Even though she's the Labor Department's Wage and Hour Division administrator who said that making a “payroll adjustment” which lowers hourly wages but keeps the total including overtime constant, one that results “in virtually no, or only a minimal increase in labor costs,” is not a pay cut.]

In fairness, I should note that the Labor Dept. also lists raising base salary above the threshold as another way to avoid paying overtime (although for workers near the cap, this 'raise' may paradoxically reduce their total takehome when they are required to do substantial ovetime).

Continue reading

Posted in Econ & Money, Politics: US | 5 Comments

Campaign Medals for the ‘War on Terror’. Really.

To this administration, nothing is above political meddling (or is that medaling?): Medals Couple Two Conflicts (washingtonpost.com) reports that not only is the administration trying to lump the Afghanistan and Iraq wars under a single global 'war against terrorism' rubric for the purpose of campaign medals — a break with tradition — but that it also wants the backroom armchair warriors in that 'war' to be able to get the same medal as people who got shot at.

“The decision not to issue separate medals seems to be the work of people who do not appreciate the importance of the values that help form a strong military culture,” added retired Army Col. John Antal, a former tank commander, who edits a magazine devoted to military history. “Politicians should be very careful when they tinker with the system that reinforces the critical values that help make our military the most capable in the world.”

But Pentagon officials say the issue is closed.

Continue reading

Posted in Politics: US | 3 Comments

Two Great Debunkings

Mark A. R. Kleiman: Anatomy of a fake scandal writes about the creation of what appears (from all we know) to be a totally fake scandal about Howard Dean's $15K in bank stocks.. Kleiman gets it, I'd say, exactly right.

How sad to see the Wall Street Journal reporters, traditionally models of journalism, descend into the gutter with their colleagues on the NY Daily News (and WSJ editorial page…).

Meanwhile, Josh Micah Marshall elegantly and surgically takes apart the attempt by neocons to label their critics as anti-semites (yes, they really do that—truth is stranger than fiction).

Remember, the real anti-semite is here. Yet have any newspapers cancelled his column? Not likely.

Posted in Politics: US | Comments Off on Two Great Debunkings

Daily Howler Back From Hiatus

We emitted low chuckles at Zell Miller’s clowning. But why are faux Dems on the march?

Yes, the incomparable Daily Howler is at last back from vacation.

Posted in Politics: US | Comments Off on Daily Howler Back From Hiatus

More Evidence of Dropping Sperm Counts

The UK's Daily Telegraph reports that sperm counts are falling in Scotland:

The largest British study into sperm counts has found that they have fallen by almost 30 per cent in 14 years, researchers announce today.

The survey, based on almost 16,000 semen samples taken between 1989 and 2002, lends weight to concerns that sperm counts are falling.

But it is a controversial area because an accurate number for “normal” sperm counts is not precisely known and some studies have failed to find evidence of a reduction.

Dr Bhattacharya said the results were significant. The level of 62 million did not affect a man's fertility, “but we need to know if the counts are going to continue to fall.

Dr Bhattacharya said there were two broad reasons for the reduction: environment and genetic factors.

Other research has pointed to increased oestrogen in water supplies, the result of women's use of the Pill and hormone replacement therapy.

Industrial processes have also been blamed, including the use of solvents and high concentrations of lead.

A recent paper suggested that plastic-lined nappies might play a part because they raised the temperature of baby boys' scrotums.

The evidence is a little hard to parse. There's evidence suggesting this is a world-wide problem, at least in industrialized countries, but there are are also national and regional variations, probably due to environmental factors.

From having lived both places, I get the impression that industrial pollution and exposure to chemicals and to radiation (think Sellafield) are greater on average in the UK than the US, so the environmental explanation seems plausible to me.

Not that things are rosy in the US….

Continue reading

Posted in Science/Medicine | Comments Off on More Evidence of Dropping Sperm Counts

Bush in 30 Seconds Ads: More Misses than Hits

The clever people at moveon.org have released the finalists in their Bush in 30 seconds contest. Entrants were asked to make a 30-second anti-Bush TV commercial.

Although impressive in many ways, overall the entries were ultimately somewhat disappointing. I think many made basic errors of playing to the choir rather than to the unconverted, and in particular would seem shrill to many voters.

Below I set out my biases going into ranking the entries, and then my (somewhat contrary) conclusion as to which one is the best.

Continue reading

Posted in Politics: US | 4 Comments