Transgender Bill PASSED!!!    THANK YOU EVERYONE

A great victory.  Massachusetts now protects gender identity in employment and education.

We still need to work on public accommodation.  Next round!

Update on CRIMINAL JUSTICE BILL

Criminal Justice Bill will wait until next session.  Since different versions were passed by the House and Senate, bill will need to wait for January.  JALSA is pleased that these versions have not been enacted into law. These are complex statutes with many provisions of concern.

These bills would result in three strikes sentences in MA mandating life without parole.   H3811 is even harsher than the notorious California Three Strikes law, which permits parole after 25 years.

Significant changes to the Massachusetts wiretap statute, enhanced criminal liability in DNA collection, expansion of the habitual offender law, mandatory post-release supervision and new standards of whom shall be eligible for parole and when were maintained.

Areas of our conversations with legislators:

1) This Bill has been proposed in an extremely hurried way with no research on what these measures will cost.

2) Research has shown that 3 strikes bills do not reduce crime.

3) Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Arkansas, New Jersey, New York and Michigan have all taken a thoughtful look at costs and crime rates without locking up more people or enacting tougher new laws; all have saved money and reduced crime by providing more substance abuse treatment both in the community and in prison. MA spends only 2.4% of its budget on programming and by implementing effective parole practices that help parolees become tax paying, lawful citizens.

Here is the link to Contagion: Not Just a Movie, a powerful look at how the common sense policy of paid sick days can prevent a real-life contagion. Five worker activists share their stories of having to go to work sick because they can’t afford to stay home or aren’t allowed to take off.

Here in Massachusetts, almost 1 million workers do not have a single paid sick day.

We all have a stake in paid sick days. KNOW THE FACTS:

·        More than 44 million workers do not have paid sick days – almost 1 million of whom are Massachusetts workers.

·        Workers earning low-wages are the least likely to have paid sick days. Only 19 percent of low-wage workers have access to paid sick days.

·        Many workers with a significant interaction with the public do not have paid sick days. This includes three in four food service workers, three in five personal health care workers and three in four child care workers.

·        1 in 6 workers have been fired or threatened with being fired for taking time off work to care for a personal or family illness.

Paid sick policy could save Mass. $22m

Click here for Hearing Update and Media Coverage3

Updated: Thursday, 14 Jul 2011, 8:54 PM EDT

• Christine Lee, 22News State House Correspondent

BOSTON, Mass. (WWLP) – In the spring, state Secretary of Labor and Workforce Development Joanne Goldstein said paid sick leave is a workers’ “basic right.” Now lawmakers are responding with legislation that could make it law.

The Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development held a hearing Thursday for a pair of bills that legally require businesses in Massachusetts to provide paid sick leave to their employees.

“The workers who cannot afford to take a sick day, those are the ones who don’t have it, the ones who are working for minimum wage,” Sen. Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville), a lead sponsor of the bill.

“It’s about healthcare for all, it’s about social justice, equitable justice,” said Rep. Cheryl Coakley-Rivera (D-Springfield), who serves as House chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development.

In a research study conducted by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR), results show that the Commonwealth could save $22.7 million dollars in emergency room costs with a paid sick leave policy.

Rep. Kay Khan (D-Newton), another lead sponsor of the bill, adds that her legislation will encourage a healthier work environment.

“I know I encourage people to stay out of my office if they’re ill because we don’t want to infect the entire office,” said Rep. Khan.

But small business owners insist that financially speaking, they’re already at the end of their rope. They’re struggling with mandatory health insurance, the recession and other employee obligations they can’t afford.

“This paid sick leave bill is one more high cost and small businesses have nothing left to give to this,” said William Vernon, the Massachusetts director of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB).

Small business advocates add that the government shouldn’t interfere with private business and “one-size” paid sick leave legislation, “doesn’t fit all”.

“A lot of small employers have part-time employees, seasonal employees,” said Jon Hurst, the president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts. “A lot of those employees are not looking for benefits. They’re looking for higher pay per hour.

Opponents of the legislation express concern that sick benefits could be abused on a nice sunny day in Cape Cod, but supporters say it’s the workers who are being abused when they must choose between working while sick or taking a pay cut.

Mandatory paid sick laws are active in San Francisco, Milwaukee, and Washington D.C.

Sheila Decter recently had a column on paid sick days in the Jewish Advocate entitled, “Choosing between getting well and getting paid”.

The following link is to an article that appeared in the Boston Globe on March 29

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/family/articles/2011/03/29/the_tug_of_war_that_decides_whether_mom_or_dad_stays_home_with_their_sick_child/

Governor issues Executive Order Adding Gender Identity and Expression to Groups Protectred by State’s Non-Discrimination Laws.   State Employees Now Covered by Non-Discrimination Protection.  Legislation still Needed to protect those working for private parties.

LETTER FROM THE MASSACHUSETTS TRANSGENDER POLITICAL COALITION.

Gunner Scott, Executive Director, MTPC

Earlier today, Gov. Deval Patrick signed an historic Executive Order that prohibits discrimination based on gender identity and expression in state employment. It applies to all state agencies in the Executive Branch, including executive offices, boards, commissions, agencies, and departments as well as businesses and organizations that contract with the Executive Branch.

Unfortunately, there are a number of people who need the protection offered by this executive order but who will not get it because they are not state employees. Transgender residents of the Commonwealth face pervasive job discrimination and workplace harassment. A study released earlier this month by the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force found that 76 percent of transgender respondents from Massachusetts were harassed or mistreated on the job, and 20 percent reported losing their jobs, because they are transgender. No one should have to live in fear that they can be legally fired for reasons that have nothing to do with their job performance. All hardworking people in our state, including transgender people, should have the opportunity to make a living and provide for themselves and their families.

The Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition applauds Gov. Patrick’s decision to sign this Executive Order protecting the jobs of transgender state employees. This is not the first time Gov. Patrick has demonstrated his commitment to the community—he also streamlined process by which transgender men and women can get proper state IDs. We know that there are transgender individuals who are state employees and we celebrate the job security the Executive Order affords them. The Commonwealth is the largest employer in the state of Massachusetts. Gov. Patrick’s decision puts the state in line with other organizations that embrace transgender employees, and opens up numerous job opportunities for transgender residents of the Commonwealth. However, we realize that not everyone works for the State. Transgender people, like all people, have a wide variety of skills, professional experiences, and employment interests. Transgender individuals need equal protections under the law so that they are free to best utilize their skills and experiences, in a way that can only benefit the Commonwealth as a whole.

This Executive Order is a good first step toward that goal. But it’s up to lawmakers to do the rest. Please contact them and ask them to pass An Act Relative to Transgender Equal Rights. And please take a moment to thank Gov. Patrick for his historic move today to bring equality to transgender residents of the Commonwealth.

Frank Schroth in a Milton on-line blog “My Town Matters,”  highlights the work of our JALSA Board member, Jeff Stone, facilitating dialogue between the Muslim American Civic and Cultural Association in Malden  and Temple Hillel B’nai Torah in West Roxbury.  Schroth noted the recent report on WBUR about this interfaith workshop working to promote understanding and knowledge through honest, open dialogue.

The WBUR report by Martha Berbinger, an NPR correspondent, indicated that the groups have begun a series of conversations about politics, stereotypes and the conflicts that have divided Muslims and Jews for centuries, working to reduce conflict during a period marked by tension from terrorist activities.

Read or listen to the program from WBUR and comments which were posted after the program.

After years of dedicated grassroots organizing, the CORI Coalition will see results from years of hard labor as the legislation is implemented. JALSA was a part of a broad coalition of civic, religious, union, and community groups working with Governor Patrick and his administration officials to address obstacles which blocked many people from obtaining work. While the CORI system was supposed to provide information about people convicted of violent crime to agencies specifically working with children and seniors, it had expanded to include persons arrested, but not convicted, of non-violent crimes, as well as violent ones, and huge obstacles stood in the way of anyone trying to correct an inaccurate record.

Starting November 4th, “Ban the Box” statewide is now in effect (Link) , making Massachusetts only the second state in the country to remove the criminal history question from initial job applications for all public and private employers. Enforcement will be by the Massachusetts Office Against Discrimination (MCAD). The Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS), formerly the Criminal History Systems Board is also a source of information.

The law makes major changes to the way employers and others obtain access to Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) and provides important protections to individuals with criminal records. Some parts of the law, such as the provision that prevents certain employers from asking whether an applicant has been convicted of a criminal offense on an initial written employment application, became effective on November 4, 2010. Other parts of the law, such as the provisions that reduce the waiting periods for sealing records, will become effective on May 4, 2012.

The Amicus Group – a collaboration of civil rights groups and members of the employment bar – have again identified a case coming before the SJC as having potential major significance for civil rights enforcement in Massachusetts.  JALSA led the way in bringing the issues of Joule v. Simmons to the attention of area civil rights groups.  Some twenty organizations – including groups focusing on race, gender, sexual orientation, low income representation, and disabilities — have now submitted an amicus brief in the case now pending in the Supreme Judicial Court.

The case presents the question whether a standard form “employment agreement” including an arbitration clause effectively waived the employee’s rights under G.L.c. 151B, the Commonwealth’s most comprehensive statutory effort to eliminate workplace discrimination.  JALSA and the other amici argue that there was no effective waiver in this case, and that, as a matter of public policy and contract law, no employer may, by way of a unilateral contract of adhesion, exempt itself from the administrative enforcement scheme established in G.L.c. 151B.  Many thanks to Anne Josephson and Heidi Alexander of Kotin, Crabtree and Strong for preparing this brief. (List of organizations signing this brief)

The Office of the Attorney General and the Massachusetts Employment Lawyers Association filed separate amicus briefs in support of this position. An amicus brief supporting the validity of such waivers was filed by the New England Legal Foundation and Associated Industries of Massachusetts.

Boston’s first-ever Director of Food Policy met with JALSA’s Environmental Justice Task Force to talk about her vision and goals for the office.

Edith Murnane, center, at October 29 JALSA meeting.

See Environmental Justice Task Force