Media clips
-
As the labor-backed Economic Policy Institute has noted, “the rule doesn’t actually require that employers distribute ‘pooled’ tips to workers. Under the administration’s proposed rule, as long as tipped workers earn minimum wage, employers could legally pocket those tips.” Why not just tweak the language? Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta claims his department doesn’t have the legal authority to ban tip theft; Congress would have to do it. It’s hard to say precisely how much pay America’s servers could see siphoned off if Trump’s regulation takes effect, in part because there’s a lack of good data about tip theft in general. But it’s possible to make an reasonable estimate. The Economic Policy Institute, for instance, thinks that restaurant workers could lose $5.8 billion annually in the bargain. The Department of Labor, on the other hand, has been officially silent on this point. Despite the fact that federal law requires government agencies to perform a cost-benefit analysis for new regulations, the proposal that department put out in December did not contain any estimate of the economic toll the regulation change might take on workers. The administration claimed that it couldn’t produce such an analysis, because it was too hard to predict how restaurants, their employees, and customers would react to the change.
Slate March 22, 2018 -
‘According to an analysis published by the Economic Policy Institite (EPI) in January, even the internal analysis that the Department of Labor successfully repressed downplayed how much the tip-stealing rule would harm workers. While the Labor Department ultimately concluded that the rule could cost workers $640 million per year in earned tips, EPI found that the actual number would be somewhere around $5.8 billion—with $4.6 billion of that coming from the pockets of women. In a statement on Wednesday, Heidi Shierholz, director of policy at EPI, argued that Acosta should withdraw the rule and “focus on things that promote the Labor Department’s mission of serving working people, not undermining their earnings.” (includes Josh’s tweets)
Common Dreams March 22, 2018 -
Previously, the DOL found that the total amount that workers could lose out on was actually in the billions, but sources told Bloomberg Law in February that senior department officials “ordered staff to revise the data methodology to lessen the expected impact.” The left-leaning think tank Economic Policy Institute has estimated that workers would lose $5.8 billion—$4.6 billion of which would come from women working in tipped jobs—if the new rule was implemented.
Splinter News March 22, 2018 -
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) estimated that if the Labor Department’s proposal to allow tip pooling was enacted, tipped workers would lose between $563 million and $14.2 billion in annual tips. EPI’s best estimate indicated an annual loss of $5.8 billion in income.
24/7 Wall St. March 22, 2018 -
But progressive groups like the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) and the National Employment Law Project say the rule lacks a safeguard to stop an employer from stealing a percentage of the workers’ tips.
The Hill March 22, 2018 -
But while paying too much for a pillow or a television is one thing, the stakes get a lot higher when the misleading product you’re buying is financial advice. In fact, undisclosed conflicts of interest cost savers an estimated $17 billion annually, according to research from the Economic Policy Institute. EPI arrived at that figure by estimating the investment losses for people who were unwittingly buying retirement products from a financial planner who was paid on commission — and thus incentivized to recommend products that might be more expensive or risky than they needed to be. (Map included)
Mic March 22, 2018 -
The progressive critique of globalization and trade deals has, in fact, received extensive validation in a number of recent studies by top economists. David Autor and Daron Acemoglu of MIT, along with a series of co-authors, have found strong statistical evidence confirming that the “shock” of increased imports from China caused massive job losses (up to 2.4 million) and significantly depressed wages for US workers, especially those with less education. Chinese imports, they found, have affected workers not only in the manufacturing industries that directly compete with imports, but also in local service sectors that serve communities impacted by the imports, as well as “upstream” industries that supply inputs to the import-competing firms. Estimates from Robert E. Scott of the Economic Policy Institute show even larger job displacement due to higher US trade deficits with Mexico and China. Whichever estimates one believes, free-trade advocates who ignore or deny these huge social costs have clearly brought the current wave of anti-trade backlash on themselves. (Rob cited throughout)
Jacobin March 22, 2018 -
One of the first things you might do when thinking about moving (or actually moving) to a new place is get a rough estimate of how much it costs to live there. Any number of cost-of-living calculators might help you find that out, considering how far your current salary might go, or even comparing the costs of groceries. But if you want to project a little farther into the future, try taking a look at the Economic Policy Institute’s (EPI) budget fact sheets and family budget calculator. The EPI’s data measures how much money a family might need “in order to attain a modest yet adequate standard of living.” You might be surprised at how much your financial outlook changes as your household grows. (whole story)
Refinery 29 March 22, 2018 -
Cost of living can look drastically different depending on where you are. It will cost a single person about $29,118 a year to live in Brownsville, Texas, for example, but in San Francisco, California, that expense more than doubles, to $69,072. That’s according to the Economic Policy Institute’s newly updated family budget calculator, which shows the income differently sized families need in order to attain a baseline standard of living across the U.S. In other words, it measures “what families need to get by,” says EPI Senior Economist Elise Gould. (whole story)
CNBC March 22, 2018 -
All U.S. residents have skin in this game. Just ask Elise Gould, Zane Mokhiber and Kathleen Bryant at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a think tank based in Washington, D.C. The EPI just updated its Family Budget Calculator to reveal what families require to meet their living costs in all 3,142 counties and 611 metro areas across the nation. According to the EPI researchers, their report provides more comprehensive economic data than the federal poverty line and the Supplemental Poverty Measure. The key takeaway: Minimum wage is not a livable wage. While the EPI data adjusts for increased city and state minimum wages, “there is nowhere in the country where a minimum-wage worker — even a single adult without children — earns enough to meet the requirements of their local family budget,” according to Gould, Mokhiber and Bryant. (whole story)
MultiBriefs March 22, 2018