Media clips
-
Of course. The problem is that employers wouldn’t necessarily be required to actually pass tips on to the workers since those tips would legally belong to the owners, explained Heidi Shierholz, a former Labor Department chief economist and lead author of an Economic Policy Institute report which estimated that the change could wind up shifting some $5.8 billion in wages from workers to employers. (Heidi quoted throughout)
Mic February 5, 2018 -
The Department of Labor estimates there are 1.08 million tipped servers (waiters and waitresses) and more than 200,000 tipped bartenders across the United States. While local regulation will mean not all of these workers are affected, the Economic Policy Institute estimates that tipped workers would lose $5.8 billion per year in tips that could be pocketed by their employers. The Department of Labor did not offer its own economic impact analysis, but Bloomberg Law reported that top Labor officials intentionally suppressed internal analysis that showed the rule change would have a negative impact on tipped workers.
Fortune February 5, 2018 -
A proposed federal rule that some describe as “tip stealing” could mean a nearly $63 million loss for workers in Nebraska who get tips as part of their pay. The public comment period ends Monday on a Labor Department proposal to allow employers to take the tips earned by their workers, as long as those workers are paid at least minimum wage. Heidi Shierholz, senior economist and director of policy at the Economic Policy Institute, served as Chief Economist at the Labor Department in the last two years of the Obama Administration. She noted the government did not include a cost-benefit analysis in the proposal about its impact. (whole story)
Public News Service February 5, 2018 -
El instituto de Política Económica (Economic Policy Institute) estima que los empleadores se quedarían con $5.8 mil millones en propinas que generalmente hubiera quedado en manos de los trabajadores.
Telemundo February 5, 2018 -
While we may not know the exact figures that scared off the DOL before the policy’s public comment period conveniently closes on February 5, an independent analysis by left-of-center think tank Economic Policy Institute suggests that employers could pocket up to $5.8 billion in tips each year. The fact that they were able to crunch the numbers also seems to undermine the DOL’s public-facing argument that it was just too difficult to figure out the data.
Extra Crispy February 5, 2018 -
After analyzing data for counties in 25 states containing Amazon fulfillment centers, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) found that within two years the centers lead to a 30% increase in warehouse and storage employment in the surrounding county. But the analysis also found no increase in overall employment in the county and, in some cases, the data suggested a reduction in overall employment. Amazon has received over $1bn in state and local subsidies to open fulfillment centers across the US. The report questions the efficacy of such tax breaks if they do not contribute to a net growth in jobs. “If policymakers instead invested in public services – particularly in early-childhood education and infrastructure – that would be a much stronger recipe for long-term economic development, rather than giving tax breaks to national employers like Amazon,” said EPI economist Ben Zipperer. (whole story)
The Guardian February 2, 2018 -
Amazon has been astoundingly successful in getting state and local governments to pay for its worksites. The online retail giant has staff dedicated to securing local tax incentives, abatements and subsidies for placing its warehouses (dubbed “fulfillment centers”), totaling more than $1.1 billion since 2000. And for months, cities have engaged in an even more unseemly spectacle: promising billions to attract Amazon’s second headquarters. The losing bids will likely set the ransom rate Amazon can demand to locate its fulfillment centers in the future. Until now, nobody has looked specifically at whether these giveaways are really worth the cost. A report from the Economic Policy Institute released on Thursday says emphatically that they’re not. (whole story)
In These Times February 2, 2018 -
In Amazon’s quest to control same-day delivery, its network of almost 100 fulfillment centers—where products are sorted, packaged, and shipped—has now spread across 25 states. Lured by the prospect of hundreds or even thousands of new full-time warehouse jobs with competitive pay and benefits, local government officials crawl over each other to land the world’s largest online retailer in their backyard. But according to a new report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), many of these policymakers might really be selling their constituents short. The report found that, on average, counties that are home to Amazon fulfillment centers did not see any overall job growth in the years following warehouse openings. While there was a sizeable increase in warehouse jobs in the counties, private-sector employment remained largely flat. The report’s author suggest this could be for two reasons: Either fulfillment centers are causing other jobs to de displaced, or growth in warehousing jobs is too limited to make a notable difference. (whole story)
The American Prospect February 2, 2018 -
While the opening of an Amazon warehouse increases warehousing employment at the county level by more than 30% after two years, private-sector employment across all industries doesn’t budge, according to a reported released Thursday by the left-leaning non-profit think tank Economic Policy Institute. “Our findings of the lack of overall job growth from opening an Amazon fulfillment centers suggest that some sort of employment displacement is taking place, or that the growth in warehousing jobs is too limited to spill over into broad-based employment gains for the overall local economy,” the report said. (whole story)
Market Watch February 2, 2018 -
Amazon’s promise of jobs and economic boom may come up short, according to analysis from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). Luring big economic concessions from cities in order to move a headline item there is a tried-and-true formula long used by the National Football League (NFL) to entice cities to host the Super Bowl. Economists have long scoffed at the estimates bandied about by hired-gun research firms that suggest the NFL’s big game will generate an economic windfall for cities in the hundreds of millions of dollars. (This year’s estimate for the Super Bowl’s economic impact for Minneapolis is $338 million.) Similarly, analysts at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) say Amazon’s claims that it’s new headquarters will bring $5 billion worth of prosperity and 50,000 jobs should be taken by local lawmakers with a grain of salt.
Yahoo Finance February 2, 2018