
three faces of Eve

community Service means Business!
“Snake-oil hustlers or global diplomats — no one can doubt the power of the PR industry. With the industry bringing in over $3.5 billion in revenue last year worldwide (according to the Council on Public Relations) and growing by over 140 percent in the past five years (PRWeek), we are talking about a major source of public information.
Is deceit endemic to the profession or does public relations simply need better PR? PR practitioners are aware of their image, of course, which is why the Public Relations Society of America has a "Reputation Management Division".
To the pros, the critics totally miss the point: that the purpose of PR is to help companies and governments communicate with — and listen to — the public. PR firms don't just step in to cover up messes, but are increasingly involved in helping shape policy and practice with a sensitivity to the public's concerns.
In fact, they say, the practice of public promotion, whether for huge multinationals or tiny nonprofits, is exactly what enables democracy to flourish. PR's critics often seek publicity, too, so are they just jealous of the good connections and sophisticated techniques of the big guys? Or is this a case of access apartheid, where the powerful have the ear of the press and their detractors can't get calls returned?” From AlterNet
By RICHARD LICHTMAN
"...Our society is no different from others in attempting to codify "ideologies" designed to establish and perpetuate the "legitimacy" of our ruling order. What distinguishes us is the manner in which we construct this ruling illusion: by technology, the manipulation of mass media, the proliferation of integrated civic institutions and the state's endorsement of professional, that is, expert, identities.
This effort is exercised in the realm of popular culture, the political and economic systems, and in the enclaves of the intellectual elites. We possess no generally acknowledged set of institutions charged to construct definitions of the "moral" and "immoral," "good" and "bad," or "normal" and "pathological." The closest we come, perhaps, is in the realm of psychotherapy, where the DSM, The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual serves to define what would generally be considered by the mental health profession, "mental disorders."
This is a manifestation of what Niebuhr had referred to as 'the conflicts of sick souls being replaced by the struggles of sick minds' in "a seeking after the kingdom of health and mental peace and its comforts." Of course, the DSM being itself an ideological work, that is, an analysis designed to disguise, mystify and invert the actual creation of "dysfunction," must be "stood on its feet" to reveal the reality it functions to obscure.
So it is no accident that the DSM begins by informing us that "Neither deviant behavior (e.g. political, religious, or sexual) nor conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict is a symptom of dysfunction in the individual...." By this account we are precluded from locating the sources of individual aggression, destruction, violence, venality, manipulation, exploitation, subordination and other such "pathologies" in the larger society. " more
Need some Land?
The Real Estate Division of the Department of Finance accepts inquiries from the general public for purchase of properties. The City makes certain that the requested property is not needed for public improvement and establishes a sale price.
The prospective purchaser is notified of the price and, if agreeable, completes a Request to Purchase Form to become a qualified buyer.
A qualified buyer is one who has paid taxes, water, sewage, etc. and is in compliance with City codes and policies.
Properties for Sale
Properties for sale through the City of Pittsburgh fall into one of three categories:
2004 Community Festivals
August
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
Pittsburgh City Council
Pittsburgh's City Council represents nearly 370,000 citizens across nine districts. District elections are held every four years, and are staggered to ensure that an experienced member is always aboard. Council member Gene
Ricciardi, incumbent representative for District 3, is currently president of this legislative body.City Council is the legislative branch of government. It carries out duties in accordance with the Home Rule Charter and the laws of the state, and is primarily responsible for making laws which govern the City of Pittsburgh.
City Council proposes, debates, and votes on legislation governing and/or affecting the city. This body also approves appointments as provided by the Charter, regulates revenues and expenditures, incurs debt, and approves the final operating and capital budgets for the city.
Council is responsible for the introduction of legislation generated by the Administrative Branch of city government.
Council may also introduce legislation generated by individual Council Members or Council as a body.
View the Home Rule Charter and the Pittsburgh City Code.- Also available are
- transcipts of legislative meetings
- copies of agendas, and
- public hearing petition forms.
Visit the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's homepage to learn about state laws.
"The state of the nonprofit workforce is excellent--the state of nonprofits and funders in supporting that workforce is more questionable.
The nonprofit sector is blessed with employees that come to work for the right reasons because they have jobs that give them a chance to make a difference. But the degree to which they can leverage this energy on behalf of their organization's mission is highly dependent on funder and organizational practices that either actively support or ignore their potential.
Boards and executive directors need to look carefully at how they manage their human capital. Are their practices designed for workers who are intrinsically rather than extrinsically motivated? Do their workers have the right tools and access to training? Do employees have time to plan and reflect?At the same time, funders need to ask how they can assure that the sector maintains its competitive advantage in coming years, starting with a hard look at how their own policies about infrastructure and operating expenses affect the sector's workforce. "
"The findings we present in this article raise important questions on
accountability.A nonprofit organization is accountable when it 'recognizes that it has made a promise to do something and accepted a moral and legal responsibility to do its best to fulfill that promise' (Brown & Moore, 2001, p. 570).
Part of being accountable may also include facilitating stakeholders' ability to monitor this promise fulfillment and being responsive to stakeholders' expectations and demands (Brown & Moore, 2001).
More than one third of agency mission statements in our study were explicit in their
desire to empower their clients. Although it is not necessarily essential, we assume that to be responsive and empowering nonprofit directors must listen to client needs.Thus, the two groups come to share a similar perspective of the social context and, at the very least, share a similar vision for future program work. We find that the nonprofit directors to whom we talked may not be living up to the latter aspects of accountability if we consider their stakeholders to be disadvantaged individuals residing in their geographic community.(4)
The nonprofit directors did not share a similar perspective with the community residents on the local neighborhood context or on what services to add. " (more...)
The spread of racial profiling since 9-11: Civil Rights Rollback
by Chisun Lee - August 3rd, 2004 10:10 AM
"Racial profiling is being stopped driving while black or driving while Hispanic. This is not racial profiling," said Mark Corallo, spokesperson for the Department of Justice, when asked about the administration's 9-11–related operations. He voiced precisely the kind of thinking that has obscured the crisis of profiling for the past three years.
Trawling for terrorists and pulling over motorists in search of drugs are in fact the same thing. While it may be acceptable to target people based on a racial or ethnic description if—and only if—there is some specific indication that those particular people are actually criminals, broad sweeps based on general traits are never OK.
Not only are they unlikely to yield "hits" and certain to humiliate innocent parties, but such dragnets also violate this nation's fundamental principle that people will be treated as individuals and not according to stereotypes. (more...)
...for example, administrative workers will have no right to overtime pay if
they earn at least $23,660 and meet both of these DOL requirements (taken
verbatim from the FLSA fact sheet):
The employee's primary duty must be the performance of office or nonmanual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer's customers; and The employee's primary duty includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance.
Employee attorney Amanda Farahany sees this language as an opening for employers to deny overtime pay to almost any office worker whose occupation is not specifically listed as nonexempt.
“Does that test mean that the receptionist who decides how to route a phone call is exercising discretion and is exempt?” asks Farahany, a partner with Barrett & Farahany LLP in Atlanta.What About the Unions?
Few union workers are covered by FLSA overtime pay regulations, but organizers still worry that their members will be hurt indirectly if their nonunion peers lose overtime rights. “Whenever labor standards in general are weakened, the next time the union contract is up, the company says, ‘Our competitors don't pay overtime,'
and then they try to weaken the contract,” says Jeff Miller, a spokesman for the
Communications Workers of America in Washington, DC.
In the end, some workers in high-demand occupations will see their overtime pay protected by market forces rather than federal regulation. “Even if someone has duties that fit the definition of exempt, that doesn't mean they can't be paid overtime,” says Ronald Bird, chief economist at the Employment Policy Foundation in Washington, DC.For example, many hourly healthcare professionals will keep their overtime pay, simply because their employers can't afford to lose them to the competition.
"The Bush Administration proposal to abrogate workers' rights departs from policies in place for over 60 years. The FLSA includes narrow exceptions for certain workers "employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity."
Under regulations released in 1940 to implement the Act, this exception is confined to employees who meet certain standards of income, who are paid a salary rather than by the hour, and whose duties involve supervision, discretion, or independent judgment, i.e., actual executives, administrators, and professionals.
Bush's proposed regulations would expand these terms, changing their definitions beyond recognition: The "executive" exception would be expanded to include even those who spend only a fraction of their time supervising two other employees, and who are without power to hire or fire them.
The "administrative" exception would be vastly expanded to include everyone in a "position of responsibility" who spends even a fraction of their time in so-called administrative work, and even those who do not exercise independent judgment or discretion.
The "professional" exception would be expanded to include workers, like dental hygienists, who lack advanced training and who do not exercise discretion or independent judgment.
Finally, ignoring the clear language of the Act, the Bush plan would declare an entirely new group ineligible for overtime protection. The proposal would classify
white-collar workers earning over $65,000 a year as "highly compensated employees," and then declare virtually all such workers to be bona fide administrators, professionals, and executives - whether their duties support this description or not.For example, a purchasing agent or bookkeeper earning $65,000 would be ineligible for overtime protection. And, incredibly, this threshold would not increase with inflation, so the "highly compensated" category would include more and more workers - of smaller and smaller means - each year.
Take action to save your overtime pay!The Bush administration’s yearlong drive to take away millions of U.S. workers’ overtime pay protections could become law Aug. 23, unless Congress acts to stop it.
President George W. Bush used the federal regulatory process, which does not require congressional approval, to make it easier for employers to avoid paying overtime to their employees. The new overtime regulations, which redefine who is eligible for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act, were published in the Federal Register in April.Since then, the U.S. Senate twice voted to block any changes in the overtime eligibility regulations. But in the House, Republican leaders refuse to even let the issue come up for debate.
“Comments filed by employer organizations support EPI’s conclusion that the proposal will lead to employers disqualifying workers from earning overtime pay. For example, Hewitt Associates, a leading human resources consultant, wrote in a memo to clients: "In any event, these proposed changes likely will open the door for employers to reclassify a large number of previously nonexempt employees as exempt. The resulting effect on compensation and morale could be detrimental, as employees previously accustomed to earning, in some cases, significant amounts of overtime pay would suddenly lose that opportunity."
“On September 9, 2003, the Senate voted to block any of the provisions in the new rules that would deny workers overtime pay. The House, on October 1, reversed a previous vote and voted to instruct negotiators, when they meet with the Senate to reconcile differences over the Labor Department’s appropriations, to support the Senate’s language to block the new proposal from stripping workers of their overtime rights.”
“The Administration however, threatened to veto any bill that included the Harkin amendment. Under the threat of a veto, on January 22, 2004, the Harkin amendment was stripped from the appropriations bill and the massive federal
spending bill was passed. The Department of Labor announced that it expects to issue the final rules by the end of March. Efforts to block the government's plan to deny workers their overtime rights continue.”Visit Viewpoints to read EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey's May 20 congressional testimony on the Department of Labor's final overtime regulations.
Read EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey's written testimony delivered on May 4, 2004 before the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee of the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations, On the Department of Labor’s Final Overtime Regulations: Preliminary Analysis of DOL's Final Rule on Overtime Exemptions.
Read the January 20, 2004 testimony on the Department of Labor's proposed rule on overtime pay presented by EPI senior economist Jared Bernstein before the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education of the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations.
Read The Truth Behind the Administration's Numbers on Overtime Pay, an explanation of the vast difference between Department of Labor and EPI estimates of the number of workers that would be affected by DOL's proposed overtime regulation.
DOL Overtime Rule Won’t Guarantee Overtime Pay for 1.3 million Low-Income Workers
Read the December 11, 2003 testimony on the Department of Labor's proposed overtime regulation presented by EPI vice president Ross Eisenbrey before the U.S. Senate Democratic Policy Committee.
Read the EPI Briefing Paper, Eliminating the right to overtime pay. Read a summary of the paper's findings in the News Release Millions Stand to Lose Overtime Pay Under Bush Plan .
Top Employer Groups Name Specific Occupations And Activities To Be Ineligible For Overtime Under New Regulations
Read the July 31, 2003 testimony of EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey before the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Read the December 5, 2003 op-ed about Bush administration's changes to the rules governing overtime pay.
The Department of Labor's Claims about the Overtime Rule: A Rebuttal
Read EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey's October 29 letter of explanation to House Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, regarding inquiries about the Department of Labor's proposed revisions to overtime regulations.
Occupations In Danger Of Losing Right To Overtime Pay If Proposed DOL Rule Changes Are Passed
U.S. Employer Groups Hail Proposed DOL Overtime Regulations
Read the February 14, 2003 op-ed, Just What the Worker Needs -- Longer Days, No Overtime.
Read the August 31, 2003 op-ed, Sad Labor Day for Working Americans
Economic Policy Institute's Recommendations to Clarify U.S. Department of Labor's Overtime Rules