Facebook: Good or Bad?
Isn’t it funny (and a little hypocritical) that the Valley Advocate publishes an op-ed piece titled “Facebook Is Not Your Friend” in the September 23, 2010 edition and then in the classifieds section of the same edition runs an ad imploring readers to use Facebook to follow the Advocate and become a fan? So which is it—Facebook is an insidious website that is extinguishing our privacy or Facebook is a useful tool that helps us keep current with the Advocate? Should we only use Facebook when it benefits the Advocate?
Andrew J. Bellotti
Northampton
More on Sick Leave
As a low-income mother and student who has been fired from a job for taking a day off to care for a sick child, I can’t stress enough the importance of paid sick leave [“It’s Enough to Make You Sick,” August 26, 2010]. The U.S. lags behind 27 industrialized nations that have paid leave policies that underscore how much these countries value families.
Using government data, the Institute for Women’s Policy Research has investigated the costs and benefits of the Paid Sick Days Act being considered here in Massachusetts. According to its report, “averaged over the private sector workforce, the weekly cost of the policy will be $1.49 per worker and savings will be $2.38 per worker, for a net savings of .89 per week.”
Clearly, the benefits of this policy reach far beyond reduced turnover rates and increased worker productivity. There are also public health benefits that would be realized by enacting sound policy that enables moms and dads to take time off work to care for sick children or other family members without sacrificing a day’s pay, or—worse—a job.
It’s important to note that this policy is not a “free lunch” for workers (Letters, September 2, 2010]. Under the Paid Sick Days Act, paid sick days would accrue at a rate of one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked, up to a maximum of seven paid sick days per year. We’ve heard a lot from lawmakers, researchers and advocates, but now it’s time to take a step back and ask those who are most affected by this issue, low-wage workers with children, if this policy works for them. Over the past year what I have heard as a grassroots organizer and mother in my local community is that we need paid sick days. No parent should have to choose between a paycheck and his or her family.
Marianne Bullock
MomsRising.org
*
Social Security No Piggy Bank
As I’ve followed news coverage of Washington’s Fiscal Reform Commission, it’s become clear to me that many members of this committee are gunning for Social Security cuts even though the program hasn’t added a dime to our deficit.
I paid for these benefits and refuse to let these so-called “fiscal hawks” use Social Security as a piggy bank to pay for a fiscal fiasco caused by astronomical health care costs, the excesses of Wall Street and the recession. Social Security cuts will not fix our deficit problem, yet this seems to be the main objective of this commission.
Social Security’s modest benefit pays an average of just $13,800 each year. With the stock market meltdown, housing market crash and high level of unemployment, people need Social Security more than ever. We don’t need billionaires like Peter G. Peterson telling us to make tough sacrifices while they reap the benefits of fiscal policies that have made them rich. It would be a great disservice to our grandchildren if we sat back quietly while these fiscal hawks spread lies about Social Security to sway public opinion against it. We can’t let that happen.
Karen Gilburg
Holyoke
Let Towns Control Health Insurance
During this election season, the Massachusetts Municipal Association is calling on all candidates for the Legislature to pledge their support for reform legislation to give cities and towns the ability to control skyrocketing health insurance costs and save local taxpayers $100 million a year. We encourage all voters and taxpayers to do the same.
Paying for health insurance is a problem for everyone, but cities and towns have been forced to pay much more than necessary because of a state law that gives municipal unions a veto over routine plan changes that would reduce the cost to taxpayers. Over the past 10 years, cities and towns have seen their health insurance costs rise by over 150 percent, squeezing out vital services and costing local taxpayers more and more.
The state has cut local aid by $825 million, and cities and towns have laid off thousands of employees, cut services and increased their reliance on property taxes. Without real health insurance reform, communities will continue to pay too much for employee health benefits, which will force even more service cuts and layoffs while local taxpayers pay millions more than they should.
When the new Legislature convenes in January, our representatives and senators need to support real reform that gives local government the same authority the state has to design health insurance plans outside collective bargaining. Cities and towns would be able to lower their lower health insurance costs by $100 million statewide. These are real savings that taxpayers deserve and need.
The reform legislation would provide relief from an indefensible state law that allows local unions to block even modest changes in health plans, such as increasing any co-pays or deductibles. Many municipalities are locked into plans that offer $5 co-pays for office visits, and no co-pays or deductibles for many expensive procedures. But state employees have $20 co-pays and much higher deductibles because state leaders have exempted themselves from this collective bargaining mandate, and state officials routinely implement plan changes to save money on health insurance with no union approval required.
Cities and towns should have the same authority the state has. There is no excuse for keeping the unique veto power that municipal unions hold over health plan changes. This veto power is costing taxpayers millions and causing the elimination of teachers, firefighters and police officers from local budgets.
We urge all voters and taxpayers to ask candidates for the Legislature for a commitment to pass strong municipal health insurance reform when the Legislature convenes in January. Otherwise the fiscal problems we face will get worse, and local taxpayers will continue to pay more and get less in return.
Geoffrey C. Beckwith, Executive Director
Massachusetts Municipal Association
