CHARLESTON, W.Va. - A petition from consumer group Public Citizen says Bank of America is so big and frail that regulators should dismantle it before problems at the huge bank provoke a crisis.

The economists, law professors and former regulators behind the call say there is a real chance that the nation's second largest bank could implode, dragging the world economy down with it.

David Arkush, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch division, says BOA's stock has fallen by 90 percent off its peak because the market thinks the bank's liabilities could be as much as three times its total capitalization.

"It has assets equal to roughly one seventh of the U.S. GDP. It's an enormous behemoth. It's too large and complex to manage or regulate properly. Its financial condition is poor and could deteriorate rapidly."

BOA took on billions in toxic assets when it bought troubled mortgage giant Countrywide and broker Merrill Lynch. According to Bill Black, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor and former bank regulator, much of the junk had been passed on to investors, who could force BOA to take it back.

"If they are required to buy back any substantial portion of the toxic waste they sold to others, then they will be not simply insolvent but extraordinarily insolvent."

In the last few years, the biggest banks have gotten larger and more interconnected, making "too big to fail" an even bigger problem than when the financial crisis started. But according to Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, last year's Wall Street reform offers a way out.

"We have to establish a financial system where we don't have banks that are too big to fail. The great thing about the financial reform law, the Dodd-Frank bill passed last year, was that that does give us a clear mechanism that gets us out from this 'too big to fail' situation."

North Carolina-based BOA has branches and mortgages in every state, including West Virginia. The bank reported profits in the past two quarters and claims to be working through its problems. Critics say the profits were attributable to accounting adjustments and one-time asset sales.

More information is online at citizen.org.


get more stories like this via email

Nevada U.S. Rep. Steven Horsford - D-Las Vegas - has introduced legislation that would aim to eliminate the subminimum wage for tipped workers across the country, and also eliminate federal taxes on tips - a proposal both presidential nominees have said they would support.

It isn't the first such proposal in Congress.

Horsford noted that a disproportionate number of tipped workers across the country are women and people of color, whom he described as making "poverty wages."

He told his fellow House members the Tipped Income Protection and Support Act is about economic justice, and recognizing that service workers are "the backbone" of the U.S. economy.

"So, to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, we cannot delay this action any longer," said Horsford. "We must act to ensure that every worker, regardless of their job, can earn a fair wage and keep more of what they earn."

Critics of the idea point out that many tipped employees don't make enough to pay income taxes, so eliminating taxes on tips wouldn't affect them.

The minimum cash wage for tipped workers in the U.S. is just over $2 an hour. Nevada has already abolished the subminimum wage for tipped workers, who now make at least $12 an hour.

Relying on customers to pay the bulk of tipped workers' wages exposes these workers to "tremendous instability of income," according to the Economic Policy Institute.

Across the country, the Institute also found poverty rates for tipped workers are more than twice as high as for non-tipped workers. Horsford called that unacceptable.

"No one should have to depend on the whims of a good tip - which is not a guarantee," said Horsford, "in order to make ends meet."

Horsford said his plan, unlike other Republican-led initiatives which would solely exempt tips from federal taxes, would go a step further and eliminate the federal subminimum wage - which he called "the crux of the problem."




get more stories like this via email

A new federal proposal to protect workers from extreme heat is being hailed as a potential lifesaver by labor advocates, even as Florida faces backlash over its heat safety rollbacks.

The proposed OSHA regulation is open for public comment until Dec. 30. It could bring long-awaited protections to millions of workers exposed to dangerous temperatures.

Micki Siegel de Hernández, national deputy director of occupational safety and health for the Communications Workers of America, said Florida recorded more than 200 heat-related worker deaths between 2010 and 2020 and she is baffled by a controversial law Gov. Ron DeSantis signed in April to block local municipalities from enacting protections for workers.

"That bill also prohibits any kind of training or posting of information. It's insane," Siegel de Hernández asserted. "It's disgusting and insane, and also blames workers in the event that they do suffer from some kind of heat-related illness."

DeSantis had sidestepped criticism of the bill by saying it did not come from him. Under the proposed OSHA rule, employers would be required to implement heat illness prevention plans, including access to water, rest breaks and shaded areas.

Siegel de Hernández noted many of Florida's workers, especially those in outdoor industries like construction and agriculture, are at risk of heat exhaustion and heat stroke.

"All of these things are preventable and without a standard, workers will continue to die," Siegel de Hernández contended. "We need to get something passed as quickly as possible."

The OSHA rule would mark the first federal legal protections for indoor and outdoor workers exposed to extreme heat. If approved, it could go into effect as early as next year.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has recommended heat safety standards since the 1970s. But this is the first time the U.S. government has proposed comprehensive heat safety regulations applicable to most industries.


get more stories like this via email

A new study showed as Texas has emerged as a national leader in wind turbine and solar energy installations, clean energy workers often face dangerous working conditions and unequal pay.

The report from a pair of advocacy groups found few Texas job sites are unionized and workers often receive low pay and lack access to benefits like health insurance, workers' compensation and retirement plans.

Bo Delp, executive director of the Texas Climate Jobs Project, said with unions on the rise in Texas and elsewhere, clean energy job sites need to give workers a voice in determining their working conditions.

"We know unionized workplaces have fewer accidents and have less income and racial inequality," Delp pointed out. "One of the things that's needed is for policymakers and for employers to lean in to that support for collective bargaining that we're seeing across the country."

The report was produced by the Texas Climate Jobs Project and the Cornell University Climate Jobs Institute. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics said while union membership is on the rise in Texas, it remains one of the least unionized states. As a so-called "right to work" state, Texans do not have to join a union to get a job.

The report found work-related injuries are common on industrial-scale work sites, including those where solar panels and wind turbines are installed.

Avalon Hoek Spaans, assistant research director for the Climate Jobs Institute at Cornell University and the study's co-author, said the research showed there were often few work rules designed to prevent injuries on job sites.

"One in four workers have experienced work-related injuries on a clean energy Texas worksite and almost half of all workers surveyed have suffered a heat-related illness," Hoek Spaans reported. "Forty-eight percent of our sample had experienced a heat-related illness, 26% an injury, and 7% saw a fatality."

The study also found rampant racial inequality on job sites, with Black workers making an average of $8,500 a year less than white workers, Spanish speakers made $5,900 less and women made $2,700 less. Workers also said employers often refuse to pay overtime.