NEWSECONOMIC JUSTICE

Hey everyone! It's William from Change.org. I wanted to pass on this message from Stef Gray about the amazing progress her campaign against Sallie Mae's "unemployment penalty" is making. Read on:

Whoa! Sallie Mae just blinked!

Today, only a couple of hours after I delivered 77,000 petition signatures from Change.org users to Sallie Mae’s front door, the company issued a statement saying that it would start applying its $50 per loan forbearance fee to customers’ loan balances instead of simply pocketing the cash. They’re obviously hearing your voices loud and clear!

I want to recognize how big Sallie Mae’s shift is. Previously, the company had called this fee a “good faith deposit”, even though it wasn’t a deposit at all! After so many people doubted Sallie Mae could be moved even a little bit, this policy change certainly comes as welcome news.

But it still isn’t enough, and my campaign isn’t over. Their move today does nothing to help borrowers like me, who graduated into the worst job market for new grads since World War II. The unemployed, the underemployed, and others facing economic hardship have no extra money to pay this onerous penalty.

The fact is, there’s still no reason Sallie Mae should be charging its private loan customers this fee when it’s not charged to their federal loan customers. The United States federal government doesn’t think people need to leave a “good-faith deposit” when requesting a forbearance for financial hardship -- why does Sallie Mae think this is necessary?

In fact, there are lots of questions Sallie Mae needs to publicly answer:

• Instead of this half-measure, why doesn’t Sallie Mae go all the way to remove this onerous burden from its worst-off borrowers?
• Does Sallie Mae still earn interest off the fees until they're released to borrowers?
• More importantly, do they get to continue counting the fees as cash on their financial books until the fee is applied to the loans?
• The Associated Press reports that their new policy will be retroactive to January 1 of this year. Why not make it retroactive to when they began charging this fee? This doesn’t give me back the $300 I’ve already paid!
• Why doesn’t Sallie Mae offer any forms of consolidation or income-based repayment to its student debtors?

It’s obvious to me that Sallie Mae isn’t at all serious about providing relief to distressed borrowers. Thankfully, there’s more you can do to push Sallie Mae to do the right thing:

• You can call Sallie Mae spokeswoman Patricia Christel at (302) 283-4076 and tell her you want them to drop their unemployment penalty. Here’s a sample script you can use:My name is _____, and I’m calling because Sallie Mae needs to go all the way to help distressed borrowers. Drop the unemployment penalty now!
• You can post a message to their Facebook Wall- here’s a sample message you can use:I won’t be fooled by Sallie Mae’s financial tricks and half-measures. If you’re serious about helping distressed borrowers like Stef Gray, you need to offer a real solution. Drop your unemployment penalty NOW! http://t.co/fiFCxMdG
• You can also call them out on Twitter! Just post this message:No more tricks! If @SallieMae is serious about helping distressed borrowers, they’ll drop the unemployment penalty NOW! http://chn.ge/SallieMae

I understand that my student debt is my responsibility. It’s a debt I want to pay back. But when my mom told me that education was the key to my future, neither of us knew the game was so rigged against borrowers like me. No student considering college, or who’s in college now, should be duped into using Sallie Mae’s private financial products.

-- Stef Gray

While the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA) were both put on hold on Friday, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) became the first major industry association to drop its support for SOPA. The ESA is the main trade association for video game companies and was one of the main business associations pushing for the bills that critics say would result in internet censorship. The ESA spent $190,000 lobbying the Senate to pass PIPA in just six months in 2011. In a statement, the ESA said: "Although the need to address this pervasive threat to our industry's creative investment remains, concerns have been expressed about unintended consequences stemming from the current legislative proposals. Accordingly, we call upon Congress, the Obama Administration, and stakeholders to refocus their energies on producing a solution that effectively balances both creative and technology interests."

The victory comes after over 136,000 people joined Shashank Katsurirangan's Change.org campaign calling on Electronic Arts, one of the most prominent ESA members to oppose SOPA as a way to push the video game industry to end its support for the legislation. EA had previously stated it did not have a position on the bills even though it is a member of the ESA.  At least five ESA members had publicly opposed the bills and ESA's position in support of them before the ESA made its announcement.

Additionally, Mark Kern, CEO of Red 5 Studios, created a Change.org campaign calling on the ESA to drop support for SOPA that was signed by over 32,000 people. This week, Kern formed an alternative organization for gaming companies and fans who oppose the ESA called the League for Gamers and had called for a boycott of the ESA's largest and most profitable annual event, E3.

The internet backlash against two proposed pieces of legislation grew rapidly last week as thousands of websites went black to protest SOPA and PIPA. Supporters of Shashank’s petition to EA increased the pressure on the company, and therefore the ESA, to drop support for the bills by

participating in a virtual march on The Sims 3’s Facebook wall. Sims characters You can see an image of the Sims protesting online here.

At the same time that the Sims held their march, others used Twitter to send a message to EA. A Board member of the company, Jeff Huber, who works at Google, publicly opposed SOPA and PIPA. Supporters of Shashank’s campaign signed a Twitter petition asking Huber to stand up and encourage EA to join him in opposing SOPA and PIPA.

As the first major industry association that had been lobbying in support of SOPA and PIPA to reverse its position, the successful Change.org campaigns targeting the ESA will build pressure on Congress to bury the controversial bills.

A couple of weeks ago we took note of the exciting role Change.org is playing in the fight against corporate personhood, as more than a dozen regular folks from around the country have started petitions demanding that their municipal governments get behind a constitutional amendment declaring that corporations don't have the same rights as people and that political contributions aren't speech.

Well hold on to your hats, because we've got some exciting news -- two of these campaigns were victorious this month!

Change.org member Erin Madden's petition to the Portland, Oregon City Council generated more than 1,200 signatures, forcing City Commissioners to eliminate critical weaknesses in an earlier draft of a resolution decrying corporate personhood. The petition also asked for a referendum on corporate personhood to allow Portland's citizens a direct voice in the matter -- a demand that was also won. With the vote, the city attorney's office has been directed to "determine the legality and process of referring an advisory vote to the citizens of Portland on the issue of corporate personhood, and refer their findings back to Council for further consideration," according to a local news account.

We now go from Portland, Oregon to Portland, Maine, where on January 18 Portland resident Will Gattis' campaign helped lead to the introduction and subsequent passage of a corporate personhood resolution.

These inspiring victories demonstrate that change really does start at home -- and more importantly, that anyone has the ability to create it. Consider using Change.org to start a petition asking your own city council to speak out against corporate personhood. Getting started is quick and easy. Until then, we'll keep you up to date on the progress of the corporate personhood campaigns here on Change.org.

There's a exciting, new front in the battle for economic justice on Change.org: real citizens vs. Citizens United.

You probably know that in January 2010 the United States Supreme Court, led by a conservative majority, overturned decades of legal precedent in ruling that corporations had the same First Amendment protections as flesh-and-blood people, and that contributions to political campaigns by corporations can be considered protected speech. The decision was handed down in the court case Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission.

Americans of all political stripes were outraged by this new doctrine -- dubbed "corporate personhood" -- and in the two years since the decision, a grassroots movement has sprung up to overturn it. The first step? Asking municipal elected bodies to pass resolutions opposing corporate personhood.

Just last month, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously passed a resolution calling on Congress to amend the United States Constitution to establish that corporations don't have constitutional rights and that money is not political speech. The New York City Council rung in the New Year by passing a similar resolution on January 4.

Similar efforts are afoot around America. How do we know? Because more than a dozen people have started their own petitions on Change.org calling on their city councils and state legislatures to pass similar resolutions.

From Portland, Oregon to Portland, Maine, Change.org members are using our platform to raise awareness of Citizens United's implications and to call on their local elected leaders to speak out. Petitions have also been started targeting the city councils of Redding, Washington, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Phoenix, Arizona, Taos, New Mexico, Moab, Utah, Corvalis, Oregon, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and the New York State Assembly.

The strategy is simple: build support at the local and state level for a constitutional amendment that would end corporate personhood and reduce the influence of corporations in American political life. Critics of Citizens United say that the Supreme Court decision will be disastrous for American democracy. They argue that by removing the firewall that separated corporate money and American politics, the political process will be deluged with corporate money and influence.

We're proud that such an exciting new movement has found a home on Change.org. If you're upset by the Citizens United decision, or anything else impacting you and your community, consider starting a petition on Change.org.

With today's "Occupy Our Homes" kickoff, the Occupy movement has gone from inhabiting the most public of spaces to the most private. They're not taking over just any home, though -- organizers are defending homeowners around the country facing imminent foreclosure.

It's a natural next step for the young but increasingly influential movement. The effort has already been met with great media coverage, and will likely be critical in once again refocusing public conversation on the plight of the 99%. Besides that, there's little question Occupy Our Homes will be successful in saving some homes from foreclosure by exposing the unfair and deceptive banking practices that have driven many homeowners to that point.

But Occupy Our Homes isn't the only avenue for holding banks accountable to homeowners. Dozens of homeowners, their family, and their friends have started petitions on Change.org calling on their banks to treat them fairly and modify their mortgages to allow them to stay in their homes.

One of those homeowners is Monique White, whose story is told by Change.org member Nick Espinosa:

Monique worked for 11 years as youth counselor at a group home to help troubled teens transition back into their communities. In February 2010, the nonprofit shut down due to state budget cuts. Although Monique still has a part-time job at a liquor store where she has worked for the past 8 years, this has not been enough to afford her mortgage payment.

Monique has gone through the process of trying to get a loan modification writing a hardship letter and sending document after document to US Bank, yet they still refused to work with her and have foreclosed on her home.

'A house across the street from mine just sold for $9,500, and the bank would rather kick me out and let the house sit empty than renogotiate my $130,000 mortage. It makes absolutely no sense,' explained Monique.

Sadly, Monique's story is not unique. Lesliane Bouchard, a disabled California schoolteacher, is facing foreclosure by First Mortgage Corporation. Vicky Aase is trying to stop foreclosure on her Los Angeles-area home after being brought to the brink of foreclosure by Bank of America. Liz Wootan, who provides reasonably-priced rental units for middle-class tenants in New York, could lose her rental property. These homeowners have all stood up for themselves using Change.org, and our hope is that many other homeowners begin to use our platform as one more tool at their disposal in their fights to save their homes.

And it can work! Just ask Seattle-area mom Vera Johnson, who managed to stop Bank of America's efforts to foreclose on her home. Sometimes the victories are smaller, but still important. For instance, many homeowners complain that banks frequently lose documents and shuffle them between multiple representatives who often know nothing of the customer's earlier conversations. Through Change.org, numerous homeowners have won the decent treatment and single point of contact they deserve.

Change is possible, and Change.org's tools can make it a little bit easier to win. If you or someone you know is facing foreclosure, consider starting a campaign on Change.org today.

This post was authored by Change.org petition creator and Target employee Anthony Hardwick. In November, 2011, Anthony launched a viral Change.org petition asking his employer to "Save Thanksgiving" and push the "Black Friday" opening from midnight on Thanksgiving to 5 a.m. the following morning. 

It's fitting that while I write a blog post about Gregg Steinhafel and the NRF'S trumped up Black Friday data, three Target Christmas ads blast me with manufactured cheer. In one of the ads a woman says good bye to her relatives after Thanksgiving dinner (must not be a Target employee) when she turns around her house is magically transforming itself for Christmas automatically. This ad more than any other sums up Target's feeling on the issue of Thanksgiving; its a holiday best ushered out the door with the in laws while the fun holiday where you get stuff takes over your life against your will.

In keeping with the best psychological warfare retailers keep repeating their party line, Christmas is about buying stuff, buying stuff, buying stuff. The average Americans affinity for Thanksgiving is a speed bump for that drive for shareholders demands of higher year to year profit margins. Failure to whip revenue skyward is an unacceptable outcome and as such the nervous decision makers at the top of the retail giants push aside anything that gets in the way, even if that means shoving families apart during the holidays.

On the surface it appears their efforts are proving successful. However when we dig deeper into the numbers provided by the National Retail Federation (please read propaganda arm of big box retailers) we see that in all actuality the feet through the door isn't nearly as impressive when actual sales are taken into account. Shouting from the rooftops a 6.6% increase in retail traffic doesn't convey the anemic sales conversion rate, a true indicator of shoppers parting ways with their hard earned money. Marshall Cohen of NDP estimates the conversion to be around 20%.  There is no doubt that there were more people showing up for the stores midnight and earlier openings, but those bodies were not shelling out the dough for what many consumers deemed less than thrilling "deals."

The reality on the floor was that gawkers showed up to see what the hub bub was and after seeing the grade A breed of crazy, opted to get out of the brick and mortars before the next pepper spraying or parking lot shooting occurred. These folks logged on to their computers accounting for over 4% of the actual sales. The result was a meager 2.8% increase in revenue over last years sales. Given the hype over the midnight open its no surprise the retailers got a little bump, and if I may Target, you are very welcome. Let's all admit that the various petitions and resulting press coverage did more for the midnight open than all the big box ad departments combined, though I'm certain Rick and I shouldn't hold our breath for a compensation check from our respective employers.  But why all the deception about sales figures?

Simple, the CEO's know they made a bad call on the earlier opens. The reset for shoppers was non-existent. After the initial pop the brick and mortar stores had seas of on the clock employees standing around looking at each other saying "we gave up Thanksgiving for this?" Factor in labor and store operations overhead and all of the sudden that 2.8% is nonexistent.

Add in the fact that most team members I spoke with couldn't remember a sale that included add on merchandise, meaning those who did buy stuff only bought what was on sale. When those two hundred dollar televisions were gone so were the shoppers.

Where did those shoppers go? All indicators are that they went to small business' on Saturday or if the preliminary figures hold up they went online on Monday. This is not good news for the boxes. If there is one thing the collapse of Borders has taught us its that the internet is a harbinger of doom for those silly and ignorant enough to ignore its allure.

Despite my towering rhetoric this is not an ideal situation for me. Despite my lack of faith in the brass at the top of my corporation of employment, I am not cheering for Target's demise. After all their paycheck keeps my lights on and if the VPs in Minneapolis drive Target off a cliff with their hubris then it'll be a little darker in Hardwick manor.

The answer is simple. Take a step back from all this Black Friday madness, save on over head with normal business hours on Black Friday, then offer unbeatable prices on the accessory attachments to coincide with real honest to god deals.  On top of that, institute a legitimate time off request system for existing employees and hire seasonal help. This cuts overhead in that you don't pay higher wages to existing employees because you're paying new team members the base rate of pay. Is it a sure fire solution, no, but it's better than trumping up some questionable data and hoping no one notices the reality of the situation.

Here's hoping big box retailers listen better to this idea than they did our Change.org petitions. Only time will tell.

In less than one month, Bank of America went from announcing a new $5 monthly debit card fee, to reeling under huge pressure from the media, Congress, and Change.org members. Now, Chase and Wells Fargo - two of Bank of America's biggest consumer banking competitors - have promised not to levy debit card fees on customers, and Bank of America is suggesting they will 'soften' their fee.

It all started with one Change.org member, Molly Katchpole, who said enough was enough and started a campaign against Bank of America's $5 fee.

Friday night, ABC World News reported on the banking industry’s reaction to Molly’s campaign. Watch the video to learn how Molly and 300,000 Change.org petition signers made big banks listen up!

• View Molly's petition to Bank of America
• Share this campaign with others
• Start your own petition

Here's how it all happened:

September 29: Bank of America announces a new $5 monthly debit card fee.

September 30: Molly creates her petition on Change.org; more than 150,000 people sign in the next 5 days.

October 5: The petition becomes a major national story. ABC News interviews Molly, then tracks down Bank of America’s CEO Brian Moynihan and forces him to respond to it.

October 6: Molly delivers 153,000 petitions to Bank of America and closes her account. She appears on ABC World News again to discuss the petition. Local media in Charlotte (where Bank of America is based) openly speculate that the growing controversy could lead to the firing of Moynihan.

October 9: Molly is featured in a major article in the New York Times as an example of the public’s frustration with big banks.

October 10: Bank of America executive Andrew Plepler calls Molly Katchpole to discuss her petition.

October 13: Molly meets with Congressman Brad Miller to discuss a bill in Congress to make it easier to switch banks. The two later appear on CNN together.

October 18: Molly’s petition reaches 225,000, as Bank of America reports a $6 billion profit. The outrage continues to grow.

October 26: Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan says he’s ‘incensed’ over recent criticism of the bank fees

October 27: JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in America, and Wells Fargo announce they will stop testing $3 debit card fees and cancel any plans to charge customers to use their debit cards.

October 28: Bank of America begins a full-on retreat from the $5 debit card fee. An unnamed source at the bank says they will 'soften' the fee and allow more customers - including anyone with a direct deposit - to avoid the $5 fee. Molly appears on ABC World News for the fourth time to talk about her petition.

October 30: Molly's Change.org petition reaches 300,000 signatures, and customers continue to demand that Bank of America cancel the $5 fee for all of its customers.

UPDATE (1/11/2011)

November 1: VICTORY! Bank of America formally announces that it will not move forward with implementing the debit card fee, marking a victory for Molly and over 306,000 other customers who signed her petition.

On November 1st, Bank of America announced that it would not move forward with implementing the debit card fee. BofA co-chief operating officer David Darnell stated in a press release, “We have listened to our customers very closely over the last few weeks and recognize concern with our proposed debit usage fee. Our customers’ voices are most important to us. As a result, we are not currently charging the fee and will not be moving forward with any additional plans to do so.” The decision marks an incredible victory for Molly and over 306,000 other customers who signed her petition. Using Change.org, Molly was able to recruit hundreds of thousands of people across the country to join her in successfully challenging one of America’s most powerful financial institutions – and also influencing the behavior of other major banks.

Inspired? Then start your own petition, and make change happen.

• View Molly's petition to Bank of America
• Share this campaign with others
• Start your own petition

There is no doubt that donating blood is extremely important. Every year 5 million U.S. patients receive blood. The Red Cross is the largest supplier of blood in the country. More than 40 percent of the blood supply is collected and processed through the Red Cross, which distributes that blood to more than 3,000 hospitals and transfusion centers. They are incredibly important, the Red Cross is facing some scrutiny from its own workers.

For 18 years, the Red Cross has been under a federal consent decree to improve its blood safety practices. The Food and Drug Administration has fined the Red Cross $37 million for blood safety violations, and the National Labor Relations Board has issued citations against Red Cross for violations of labor laws. The Worker Committee for Blood Safety believes the two issues are interrelated; the Red Cross isn't treating its workers well and that has resulted in less safe blood drives.

That is why they've started a petition here on Change.org. They are asking you to write to Gail McGovern, President and CEO of American Red Cross, and tell her that Red Cross must invest in its workforce to improve blood safety compliance and stop violations of workers’ rights. Specifically, the Worker Committee for Blood Safety wants adequate staffing at all blood drives, including at least one licensed nurse. They say that staffing has become a serious point of contention because the Red Cross is not consistent about staffing blood drives. Where drives in some states may be staffed by two licensed nurses, drives in other states have no licensed personel at all.  They want the Red Cross to adopt, publicize, and enforce a consistent staffing policy for all blood drives.

Sodexo is one of the largest food service companies, and the world's 21st largest employer overall. They have also been a regular target of protest on issues ranging from human rights violations, to environmental issues, to labor rights. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has long been in a battle with Sodexo over wages, benefits, and, perhaps most importantly, the right of Sodexo workers to organize a union without interference and intimidation from the company. SEIU has organized protests, day long strikes, and embattled organizing drives across the country, aimed at improving working conditions for Sodexo employees.

Change.org members have thrown their weight behind Sodexo workers as well. Over the last 6 months or so, over 800 Change.org supporters have emailed Sodexo's headquarters telling them they need to respect their workers, pay them a decent wage, and allow them to form unions if they want.

Recently, in part thanks to your support, SEIU made a huge step forward in this battle. The union and Sodexo have agreed to an amicable settlement. Under this settlement, SEIU and Sodexo have affirmed their mutual commitment to the rights of Sodexo employees to make free and informed choices about unionization. "With today's resolution in place, we will continue to serve our members and future members in the foodservice, cleaning, and security industries," said Tom Woodruff, SEIU Executive Vice President. The specific terms of the settlement are confidential, but these types of agreements are incredibly important in labor organizing efforts.

After 2 years without a contract, poor treatment on the job, and an abysmal health and safety record, housekeepers and other staff at Hyatt hotels in Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Honolulu walked off the job for a week long strike. Let Hyatt know that you support the workers on strike by signing this petition, started by Unite Here, the union representing the workers.

The whole labor dispute heated up, literally, when a manager at Chicago's Park Hyatt turned heat lamps on picketing workers demonstrating for a new contract... in July... in a heatwave. The major complaint from workers is not the money or benefits, but rather the way management treats them. As if to prove just how right the workers were, management responded in about as petty and retaliatory manner as they could have. One local radio station reports that, "combined with the outdoor air temperature, Linda Long says it was hotter than the Hyatt kitchen she’s worked in for eleven years."