DOCSLIB.ORG

May Day and the Struggle for the Eight Hour Day in California by David

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
May Day and the Struggle for the Eight Hour Day in California by David May Day and the Struggle for the Eight Hour Day in California by J. David Sackman, Esq. California is one of the few states which requires employers to pay overtime after eight hours work in a day. 1/ Federal law only requires overtime after forty hours in a week. 2/ The Eight-Hour-Day (at least on public works) is even ensconced in the California Constitution. 3/ The Eight Hour Day was not won easily. Nationally, the movement for the Eight Hour Day gave birth to May Day, which is celebrated throughout the world as a day for Labor. In California, the Eight Hour Day is the result of a long struggle of what Carey McWilliams called the “total engagement” of labor: “The California labor movement has long occupied an altogether exceptional niche in the history of American labor. The California labor movement, to a degree that is not generally appreciated, has had an important influence on national labor trends. It has been the total engagement of labor in California that has, from the beginning, given the California labor movement its distinctive character. The labor struggle in the state has not been partial and limited, but total and indivisible; all of labor pitted against all of capital.” 4/ industries. Labor marched and struck, if necessary, to achieve this goal. Labor also took its cause back to the Legislature, and managed to pass California’s first 8-hour law. The first section of the 1868 law, similar to the 1853 law, provided that “Eight hours labor shall be deemed and held to be a legal day’s work, in all cases within this State, unless otherwise expressly stipulated between the parties concerned.” Again, it was up to workers to maintain the 8-hour day through their own bargaining power, in private employment at least. The 1868 law also mandated an 8- hour day for public works for the State, and required that “a stipulation to that effect shall be made of all contracts” for public work. Finally, it absolutely prohibited employment of minors for more than 8 hours a day. 8/ While Labor had some influence in the Legislature, the Courts were mostly on the side of business when it came to economic matters. So the 1868 law immediately ran into trouble in the courts. The California Supreme Court limited the law, as applied to public works, by reading it as requiring only that contractors agree to abide by the law, but not to actually give an 8-hour day to their workers, since the latter would be “an abridgement of, and a limitation upon, the powers of parties to contract about their Chinese laborers working on a railroad in California. own concerns.” 9/ Following this decision, Labor went back to the Legislature to obtain a stronger law. They did this by adding a Early Struggles to Limit the Hours provision that all workers on public works “shall be employed by the day, and no work upon any of said buildings shall be done by of Work in California contract.” 10/ Economic depression gripped the state through most of the As early as 1853, the brand-new state of California, still 1870s. As a result, many workers lost the 8-hour day they basking in the Gold Rush, passed one of the first laws limiting the previously had won through their bargaining power. They worked hours of labor. The original proposal, which received widespread longer hours, for shorter pay, and many more were unemployed. support, would have punished any employer who required 5/ Many workers blamed the Chinese for their problems. Chinese employees to work more than ten hours. Subsequent lobbying laborers were brought in to build the transcontinental railroad. by employers watered down the proposal, so that the law finally After the rail line was completed in 1869, many Chinese enacted provided only that “Ten hours shall be considered a legal 6/ remained in California, where they often competed with European day’s labor in any action in law, in any of the courts of the State.” workers for scarce jobs. As conditions worsened, workers This meant that the 10-hour day was only a presumption at law. gathered in “sandlot” meetings to hear speakers and protest their Employers could require more hours, if they made it an explicit conditions. Dennis Kearney, who had previously been hired as a part of the employment agreement. So this law was up to the goon to break up strikes, dominated these sandlot meetings as a workers to enforce through their own bargaining power. At the supposed advocate for Labor, blaming the Chinese for the time, labor was strong enough to maintain a ten hour day workers problems. He managed to take over the newly-formed maximum in most industries. But as the economy rose and fell, “Workingmen’s Party” and divert its agenda to anti-Chinese along with the bargaining power of labor, the maximum hours of agitation. work fell and rose accordingly. The Workingmen’s Party garnered a tremendous amount of Following the Civil War, Labor began agitating for an 8-hour support, and began fielding candidates throughout the state. day in California. In 1866, a bill was introduced for an 8-hour 7/ They led a successful effort to call a new Constitutional day, but it was killed after passing the Assembly. Unions then Convention, and won a large number of seats at the Convention began agitating for the 8 hour day through their economic power. itself. In the new Constitution drawn up at this Convention in An “Eight Hour League” was formed by a coalition of labor 1879, most of the Workingmen’s Party effort was directed organizations. Unfortunately, much of its activity was diverted to towards anti-Chinese provisions. But many pro-Labor provisions anti-Chinese agitation. were also added, including one for the 8 hour day. The 1879 The first “Labor Day” in California was June 3, 1867. This was California Constitution, as approved by the voters, provided that the deadline set by unions in the state, for an 8-hour day in all “Eight hours shall constitute a legal day’s work on all public work.” 11/ 2 The First May Day The 1880's saw renewed effort to obtain and keep an 8 hour day, throughout the nation. At its 1884 Convention, the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the United States and Canada, which later became the American Federation of Labor (AFL), adopted this resolution: "Resolved, . that eight hours shall constitute a legal day's labor from and after May 1, 1886, and that we recommend to labor organizations throughout this district that they so direct their laws as to conform to this resolution by the time named." 12/ This demand was meant to be backed up by stikes where necessary to achieve the 8-hour day by the May 1, 1886 deadline. It was promoted throughout the nation over the next two years. By the first May Day, 350,000 workers went on strike Artist depiction of bomb at Haymarket Square in Chicago, 1886 at 11,562 establishments. Approximately 185,00 achieved the 8- hour day as a result. 13/ This of course does not count the many Labor in California was too preoccupied with throwing out the more who had already achieved the 8-hour day, including many Chinese to pay much attention to their own working conditions. in California. According to Samuel Gompers, head of the AFL: That first May Day “received virtually no support from the 16/ Instead, labor supported a "I have no hesitation in expressing my conviction that the organized workers in California." pogrom of violence against the Chinese throughout the state. movement of 1886 resulted in a reduction of fully 1 hour's labor of 14/ Because they were caught up in racism, California labor missed the working people of the United States." this opportunity to advance the 8-hour day on the first May Day in Among those striking on the first May Day for the 8-hour day 1886. 17/ were workers at McCormick Harvester in Chicago. On May 3, 1886, the workers were still out on strike when strikebreakers The Progressive Era and the Eight were brought through the picket lines by police. The crowd of strikers and supporters tried to block the scabs, and police fired Hour Day for Women into the crowd, killing four and wounding many others. A mass demonstration against the killings was immediately organized, Revolution was in the air when the Second Decade of the and set for Haymarket Square the next day, May 4. The Twentieth Century dawned on California. Labor was on the rise, organizers included anarchist labor activists Albert R. Parsons, especially in Los Angeles, where class warfare literally exploded August Spies and Samuel J. Fielden. By the time the speeches with the bombing of the Los Angeles Times building. Job were wrapping up and the crowd breaking up that evening, the Harriman, one of the lawyers representing the union officers police returned, and ordered the crowd to immediately disperse. accused of the bombing, was nearly elected mayor of the city, on As if on cue, a bomb was thrown. One of the police was killed, a Labor-Socialist ticket. A few blocks away, some of Harriman’s and many more in the crowd were wounded. other clients, refugees from the Diaz regime in Mexico, were planning the takeover of Baja California by the Partido Liberal de The next day, police swept through Chicago and arrested Mexico (PLM), which would be known as the precursor of the hundreds - mostly union leaders and anarchists.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Budgetary Effects of the Raise the Wage Act of 2021 February 2021
    The Budgetary Effects of the Raise the Wage Act of 2021 FEBRUARY 2021 If enacted at the end of March 2021, the Raise the Wage Act of 2021 (S. 53, as introduced on January 26, 2021) would raise the federal minimum wage, in annual increments, to $15 per hour by June 2025 and then adjust it to increase at the same rate as median hourly wages. In this report, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill’s effects on the federal budget. The cumulative budget deficit over the 2021–2031 period would increase by $54 billion. Increases in annual deficits would be smaller before 2025, as the minimum-wage increases were being phased in, than in later years. Higher prices for goods and services—stemming from the higher wages of workers paid at or near the minimum wage, such as those providing long-term health care—would contribute to increases in federal spending. Changes in employment and in the distribution of income would increase spending for some programs (such as unemployment compensation), reduce spending for others (such as nutrition programs), and boost federal revenues (on net). Those estimates are consistent with CBO’s conventional approach to estimating the costs of legislation. In particular, they incorporate the assumption that nominal gross domestic product (GDP) would be unchanged. As a result, total income is roughly unchanged. Also, the deficit estimate presented above does not include increases in net outlays for interest on federal debt (as projected under current law) that would stem from the estimated effects of higher interest rates and changes in inflation under the bill.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender Pay Gaps
    Equality and Human Rights Commission Briefing paper 2 Gender pay gaps David Perfect Gender pay gaps David Perfect, Equality and Human Rights Commission © Equality and Human Rights Commission 2011 First published Spring 2011 ISBN 978 1 84206 351 4 Equality and Human Rights Commission Research The Equality and Human Rights Commission publishes research carried out for the Commission by commissioned researchers and by the Research Team. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission. The Commission is publishing the report as a contribution to discussion and debate. Please contact the Research Team for further information about other Commission research reports, or visit our website: Research Team Equality and Human Rights Commission Arndale House The Arndale Centre Manchester M4 3AQ Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0161 829 8500 Website: www.equalityhumanrights.com You can download a copy of this report as a PDF from our website: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/ If you require this publication in an alternative format, please contact the Communications Team to discuss your needs at: [email protected] Key findings Men working full-time continue to have higher average (mean) hourly, weekly and annual earnings than women. Across the United Kingdom, the mean full-time gender pay gap (the difference in percentage terms between the average earnings of women and men working full-time) in 2010 was 15.5 per cent for hourly earnings excluding overtime and 21.5 per cent for gross weekly earnings. The gap was wider in weekly than hourly earnings, since men tend to work longer weekly hours than women and are also more likely to receive additional payments, such as overtime.
    [Show full text]
  • MINIMUM WAGE Sheryl Maxfield Director
    Mike DeWine Governor STATE OF OHIO Jon Husted Lt. Governor 2021 MINIMUM WAGE Sheryl Maxfield www.com.ohio.gov Director NON-TIPPED EMPLOYEES A Minimum Wage of $8.80 per hour “Non-Tipped Employees” includes any employee who does not engage in an occupation in which he/she customarily and regularly receives more than thirty dollars ($30.00) per month in tips. “Employers” who gross less than $323,000 shall pay their employees no less than the current federal minimum wage rate. “Employees” under the age of 16 shall be paid no less than the current federal minimum wage rate. “Current Federal Minimum Wage” is $7.25 per hour. TIPPED EMPLOYEES A Minimum Wage of $4.40 per hour PLUS TIPS “Tipped Employees” includes any employee who engages in an occupation in which he/she customarily and regularly receives more than thirty dollars ($30.00) per month in tips. Employers electing to use the tip credit provision must be able to show that tipped employees receive at least the minimum wage when direct or cash wages and the tip credit amount are combined. OVERTIME INDIVIDUALS EXEMPT FROM MINIMUM WAGE 1. An employer shall pay an employee for overtime at a wage rate of one and one-half times the employee’s wage rate for hours in 1. Any individual employed by the United States; excess of 40 hours in one work week, except for employers grossing less than $150,000 per year. 2. Any individual employed as a baby-sitter in the employer’s home, RECORDS TO BE KEPT BY THE EMPLOYER or a live-in companion to a sick, convalescing, or elderly person whose principal duties do not include housekeeping; 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Montgomery County (An Employer of One Employee Is Subject to the County Minimum Wage Law After 7/1/19.)
    Minimum Wage and Overtime Law Montgomery County (An employer of one employee is subject to the County minimum wage law after 7/1/19.) Montgomery (Chapter 27, Article XI, Montgomery County Code ) Minimum Wage County Most employees must be paid the Montgomery Co. Minimum Wage Rate. Employees age 18 Minimum Wage Rates and under working under 20 hours per week are exempt from this rate. Tipped Employees (earning more than $30 per month in tips) must earn the Montgomery Co. Large Employers with 51 Minimum Wage Rate per hour. Employers must pay at least $4.00 per hour. This amount or more employees: plus tips must equal at least the Montgomery Co. Minimum Wage Rate. Subject to the adoption of related regulations, restaurant employers who utilize a tip credit are required to $14.00 provide employees with a written or electronic wage statement for each pay period showing After 7/1/20 the employee’s effective hourly rate of pay including employer paid cash wages plus tips for tip credit hours worked for each workweek of the pay period. Additional information and $15.00 updates will be posted on the Maryland Department of Labor website. After 7/1/21 Employees under 18 years of age must earn at least 85% of the State Minimum Wage Rate $15.00+CPI-W1 After 7/1/22 Overtime Most employees must be paid 1.5 times their usual hourly rate for all work over 40 hrs. per Mid-sized Employers with week. Exceptions: 11 to 50 employees Employees of bowling establishments, and institutions providing on-premise care (other than hospitals) to the sick, the aged, or individuals with disabilities for all work over 48 $13.25 hrs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, As Amended
    The Fair LaboR Standards Act Of 1938, As Amended U.S. DepaRtment of LaboR Wage and Hour Division WH Publication 1318 Revised May 2011 material contained in this publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced fully or partially, without permission of the Federal Government. Source credit is requested but not required. Permission is required only to reproduce any copyrighted material contained herein. This material may be contained in an alternative Format (Large Print, Braille, or Diskette), upon request by calling: (202) 693-0675. Toll-free help line: 1-866-187-9243 (1-866-4-USWAGE) TTY TDD* phone: 1-877-889-5627 *Telecommunications Device for the Deaf. Internet: www.wagehour.dol.gov The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq. To Provide for the establishment of fair labor standards in emPloyments in and affecting interstate commerce, and for other Purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938”. § 201. Short title This chapter may be cited as the “Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938”. § 202. Congressional finding and declaration of Policy (a) The Congress finds that the existence, in industries engaged in commerce or in the Production of goods for commerce, of labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers (1) causes commerce and the channels and instrumentalities of commerce to be used to sPread and Perpetuate such labor conditions among the workers of the several States; (2) burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; (3) constitutes an unfair method of competition in commerce; (4) leads to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and (5) interferes with the orderly and fair marketing of goods in commerce.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimum Wages and the Gender Gap in Pay: New Evidence from the UK and Ireland
    DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES IZA DP No. 11502 Minimum Wages and the Gender Gap in Pay: New Evidence from the UK and Ireland Olivier Bargain Karina Doorley Philippe Van Kerm APRIL 2018 DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES IZA DP No. 11502 Minimum Wages and the Gender Gap in Pay: New Evidence from the UK and Ireland Olivier Bargain Bordeaux University and IZA Karina Doorley ESRI and IZA Philippe Van Kerm University of Luxembourg and LISER APRIL 2018 Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but IZA takes no institutional policy positions. The IZA research network is committed to the IZA Guiding Principles of Research Integrity. The IZA Institute of Labor Economics is an independent economic research institute that conducts research in labor economics and offers evidence-based policy advice on labor market issues. Supported by the Deutsche Post Foundation, IZA runs the world’s largest network of economists, whose research aims to provide answers to the global labor market challenges of our time. Our key objective is to build bridges between academic research, policymakers and society. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. IZA – Institute of Labor Economics Schaumburg-Lippe-Straße 5–9 Phone: +49-228-3894-0 53113 Bonn, Germany Email: [email protected] www.iza.org IZA DP No. 11502 APRIL 2018 ABSTRACT Minimum Wages and the Gender Gap in Pay: New Evidence from the UK and Ireland Women are disproportionately in low paid work compared to men so, in the absence of rationing effects on their employment, they should benefit the most from minimum wage policies.
    [Show full text]
  • La Gran Marcha: Anti-Racism and Immigrants Rights in Southern California
    La Gran Marcha: Anti-Racism and Immigrants Rights in Southern California Jenna M. Loyd1 Department of Geography, Syracuse University 144 Eggers Hall, Syracuse, NY 13244-1020 USA Email: [email protected] Andrew Burridge Department of Geography, University of Southern California, 416 Kaprielian Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0255 USA Email: [email protected] Abstract Millions of people across the United States took to the streets in spring 2006 to protest repressive immigration legislation, demand just immigration reform, and seek justice in daily life. This article has two aims. First, we seek to intervene in the popular immigration debate, which denies racism and claims to be concerned only with law-and-order. Second, we analyze (im)migration politics in relation to national racial formations. That is, racialized immigration policies do not exist apart from a racially stratified citizenry. We rely on the concept of social death to trace state policies of immigration and criminalization as key sites of interracial and transnational struggles against racism and for justice and liberation. Thus, we seek to elucidate possibilities for anti-racist alliances and social change. We conclude with a discussion of the ways in which we see the immigrants rights movement connecting with other struggles for social justice, and the implications that 1 © Jenna M. Loyd and Andrew Burridge, 2007 La Gran Marcha: Anti-Racism and Immigrants Rights in Southern California 2 concepts of national racial formation and social death have for the movement against global apartheid. KEY WORDS: immigrants rights, racism, national racial formation, social death, criminalization, militarization, United States “Immigration politics also surfaced in California’s gubernatorial race … with Gov.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Overtime Regulations on Employment
    RONALD L. OAXACA University of Arizona, USA, CEPS/INSTEAD, Luxembourg, PRESAGE, France, and IZA, Germany The effect of overtime regulations on employment There is no evidence that being strict with overtime hours and pay boosts employment—it could even lower it Keywords: overtime, wages, labor demand, employment ELEVATOR PITCH A shorter standard workweek boosts incentives Regulation of standard workweek hours and overtime for multiple job holding and undermines work sharing hours and pay can protect workers who might otherwise be Standard workweek (hours) Percent moonlighting required to work more than they would like to at the going rate. By discouraging the use of overtime, such regulation 48 44 can increase the standard hourly wage of some workers 40 and encourage work sharing that increases employment, with particular advantages for female workers. However, regulation of overtime raises employment costs, setting in motion economic forces that can limit, neutralize, or even reduce employment. And increasing the coverage of 7.6 overtime pay regulations has little effect on the share of 4.8 4.3 workers who work overtime or on weekly overtime hours per worker. Source: Based on data in [1]. KEY FINDINGS Pros Cons Regulation of standard workweek hours and Curbing overtime reduces employment of both overtime hours and pay can protect workers who skilled and unskilled workers. might otherwise be required to work more than they Overtime workers tend to be more skilled, so would like to at the going rate. unemployed and other workers are not satisfactory Shortening the legal standard workweek can substitutes for overtime workers. potentially raise employment, especially among Shortening the legal standard workweek increases women.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Movements, Political Goals and the May 1 Marches: Communicating ∗ Protest in Polysemic Media Environments
    Social Movements, Political Goals and the May 1 Marches: Communicating ∗ Protest in Polysemic Media Environments Louisa Edgerly Department of Communication, University of Washington Amoshaun Toft Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, University of Washington Bothell Mary Lynn Veden Department of Communication, University of Arkansas Abstract This paper presents an analysis of patterns of representation of the May 1, 2006 “day without an immigrant” marches in three news genres by comparing their use of language to self- presentations by movement participants. We argue that the growing popularity of niche and opinion oriented news programming is leading to a bifurcation of news norms. Instead of a homogenous journalistic audience, movement participants who seek to “send a message” through mediated news venues are presented with a greater level of polysemic interpretations among journalists. We present three themes in our analysis of how activists and journalists discursively produced the May 1 actions through language use: economic impact, policy/rights , and law/order . We argue that journalists engaged with these themes differently in the three samples: the 297 daily newspaper front pages we analyzed portrayed a negotiated reading position, Lou Dobbs Tonight an oppositional reading position, and Democracy Now! a dominant reading position. We conclude by noting several implications for the study of political communication in the context of mass mediated political protest. Introduction It is well known that social movement actors face a paradox when it comes to media coverage; they must conform to the news values of conflict, novelty and personalization just to attract journalistic attention (Cook 1998; Gans 1979; Tuchman 1978), yet such tactical choices aimed at ∗ (2011) In press in the International Journal of Press/Politics .
    [Show full text]
  • BP Labour Rights & Modern Slavery Principles
    BP Labour Rights & Modern Slavery Principles © BP 2019 We are committed to respecting workers’ rights, in line with International Labour Organisation Core Conventions on Rights at Work and expect our contractors, suppliers and joint ventures we participate in to do the same. Our expectation is that workers in our operations, joint ventures and supply chains are not subject to abusive or inhumane practices, such as child labour, forced labour, trafficking, slavery or servitude, discrimination, or harassment. The below principles are intended to assist our businesses as they work to check performance on this expectation, including with our contractors and suppliers. 1. Terms: Workers have clear, written employment terms 8. Working time and rest: Workers are not required to before deployment in a language they understand, and in work unreasonable hours, hours beyond legal limits, or line with terms at point of recruitment, which are without appropriate breaks and defined leave periods. consistently upheld.1 9. Grievance: A grievance process is in place by which 2. Legal status: Workers are legally authorized to work for workers can make complaints, including anonymously, and their employer and possess the necessary visas, work receive appropriate responses and timely updates on the permits, and any similar legal documentary requirements. status of concerns. Concerns may be raised through any process (formal or informal) without fear of retaliation, 3. Protection of Young Persons: Workers below 15 or discrimination or harassment. the legal minimum working age (whichever is higher) are not hired, either directly or indirectly. 10. Working conditions and accommodation: Workers enjoy a safe and hygienic working environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Overtime and Compensatory Time Updated: June 2021 Federal and State Law
    Overtime and Compensatory Time Updated: June 2021 Federal and State Law • Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): Requires that employees are paid overtime for work in excess of forty (40) hours in a week. • California Labor Code§514: Requires that employees are paid overtime for work in excess of eight (8) hours in a day; while the City and County of San Francisco is not covered by this law because our employees are covered under collective bargaining agreements, we have negotiated that our employees receive this benefit. 2 MOU Overtime – 1x v. 1.5x • One-And-One-Half-Time (1.5x) Overtime (‘OTP’): Earned for hours worked in excess of 8 in a day or 40 hours in a week. • Straight-Time (1x) Overtime (‘OST’): Earned for hours worked outside an employee’s regular work schedule where an employee has not yet worked more than 8 hours in a day or 40 in a week under an MOU based on calculating overtime on hours worked (not hours paid). 3 MOU Overtime – 1x v. 1.5x Example 1: Employee works their regular work schedule from 8:00am to 5:00pm with one hour unpaid lunch and then works four additional hours of overtime. All four hours are earned at the 1.5x overtime rate. Example 2: Same employee takes off two hours of paid sick leave at the beginning of their regular work schedule and then works the remaining six hours of their regular shift. The employee then works four additional hours of overtime of which two are at the 1x rate and two are at the 1.5x overtime rate.
    [Show full text]
  • Ningún Ser Humano Es Ilegal!
    No Human Is Illegal: ¡Ningún Ser Humano es Ilegal! immigrantsolidarity.org An Educator’s Guide for Addressing Immigration in the Classroom New York Collective of Radical Educators http://www.nycore.org April 2006 New York Collective of Radical Educators (NYCoRE) NYCoRE is a group of public school educators committed to fighting for social justice in our school system and society at large, by organizing and mobilizing teachers, developing curriculum, and working with community, parent, and student organizations. We are educators who believe that education is an integral part of social change and that we must work both inside and outside the classroom because the struggle for justice does not end when the school bell rings. http://www.nycore.org [email protected] To join the NYCoRE listserv, send email to [email protected] Table of Contents 1. How To Use This Guide……………………………………………………...…….…P. 2 2. NYCoRE’s Recommendations and Statement in English and Spanish..…… P. 3 3. Participate with NYCoRE in the May 1st Great American Boycott……..….…..P. 4 4. Encourage and Protect Students who Organize and Participate…… ………P. 5 a. Recent Press about Student Walkouts………………………….…………….P. 5 b. Know Your Students’ Rights……………………………………………………P. 6 5. Connect your Activism to Your Academics……………………………….………P. 7 a. The Proposed Legislation HR 4437……………………………………………P. 7 b. Organizing Responses…………………………………………………………..P. 8 c. Curricular Materials and Resources……………………………………………P. 10 6. New York City Resources……………………………..………………………………P. 11 How To Use This Guide This guide is most useful when used online, as opposed to a paper copy. Most of the resources in this guide are web- based links, so if viewed online, just click on the links.
    [Show full text]