SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
workers
US Banana Giant Chiquita Fires Thousands of Striking Workers in Panama
The Chiquita workers' strike is part of a nationwide protest movement against pension reforms approved by Panama's right-wing government.
May 23, 2025
The U.S.-headquartered banana giant Chiquita said Thursday that it moved to fire thousands of Panamanian workers who walked off the job last month as part of nationwide protests against the right-wing government's unpopular reforms to the nation's pension system.
Citing an unnamed source close to Chiquita, Reutersreported that the mass firings are expected to impact around 5,000 of the company's 6,500 Panamanian workers. José Raúl Mulino, Panama's right-wing president, defended the banana giant formerly known as United Fruit, accusing striking workers of unlawful "intransigence."
The company estimates that the strike, which began in late April, has cost it at least $75 million.
The pension reforms, known as Law 462, sparked outrage across Panama, with unions and other groups warning the changes would result in cuts to retirement benefits, particularly in the future for younger workers. The law transitions the country's pension system to an individual account structure that opponents say will be far less reliable than its predecessor.
"With the previous legislation, we could retire on 60% to 70% of our salary. Now, with the new formula, that amount drops to just 30% to 35%," said Diógenes Sánchez of Panama's main teachers' union. "It's a starvation pension."
The Associated Pressnoted Thursday that in recent weeks, "marches and occasional roadblocks have stretched from one end of the country to the other as teachers, construction workers, and other unions expressed their rejection of changes the government said were necessary to keep the social security system solvent."
Keep ReadingShow Less
A National Single-Payer Healthcare System Would Be Good for Employers, Too
Job-based insurance poses health-related and financial burdens on company employers and employees. These burdens would disappear with universal healthcare.
May 17, 2025
The National Day of Action is set for May 31, 2025, as a call to action in communities across the United States. The goal is to unite people locally and nationally to eliminate profit-based healthcare. This nonviolent campaign is a collective effort that aims to put National Single Payer on the national agenda. Everyone has a basic human right to healthcare.
This opinion piece shares research findings to advocate for a single-payer healthcare system. Among wealthy countries, the U.S. has by far the most expensive healthcare system, and yet the only one without universal coverage. It is fundamentally broken. The system is inequitable due to differences in insurance availability based on work status, income, and other factors. Individuals of different backgrounds don’t have the same level of access to quality healthcare services. Excess administrative costs for insurers and providers add to an estimate of $504 billion out of $1.1 trillion. The time that it takes providers to complete billing tasks can compromise patient-provider relationships and care delivery.
Employer-sponsored insurance plans are the mainstay of U.S. health insurance. More than 156 million Americans (workers and their families) are covered by job-based insurance. The plans can incur high costs for employees and their families. It also places a burden on employers, including premium payments, time spent managing insurance, and potential compromises to hiring and worker productivity. One study estimated annual transactions costs to companies of $21.6 billion. Time spent by employees dealing with insurance issues may constitute the “sludge” that reduces productivity.
“All my employees are friends of mine. It really pains me to see them not go to the doctor, especially for specialists.”
Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley and the University of California, San Francisco studied the consequences of the U.S. system of health insurance on employers. We conducted seven company case studies, with companies in various industries and of varying sizes. Companies were qualitatively and quantitatively explored for the burdens imposed on employers by providing health insurance to their workers and dependents. We interviewed company owners and managers. Below are summaries of the findings:
- All of the companies care about employee health and financial well-being. They strive to provide reliable health insurance, though employees often have other options (spousal coverage or Medicaid).
- Strategies vary widely in terms of types of coverage. Most companies reported substantial management time overseeing the insurance process. Several companies have utilized brokers or consultants for assistance.
- The two largest companies (both in the manufacturing industry) incurred unique costs related to being self-insured.
- Premium and other financial costs represented 4% to 27% of labor costs. The management cost component is up to 50% of the premium cost. Employee productivity lost to insurance activities was not significant. While there hasn’t been a significant impact on business operations, such as strategies to increase production to meet demand surges, it does affect hiring and can lead to significant costs.
Below are direct quotes from some of those interviews:
“Where [health insurance] really has an impact is who we can hire. The people who would want to work for us would want insurance and so that was always a big barrier to getting talent.”—Owner, Custom Gifts and Products company
“The cost of health insurance has limited, I mean that there’s a certain limit to my profit margin and particularly with other factors such as supply chain issues... I’m getting squeezed on a lot of different fronts, and if my health insurance didn’t go up 10% every year, I could pay people 10% more every year... They don’t want to give up their health insurance, but I think they know that it’s suppressing the wages that we can pay.”—Owner, Print and Design company
“All my employees are friends of mine. It really pains me to see them not go to the doctor, especially for specialists... And our specialist cost is very high... And for some of our employees, especially the warehouse employees, they’re not super high compensation.”—Owner, Aviation Distribution company
To conclude, job-based insurance poses health-related and financial burdens on company employers and employees. These burdens would disappear with the implementation of a national single-payer healthcare system.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We're at the End of Our Rope': Union NJ Transit Workers Go on Strike
"They have money for penthouse views and pet projects, just not for their frontline workers. Enough is enough," said the national president of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen.
May 16, 2025
Hundreds of engineers and trainees who work for New Jersey's public transportation system went on strike early Friday, according to the union that represents the NJ Transit workers, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen.
The strike, the first by NJ Transit workers since 1983, comes as contract negotiations have dragged out for over five years, according to the New Jersey Monitor. Wages are the key sticking point between the unionized workers and NJ Transit, which is state-owned.
The strike is poised to disrupt the commutes of some 100,000 daily rail riders, many of whom are traveling to and from Manhattan.
Thomas Haas, general chairman for the NJ Transit engineers union, said on Wednesday night before the NJ Transit board that "we, the locomotive engineers of NJ Transit are asking only for a fair and competitive wage," according to CNN.
"The last thing we want to see is that [service] to be interrupted. But we're at the end of our rope," Haas said.
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) officials reached a tentative deal with NJ Transit in March, but the union's some 450 rank-and-file workers voted down the agreement, saying that it didn't include a large enough pay increase, according to Gothamist. The rejected deal teed up Friday's strike.
The rejected deal from November would have raised wages, but the union has said its members are seeking wage parity with those who work for nearby commuter rails, like the Long Island Rail Road.
"NJ Transit has a half-billion dollars for a swanky new headquarters and $53 million for decorating the interior of that unnecessary building. They gave away $20 million in revenue during a fare holiday last year," said BLET national president Mark Wallace in a statement on Thursday. "They have money for penthouse views and pet projects, just not for their frontline workers. Enough is enough. We will stay out until our members receive the fair pay that they deserve."
The union announced that picket locations have been set up, including at New York City's Penn Station.
"I have always said that any deal we reach would have to be fair to our engineers and fiscally responsible without burdening our riders or the taxpayers of New Jersey," said NJ Transit president and CEO Kris Kolluri on Thursday.
"This strike will upend the lives of hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans," said Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy. "The path to a new contract will be paved at the negotiating table, not the picket line."
Railroads are subject to the Railway Labor Act, which means that even if members of a union reject a deal, the federal government can force both sides to accept a deal and order workers back to work. This happened in 2022, when then-President Joe Biden signed legislation averting a rail strike and forcing freight rail workers to accept a deal that multiple unions had rejected.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular