July 02, 2020
By Adam Beam and Kathleen Ronayne
Associated Press
California took a big step back in reopening its economy on Wednesday as Gov. Gavin Newsom shut down bars, wineries, museums, movie theaters and inside restaurant dining across most of the state for three weeks amid troubling increases in coronavirus cases and hospitalizations.
The order affects Los Angeles and 18 other counties where nearly three-quarters of the state’s roughly 40 million people live. The impacted counties are those seeing the most serious uptick in infections, and include almost all of Southern California, though not San Diego, which is faring better.
“The bottom line is the spread of this virus continues at a rate that is particularly concerning,” Newsom said.
To encourage greater adherence to health rules, Newsom also said the state is creating “strike teams” of state regulators to more aggressively go after non-compliant businesses.
He also is limiting beach access and imposed statewide changes for religious services — no more singing or chanting — and at gyms, where people now must wear masks while working out.
For the two weeks ended Monday, California’s confirmed coronavirus cases increased 45% to nearly a quarter-million and hospitalizations increased 52% to 5,077. About 500 more patients were sick enough for intensive care treatment, bringing the state total to 1,528 in ICUs.
The state’s worst outbreak is in Imperial County, an agricultural center along the border with Mexico. Infection rates are 20% -- more than double the state average -- and hospitals are overwhelmed.
Last week the state took the unprecedented step of ordering Imperial officials to come up with a new health order and on Wednesday the most restrictive plan in California was approved -- it bars nonessential gatherings of any size, shopping in stores and indoor religious ceremonies.
Other states, including Texas and Florida, have also paused their reopenings after seeing similar spikes in coronavirus cases. In Arizona, Gov. Doug Ducey has ordered bars, gyms and movie theaters to close for 30 days and banned large gatherings.
California authorities have said many things contributed to the increase in the state, including people not following the mandate to wear masks and gathering socially with friends and relatives.
Jot Condi, who heads the California Restaurant Association, said the order is devastating for restaurants that have worked to put in place safety measures and reduced seating to meet the state’s requirements for inside dining. The changes have left many with no room to spare on revenue.
“This will be the last straw for a lot of restaurants,” Condi said, adding the state hasn’t provided evidence to specifically show dining in restaurants is helping fuel the increase in virus cases.
Newsom imposed the nation’s first statewide stay-at-home order in March, earning praise from public health officials as virus cases were kept relatively low in the nation’s most populous state for more than two months. But the order devastated the economy, forcing most businesses to close and prompting more than 6.7 million people to file for unemployment benefits.
As the spread of the virus slowed in May, Newsom moved quickly to begin allowing businesses to reopen across the state. Bars got the green light on June 12 and quickly images emerged showing throngs packed tightly together, many not wearing masks as required by the state.
Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, an epidemiology professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the new restrictions could be an “over response.” He said the state should consider other strategies designed to keep young people away from older people, who are more at risk for the virus.
“It appears we’re playing a game of whack-a-mole. Every time there is an increase in cases we have to take a step backwards,” he said.
However, Klausner said when restrictions are imposed they “can tell people (that) health officials are very serious and therefore people are more likely to adopt personal behavior change.”
Dr. Mark Ghaly, secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency, said the new order is targeted at places where people can’t wear face coverings the whole time, like restaurants where they are removed to eat and drink, or where people are likely to mix with others outside their household.
Businesses not on the list, like hair salons, are able to “do things in a lower-risk way,” he said.
For most people, the coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks. For some, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, it can cause more severe illness, including pneumonia and death.
Ghaly defended the state’s process for reopening, saying officials carefully developed guidance that businesses should follow. But he noted the state has seen a “sufficient number” of places not following the guidance.
“We have always prepared for something like this, we have always been ready,” he said.
At Crepeville in Sacramento, owner Derar Zawaydeh cussed when informed of the new mandate for restaurants. He has a few tables outside but most are inside and will be lost.
“It definitely presents a challenge,” he said. “But on the flip side if that is what we need to do to ... reduce the risk of infection, then we really don’t have much of a choice,.”
Ahead of the busy Fourth of July weekend, Newsom also closed state beaches in Los Angeles and Ventura counties to mirror local public health orders. Other state beaches will stay open, but parking lots will close this weekend to limit overcrowding in Marin, Monterey, Orange, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz and Sonoma counties.
For people planning gatherings of family and friends this weekend, Newsom urged them to reconsider. In Los Angeles County, Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer says many outbreaks in the past three weeks are linked to parties and gatherings of family and friends, adding “there are very real risks to celebrating this holiday with people who are not in our households.”
Newsom’s order applies to 19 counties that have been on the state’s watch list for increasing coronavirus cases for at least three consecutive days: Besides, Los Angeles, they include: Contra Costa, Fresno, Glenn, Imperial, Kern, Kings, Merced, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Joaquin, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Solano, Stanislaus, Tulare and Ventura.
July 02, 2020
By Quinci LeGardye
California Black Media
On June 24, a coalition consisting of the California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the City Attorneys of Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco announced plans to file a preliminary injunction motion to require Uber and Lyft to immediately stop misclassifying their drivers as independent contractors.
The injunction motion follows the coalition’s lawsuit against Uber and Lyft, which alleges “that Uber’s and Lyft’s misclassification of drivers deprives workers of critical workplace protections such as the right to minimum wage and overtime, and access to paid sick leave, disability insurance, and unemployment insurance,” according to a June 24 press release from the Attorney General’s office.
With this bold move in their legal battle against the two biggest ride-hailing companies, the Attorney General and city attorneys argue that immediate action needs to be taken, and that the companies’ misclassification harms the public by depriving the state of tax revenue and depriving their drivers of employment protections.
“Misclassifying your workers as ‘consultants’ or ‘independent contractors’ simply means you want your workers or taxpayers to foot the bill for obligations you have as an employer — whether it’s paying a legal wage or overtime, providing sick leave, or providing unemployment insurance. That’s not the way to do business in California,” said Attorney General Becerra.
“Now more than ever drivers need these benefits,” said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera. “Despite a campaign of misinformation, nothing prevents Uber and Lyft from properly classifying drivers and giving them flexibility.”
The motion is the Attorney General's latest step towards enforcing AB 5, California’s worker misclassification law. Uber and Lyft have spoken against the law since it was passed September 2019, claiming that their business would be adversely affected.
In a press statement, an Uber spokesman argued that the company’s drivers value their independence. “When over 3 million Californians are without a job, our elected leaders should be focused on creating work, not trying to shut down an entire industry,” the statement read.
According to Lyft’s statement, the company believes “the courts should let the voters decide. Trying to force drivers to give up their independence 100 days before the election threatens to put a million more people out of work at the worst possible time.”
Uber and Lyft have funded a campaign for a ballot measure in the November election, which would override AB 5 to classify ride-hail drivers as independent contractors and enact labor and wage policies, healthcare subsidies and occupational accident insurance for ride-hail drivers.
June 18, 2020
By Quinci LeGardye
California Black Media
The Black Small Business Association of California (BSBA) sent a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom June 12. In it, the group criticized the state’s proposed allocation of $20 million in the 2020-21 budget to enforce AB 5.
When the controversial labor law took effect in January, AB 5 reclassified millions of workers in California from independent contractors to W-2 employees.
The letter, signed by the organization’s president Salena Pryor, argues that the state’s costly plan to enforce AB 5 would only exacerbate income inequality.
“BSBA believes that at this time, when California is facing a massive $54 billion deficit and the state’s unemployment rate is 24 percent, it would be fiscally imprudent to spend $20 million on enforcement of a policy that has been detrimental to the livelihoods of Black small business owners,” the letter reads.
The fight to amend or, for some, to overturn AB 5 has continued amid the COVID-19 pandemic and, now, the George Floyd protests. In the wake of worldwide efforts to call out systemic racism, Black business organizations are speaking out against the restrictions that AB 5 has placed on African American entrepreneurs in California.
Many California Democrats, including the bill’s author Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), say they are open to making adjustments in the law as long as its core purpose, fighting against gig worker misclassification, is kept. Republican opponents, on the other hand, have called for suspending AB 5 altogether so independent contractors can work freely during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Gov. Newsom has not discussed whether or not he is in favor of making updates to AB 5 since he declared his support for it at a press conference in April.
The California Black Chamber of Commerce (CBCC) and the Los Angeles Urban League both released statements June 9 criticizing the law. They point out that a disproportionate number of Black independent contractors and businesses have been negatively impacted by AB 5.
The statement signed by Michael Lawson, President of the Los Angeles Urban League, read, “AB 5, the legislation introduced by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez focuses solely on the employee side of the equation and ignored the impact that this legislation has on Black-owned businesses that have suffered through a history of redlining that allowed banks and other financial institutions to legally discriminate against Black-owned businesses, preventing them from gaining access to capital and credit.”
Though there has been no official study of the impacts of AB 5 on Black owned business, the Center for Responsible Lending found that 95% of businesses owned by African Americans and other people of color were unlikely to receive aid from the Paycheck Protection Program because of a lack of commercial banking relationships. That effort was a part of the federal government’s emergency response to the Coronavirus crisis.
Both organizations’ statements also criticized a recent tweet by Gonzalez defending AB 5. Gonzales wrote, “Can you imagine if folks were arrested for wage theft? Or if police just shot them like they were looters?”
“How dare you use the shooting of civilians by police as a political weapon to defend your misguided and disastrous law that has robbed thousands of Californians of their right to earn a living with dignity, respect, and independence,” the CBCC press release fired back. It was signed by Edwin Lombard, who is listed on the letterhead as president and CEO.
The CBCC is currently in a legal dispute over leadership with two factions vying in court to take the helm of the organization.
On June 11, the California State Assembly voted unanimously to amend AB 5 based on months of negotiations between Gonzalez and different advocacy groups. The bill’s two amendments loosen restrictions for independent contractors in multiple industries, including writers, photographers, musicians, translators and interpreters.
During the June 11 floor hearing, Assemblymember Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) spoke in favor of the amending the bill by reading from the CBCC’s letter, stating plainly the effects of AB 5 on Black businesses.
Kiley, a staunch opponent of AB 5, has said he would like to see the law overturned.
“AB5 has already crushed thousands of Black businesses and will keep more form operating in the gig economy,” Kiley read, restating the position of Black business owners. “Nearly a million Californians would lose jobs, opportunities, and independence if the future of AB5 were up to you.
“We are not asking for your help or misguided protection. Just open the door and let us help ourselves,” the CBCC letter read.
This note clarifies that our recent article, titled “Black Business Group Takes AB 5 Independent Contractor Fight to Gov. Newsom,” Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego) was referring to her bill AB 3075 and not AB 5 in a message she tweeted June 6. AB 3075 proposes protections that would prevent employers from setting up new corporations to avoid paying wages they owe previous employees.
May 28, 2020
By Charlene Crowell
Contributing Writer
As the nation’s Center for Disease Control (CDC) tracks the spread of COVID-19, by mid-May, at least 1.6 million infections and over 92,000 deaths occurred. This data includes all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the territories of Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S Virgin Islands.
At the same time, the Bureau of Labor’s most recent unemployment data for the month of April showed that over 36 million people have filed for unemployment and affected all major employment groups. One bit of data also showed that Black America’s unemployment rate of 16.7% was surpassed by that of Latinos at 18.9%. Similar data for others showed that of Asian-Americans to be 14.5% and whites at 14.2%.
Further and according to a survey published on May 14 by the Federal Reserve Board on the COVID-19 pandemic, as of early April:
• Among adults who lost a job or had their hours reduced, 70 percent reported that their income declined;
• More than 9 in 10 who lost a job or were told not to work expect to return to the same job; and
• Sixty-seven percent of workers who never attended college and 60 percent who completed some college or an associate degree worked entirely outside of their homes.
In sum, the economic effects of a raging pandemic are affecting people of all races, backgrounds, and educational levels. And an unfortunate pattern continues: families hardest hit by the Great Recession are again disproportionately affected.
Speaking on behalf of the 12-million strong American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations, more commonly known as the AFL-CIO, Richard L. Trumka , its President sent a May 15 letter to Congress that spoke to the real-life concerns of working people.
“Don’t tell us we should wait a little longer for the unemployment benefits we earned or the health insurance we deserve,” wrote, the AFL-CIO’s Trumka. “We have waited long enough.”
“Don’t tell us we should sacrifice our pensions,” he continued.” Don’t tell us states should go bankrupt or that federal relief is a blue state bailout. We are all vulnerable, and this nation deserves better.”
Later that day, a new $3 trillion legislative initiative known as the HEROES Act, passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, May 15 on a 208-199 vote, and awaits review and action by the U.S. Senate.
But how swiftly will the upper chamber move on the new COVID-19 plan? And how many Senate amendments will strike at key provisions passed by the House?
Introduced on May 12 by New York Congresswoman Nita Lowey, the HEROES Act had 11 co-sponsors representing the additional states of Arizona, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia and provides a broad assortment of new and renewed assistance targeted to essential workers, first responders, minority-owned and other small businesses, students, the homeless and others.
For example, housing concerns for renters, homeowners and the homeless in the HEROES Act would extend the CARES Act’s previous moratorium on evictions and foreclosures. But it would also provide new housing assistance with $100 billion in emergency rental assistance, $75 billion for homeowner assistance, $11.5 billion in homeless grants and expand Section 8 vouchers with a $1 billion revenue infusion. The bill also includes $500 million for Section 202 Housing for the Elderly, $100 million for housing counseling, and $14 million for fair housing activities.
Similarly, debt collections against either minority-owned and other small businesses or consumers would be suspended during the pandemic. Consumers would not be subjected to negative credit reporting and debt collection, while the Federal Reserve would be required to make low-cost, deferrable loans to small businesses, nonprofits, and public universities. Nonprofits serving low-income communities could be eligible for these loans to be forgiven.
Before the early evening House vote, multiple stakeholder groups spoke out in support of the bill.
“The HEROES Act focuses on real people because consumers drive our economy and we can’t just leave American families to trickle-down help from businesses,” said Lauren Saunders, associate director of the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC).
For Abby Shafroth, an NCLC attorney, criminal justice issues were a particularly key part of the legislation.
“The last thing that we need right now is to have people in unsafe prisons and jails for the crime of being poor,” said Shafroth. “By prohibiting the government from incarcerating people for nonpayment of debts, restricting the use of money bail to detain poor people who have not been convicted of a crime, and incentivizing state and local governments to suspend imposition and collection of fines and fees during the crisis, the HEROES Act protects people from being imprisoned or trapped in the broken criminal justice system merely because they are unable to afford a debt or a fine.”
Before House voting began and speaking on the chamber’s floor, Chairwoman Maxine Waters of the House Financial Services Committee summarized the feelings of many citizens and lawmakers alike.
“We hear Members on both sides of the aisle talking about how much they love America, how much they love their constituents, said Waters. “Put up or shut up. Now is the time to do it.”
That advice needs to be heard in the Senate, where the bill’s outcome is unclear. Although the House inserted provisions to address wide-ranging concerns, there is no guarantee that the Senate will act promptly or as generously.
Even so, the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL) remains hopeful that the act will not only be preserved; but strengthened.
“The HEROES Act shows strong promise and addresses important needs of low-wealth families impacted by COVID-19, such as mortgage and forbearance relief, extended unemployment benefits, food assistance, and protections against harmful debt collection activities and negative credit reporting”, said Ashley Harrington, CRL’s Federal Advocacy Director and Senior Counsel.
“However as amended, the bill curtails its original, inclusive plan to cancel $10,000 of debt for all federal and private student loan borrowers,” added Harrington. “These cancellation provisions are unmanageable and inequitable – they won’t help many of the student loan borrowers due to its structural flaws that exclude millions from getting relief.”
Harrington also noted how the HEROES Act fails to include “important safeguards against high-cost lending and abusive overdraft fees” during the crisis.
“The Senate should act swiftly to include these additional consumer protections and ensure that all those with student debt are able to benefit from debt cancellation,” concluded Harrington.
Charlene Crowell is a senior fellow with the Center for Responsible Lending. She can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .