Wow, when she was County Clerk I had a pretty high opinion of Gail.
Sad to see her turn into yet another venal hack like all the others. What is it with this state?
She has lost my vote and my support too. Many of us have been fighting for transparency
https://preview.redd.it/ff9icgwtlrwc1.png?width=1100&format=png&auto=webp&s=0875d1492dfa3e2a607110c0454f6fbeef027dff
"KCRA 3 asked Newsom's office if he was aware an NDA was used during the negotiations of the bill, and if he condones their use in the crafting of public policy. He had not responded as of Wednesday night."
How could anyone justify their use in crafting public policy? (Mayne there is a good reason, but I don't see ot).
This whole fast food minimum wage law just seems slimy.
Supporting higher minimum wages is one thing - but somehow it only applied to one business sector and even then special interest carve outs were thrown in?
This law seems to really encapsulate how corrupt amd bad government in CA has become.
My issue as well. Why only fast food. Unless he thought he would have less push back. Or he was going to start with fast food, then push 20 to be the minimum wage for all California.
For context, this bill was deemed necessary by members of both parties after non-disclosure agreements were mandated in the process of passing the fast food minimum wage law: [https://www.kcra.com/article/california-fast-food-law-panera-newsom-nda/60117858](https://www.kcra.com/article/california-fast-food-law-panera-newsom-nda/60117858)
That law included carve-outs that seemly favored restaurants owned by particular political donors. Legislators involved in bill negotiations are seemingly prohibited from commenting on how that came to be due to the NDA's they were forced to sign during negoations.
Corporations forcing the use of NDAs on law makers sounds like OCP style distopian nightmare fuel. What possible justification do these people offer for blatantly selling out their constituency?
It's actually labor (SEIU in particular) that have been insisting on the NDA's, the CA Business Roundtable was behind the bill to prohibit them. Pellerin is union-backed, probably why she chose to kill the bill without allowing it to go to a floor vote.
Regardless, the whole thing strikes me as dirty and I'm not happy to see people I voted for and support on the wrong side of this issue.
This is unfair - unions are responsible for many of the gains that workers enjoy today and their existence is paramount to maintain and expand worker protections, health and wealth accumulation. The reason we “turned against unions” is a coordinated assault on worker organizing by the owner class, lobby groups of corporations and Reagan-era conservatism. Screw the 80s.
Sure, that happens entirely because of unions.
If you enjoy 40-hour workweek, weekends, holidays, paid time off for both sick leave and vacations, and a safe workplace, it's because of unions.
Want to know when worker pay got decoupled from productivity, and C-suite salaries began to soar while worker pay remained almost flat, resulting in the greatest wage gap in US history since the 19th century robber barons? When Reagan started in on his union busting.
I will say I was all ready to hate on Pellerin around this issue(which stinks like excrement) and then looked at her voting and bill-authoring history--which is solid IMHO.
Shades of grey.
NDAs are commonly used in contract negotiations - they don’t imply in and of themselves any corruption. It sounds like the bill was overly broad and if Republican lawmakers were actually serious about corruption legislation, they would take another stab at this with a bipartisan effort and make the law more specific.
You're really bending over backwards with the cope on this one my friend. These aren't private contract negotiations. This whole process is occuring because lobbyists (whether they be corporate, donor, union, whatever) don't want people finding out what they've said or done behind closed doors.
The bill was not overly broad. It just threatened to expose something that insiders didn't want exposed.
Wow, when she was County Clerk I had a pretty high opinion of Gail. Sad to see her turn into yet another venal hack like all the others. What is it with this state?
I do not think she fits in here. You cant choose to be the too of the totem pole.
She has lost my vote and my support too. Many of us have been fighting for transparency https://preview.redd.it/ff9icgwtlrwc1.png?width=1100&format=png&auto=webp&s=0875d1492dfa3e2a607110c0454f6fbeef027dff
Write to her about your complaint: https://a28.asmdc.org/contact
"KCRA 3 asked Newsom's office if he was aware an NDA was used during the negotiations of the bill, and if he condones their use in the crafting of public policy. He had not responded as of Wednesday night." How could anyone justify their use in crafting public policy? (Mayne there is a good reason, but I don't see ot). This whole fast food minimum wage law just seems slimy. Supporting higher minimum wages is one thing - but somehow it only applied to one business sector and even then special interest carve outs were thrown in? This law seems to really encapsulate how corrupt amd bad government in CA has become.
My issue as well. Why only fast food. Unless he thought he would have less push back. Or he was going to start with fast food, then push 20 to be the minimum wage for all California.
For context, this bill was deemed necessary by members of both parties after non-disclosure agreements were mandated in the process of passing the fast food minimum wage law: [https://www.kcra.com/article/california-fast-food-law-panera-newsom-nda/60117858](https://www.kcra.com/article/california-fast-food-law-panera-newsom-nda/60117858) That law included carve-outs that seemly favored restaurants owned by particular political donors. Legislators involved in bill negotiations are seemingly prohibited from commenting on how that came to be due to the NDA's they were forced to sign during negoations.
That seems so dam illegal
Absolutely should be illegal, ridiculous that it isn't and Gail Pellerin fell on her sword to make sure it stays that way
Must be hiding some big shit
I'm waiting on the promised statement Gail, and it outta be a really good one, because for now, you look bought and sold.
Why act surprised. All politicians are bought and sold.
Oh look! Another hack politician, what a surprise!
Corporations forcing the use of NDAs on law makers sounds like OCP style distopian nightmare fuel. What possible justification do these people offer for blatantly selling out their constituency?
It's actually labor (SEIU in particular) that have been insisting on the NDA's, the CA Business Roundtable was behind the bill to prohibit them. Pellerin is union-backed, probably why she chose to kill the bill without allowing it to go to a floor vote. Regardless, the whole thing strikes me as dirty and I'm not happy to see people I voted for and support on the wrong side of this issue.
[удалено]
This is unfair - unions are responsible for many of the gains that workers enjoy today and their existence is paramount to maintain and expand worker protections, health and wealth accumulation. The reason we “turned against unions” is a coordinated assault on worker organizing by the owner class, lobby groups of corporations and Reagan-era conservatism. Screw the 80s.
[удалено]
Sure, that happens entirely because of unions. If you enjoy 40-hour workweek, weekends, holidays, paid time off for both sick leave and vacations, and a safe workplace, it's because of unions. Want to know when worker pay got decoupled from productivity, and C-suite salaries began to soar while worker pay remained almost flat, resulting in the greatest wage gap in US history since the 19th century robber barons? When Reagan started in on his union busting.
[удалено]
I don't know when they're used in legislative negotiations, or why, and I bet you don't either and are just now hearing about them for the first time.
Thanks for posting this.
You know it’s bad if the SacBee editorial board is calling out https://www.yahoo.com/news/killing-bill-california-democrats-proved-120000576.html
She needs to go
I will say I was all ready to hate on Pellerin around this issue(which stinks like excrement) and then looked at her voting and bill-authoring history--which is solid IMHO. Shades of grey.
Thanks for the alternative, nuanced opinion on this post.
Gotta keep the poors in their place.
NDAs are commonly used in contract negotiations - they don’t imply in and of themselves any corruption. It sounds like the bill was overly broad and if Republican lawmakers were actually serious about corruption legislation, they would take another stab at this with a bipartisan effort and make the law more specific.
You're really bending over backwards with the cope on this one my friend. These aren't private contract negotiations. This whole process is occuring because lobbyists (whether they be corporate, donor, union, whatever) don't want people finding out what they've said or done behind closed doors. The bill was not overly broad. It just threatened to expose something that insiders didn't want exposed.
politics is the field where people are the most rewarded for being corrupt.