Connect with us

Business

Column: Right-wing hatemongers count on the cowardice of companies such as Target

Published

on

Column: Right-wing hatemongers count on the cowardice of companies such as Target

If there’s a company in America you’d expect to have the gumption and spirit to see off a stupid and specious attack on the selling of LGBTQ+-themed merchandise for Pride Month in June, it would be Target.

After all, the Minneapolis-based company is one of America’s biggest retailers, racking up more than $100 billion a year in sales. Only two weeks ago, its chief executive, Brian Cornell, was boasting that “our long-standing commitment to diversity, and equity, and inclusion … has fueled much of our growth over the last nine years.”

Yet when the braying mob of anti-LGBTQ+ reactionaries targeted Target, the company folded like a cheap off-the-rack suit. It told personnel in many stores to shrink or even eliminate their Pride-themed merchandise displays or move them to less conspicuous sections of the stores. Some LGBTQ+ designers say their products have been taken off the shelves.

Target explained its reaction by citing physical threats to its store workers from anti-LGBTQ+ militants. But something more is going on here, and Target’s response doesn’t show the company in a good light.

Advertisement

The context is a concerted effort from the right wing to demonize the LGBTQ+ movement and thereby make any outreach or even acknowledgement of this community toxic for consumer businesses. The goal is to disappear these people and their advocates, reversing a decades-long trend toward acceptance, equity and inclusion.

“Our long-standing commitment to diversity, and equity, and inclusion…has fueled much of our growth over the last nine years.”

— Target CEO Brian Cornell, just before the company downplayed its merchandising of Pride-themed goods

The attacks take many forms, all of them chiefly employed by Republicans and their right-wing acolytes and all of them equally factitious.

Sometimes LGBTQ+ people are accused of being pedophiles who “groom” children for abuse. Sometimes the anti-queer movement is cast as an arm of the right’s attack on “wokeness,” which is just another way of promoting the idea that only straight white males count in this U.S. of A.

Advertisement

Anti-”wokeness” is the chief theme of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ presidential ambition tour. As is well known, DeSantis has been on the warpath with Walt Disney Co., one of his state’s leading employers and economic engines, over the company’s public criticism of his so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law, which suppresses classroom references to gender identity.

(During his glitch-beleaguered May 24 presidential campaign launch on Twitter, DeSantis ludicrously accused Disney of “trying to inject matters of sex into the programming for the youth.”)

There’s no evidence that anti-queer militants comprise anything but a tiny minority of the American public. When they act in concert and their efforts are fueled by social media, however, they can appear to be weightier than they are.

That’s probably what accounted for the pusillanimous reaction of Anheuser-Busch to a right-wing, social-media driven campaign against its Bud Light beer, after the company’s marketing department launched a publicity campaign with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney.

Anheuser-Busch not only issued a wan statement of regret for the marketing outreach, but sidelined the two marketing executives responsible for the campaign. Given that their assignment had been to revive the brand’s fading popularity, Anheuser-Busch’s effective demotion of the executives signaled to the boycotters that their voices had been heard. That wasn’t a positive corporate message, to say the least.

Advertisement

Anheuser-Busch stock has fallen by about 20% in the last two months, while the boycott has been in full cry. Target shares have fallen by about the same percentage since mid-May.

To some extent, it’s unfair to blame the far-right for launching boycotts against brands they choose not to like. I’ve defended consumer boycotts in the past, in principle. But all boycotts are not created equal.

There’s a qualitative difference between those directed at noxious behavior, such as the open racism of Tucker Carlson or the bloodlust of the National Rifle Assn., and those directed at efforts to promote tolerance and equality. One knows boycotters by their boycottees.

That brings us back to the companies’ hasty responses. These have been widely misjudged. Alex Shepherd of the New Republic cursed “total, preemptive capitulation” by Anheuser-Bush and Target to the anti-LGBTQ+ boycotts as “profoundly un-American.”

If only they were. Corporate America’s response to even a hint of controversy, no matter how specious the boycotters’ objections, is as American as apple pie. As we’ve seen time and time again, consumer companies are notable not for their steadfastness in defending the public interest, but their cravenness. That’s especially so when, as is the case with the Bud Light and Target campaigns, the context is overtly partisan.

Advertisement

Remember all the companies that pledged to cease or at least suspend campaign contributions to the 147 Republican representatives and senators who voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election? Many, if not most, have gone back on their promise.

Among them, according to ProPublica, are Home Depot, which by the end of 2022 had donated to 65 of the election deniers, and Boeing, which funded at least 74. Toyota, to give it begrudging credit, was at least candid about the thought process involved in resuming contributions to supporters of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection: It selected politicians that could carry its water in Washington.

“Toyota supports candidates based on their position on issues that are important to the auto industry and the company,” the company told me in June 2021. “We do not believe it is appropriate to judge members of Congress solely based on their votes on the electoral certification.” To put it another way, “money talks, democratic principle walks.”

Many corporations will say for the record that they believe in women’s healthcare rights. But when a horrifically punitive anti-abortion law went into effect in Texas in 2021, the silence from the corporate community was deafening. It still is; not a peep of protest has come from Texas-based big businesses such as American Airlines, Texas Instruments, Dell and Hewlett Packard Enterprise — even though the law is certain to make recruiting women for important jobs harder for them.

One problem in assessing the campaigns against Bud Light and Target is a lack of clarity about their results. It’s hard to be sure whether Bud Light’s continuing sales slump is due to the anti-woke publicity or to the fact that, not to be indelicate, the product tastes like it’s been strained through a horse.

Advertisement

Target muddied the waters in its own case by explaining that it minimized the displays of Pride-themed merchandise to protect its employees from violence.

There are, of course, other ways to achieve that end, including by stepping up security in vulnerable stores and making clear that it will prosecute the hell out of anyone who commits or threatens to commit an assault on its premises.

Target has also let it be known that the merchandise it removed from inventory was from a single British designer whose work has exploited satanic imagery. The company’s website, anyway, is replete with Pride-themed goods.

One would hope that companies that become objects of ideologically inspired campaigns like these don’t think they can mollify the torch-bearing mob. If they think they can immunize themselves, they can take a lesson from the experience of Chick-fil-A.

The fast-food chain became the target of localized boycotts in 2012, when CEO Dan Cathy publicly voiced the conviction that gay marriage violated God’s plan.

Advertisement

Progressive politicians in Boston, Philadelphia and Chicago, among other places, threatened to ban Chick-fil-A stores from their jurisdictions. Calls for boycotts erupted on Facebook and Twitter. The company issued a statement disavowing Cathy’s viewpoint as a matter of corporate policy. A sort of reverse boycott occurred, in the form of a one-day eat-in by company fans at Chick-fil-A stores.

But the political environment has changed. Recently it became known that Chick-fil-A had appointed a vice president for diversity, equity and inclusion — in 2021. (Moreover, the VP is Black.) The discovery has inspired a new campaign for a boycott, this time from the right wing. As one acolyte of Donald Trump tweeted, “Disappointing. Et tu Chik-fil-A?”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

Column: The GOP’s suicidal shutdown plan will murder America’s safety net

Published

on

Column: The GOP’s suicidal shutdown plan will murder America’s safety net

It’s all well and good to treat the House Republicans’ careening toward a government shutdown as a cabaret farce staged for our amusement.

However, the threat to ordinary Americans, especially those dependent on government programs, is no joke.

Even if the Republicans don’t provoke the shutdown currently likely to begin at 12:01 a.m. Sunday, the budget cuts House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) has said he would support to meet the demands of his caucus’ far-right wing would devastate government assistance to the most vulnerable Americans.

As outlined by the Center for American Progress and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, two progressive think tanks working from official communications including the budget resolution released Sept. 20 by House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), they would involve these cuts in the social safety net:

  • A cut of $14.7 billion, or 77%, in Title I education grants to school districts with high levels of poverty, which fund services and supports for students from low-income or disadvantaged backgrounds. The CBPP calls this funding “a core federal support for K-12 education.”

The ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes went about with a lantern in search of an honest man. We don’t even need that much: Just a man with a hint of steadfastness in his makeup. Apparently we’ll have to keep looking.

  • Reduction of the fruit and vegetable benefit in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) by 56% to 70%, affecting about 5 million participants.
  • Unsustainable reductions in low-income assistance programs for housing and heating.
  • $1.9 trillion in Medicaid cuts over 10 years.

These cuts go well beyond those agreed upon in the debt-ceiling negotiations last May, which McCarthy accepted.

As a sop to the Republicans’ rich patrons, the House caucus would rescind all of the $88 billion in additional funding for the Internal Revenue Service that was enacted as part of last year’s Inflation Reduction Act.

Advertisement

This exceeds the $21-billion cut in the debt-ceiling negotiations. It’s the usual GOP penny-wise-and-plain-foolish approach to IRS funding, since it hamstrings the agency’s enforcement capabilities and taxpayer services such as phone advice.

Every dollar spent on enforcement yields multiples in recovered taxes. The IRS reported in July that it had recovered $38 million in delinquent taxes from more than 175 high-income taxpayers in previous months, using the enforcement funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act. Obviously, that sticks in the craw of a party devoted to protecting its patrons from paying their obligations.

The absurd truth of all this “negotiating” is that it won’t help Speaker McCarthy, America’s most outstanding political invertebrate, get a funding proposal through his chamber that would be even remotely acceptable to the Senate. That includes Senate Republicans, who have signed on to a bipartisan spending scheme.

There are doubts that McCarthy can get any proposal through his caucus, which is in effect controlled by extremists who keep moving the goalposts by insisting on ever more draconian spending cuts. They show every sign of determination to shut the government down this weekend, even though it’s a political article of faith that the public always blames the GOP for shutdowns (as it should), leading to disaster at the ballot box.

The lack of character among congressional Republicans, not excepting those aligned with McCarthy, is truly amazing. These are people who have no compunctions about slandering working Americans while taking every opportunity themselves for slacking off.

Advertisement

Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.), one of McCarthy’s lieutenants, remarked during the debt-ceiling negotiations that Democrats were “willing to default on the debt so they can continue making welfare payments for people that are refusing to work.”

The serene nerviness of this slander was truly impressive, given that the House of Representatives had taken 12 of 20 workdays off in April and 10 of 22 workdays (not counting Memorial Day) off in May. Overall, the House has been scheduled to be in session only 117 days in 2023, fewer than half of the 240 days most of the rest of us are at work.

The House took off the entire month of August and didn’t return to session until Sept. 12, all while the possible shutdown was looming. The rest were officially designated “district work days,” to which we can only respond, “Oh, sure.”

Graves has resurfaced during the shutdown negotiations, telling the Washington Post that the Republicans’ “bottom line is we’re singularly focused right now on achieving our conservative objectives,” which include “huge savings.”

As the Post toted up the numbers, those savings involved “taking more than $150 billion per year out of the part of the budget that funds child care, education subsidies, medical research and hundreds of additional federal operations.”

Advertisement

If there’s a silver lining in the House GOP’s performative horseplay, it’s that it has cured the political press of treating the standoff as a symptom of congressional dysfunction. It’s not; as is being reported more accurately and sensibly in recent days, it’s a symptom of Republican dysfunction and, more than that, McCarthy’s dysfunction.

No one doubts that a workable budget plan can be enacted by the House. McCarthy’s problem is that it would involve House Democrats agreeing to get it over the finish line. But any action that requires him to reach agreement with the Democrats would provoke his own right wing to mount an ouster campaign. So McCarthy is as guilty as the rest of them.

The ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes went about with a lantern in search of an honest man. We don’t even need that much: Just a man with a hint of steadfastness in his makeup. Apparently we’ll have to keep looking.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Tesla sued for ‘widespread and ongoing’ racial harassment at California plant

Published

on

Tesla sued for ‘widespread and ongoing’ racial harassment at California plant

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is suing Tesla Inc. for “widespread and ongoing” racial harassment of its Black employees and for retaliating against workers who spoke out about the problem, the federal agency announced Thursday.

Since at least 2015, “Black employees at Tesla’s Fremont, California, manufacturing facilities have routinely endured racial abuse, pervasive stereotyping, and hostility as well as epithets,” the commission said in a statement.

The EEOC added: “Black employees regularly encountered graffiti, including variations of the N-word, swastikas, threats, and nooses, on desks and other equipment, in bathroom stalls, within elevators, and even on new vehicles rolling off the production line.”

The lawsuit was brought by the EEOC’s San Francisco District Office, which has jurisdiction over Northern California, northern Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Idaho and Montana.

EEOC officials said the lawsuit is seeking compensatory and punitive damages “and back pay for the affected workers, as well as injunctive relief designed to reform Tesla’s employment practices to prevent such discrimination in the future.”

Advertisement

EEOC Chairperson Charlotte A. Burrows said the lawsuit “makes clear that no company is above the law.”

“The EEOC will vigorously enforce federal civil rights protections to help ensure American workplaces are free from unlawful harassment and retaliation,” she said.

Attempts to reach officials at Tesla for comment were unsuccessful.

Tesla, the world’s most valuable car company, faces similar action on several other fronts.

In February, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing filed a lawsuit on behalf of more than 4,000 current and former Black Tesla workers — the largest racial discrimination suit ever brought by the state based on number of workers affected.

Advertisement

In that suit, three former employees alleged that racist slurs in English and Spanish were often aimed at Black employees by co-workers and supervisors. They said Tesla segregated Black workers into separate areas, gave them the hardest tasks and routinely denied them promotions. And they alleged that when they informed the company about racist treatment, their complaints went ignored or they were fired.

Tesla disputed the former employees’ accounts, stating that the three workers did not complain to the company about racism and that any discipline they received was the result of their own workplace behavior.

“Race plays no role in any of Tesla’s work assignments, promotions, pay or discipline,” attorneys for the company said in a statement at the time. “Tesla prohibits discrimination, in any form.”

Thursday’s lawsuit puts a different kind of pressure on Tesla, said attorney Clifton W. Albright, founding partner and president of Albright, Yee & Schmit, a labor and employment law firm in downtown Los Angeles.

“The EEOC’s preference is to resolve issues quietly…. They don’t have a dog in this fight,” he said, unlike lawsuits filed by private firms or civil rights organizations.

Advertisement

“For the EEOC to come out so strongly, they must think there is significant evidence that the employer refuses or fails to recognize or address.”

Continue Reading

Business

The unionization wave hits L.A. area bubble tea cafes

Published

on

The unionization wave hits L.A. area bubble tea cafes

Six Boba Guys locations in Los Angeles County will become the first unionized boba stores in California after a successful election, the union said Wednesday.

The bobaristas will join the California Retail & Restaurant Worker Union, which also represents workers at Genwa. The Los Angeles Korean barbecue restaurant chain unionized in 2021.

“When companies remain neutral and do not interfere with anti-union campaigns … the workers will overwhelmingly support unionizing of their workplace,” said CRRWU President José Roberto Hernández.

Hernández said the union had been engaging with workers for the last six months. They filed for a union with the National Labor Relations Board in July and counted the results of the mail-in ballot election Wednesday afternoon. Boba Guys will be the first unionized boba stores in California, if not the country, Hernández said.

CRRWU also represents workers in ongoing unionization efforts at Korean grocery outlet Hannam Chain and at air purifier manufacturer Coway.

Advertisement

“We want to publicly express our support of the labor vote conducted by the National Labor Relations Board and [CRRWU],” Andrew Chau, co-founder and CEO of San Francisco-based Boba Guys, said in a statement. “We have always believed in the right to organize and have cooperated with CRRWU and the NLRB throughout the entire process.”

Chau encouraged other businesses to “follow suit and open up the conversation on the much-needed dialogue surrounding labor in this country.”

Last fall, the boba chain — known for its drinks made with organic milk, loose-leaf teas and homemade syrups — faced backlash after firing a worker from its flagship store in San Francisco’s Mission District; the worker said Boba Guys told her it was because she had made “inappropriate, disparaging” comments to co-workers that were sexual in nature, but she believed she had been fired for posting about unions in a company Slack channel.

At that store, several workers publicly complained of reduced hours, a decrease in time given to open and close stores, and fewer people working per shift. They also spoke of working through heat waves without air conditioning, dealing with vermin and having their hours cut when they took their concerns to management.

The company eventually permanently closed that location.

Advertisement

Carmen Lau, a former manager at Boba Guys’ Culver City shop, said workers had been unhappy for months about their working conditions but weren’t sure what they could do about it.

“How do you fix it? How do you do more than just talk to the people in charge who have heard your complaints a number of times, acknowledge [them], but there’s no follow through?” Lau said.

She left the company in May for another professional opportunity, but also because of increasing demands at work and issues that remained unaddressed, she said.

“The increasing expectations for work, just having less time to prepare and prepare all the ingredients for opening — I found that it was getting really impossible to meet those expectations,” Lau said.

News of what happened at the Mission District store spread rapidly and drove a lot of the desire to push for increased benefits and protections, said Stephen Lightfoot, who works at the Boba Guys location in North Hollywood.

Advertisement

As an actor and sound designer, Lightfoot was well aware of the benefits joining a union could bring workers and was active in spreading the word to his colleagues, who were “very excited,” he said.

Los Angeles has become a center of labor activity as screenwriters, actors, hotel employees and city staffers went on strike over the summer, and there are unionization efforts underway at companies including Starbucks, Amazon.com and Trader Joe’s.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending