The news has not been kind to the fast food industry over the past few years. From labor strikes to claims of wage theft, companies like McDonald's and Burger King have taken increasing criticism for treatment of workers and their low wage jobs. Now a new report from New York-based think tank Demos has added fuel to the fire.
(New York, NY) – Today, national public policy organization Demos will release a new report examining the latest CEO-to-worker compensation ratios of the largest publicly traded fast food companies and shows that the fast-food industry has the greatest pay disparity in our economy, with ratios exceeding 1,000-to-1.
(New York, NY) – As shareholders prepare for annual meetings, Demos released a new study today that finds that the fast-food industry has the greatest CEO-to-worker pay disparity in our economy, with ratios exceeding 1,000-to-1. The study finds that the growing disparity within fast-food threatens economic growth and shareholder investment.
The recent op-ed from NAACP LDF president Sherrilyn Ifill on the recent McCutcheon ruling is a must read. In it, she implores us to focus in on the “devastating aspect” of Chief Justice John Roberts's majority opinion ruling as summarized in his opening sentences:
"There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders.
David Novak, the CEO of YUM! Brands, which owns Taco Bell and KFC, took home more than $22 million last year after exercising stock options, according to proxy statements. The average full-time fast-food worker, by comparison, would have made about $19,000 on the year. [...]
Fast food CEOs were paid more than 1,200 times the average fast food worker in 2012, according to a new study released Tuesday by Demos, a public policy group.
On a conference call to discuss the report New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer said such a wide income disparity could affect the city's pension fund, which holds millions of shares in several fast food companies. And it could trickle down to affect every day New Yorkers, he said. [...]
Fast-food restaurants are serving up plenty of food for discussion in the debate over income inequality.
Fast-food chief executives take home $1,000 for every $1 dollar earned by their average workers, making it the most unequal sector within the U.S. economy, according to a new report from public policy group Demos.
Shantel Walker has been working on and off for Papa John’s pizza since she was in high school. The 32-year-old New York City resident says that over her 15 years at a Brooklyn outlet of the Louisville, Ky.-based pizza chain, she’s received only two raises that weren’t mandated by federal or state minimum wage hikes. Today she makes $8.50 an hour, 50 cents above the New York State minimum wage, but her employer doesn’t currently use her more than 24 hours a week.
Is reducing inequality a lost cause? It can sure feel that way given what's happened in the past few decades: Like two billion new workers showing up in the global economy ready to work at a fraction of the pay of American workers. Or advances in technology and communications allowing corporations to easily shift production and back office operations anywhere -- or to just replace human beings altogether.
Capital is triumphant, labor is weak, inequality is inevitable.
Vishaan Chakrabarti has a great op-ed yesterday that asks a question that we've asked here before: Why does our government so heavily subsidize the suburbs when urban living makes more sense: environmentally, economically, and culturally?
A sudden change of fortune for 32,400 Detroit pensioners in the city’s historic bankruptcy — from the threat of draconian pension cuts to a modest reduction in lifetime benefits — could face mathematical scrutiny as the case proceeds, experts say.
In just 10 months, Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr has gone from offering pensioners double-digit percentage reductions in benefits to potentially settling for baseline cuts of as little as 4.5 percent.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Steven Rhodes last week approved an agreement that has the city of Detroit paying $85 million to escape a disastrous interest-rate swap deal with two banks.
Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr, for one, applauded the decision.
“Today’s ruling is a victory for Detroiters that will help the city reinvest in the services it provides its residents and businesses,” Orr said in a prepared statement. “We’re making good progress in reaching consensual resolutions with our creditors and stakeholders.”
NEW YORK— Yesterday, New York joined ten states and the District of Columbia to enact a National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) proposal. NPVIC, if enacted, would award all of a state’s electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, ensuring the winner of the popular vote wins the presidency. NPVIC, which takes effect when enacted by states representing a majority of electors, has now received over half of the state laws it needs to be realized.
New York adopting the National Popular Vote proposal is a victory for democracy
It is indeed remarkable that the Detroit’s Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr has agreed that existing pensioners can receive virtually all of their retirement benefits in a startling settlement proposal. Police and fire will receive their entire amounts (minus a portion of cost of living adjustment) while other former employees will receive 96 percent (minus all cost of living). This is quite a distance from the 5 percent and 26 percent haircuts previously threatened.
It's no secret that when the wealthy speak, the powerful listen. What else would you expect when the average cost of winning a House seat has soared by 344 percent since 1986? But the other side of this coin tends to get less attention: How do the powerful respond to the voices of ordinary people -- those who aren't part of the "donor class?"
A newly-released study by Demos, a think-tank, shows that there is a correlation between income and voter turnout in presidential elections. Using the 2008 presidential election as a reference for the study, Demos found that the richer an individual is, the more likely they are to vote.
