I’ve been reading NJ.com since the early 2000’s. I’m from NJ a long time ago, they usually have lots of interesting reporting, they cover the Giants and Devils, and I used to love the forums, sports and politics. They’re very much a left wing paper. Overall, probably slightly less left than Pelosi and Schumer. But, hey, just like so many other Democrat companies, when Government starts raising their costs, they suddenly squeal and abandon those leftist principles
This fresh blow to newspapers — and our democracy — must be stopped | Editorial
This editorial is that rare piece that presents an unavoidable conflict of interest for us, since we in the dwindling press corps are not the observers this time; we are one of the players. But please, hear us out.
Because for local newspapers, this could be a matter of life and death. And for larger papers, like the Star-Ledger, the risk is further reductions in the already depleted coverage of local towns and school districts. Does any sane person believe that calling off the watchdogs would be good for New Jersey?
Wait, wait, Government instituting policies and requirements can have an adverse effect on companies? Huh
The solution wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime. It would only require that the state allow the status quo to continue, as a bill pending in the Assembly would do. New York and California have already passed laws to protect newspapers in their states. New Jersey needs to follow that lead, as a pending bill would do, and it’s urgent.
The issue is the treatment of the men and women who deliver newspapers, usually for a few hours a day, early in the morning, typically earning about $300 a week. For nearly two centuries, and across the country, the job has been done by contractors who are not classified as employees of the newspapers.
But now the state Department of Labor is strictly enforcing a law that’s been on the books since the FDR era, upending tradition by ordering these workers to be treated as employees. That means newspapers, or the firms they hire to handle delivery, would have to pay taxes to cover benefits like unemployment and disability, just as they do for full-time employees. It would cost the Star-Ledger, already diminished by layoffs and buyouts, about $3 million a year.
You can easily dig through the archives, including the writings of the editorial board, to find that NJ.com has taken the side of the Democrats in all sorts of issues, such as Obamacare, raising taxes on businesses, and raising the minimum wage, not too mention all the COVID shutdowns and such. But, when it hits NJ.com in the wallet? No siree Bob!. We keep seeing this, like Starbucks being again unionizing stores. The NY Times and Amazon were against unions in their own workplaces. Plenty of examples of that.
Understand, this is not a simple story about heroes and villains. Many contract workers are happy to be independent players. And it’s impossible to draw a bright line between contractors and employees that fits every circumstance. Gray areas abound.
Interesting
N.J. legislators should do what Washington state just did for rideshare drivers | Opinion
The past month has been incredible for working people. Just this week, Starbucks workers in Boston voted to unionize two stores. This follows another victory just across the Hudson, where Amazon warehouse workers in Staten Island recently unionized after years of intense confrontation with the company.
As a driver with Lyft, one win that happened on the other side of the country still hits close to home. There in Washington state, rideshare drivers worked with Uber and Lyft, the local Teamsters union and democratically elected officials to pass a first-of-its-kind law providing them greater benefits and protections without jeopardizing their independence.
Granted, that’s not the editorial board, but, the paper was good with government forcing other companies to unionize, to treat contract labor as employees. Just, not their own company.
Read: Surprise: NJ.com Editorial Board Is Against Treating Contractors As Employees »