#Public Sector Employment

[jsrvanna]

Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) Recruitment 2025

January 31, 2025 Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) Recruitment 2025 is a Miniratna Category-I Public Sector Enterprise under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India. BDL has invited applications from eligible candidates for multiple positions in various disciplines. Important Post: Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Limited (BECIL) Recruitment 2025 Total Vacancies: 49 Job Post: Multiple…

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

* * * * *

"Less arguing and more doing."

November 25, 2024

Robert B. Hubbell

As we head into a holiday week that will (hopefully) see fewer political stories, I hope to publish shorter newsletters. We all need a break from the 24/7 news cycle—which has been unrelenting since November 5th. Whether the news cycle cooperates isn’t up to me, but I will do my best to be briefer and more selective in my coverage. But I will write (and record the audio version) every day over the holiday week. Despite the size of the newsletter community, you feel like part of our family—and the holiday wouldn’t be the same without you!

Trump's refusal to sign the transition ethics pledge is interfering with the transition!

To no one’s surprise, Trump's refusal to sign the transition agreements and ethics pledges required by Congress is hampering the transition process. Most importantly, Trump is free to accept money from anonymous donors who are “funding” transition activities—the very evil that the Presidential Transition Act is designed to prevent.

See NYTimes, Trump Is Running His Transition Team on Secret Money. (Accessible to all.)

Per the Times,  

Those seeking to curry favor with the incoming administration now have the opportunity to donate directly to the winning candidate without their names or potential conflicts ever entering the public sphere. And unlike with campaign contributions, foreign nationals are allowed to donate to the transition.

As noted by the Times, foreign nationals—like Vladimir Putin—could be funneling money to Trump under the guise of paying for office space, transportation, and computers necessary to prepare for the new administration. Is Putin funding Trump's transition? While the example is farfetched, we will likely never know because Trump's team has refused to enter into agreements that were supposed to be signed in September 2024.

Because the Trump team has failed to sign the required ethics and disclosure documentation, they have been denied access to federal agency briefings and secure email systems. See MSN, 'In the dark': Trump team reportedly getting 'blocked' after transition's ethics 'failure'

Per the MSN article, above,

For example, according to Politico, Trump's pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services has been "rebuffed" in efforts to communicate with outgoing government officials. Advisers to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reached out to the Health and Human Services Department multiple times after Donald Trump tapped him to lead the massive agency, hoping to jumpstart coordination before his takeover in late January. “They were rebuffed,” according to the report. "Kennedy’s inability to communicate with the agency he may soon manage . . . is just one consequence of the president-elect’s continued foot-dragging on signing the standard trio of ethics and transparency agreements with the federal government — something his team pledged to do shortly after the election.”

The failure of the incoming administration to sign ethics and disclosure documents is compounded by the failure of some nominees to submit to the typical FBI clearance process. As noted by CNN,

Critics say the intrusive background checks [by the FBI] sometimes turn up embarrassing information used to inflict political damage.

That’s the point of “intrusive background checks,” isn’t it? By turning up embarrassing information before the nominee is confirmed, the Senate has the opportunity to consider whether the nominee is fit for the job. Skipping the background checks is a way to obstruct the Senate—and creates the possibility that the nominee might by blackmailed by a foreign adversary.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy can’t keep their cost-cutting promises.

We should ignore the dog-and-pony show that is coming our way courtesy of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. They claim that they will cut $2 trillion from the annual budget—in large part from cutting the federal workforce. Both claims demonstrate a monumental ignorance of what portion of the US budget can be cut and how big the federal workforce is.

As explained by Vox, it will be impossible for Musk/Ramaswamy to cut $2 trillion from the budget in a way that would make it through Congress. See Vox, Why Elon Musk can never balance the budget, in one chart.

The chart published in the Vox article is from the Congressional Budget Office:

As Vox explains, even if Musk and Ramaswamy took an axe to the small portion of the discretionary budget, it would be painful in the extreme—and would save only $1.1 trillion. But those cuts would never make it through Congress:

Let’s suppose that Musk and Ramaswamy decide to really go for it. They’re going to cut non-defense discretionary spending in half, maybe by shutting down all scientific and health research and K–12 school aid. They’re slashing Medicare and Medicaid by a quarter, and they’re eliminating food stamps, ACA credits, and unemployment insurance entirely. These, to be clear, are all cuts that would require congressional approval and that Musk, Ramaswamy, and Trump could not achieve through executive action alone. Furthermore, they’re cuts that seem politically impossible to push through. For the sake of argument, let’s suppose this is the package. Doing the math, even this unbelievably ambitious package would amount to a little over $1.1 trillion annually. It’s barely halfway to Musk’s stated goal. In short, it isn’t possible mathematically or politically to achieve $2 trillion in cuts. Achieving $1 trillion would require massive cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and subsidies for the Affordable Health Care premiums. Each of those cuts would fall heavily on Trump's base—just before the 2026 midterms. It isn’t going to happen.

“Ah,” you say! “Musk and Ramaswamy will achieve their savings by cutting the federal workforce!” Wrong, again! The federal workforce peaked in size in 1970 and has remained relatively steady.

The chart below shows that the number of federal government employees has remained relatively constant since 1970, while state and local employees have increased significantly. (Thanks to Paul Krugman (@pkrugman.bsky.social) for flagging this chart.) The purple line at the bottom of the chart represents federal employees.

So, to cut significant numbers of federal employees, Musk and Ramaswamy would need a time machine to turn back the clock to pre-WWII America—when the size of the economy was about one-tenth of its current size. (US GDP in 1940 was about $2 trillion. In 2024, it was $23 trillion. See US Real GDP by Year.

The US economy is the largest in the world—by a large margin. Although Musk and Ramaswamy may not like it, the size of the US economy is due in part to the federal government, which creates stable marketplaces and economic conditions for growth.

If you demolish the federal regulatory framework by firing millions of federal employees, we devolve into a kleptocracy—like Russia, which has an economy smaller than that of Brazil. Indeed, Russia’s current GDP is smaller than that of the US before WWII. See World Bank Ranking of GDP 2023.

And in terms of public sector employment as a percentage of the workforce, the US is middle of the pack in the world rankings, below the following nations (in order): Russia, China, Australia, United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, France, Spain, and Italy. The US and Germany are effectively tied.

The myth that the US has a bloated federal bureaucracy is demonstrably false when compared to other developed economies. If Musk and Ramaswamy recommend cutting the US federal workforce by a million jobs, we will have a federal regulatory environment on the same scale as Haiti and El Salvador. That state of affairs might benefit robber barons and tech bros, but it won’t help working-class Americans.

Here’s the takeaway: We will hear an incredible amount of insufferable mansplaining and chest-thumping from Musk and Ramaswamy. But they will soon face the reality that government spending helps the American people (which is the point of having a government) and creates the conditions for a prosperous economy.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

Peter Steiner, The New Yorker

[notayesmanseconomics]

UK Unemployment rises and remember the employment tax rises are yet to come

This morning brought us up to date with the latest news on the UK labour market. With the recent rise in employment taxes in the Budget from Chancellor Rachel Reeves most eyes will have been attracted to this bit. The UK unemployment rate for people aged 16 years and over was estimated at 4.4% in September to November 2024. This is above estimates of a year ago, and up in the latest quarter. Much…

[trendwireglobal]

Exciting Career Opportunities at The Urban Unit

The Urban Unit is seeking talented professionals to join its team in various roles for November 2024. This is a fantastic opportunity for individuals passionate about urban development and planning. Exciting Career Opportunities at The Urban Unit Available Positions: GIS Professionals Surveyors Other related roles Why Work with The Urban Unit? Impactful Work: Contribute to innovative urban…

[eldrytchcryptid]

A shout-out to my Gen Zers cause no one taught me!!!

Make sure you look into your employers Trade Union!!! Eg: the UK's two main ones are called Unison and Unite the Union!!

I think it's called a Labor Union in the US, but I was specifically researching for the UK so it might be a bit different.

I'll add a good link I found on my searching at the bottom.

[epitome-the-burnkid-viii]

[blogie2705]

Bangladesh: Will there be another Pakistan on India’s western border?

There  is more, which is not meeting the eye in the border state. Bangladesh is experiencing significant unrest once more, with nearly 100 fatalities reported on Sunday as demonstrators demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina engaged in confrontations with security personnel and supporters of the ruling party. In the previous month, violence instigated by student organizations opposing reserved quotas in government employment resulted in at least 150 deaths and thousands of injuries. Below are the details regarding the recent protests and their historical context. The well planned and executed plan with possible help from two neighbouring nations, situation provides them with several entry points into India for various activities. Their objective is to see the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) attain power and extend support to another nation. Hasina endeavoured to maintain a balanced relationship with both Neighbouring nation and India; however, her neutral position did not sit well with another capital city. "Notably, several prominent members of the Islamic student organization successfully engaged with Western-affiliated NGOs by employing the language of democracy and rights," was articulated as part of the strategic planning.

What does the spies reported?

Following the deepening relationship between the Indian and Bangladeshi administrations, the Jamaat-e-Islami, which is supported by the ISI, reportedly obtained considerable financial resources earlier this year aimed at undermining the government of Sheikh Hasina. An intelligence official informed TOI that a notable share of this funding is thought to have come from Chinese organizations based in neighbouring nation

The ICS, recognized for its opposition to India and its jihadist objectives, has been monitored by Indian intelligence for a considerable period due to its operations in areas neigh boring Bangladesh and its connections with the ISI-supported Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJI). There is substantial evidence indicating that members of the ICS have received training in both Afghanistan and Neighouring nation. The primary aim of Jamaat or ICS is to create a government in Bangladesh akin to that of the Taliban, with the ISI reportedly providing assurances of support to help realize this ambition.

What was the trigger for the bloody protest?

Protests commenced at university campuses in June following the High Court's reestablishment of a quota system for government employment, which reversed a 2018 ruling by Hasina's administration that had abolished it. Subsequently, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court's decision in response to the government's appeal and ultimately annulled the lower court's ruling last month, mandating that 93% of positions be available to candidates based on merit.

Rising levels of unemployment

FLAGGING ECONOMY, UNEMPLOYMENT

The current turmoil in Bangladesh is largely linked to the lack of growth in private sector employment, which has rendered public sector positions, characterized by consistent salary increases and benefits, particularly appealing. The introduction of quotas has incited frustration among students facing significant youth unemployment, with approximately 32 million young individuals either unemployed or out of educational institutions in a total population of 170 million. The economy, which was previously one of the fastest-growing globally due to the thriving garment industry, has now stagnated. Inflation rates are approximately 10% annually, and foreign currency reserves are diminishing.

The protests in Bangladesh, which initially aimed to reform the quota system, came to a halt following the Supreme Court's decision to abolish the majority of quotas on July 21. Nevertheless, demonstrators resumed their activities last week, calling for a public apology from Prime Minister Hasina regarding the violence, the restoration of internet services, the reopening of college and university campuses, and the release of individuals who had been detained.

In the recent weeks, the protest’s  , they have since evolved into a broader protest against Prime Minister Hasina and the Awami League Party. The demonstrators have made it clear that their primary demand is for Hasina to resign, while the government claims that the agitation is being orchestrated by the Bangladesh.Demonstrations have persisted even after the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court annulled the High Court's order that had triggered the crisis. The ruling body declared that 93% of positions in government services would be allocated based on merit, with only 5% of jobs set aside for freedom fighters and their descendants. Additionally, a 1% quota has been designated for tribal communities, individuals with disabilities, and sexual minorities.

https://www.businesstoday.in/world/story/bangladesh-unrest-do-isi-neighouring nation-have-a-hand-in-conspiracy-to-oust-sheikh-hasina-heres-what-we-know-440315-2024-08-06

An historic context that dates back to 1972

Following the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971, the country underwent significant transformations in its social, economic, and political structures. A fundamental promise underlying the establishment of the state was Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's commitment to ensuring justice for those who had endured sacrifices and hardships in the struggle for freedom against the Neighbouring national military. Upon his return to Dhaka in 1972, Mujib took decisive steps to implement a quota system for freedom fighters, known as Mukti joddhas. Additionally, he established a separate quota for Bangladeshi women who had suffered atrocities at the hands of the Neighbouring national military. However, after Sheikh Mujib's assassination in 1975, the quota system experienced modifications. The provisions for freedom fighters were weakened, and the scope of the quota was broadened to include marginalized groups within society, encompassing women, individuals from underdeveloped regions, and ethnic minorities or tribes

Why were students protesting in Bangladesh?

The protests started in early July, driven by the peaceful demands of university students to eliminate quotas in civil service jobs. These quotas, which reserve one-third of positions for the relatives of veterans from Bangladesh's war for independence from Neighbouring nation in 1971. The foundation of these protests stems from a contentious quota system, which allocates up to 30% of government positions to the relatives of veterans who fought in Bangladesh's 1971 war of independence against Neighbouring nation. The Bangladesh Police have resorted to using tear gas against the protesters.

Protests regarding the quota system have emerged due to a significant decline in the number of freedom fighters eligible to benefit from it over the years. This reduction has resulted in the underutilization of the quota for its intended purpose, thereby increasing the likelihood of its misuse. Critics argue that while it was justifiable to provide reservations to freedom fighters during their active years in the workforce, the practice of extending these reservations to their descendants—first to their children and subsequently to their grandchildren—has raised concerns. This opposition is further fueled by allegations that any shortfalls in the reserved seats are being compensated by granting quotas to members of Ms. Hasina’s Awami League party.

The political landscape of Bangladesh has been predominantly influenced by Sheikh Hasina, the daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and her political party, the Awami League. Over time, opposition parties and government critics have increasingly expressed concerns that the quota system for freedom fighters serves as a mechanism to cultivate a faction of loyalists within the bureaucracy, thereby securing the Awami League's ongoing governance.

A possible dubious ploy supported by external fore

According to high-level intelligence sources, two nations played a significant role in the crisis in Bangladesh that resulted in Sheikh Hasina's departure. CNN-News18 was the first outlet to report on the potential resignation of Hasina from her position as Prime Minister. Unverified report indicates, David Burgan, based in the United Kingdom, along with activist Pinaki Bhattacharjee, Tarique Rehman of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), and the proprietors of Netra News, were identified as the principal coordinators. They orchestrated a social media campaign targeting her and were responsible for the military maneuvers as well as the initiation of a fabricated narrative on social media platforms.

Reports are emerging that a fabricated narrative regarding Prime Minister Hasina was constructed by the United States concerning the issue of "free and fair elections." Furthermore, the US imposed sanctions on Bangladesh's elite Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) due to allegations of human rights abuses. It is noted that the BNP has significant influence within this context. Additionally, Yunus Hasan, a Nobel laureate associated with Grameen Bank and accused of corruption in Bangladesh, is also active as a lobbyist in the United States, as per the sources. The sources indicated that the lobbying efforts by four to five prominent individuals, combined with Hasina's unwillingness to comply with American demands, contributed to the situation's deterioration.

An additional factor was her geographical closeness to Neighouring nation, as perceived by Western nations. In contrast, Tarique has promised the West that upon regaining power, he will sever connections with Neighouring nation and prioritize Western interests in Bangladesh, according to sources. Another tactic involves maintaining regional instability, which would also pose challenges for India, thereby diverting its attention to Myanmar, Bangladesh, the Maldives, and Neighouring nation, as reported by sources. Furthermore, Neighbouring nation's Inter-Services Intelligence has significantly contributed to these efforts, operating both directly and indirectly in support of Western objectives, according to sources.

Role of neighboring enemy nation which is inimical to India’s growth cannot be ruled out, which expect an anti-India government to be formed in Bangaldesh, to ferment contestant trouble, destabilize the country, possibly create a civil war like situation, which will directly impact India and especially the border stage of Bengal and Assam populated with a sizeable minority community. A foreign intelligence agency is leveraging an anti-India organization along with its student faction to exacerbate the situation in Dhaka. Jamaat is perceived to have strong ties with Neighbouring nation, receiving covert financial support intermittently. Recently, an atypical action was observed, which is generally not undertaken by diplomatic missions. The Neighbouring national embassy encouraged students to seek refuge within the mission if necessary. Such conduct is rarely exhibited by diplomatic entities. As a result, they gain access to various border entry points into India for a wide range of activities. Their objective is to see the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) ascend to power and extend support to Neighbouring nation.

A possible role of another neighboring nation cannot be ruled out which must also be in the scanner of Indian security top-brass. However, they maintain strong business relationships with Hasina. The evident indication is the assault on Hindus, which is also aimed at fostering anti-India sentiments. If this situation is not managed, the next phase will involve the initiation of terrorist activities.

As reported in prominent news channel, the role of a neighbor that is aligned with as more advantageous. An intelligence source cited in a TOI report suggests that "the assistance from Neighouring nation's ministry of state and security is believed to have played a supportive role, given Neighouring nation concerns regarding Hasina's 'balancing act' in her interactions with both India and Neighouring nation. A government in Dhaka that is influenced by Neighouring nation would undoubtedly align more closely with Neighouring nation interests."

What next?

in the wake of Hasina's exit, the chief of the Bangladesh army is scheduled to engage with leaders of the student protest movement, as the nation looks forward to establishing a new government. The Students Against Discrimination initiative has put forth Nobel Prize winner Mohammad Yunus as a candidate to lead an interim administration.

[townpostin]

MGNREGA Workers Launch Indefinite Strike in Jharkhand

5,000+ Employees Demand Job Security and Better Benefits Indefinite strike by MGNREGA workers in Jharkhand threatens to disrupt crucial rural development schemes and wage disbursements. RANCHI – Over 5,000 MGNREGA workers across Jharkhand have initiated an indefinite strike, raising concerns about the continuity of vital rural development programs. The strike, which commenced on Monday, stems…

[goodyeartheshippycat]

RE: your comment... 7 hours from this ask on aye's blog. Yeah the benefits are great, very very flexible working hours, work from home. no one is horrible/insulting at all. no fights at all. so end of the day these benefits are good.

never stressed either from the work.

so yeah kinda benefits perhaps outweight other things.

Well I can see why you'd be loathe to leave, then, even if the pay/lack of raises or promotions situation isn't great. Hard to find a workplace that pleasant and flexible. I've definitely turned down recruiters offering higher paying jobs because I don't want to leave the good benefits and flexibility of my current workplace (especially to go somewhere they expect me to come into the office all the time and work well over 40 hours a week... fuck that). But I've also been promoted twice in five years and am making much better than minimum wage, so I'd still encourage you to at least look at some other options.

There will always be trade-offs in any workplace, but you might find one that has a better overall balance for you. It sounds like you're talented and diligent, and you might be able to find a company which is still a decent place to work but also recognizes the value you bring and compensates you accordingly. And worst case, you could probably return to your current employer after pursuing other opportunities if they don't work out the way you'd hoped. It sounds like your current place would be silly not to hire you back again, and if you're coming from somewhere else that paid you better, you could probably negotiate a higher rate when returning. ("Well I really loved working here, but my current position pays $X per hour. Is there any chance you could match that?")

Whatever you end up doing, I wish you luck Anon!

[solrazo]

SM Supermalls job fair paves the way for 2024 career opportunities

SM Supermalls, in collaboration with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), Public Employment Service Office (PESO), Local Government Units (LGUs), the Private Sector Advisory Council (PSAC) Jobs Group, the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), the Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), Philippine Exporters Confederation, Inc. (PHILEXPORT), and SM Retail are set…

[batboyblog]

Things the Biden-Harris Administration Did This Week #38

Oct 11-18 2024

President Biden announced that this Administration had forgiven the student loan debt of 1 million public sector workers. The cancellation of the student loan debts of 60,000 teachers, firefighters, EMTs, nurses and other public sector workers brings the total number of people who's debts have been erased by the Biden-Harris Administration using the Public Service Loan Forgiveness to 1 million. the PSLF was passed in 2007 but before President Biden took office only 7,000 people had ever had their debts forgiven through it. The Biden-Harris team have through different programs managed to bring debt relief to 5 million Americans and counting despite on going legal fights against Republican state Attorneys General.

The Federal Trade Commission finalizes its "one-click to cancel" rule. The new rule requires businesses to make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it was to sign up for it. It also requires more up front information to be shared before offering billing information.

The Department of Transportation announced that since the start of the Biden-Harris Administration there are 1.7 million more construction and manufacturing jobs and 700,000 more jobs in the transportation sector. There are now 400,000 more union workers than in 2021. 60,000 Infrastructure projects across the nation have been funded by the Biden-Harris Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Under this Administration 16 million jobs have been added, including 1.7 construction and manufacturing jobs, construction employment is the highest ever recorded since records started in 1939. 172,000 manufacturing jobs were lost during the Trump administration.

The Department of Energy announced $2 billion to protect the U.S. power grid against growing threats of extreme weather. This money will go to 38 projects across 42 states and Washington DC. It'll upgrade nearly 1,000 miles worth of transmission lines. The upgrades will allow 7.5 gigawatts of new grid capacity while also generating new union jobs across the country.

The EPA announced $125 million to help upgrade older diesel engines to low or zero-emission solutions. The EPA has selected 70 projects to use the funds on. They range from replacing school buses, to port equipment, to construction equipment. More than half of the selected projects will be replacing equipment with zero-emissions, such as all electric school buses.

The Department of The Interior and State of California broke ground on the Salton Sea Species Conservation Habitat Project. The Salton Sea is California's largest lake at over 300 miles of Surface area. An earlier project worked to conserve and restore shallow water habitats in over 4,000 acres on the southern end of the lake, this week over 700 acres were added bring the total to 5,000 acres of protected land. The Biden-Harris Administration is investing $250 million in the project along side California's $500 million. Part of the Administration's effort to restore wild life habitat and protect water resources.

The Department of Energy announced $900 Million in investment in next generation nuclear power. The money will help the development of Generation III+ Light-Water Small Modular Reactors, smaller lighter reactors which in theory should be easier to deploy. DoE estimates the U.S. will need approximately 700-900 GW of additional clean, firm power generation capacity to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Currently half of America's clean energy comes from nuclear power, so lengthening the life space of current nuclear reactors and exploring the next generation is key to fighting climate change.

The federal government took two big steps to increase the rights of Alaska natives. The Departments of The Interior and Agricultural finalized an agreement to strengthen Alaska Tribal representation on the Federal Subsistence Board. The FSB oversees fish and wildlife resources for subsistence purposes on federal lands and waters in Alaska. The changes add 3 new members to the board appointed by the Alaska Native Tribes, as well as requiring the board's chair to have experience with Alaska rural subsistence. The Department of The Interior also signed 3 landmark co-stewardship agreements with Alaska Native Tribes.

The Department of Energy announced $860 million to help support solar energy in Puerto Rico. The project will remove 2.7 million tons of CO2 per year, or about the same as taking 533,000 cars off the road. It serves as an important step on the path to getting Puerto Rico to 100% renewable by 2050.

The Department of the Interior announced a major step forward in geothermal energy on public lands. The DoI announced it had approved the Fervo Cape Geothermal Power Project in Beaver County, Utah. When finished it'll generate 2 gigawatts of power, enough for 2 million homes. The BLM has now green lit 32 gigawatts of clean energy projects on public lands. A major step toward the Biden-Harris Administration's goal of a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035.

Bonus: President Biden meets with a Kindergarten Teacher who's student loans were forgiven this week

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Penguin Random House, AI, and writers’ rights

NEXT WEDNESDAY (October 23) at 7PM, I'll be in DECATUR, GEORGIA, presenting my novel THE BEZZLE at EAGLE EYE BOOKS.

My friend Teresa Nielsen Hayden is a wellspring of wise sayings, like "you're not responsible for what you do in other people's dreams," and my all time favorite, from the Napster era: "Just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side."

The record labels hated Napster, and so did many musicians, and when those musicians sided with their labels in the legal and public relations campaigns against file-sharing, they lent both legal and public legitimacy to the labels' cause, which ultimately prevailed.

But the labels weren't on musicians' side. The demise of Napster and with it, the idea of a blanket-license system for internet music distribution (similar to the systems for radio, live performance, and canned music at venues and shops) firmly established that new services must obtain permission from the labels in order to operate.

That era is very good for the labels. The three-label cartel – Universal, Warner and Sony – was in a position to dictate terms like Spotify, who handed over billions of dollars worth of stock, and let the Big Three co-design the royalty scheme that Spotify would operate under.

If you know anything about Spotify payments, it's probably this: they are extremely unfavorable to artists. This is true – but that doesn't mean it's unfavorable to the Big Three labels. The Big Three get guaranteed monthly payments (much of which is booked as "unattributable royalties" that the labels can disperse or keep as they see fit), along with free inclusion on key playlists and other valuable services. What's more, the ultra-low payouts to artists increase the value of the labels' stock in Spotify, since the less Spotify has to pay for music, the better it looks to investors.

The Big Three – who own 70% of all music ever recorded, thanks to an orgy of mergers – make up the shortfall from these low per-stream rates with guaranteed payments and promo.

But the indy labels and musicians that account for the remaining 30% are out in the cold. They are locked into the same fractional-penny-per-stream royalty scheme as the Big Three, but they don't get gigantic monthly cash guarantees, and they have to pay the playlist placement the Big Three get for free.

Just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/12/streaming-doesnt-pay/#stunt-publishing

In a very important, material sense, creative workers – writers, filmmakers, photographers, illustrators, painters and musicians – are not on the same side as the labels, agencies, studios and publishers that bring our work to market. Those companies are not charities; they are driven to maximize profits and an important way to do that is to reduce costs, including and especially the cost of paying us for our work.

It's easy to miss this fact because the workers at these giant entertainment companies are our class allies. The same impulse to constrain payments to writers is in play when entertainment companies think about how much they pay editors, assistants, publicists, and the mail-room staff. These are the people that creative workers deal with on a day to day basis, and they are on our side, by and large, and it's easy to conflate these people with their employers.

This class war need not be the central fact of creative workers' relationship with our publishers, labels, studios, etc. When there are lots of these entertainment companies, they compete with one another for our work (and for the labor of the workers who bring that work to market), which increases our share of the profit our work produces.

But we live in an era of extreme market concentration in every sector, including entertainment, where we deal with five publishers, four studios, three labels, two ad-tech companies and a single company that controls all the ebooks and audiobooks. That concentration makes it much harder for artists to bargain effectively with entertainments companies, and that means that it's possible -likely, even – for entertainment companies to gain market advantages that aren't shared with creative workers. In other words, when your field is dominated by a cartel, you may be on on their side, but they're almost certainly not on your side.

This week, Penguin Random House, the largest publisher in the history of the human race, made headlines when it changed the copyright notice in its books to ban AI training:

https://www.thebookseller.com/news/penguin-random-house-underscores-copyright-protection-in-ai-rebuff

The copyright page now includes this phrase:

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner for the purpose of training artificial intelligence technologies or systems.

Many writers are celebrating this move as a victory for creative workers' rights over AI companies, who have raised hundreds of billions of dollars in part by promising our bosses that they can fire us and replace us with algorithms.

But these writers are assuming that just because they're on Penguin Random House's side, PRH is on their side. They're assuming that if PRH fights against AI companies training bots on their work for free, that this means PRH won't allow bots to be trained on their work at all.

This is a pretty naive take. What's far more likely is that PRH will use whatever legal rights it has to insist that AI companies pay it for the right to train chatbots on the books we write. It is vanishingly unlikely that PRH will share that license money with the writers whose books are then shoveled into the bot's training-hopper. It's also extremely likely that PRH will try to use the output of chatbots to erode our wages, or fire us altogether and replace our work with AI slop.

This is speculation on my part, but it's informed speculation. Note that PRH did not announce that it would allow authors to assert the contractual right to block their work from being used to train a chatbot, or that it was offering authors a share of any training license fees, or a share of the income from anything produced by bots that are trained on our work.

Indeed, as publishing boiled itself down from the thirty-some mid-sized publishers that flourished when I was a baby writer into the Big Five that dominate the field today, their contracts have gotten notably, materially worse for writers:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/19/reasonable-agreement/

This is completely unsurprising. In any auction, the more serious bidders there are, the higher the final price will be. When there were thirty potential bidders for our work, we got a better deal on average than we do now, when there are at most five bidders.

Though this is self-evident, Penguin Random House insists that it's not true. Back when PRH was trying to buy Simon & Schuster (thereby reducing the Big Five publishers to the Big Four), they insisted that they would continue to bid against themselves, with editors at Simon & Schuster (a division of PRH) bidding against editors at Penguin (a division of PRH) and Random House (a division of PRH).

This is obvious nonsense, as Stephen King said when he testified against the merger (which was subsequently blocked by the court): "You might as well say you’re going to have a husband and wife bidding against each other for the same house. It would be sort of very gentlemanly and sort of, 'After you' and 'After you'":

https://apnews.com/article/stephen-king-government-and-politics-b3ab31d8d8369e7feed7ce454153a03c

Penguin Random House didn't become the largest publisher in history by publishing better books or doing better marketing. They attained their scale by buying out their rivals. The company is actually a kind of colony organism made up of dozens of once-independent publishers. Every one of those acquisitions reduced the bargaining power of writers, even writers who don't write for PRH, because the disappearance of a credible bidder for our work into the PRH corporate portfolio reduces the potential bidders for our work no matter who we're selling it to.

I predict that PRH will not allow its writers to add a clause to their contracts forbidding PRH from using their work to train an AI. That prediction is based on my direct experience with two of the other Big Five publishers, where I know for a fact that they point-blank refused to do this, and told the writer that any insistence on including this contract would lead to the offer being rescinded.

The Big Five have remarkably similar contracting terms. Or rather, unremarkably similar contracts, since concentrated industries tend to converge in their operational behavior. The Big Five are similar enough that it's generally understood that a writer who sues one of the Big Five publishers will likely find themselves blackballed at the rest.

My own agent gave me this advice when one of the Big Five stole more than $10,000 from me – canceled a project that I was part of because another person involved with it pulled out, and then took five figures out of the killfee specified in my contract, just because they could. My agent told me that even though I would certainly win that lawsuit, it would come at the cost of my career, since it would put me in bad odor with all of the Big Five.

The writers who are cheering on Penguin Random House's new copyright notice are operating under the mistaken belief that this will make it less likely that our bosses will buy an AI in hopes of replacing us with it:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/09/ai-monkeys-paw/#bullied-schoolkids

That's not true. Giving Penguin Random House the right to demand license fees for AI training will do nothing to reduce the likelihood that Penguin Random House will choose to buy an AI in hopes of eroding our wages or firing us.

But something else will! The US Copyright Office has issued a series of rulings, upheld by the courts, asserting that nothing made by an AI can be copyrighted. By statute and international treaty, copyright is a right reserved for works of human creativity (that's why the "monkey selfie" can't be copyrighted):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/20/everything-made-by-an-ai-is-in-the-public-domain/

All other things being equal, entertainment companies would prefer to pay creative workers as little as possible (or nothing at all) for our work. But as strong as their preference for reducing payments to artists is, they are far more committed to being able to control who can copy, sell and distribute the works they release.

In other words, when confronted with a choice of "We don't have to pay artists anymore" and "Anyone can sell or give away our products and we won't get a dime from it," entertainment companies will pay artists all day long.

Remember that dope everyone laughed at because he scammed his way into winning an art contest with some AI slop then got angry because people were copying "his" picture? That guy's insistence that his slop should be entitled to copyright is far more dangerous than the original scam of pretending that he painted the slop in the first place:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/artist-appeals-copyright-denial-for-prize-winning-ai-generated-work/

If PRH was intervening in these Copyright Office AI copyrightability cases to say AI works can't be copyrighted, that would be an instance where we were on their side and they were on our side. The day they submit an amicus brief or rulemaking comment supporting no-copyright-for-AI, I'll sing their praises to the heavens.

But this change to PRH's copyright notice won't improve writers' bank-balances. Giving writers the ability to control AI training isn't going to stop PRH and other giant entertainment companies from training AIs with our work. They'll just say, "If you don't sign away the right to train an AI with your work, we won't publish you."

The biggest predictor of how much money an artist sees from the exploitation of their work isn't how many exclusive rights we have, it's how much bargaining power we have. When you bargain against five publishers, four studios or three labels, any new rights you get from Congress or the courts is simply transferred to them the next time you negotiate a contract.

As Rebecca Giblin and I write in our 2022 book Chokepoint Capitalism:

Giving a creative worker more copyright is like giving your bullied schoolkid more lunch money. No matter how much you give them, the bullies will take it all. Give your kid enough lunch money and the bullies will be able to bribe the principle to look the other way. Keep giving that kid lunch money and the bullies will be able to launch a global appeal demanding more lunch money for hungry kids!

https://chokepointcapitalism.com/

As creative workers' fortunes have declined through the neoliberal era of mergers and consolidation, we've allowed ourselves to be distracted with campaigns to get us more copyright, rather than more bargaining power.

There are copyright policies that get us more bargaining power. Banning AI works from getting copyright gives us more bargaining power. After all, just because AI can't do our job, it doesn't follow that AI salesmen can't convince our bosses to fire us and replace us with incompetent AI:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/11/robots-stole-my-jerb/#computer-says-no

Then there's "copyright termination." Under the 1976 Copyright Act, creative workers can take back the copyright to their works after 35 years, even if they sign a contract giving up the copyright for its full term:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/09/26/take-it-back/

Creative workers from George Clinton to Stephen King to Stan Lee have converted this right to money – unlike, say, longer terms of copyright, which are simply transferred to entertainment companies through non-negotiable contractual clauses. Rather than joining our publishers in fighting for longer terms of copyright, we could be demanding shorter terms for copyright termination, say, the right to take back a popular book or song or movie or illustration after 14 years (as was the case in the original US copyright system), and resell it for more money as a risk-free, proven success.

Until then, remember, just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side. They don't want to prevent AI slop from reducing your wages, they just want to make sure it's their AI slop puts you on the breadline.

Tor Books as just published two new, free LITTLE BROTHER stories: VIGILANT, about creepy surveillance in distance education; and SPILL, about oil pipelines and indigenous landback.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/19/gander-sauce/#just-because-youre-on-their-side-it-doesnt-mean-theyre-on-your-side

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[reasonsforhope]

"Rewilding in Scotland has created a more than 400% increase in jobs, research has found amid calls for it to continue.

Research by Rewilding Britain shows 35 jobs have been created at one site alone in the Highlands since 2008.

The research found there has been a 412% increase in jobs at 13 major rewilding projects covering almost 60,000 hectares, including sites owned or managed by charities, communities, private landowners, and public bodies.

Full-time equivalent jobs across the sites increased from 24 before rewilding to 123, across sectors including hospitality, estate management, ecology, environmental monitoring, rewilding interventions, recreation, and education.

The largest recorded rise in jobs was at Trees for Life’s 4,000-hectare Dundreggan estate near Loch Ness in the Highlands, a former deer stalking estate.

Since 2008, some 35 jobs have been created in addition to the sole previous position, while volunteer numbers have risen from zero to 100.

A rewilding centre was opened at the site last year and an open invitation has been extended to Hollywood star Leonardo DiCaprio to visit it after he backed a campaign for Scotland to become the world’s first “rewilding nation”.

All the sites are more than 100 hectares in size and are part of the Rewilding Network managed by Rewilding Britain.

The research found combined volunteer numbers at the sites increased from zero to 435...

The Scottish Government has been urged to commit to nature recovery across 30% of land by restoring habitats including peatlands, native woodlands, wetlands, rivers and seas, with no loss of productive farmland.

Kevin Cumming, rewilding director at Rewilding Britain and deputy convener of the Scottish Rewilding Alliance, said: “These remarkable job creation figures show how rewilding can turbo-charge social and economic benefits, while offering hope for reversing biodiversity loss and tackling climate breakdown.

“This is yet another powerful illustration of why the Scottish Government should declare Scotland a rewilding nation.

“The opportunity is huge – for jobs and local economies, better health, food production, access to fresh water and clean air.”

The alliance’s Rewilding Nation Charter – including representations from more than 20 organisations – has been signed by thousands of people since it launched in the spring.

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “Restoring Scotland’s natural environment is a key way that we can help address the twin challenges of nature loss and climate change, including many of the interventions championed by the Scottish Rewilding Alliance.

“We welcome this evidence of employment in rural communities and will consider this research as we continue to work towards our commitment to protect and restore 30% of Scotland’s land and seas for nature.

“Our £65 million Nature Restoration Fund has committed nearly £40 million since 2021 to unlock the full potential that nature restoration projects can bring to communities.

“The fund has supported local businesses, helped landowners with pollinator projects to boost food production and supported improved access to green spaces throughout Scotland, alongside restoration of our marine environment.”

The charter can be viewed at www.rewild.scot/charter."

-via The Independent, June 19, 2024

[philosopherking1887]

More good things the Biden administration is doing: OSHA heat safety rules for workers

Remember when Texas and Florida passed laws preventing local and municipal governments from implementing their own heat safety rules and said that if heat is such a big problem, OSHA should make rules that apply to everyone? If not, NPR can remind you. OSHA has now accepted the challenge, moving much faster than they usually do:

OSHA National News Release U.S. Department of Labor July 2, 2024 Biden-Harris administration announces proposed rule to protect indoor, outdoor workers from extreme heat WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Labor has released a proposed rule with the goal of protecting millions of workers from the significant health risks of extreme heat. If finalized, the proposed rule would help protect approximately 36 million workers in indoor and outdoor work settings and substantially reduce heat injuries, illnesses, and deaths in the workplace. Heat is the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the U.S. Excessive workplace heat can lead to heat stroke and even death. While heat hazards impact workers in many industries, workers of color have a higher likelihood of working in jobs with hazardous heat exposure. “Every worker should come home safe and healthy at the end of the day, which is why the Biden-Harris administration is taking this significant step to protect workers from the dangers posed by extreme heat,” said Acting Secretary of Labor Julie Su. “As the most pro-worker administration in history, we are committed to ensuring that those doing difficult work in some of our economy’s most critical sectors are valued and kept safe in the workplace.” The proposed rule would require employers to develop an injury and illness prevention plan to control heat hazards in workplaces affected by excessive heat. Among other things, the plan would require employers to evaluate heat risks and — when heat increases risks to workers — implement requirements for drinking water, rest breaks and control of indoor heat. It would also require a plan to protect new or returning workers unaccustomed to working in high heat conditions. “Workers all over the country are passing out, suffering heat stroke and dying from heat exposure from just doing their jobs, and something must be done to protect them,” said Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Douglas L. Parker. “Today’s proposal is an important next step in the process to receive public input to craft a ‘win-win’ final rule that protects workers while being practical and workable for employers.” Employers would also be required to provide training, have procedures to respond if a worker is experiencing signs and symptoms of a heat-related illness, and take immediate action to help a worker experiencing signs and symptoms of a heat emergency. The public is encouraged to submit written comments on the rule once it is published in the Federal Register. The agency also anticipates a public hearing after the close of the written comment period. More information will be available on submitting comments when the rule is published. In the interim, OSHA continues to direct significant existing outreach and enforcement resources to educate employers and workers and hold businesses accountable for violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s general duty clause, 29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(1) and other applicable regulations. Record-breaking temperatures across the nation have increased the risks people face on-the-job, especially in summer months. Every year, dozens of workers die and thousands more suffer illnesses related to hazardous heat exposure that, sadly, are most often preventable. The agency continues to conduct heat-related inspections under its National Emphasis Program – Outdoor and Indoor Heat-Related Hazards, launched in 2022. The program inspects workplaces with the highest exposures to heat-related hazards proactively to prevent workers from suffering injury, illness or death needlessly. Since the launch, OSHA has conducted more than 5,000 federal heat-related inspections. In addition, the agency is prioritizing programmed inspections in agricultural industries that employ temporary, nonimmigrant H-2A workers for seasonal labor. These workers face unique vulnerabilities, including potential language barriers, less control over their living and working conditions, and possible lack of acclimatization, and are at high risk of hazardous heat exposure.