Ever wonder why you can still get a manicure for $5 in parts of New York City? Or why waiters here are mostly white, while all the busboys are immigrants? All this is explained in a disturbing report just released by the Brennan Center for Justice, which shows that abusive is becoming the new normal in the urban workplace. The authors of Unregulated Work in the Global City: Employment and Labor Law Violations in New York City, studied 13 industries over three years, and found that violations of wage and hour, health and safety, discrimination and workers' compensation laws, as well as of the right to organize, were commonplace, and generally went unpunished. (The authors are currently studying unregulated work in other cities, and are finding that the problem is a national one, so don't dismiss this as an New York-centric story!)

Consumer patterns play a part; we all expect more convenience, services and goods, even when we don't make much money. Just yesterday, I discovered that I could get a massage for $10.50 even in Manhattan (the Brennan Center reports that massage therapists in this low-priced segment can make as little as $275 a week, and employers routinely fail to protect them from customer harassment). Some businesses -- discount stores, nail salons -- keep prices low to serve poor consumers (whose work may also be largely unregulated) but to do that, must miserably exploit their workers, not even paying minimum wage, much less overtime.

Yet consumer poverty can't explain everything, because high end restaurants are no picnic for workers, either (in fact, they seem to to be worse than fast food and other chain and franchise restaurants). In the city's restaurant industry, illegal discrimination based on race and ethnicity is so common it goes almost unnoticed. So are violations of minimum wage: $5 an hour is about average, and it's not unusual for coat checkers and delivery guys to make as little as $3 an hour.

So what is to be done? Often, we lefty types think that if everyone would just wake up, open their eyes and organize in their communities, all would be well. But actually, a lot of people have been doing just that, especially the immigrant workers most affected by these conditions. The Chinese Staff and Workers' Association has been bringing attention to these problems for years. Another workers' group, the Restaurant Opportunities Center, has also had organizing successes, forcing many restaurants to pay back wages to workers after public pickets. These groups are great at what they do, but the problems still persist because -- as the title of this report suggests -- there is little enforcement in many of these industries. When rampant lawlessness becomes an industry-wide norm, some businesses say they have to abuse workers in order to compete. Most Americans agree New York City is a nicer place to visit than it used to be, now that you're less likely to be mugged. But it's time to get tough on other kinds of crimes.

Comments (31)

1. Ms Featherstone didn't get the memo on Bloomberg....

   BLOG | Posted 06/20/2007 @ 06:37am Bloomberg Sounds Like Independent Candidate by John Nichols

   BLOG | Posted 06/20/2007 @ 1:15pm A NY State of Mind by Katrina vanden Heuvel

   Supposed to talk him up, to keep things interesting...heheh.

   Posted by Mask at 06/21/2007 @ 7:55pm

2. Hmmmm..., could it be the `abused' New Yorkers aren't quite the "I Love NY" types? Isn't all them NY progressives/libs looking after the oppressed right under their noses? Really, what is this world coming to?

   Posted by Happy at 06/21/2007 @ 10:29pm

3. divine liza...

   keep raking that muck.

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/21/2007 @ 11:21pm

4. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ WHERE IS WALMART HERE?ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

   Posted by john maasch at 06/22/2007 @ 12:16am

5. Dangerously Unregulated?

   Sounds like the beginning of a study on antonyms

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/22/2007 @ 07:42am

6. Thanks, Liza, for the brief ethnology of the "Big Apple's" service workers' status. No answers here, but I'm glad to hear of your successes in shopping for wholesale pricing and trust you tip well so as to remain a "working class" hero.

   Posted by lewwelge at 06/22/2007 @ 09:23am

7. As usual when Ms. Featherstone reports on abuses against workers, any workers, the centrists, right-wingers and sexist left-wingers start launching their personal attacks against her and/or the staff of The Nation instead of dealing with the substance of her piece, in this case, a study outlining widespread violations of the law, which some of you claim to be in favor of upholding.

   And most of you aren't even the complete idiots and fools who post here! What a pathetic bunch of sexist jerks.

   Posted by cka2nd at 06/22/2007 @ 10:52am

8. What a pathetic bunch of sexist jerks.

   Posted by CKA2ND 06/22/2007 @ 10:52am

   Where's the "sexism", CKA?

   Posted by Mask at 06/22/2007 @ 1:17pm

9. Temper, temper...always consider the source CKA2nd. And when not identifiable, as here, gear down the calumnious generalizations, please.

   The "ignore" button is EXTREMELY useful.

   Happy Friday.

   Posted by lewwelge at 06/22/2007 @ 1:25pm

10. CKA2ND: Please use something other than "sexist" to describe, well, from your post, I'd say ALL of us. "Sexist" is just a label made up by someone to control people's behavior or thought processes. It is a "non word" like "homophobe" ( After all, I don't hear anyone calling pro-gay-lifestyle people "heterophobes")

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/22/2007 @ 2:47pm

11. Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/22/2007 @ 2:48pm

12. The sexism, Mask, is in the consistent response to Featherstone's posts on the part of a significant number of the regular posters to this site. Sure, some folks bust Nichols' or Corns' chops for trying to sell their book in their blogs, but the regular women bloggers on this site, Liza Featherstone and Katarina Vanden Heuvel, are consistently the most personally attacked, with disparaging comments made about their personal lives, their husbands, their alleged (speculated, divined in a lamb's entrails?) consumer habits, etc. In Featherstone's case, even the topics that she writes about are sometimes dismissed as unimportant in a time of war, as if Wal-Mart, perhaps the most important corporation in the world during the last 20 years, has not directly affected the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and indirectly changed the work lives and consumption habits of millions.

    Someone writes about working people struggling to make $3.00 an hour while living in New York City, or about the joys and wonders of the Wal-Mart experience (How many thousands of women are they now supposed to be paying anti-discrimination settlements to? How many times have they been found to have violated federal labor law, including health and safety laws?), and too many of you guys - presumptuous of me, I know - react as if she's a Sunday school teacher scold from your youth, except instead of sniggering behind her back, you do it on the Internet.

    As I said, pathetic.

    And, just to make sure there's no doubt who I was aiming at, this goes out to Freiheit, Maasch, Thornton, Happy, you, and, most regrettably, Zero.

    Posted by cka2nd at 06/22/2007 @ 4:18pm

13. I'm Honored

    One thing though CKA2nd, If you think I wouldn't say it to Sister Mary Liza's face, think again.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 06/22/2007 @ 4:25pm

14. Posted by CKA2ND 06/22/2007 @ 4:18pm

    Wait, you left out our buddy, Maasch! Unless, you didn't `get it'!

    To be honest, unless I quote the author in my comments or had strong reactions, I did't remember who wrote this thread! So much for your "sexism"!

    Posted by Happy at 06/22/2007 @ 4:42pm

15. Posted by CKA2ND 06/22/2007 @ 4:18pm

    CKA....sorry....care to provide a few SPECIFIC examples of where attacks on Ms Featherstone or Ms vanden Heuvel are gender-specific or harsher personally than attacks on Mr Nichols, Mr Corn, etc.?

    See, without specifics, your critique comes off as "You guys are picking on the girls!" and THAT is sexism, because it seems to imply that some special "protection" is necessary for strong, capable women like Ms Featherstone and Ms vanden Heuvel, that Mr.s Nichols, Corn, Rothberg, Berman do NOT need.

    Posted by Mask at 06/22/2007 @ 4:49pm

16. BTW, specifically....mentions I've made of Ms vanden Heuvel's husband, Prof. Stephen Cohen, have been in relation to her sourcing his stance on Russian relations as support for her own arguments on the subject and given their different family names, rarely mentioning their marital status in what may be a disengenuous manner.

    I'd do the same if Ms Featherstone was quoting Doug Henwood and failing to cite said source as having a "special relationship" with her, but acting as if he was merely another quotable expert.

    Posted by Mask at 06/22/2007 @ 4:54pm

17. Mask, I feel no need to offer footnotes and links or cut and paste. I've noted quite specifically the TYPES of behavior that I've noticed. If you want actual examples, feel free to go trolling through the archives yourself.

    Also, a mass of comments do not have to be gender-specific in order to be sexist. If the behaviour towards a woman is consistently different from that towards men, that can be evidence enough. I beleive that has been the case here.

    Posted by cka2nd at 06/22/2007 @ 5:57pm

18. I am honored to be in such fine esteemed company...and Zero..

    I don't care what Lizas gender is, she is addicted to unionising every kiosk, coffee shop, pay toilet and Walmart in the world , resulting in higher prices accross the board for everyone..and defeating many companys model for existance at all...why? Who knows, she certainly doesn't it seems, but it must be the "we meant well" coalition...as the very entities she attacks close down and move...

    Lizas trouble is she can't distinguish between an entry level job with all that it encumbers and a career...she gets poor responses from most here because it is always the same old crap....

    The real problem is not some percieved notion of sexism, but rather the lack of real reponses to ANY of her articles...to follow CKs path, the fact that 90% of the posters here DO NOT POST TO LIZAS ARTICLES AT ALL..IS SEXIST? OR DO THEY TOO, BELIEVE IT IS NOT WORTH THE RESPONSE AT ALL?

    Posted by john maasch at 06/22/2007 @ 9:22pm

19. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Posted by john maasch at 06/22/2007 @ 9:22pm

20. Posted by CKA2ND 06/22/2007 @ 5:57pm

    Again, you offer no examples, just a generic attack on supposed attacks.

    To me....you are simply saying "You guys quit picking on the girls, it's sexist!"....which to me...is sexist.

    Posted by Mask at 06/22/2007 @ 9:31pm

21. We're lucky if Happy even READS the article, much less remembers the writer!

    Posted by Hman23 at 06/22/2007 @ 10:19pm

22. We're lucky if Happy even READS the article, much less remembers the writer!

    Posted by HMAN23 06/22/2007 @ 10:19pm

    Too bad The Nation don't give us the "Ignore" feature for screening out certain writers.....for their own protection against those of us who are sexists, homophobes, Jew-haters, etc....

    JM can put Liza on Ignore for example, he seems to have her down pretty pat....me, I am still working on `reading' this article:)

    Posted by Happy at 06/22/2007 @ 10:35pm

23. Glad to see this blog is "on topic". I will be in NYC on Monday and I will make a point to talk to some "service" workers to see just how rampant the abuses seem to be. Seriously, what is the point of blogging here if you pay close attention to the trolls that only want to talk shit, and never want to talk about issues--iggy some of the worst offenders if they bother you that much and move on.

    Posted by jpolston at 06/23/2007 @ 4:01pm

24. Seriously, what is the point of blogging here.....

    Posted by JPOLSTON 06/23/2007 @ 4:01pm

    I'm still relatively new, so, can you shed some `wisdom'?

    Are the bloggers supposed to be an echo chamber of the TN's writers? An echo chamber for themselves? Do TN's writers actively discuss/debate with us fellow blogger (PETER as an exception, so far as I can see)? Do you read more interesting `debates' by bloggers of different political stripes or vice versa?

    Seriously, the best bloggers here DON'T come here to find agreement! It is quite plausible that TN is simply over-your-head!....But, if any consolation, you are NOT alone!

    Posted by Happy at 06/23/2007 @ 4:55pm

25. Bargain priced massages, and pedicures? How 'bout child care and maid service? Lots of Illegals being exploited, doing jobs americans won't do (Not for slave-level wages, anyway......)

    The comparison of the white waiters and the hispanic busboys is telling....Being a waiter in NYC generally requires speaking english...

    The story above is only the latest glimpse of NYC's cheap illegal alien labor creating it's own demand...Elsewhere, It can be seen at nearly every construction site across America, and doing landscaping and lawn cutting in a neighborhood near you.......

    But, what happens when construction slows down? Will the workers go back from whence they came? Not if Congress has it's way......

    Posted by davebarlett at 06/23/2007 @ 8:12pm

26. Lots and lots of markers being called in on this amnesty for illegals bill....Watch as politicians on both sides of the aisle sell american workers down the river, with no apologies........

    Posted by davebarlett at 06/23/2007 @ 8:15pm

27. I am one of those workers. I chose that life. I could take a job with benefits and higher pay, but I am also a musician by choice. I know, full well, that as a waiter/musician this is the sort of thing I must deal with. The only way this will change is if all of us waiters, musicians, artists, whatever band together and strike or organize, but that isn't going to happen because then we we'll simply be replaced by people who are willing to put up with it. It's a choice I made and a lot of people make in order to have the freedom to do what we want and to work the hours that we want.

    Posted by Paunk at 06/24/2007 @ 12:08am

28. JM can put Liza on Ignore for example, he seems to have her down pretty pat....me, I am still working on `reading' this article:)

    Posted by HAPPY 06/22/2007 @ 10:35pm

    If only I could, I would, but on the other hand, I would lose a source of laughter, humour and outright disbelief that one could hold these views, that gives me great entertainment.

    Posted by john maasch at 06/24/2007 @ 11:02am

29. Ms Featherstone didn't get the memo on Bloomberg....

    The closer America looks at this guy, the more they will discover that, despite a few creative ideas, he is the wrong person to lead this country.

    It is doubtful that Bloomberg even notices that all the waiters in NYC are white and the buspersons non-white. In the world of a NYC billionare, racism is kind of normal.

    Posted by Metteyya at 06/24/2007 @ 2:38pm

30. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press Bloomberg Well Known, But of Limited Appeal for Now

    by Michael Dimock and Shawn Neidorf June 20, 2007

    Figure

    Michael Bloomberg has created some excitement in the political world about a possible run for the presidency by dropping his Republican affiliation. But a recent nationwide Pew voter survey found that while the New York mayor is relatively well known, his appeal is very modest at this point.

    Almost two-thirds of American voters (65%) know who Michael Bloomberg is – more than have heard of Mitt Romney (62%), Joe Biden (58%), Fred Thompson (51%) or Bill Richardson (48%). Overall, Bloomberg's visibility falls in the middle of the pack of presidential contenders – well below the current Democratic or Republican frontrunners.

    But as the New York mayor reportedly considers an independent bid for the presidency, only 9% of voters who have heard of him say there's a good chance they'd cast a ballot for him.

    Another 23% say there is some chance, but more than half of American voters – 56% – say there's no chance Bloomberg would get their vote.

    Majorities of Republican, Democratic and independent voters who have heard of Bloomberg say there is no chance they'd vote for him, though he is somewhat more appealing to independents and Republicans than he is to Democrats.

    As many as 38% of independent voters and 36% of Republican voters who have heard of Bloomberg say there is at least some chance they'd vote for him, compared to just 26% of Democratic voters. Figure

    Bloomberg fares only slightly better in the Northeast, where 38% of voters who had heard of him also said there is some chance they'd cast a ballot for him. Somewhat fewer in the Midwest (31%) South (30%) and West (27%) see themselves backing Bloomberg, not because they flatly oppose him (there is no regional difference in the percent saying there is "no chance" they will back him) but because even those who have heard of Bloomberg in these areas have less of a sense of him.

    The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey was conducted May 30 to June 3, 2007, among 1,503 adults. That includes 1,247 registered voters (margin of error, +/-3%), 847 of whom had heard of Bloomberg and were asked to rate the chances they would vote for him (margin of error, +/-4%).

    Posted by Metteyya at 06/24/2007 @ 6:54pm

31. Yea, the old saw "racism is nothing compared with sexism," has some purchase here. Be that as it may, as a self-described "feminist," basically believing in "equal opportunity" and "equal compensation" for comparable tasks, I applaud all who here make real Susan Sontag's words: "literature IS self-criticism." Rock on fras and sisters!

    Posted by lewwelge at 06/24/2007 @ 7:48pm