LETTERS - Sept. 1

ISSUE | LABOR DEAL

Center agreement best for city, workers

The Inquirer rightly noted the major gains already realized at the Convention Center as a result of the seamless four-union workforce and new customer-friendly work rules ("Union rules needed," Aug. 24). Unfortunately, the carpenters' union has mounted a propaganda campaign, falsely claiming its members are victims of a lockout. Center management, SMG, and all six center unions spent months hammering out a new Customer Satisfaction Agreement that gave exhibitors more leeway in setting up booths. It also gave us a 10-year contract extension with 3 percent annual increases in wages and benefits. Our four unions understood that the relatively minor concessions would make the center more competitive. The carpenters (and Teamsters, who weren't required to make concessions) refused to sign the agreement in time. In fact, the carpenters' Ed Coryell said at the May 6 Convention Center board meeting that he'd "never" sign. It wasn't our desire to move forward without two unions, but we signed because it was the right thing to do not only for the city and state, but for every chambermaid, bartender, waiter, busboy, and front-desk clerk whose livelihood depends on a robust Convention Center.

|Michael Barnes, business manager, Stagehands Local 8; Samuel Staten Jr., business manager, Laborers Local 332; John J. Dougherty, business manager, IBEW Local 98; and Sam Malone, business manager, Ironworkers Local 405

ISSUE | PROTESTS

Peaceful, yes

Tabatha Abu El-Haj seems to have taken great liberties with the First Amendment by asserting that outdoor assemblies must be allowed to be disruptive in order to be effective, that illegal acts short of violence are to be condoned, even encouraged, and that our country's founders "granted constitutional protection to the disruptive elements of outdoor gatherings" ("Fundamental right to disrupt," Aug. 28). In part, the First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble."

There is no indication in this text that the founders intended to protect disruptive public gatherings and illegal but nonviolent acts in the course of public assemblies.

|Richard Schmidt, West Chester

ISSUE | INHALING, EXHALING

Glad locker check will include CPR manuals

Congratulations to New Jersey for requiring all high school students to learn cardiopulmonary resuscitation ("High schoolers in N.J. will be trained to do CPR," Aug. 21). In January, my 53-year-old son suffered a cardiac arrest in the elevator of his condominium. A visiting teenager who had learned CPR as a lifeguard saved his life. Think how many lives this initiative will save.

|Gertrude Huntington, Kennett Square

Crackdown more than one toke over the line

On behalf of Americans for Democratic Action of Southeastern Pennsylvania, District 1199C, Jobs with Justice, Philadelphia NOW, Philadelphia Democratic Progressive Caucus, and Philly for Change, I strongly urge Mayor Nutter to sign pending legislation that seeks to eliminate arrests, court time, and prison for possession of modest amounts of marijuana. The bill was approved weeks ago by City Council on a vote of 13-3.

It is clear to all informed observers that there is an intrinsic bias in how marijuana laws are enforced, which serves to exacerbate the gross and expanding income gap for minorities and the poor. A teenager who is convicted of marijuana possession - no matter how minor - will have a criminal record that renders him less employable for the rest of that teenager's life.

Long ago, District Attorney Seth Williams announced he would not prosecute for possession of petty amounts of marijuana. He concluded that aggressive enforcement would continue to waste the time of police and prosecutors and court resources. There is no public safety argument that can be mounted against this bill that could not also be mounted against beer or wine possession. No one's freedom and prospect of employment is threatened by possession of beer and wine.

With the stroke of his pen, the mayor can expand economic and social justice for Philadelphians who are subject to the biased enforcement of this anachronistic law.

|Glenavie Norton, chair, Americans for Democratic Action of Southeastern Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

ISSUE | SUITING UP, SUING

Waited on hand and foot, but not paying?

Recent reports about Philadelphia restaurant workers suing their former employers are a reminder that a large minority of such businesses fail to pay their workers, stealing wages in order to lower costs and unfairly compete with businesses that follow the law. What's more, wage theft in Pennsylvania is partly enabled by weak laws that barely penalize employers who fail to fully pay their workers.

Under state law, an employer is fined 25 percent of the unpaid wages if an employee successfully wins a lawsuit for wage theft. With such a low penalty, 9 out of every 10 workers who suffer wage theft have to win in court before their employers have to pay more than the original wages owed. This is unlikely and an untenable situation.

State Sen. Christine Tartaglione (D., Phila.) has introduced legislation that increases penalties for wage theft from 25 percent to 200 percent. This is a commonsense solution that provides real punishment for the businesses that compete unfairly by stealing their employees' wages.

|Michael Hollander, staff attorney, Community Legal Services, Philadelphia