Chris Hedges's Blog, page 352

40 Dead, Many Feared Buried in Mud After Brazil Dam Collapses

BRUMADINHO, Brazil—The death toll from the collapse of a dam holding back mine waste in southeastern Brazil rose to 40 on Saturday as searchers flying in helicopters and rescuers laboring in deep mud uncovered more bodies. An estimated 300 people were still missing and authorities expected the death toll to increase during a search made more challenging by intermittent rains.

Scores of families in the city desperately awaited word on their loved ones, and Romeu Zema, governor of Minas Gerais state, promised that those responsible “would be punished.”

Employees of the mining complex owned and operated by Brazilian mining company Vale were eating lunch Friday afternoon when the dam gave way, unleashing a sea of reddish-brown mud that knocked over and buried several structures of the company and surrounding areas. The level of devastation quickly led President Jair Bolsonaro and other officials to describe it as a “tragedy.”

The flow of waste reached the nearby community of Vila Ferteco and an occupied Vale administrative office. On Saturday, rooftops poked above an extensive field of the mud, which also cut off roads. After the dam collapse, some were evacuated from Brumadinho. Other residents of the affected areas barely escaped with their lives.

“I saw all the mud coming down the hill, snapping the trees as it descended. It was a tremendous noise,” said a tearful Simone Pedrosa, from the neighborhood of Parque Cachoeira, about 5 miles (8 kilometers) from where the dam collapsed.

Pedrosa, 45, and her parents dashed to their car and drove to the highest point in the neighborhood. “If we had gone down the other direction, we would have died,” Pedrosa said, adding that she had a feeling “that this was the end of my life.”

“I cannot get that noise out of my head,” she said. “It’s a trauma … I’ll never forget.”

In addition to the 40 bodies recovered as of Saturday afternoon, 23 people were hospitalized, said authorities with the Minas Gerais fire department. There had been some signs of hope earlier Saturday when authorities found 43 more people alive. Company officials also had said that 100 workers were accounted for.

But the company said in a statement Saturday afternoon that more than 200 workers were still missing, while fire officials at one point estimated the total number at close to 300. Vale CEO Fabio Schvartsman said he did not know what caused the collapse. About 300 employees were working when it happened.

Emergency workers suspended their search shortly after nightfall. They planned to resume at first light Sunday morning.

For many, hope was fading to anguish.

“I don’t think he is alive,” said Joao Bosco, speaking of his cousin, Jorge Luis Ferreira, who worked for Vale. “Right now I can only hope for a miracle of God.”

Vanilza Sueli Oliveira described the wait for news of her nephew as “distressing, maddening.”

“Time is passing,” she said. “It’s been 24 hours already. … I just don’t want to think that he is under the mud.”

The rivers of mining waste also raised fears of widespread contamination.

According to Vale’s website, the waste, often called tailings, is composed mostly of sand and is non-toxic. However, a U.N. report found that the waste from a similar disaster in 2015 “contained high levels of toxic heavy metals.”

On Friday, Minas Gerais state court blocked $260 million from Vale for state emergency services and told the company to present a report about how they would help victims. On Saturday, the state’s justice ministry ordered an additional $1.3 billion blocked.

Brazil’s Attorney General, Raquel Dodge promised to investigate, saying “someone is definitely at fault.” Dodge noted there are 600 mines in the state of Minas Gerais alone that are classified as being at risk of rupture.

Another dam administered by Vale and Australian mining company BHP Billiton collapsed in 2015 in the city of Mariana in Minas Gerais state, resulting in 19 deaths and forcing hundreds from their homes. Considered the worst environmental disaster in Brazilian history, it left 250,000 people without drinking water and killed thousands of fish. An estimated 60 million cubic meters of waste flooded rivers and eventually flowed into the Atlantic Ocean.

Schvartsman said what happened Friday was “a human tragedy much larger than the tragedy of Mariana, but probably the environmental damage will be less.”

Sueli de Oliveira Costa, who hadn’t heard from her husband since Friday, had harsh words for the mining company.

“Vale destroyed Mariana and now they’ve destroyed Brumadinho,” she said.

Daily Folha de S.Paulo reported Saturday that the dam’s mining complex was issued an expedited license to expand in December due to “decreased risk.” Preservation groups in the area alleged that the approval was unlawful.

On Twitter, President Bolsonaro said his government would do everything it could to “prevent more tragedies” like Mariana and now Brumadinho.

The far-right leader campaigned on promises to jump-start Brazil’s economy, in part by deregulating mining and other industries.

Environmental groups and activists said the latest spill underscored a lack of regulation, and many promised to fight any further deregulation by Bolsonaro in Latin America’s largest nation.

“History repeats itself,” tweeted Marina Silva, a former environmental minister and three-time presidential candidate. “It’s unacceptable that government and mining companies haven’t learned anything.”

___

Anna Jean Kaiser reported from Sao Paulo and Peter Prengaman reported from Arraial do Cabo, Brazil.

House Democrats Push Trump to Remove Troops From Syria

Democratic Reps. Barbara Lee and Ted Lieu of California, joined by 30 of their colleagues in Congress, sent a letter to President Donald Trump on Friday urging him “to present a long-overdue comprehensive diplomatic, political, and humanitarian strategy for Syria to Congress and the American people.”

“While we believe there was never a military solution in Syria—nor Congressional authorization for the use of force—we are deeply concerned about the chaotic way in which the withdrawal plan has been rolled out,” the letter states, “including continuing confusion over the timeline for the withdrawal and your administration’s lack of a diplomatic strategy in Syria.”

Noting worries over hawkish National Security Adviser John Bolton’s recent remarks that contradicted Trump’s stated desire to bring troops home, it continues, “We strongly support the withdrawal of American forces from Syria, and at the same time recognize that such a decision nevertheless presents risks that can and must be mitigated through the implementation of a coherent and well-thought-out plan.”

The letter—which was also sent to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan—asks the president for detailed responses to a list of questions about his policy goals and plans for Syria by Jan. 31. In addition to 32 House Democrats, letter is backed by the groups Peace Action, Win Without War, and the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL).

“Thankfully, these members of Congress are exercising their oversight authority on questions of war by requesting a comprehensive strategy from the administration,” said Paul Kawika Martin of Peace Action, welcoming calls for diplomatic and humanitarian strategies. “Americans need to know what guiding principles and strategies lay behind the administration’s haphazard approach to Syria, so that those principles and strategies can be laid bare and subjected to public debate.”

Thank you @RepBarbaraLee and @RepTedLieu for leading this letter of 32 members of #Congress to @realDonaldTrump urging diplomatic and humanitarian strategies for #Syria. I'm excited to see new Representatives like @RashidaTlaib, @AOC, @KatieHill4CA and @IlhanMN onboard! pic.twitter.com/Gx57j64sxh

— Paul Kawika Martin (@PaulKawika) January 25, 2019

“We cannot cast a blind eye to the consequences of U.S. policies in Syria,” the letter emphasizes. “Prioritizing stabilization and reconstruction, as well as ensuring the access of humanitarian aid organizations to civilians, is vital to protecting the Syrian people and preventing a renewal of violence that could encourage the resurgence of extremist groups like ISIS.”

“Most immediately, the United States must use our leverage with Turkey to prevent further military incursions into Syrian territory, particularly those targeting Kurdish communities there,” it stresses. “The U.S. should also be working to revive and strengthen a U.N.-led peace process to secure a ceasefire that protects our partners and ultimately results in a negotiated solution to the Syrian war.”

Along with Lee and Lieu, the letter was signed by Democratic Reps. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.), Frank Pallone, Jr. (N.J.), Peter A. DeFazio, (Ore.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), Steve Cohen (Tenn.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Jared Huffman (Mo.), Bobby Rush (Ill.), Jim Himes (Conn.), Anna Eshoo (Conn.), José Serrano (N.Y.), Mark DeSaulnier (Mass.), James McGovern (Mass.), Judy Chu (Calif.), Karen Bass (Calif.), Peter Welch (Mass.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (N.J.), Katie Hill (Calif.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Debbie Dingell (Mich.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), Chellie Pingree (Maine) Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), Jerry McNerney (N.M.), Nydia Velázquez (N.Y.), and Raul Grijalva (Ariz.).

Read the full letter:

Dear President Trump:

We write as Members of Congress who have long been concerned about and opposed to U.S. military operations and troop presence in Syria, to urge you to present a long-overdue comprehensive diplomatic, political, and humanitarian strategy for Syria to Congress and the American people. Given the conflicting statements made by your administration, we are also concerned that you are backtracking from your initial decision to withdraw troops.

While we believe there was never a military solution in Syria—nor Congressional authorization for the use of force—we are deeply concerned about the chaotic way in which the withdrawal plan has been rolled out, including continuing confusion over the timeline for the withdrawal and your administration’s lack of a diplomatic strategy in Syria. National Security Advisor John Bolton’s recent statement indicating that U.S. forces could remain in Syria indefinitely directly contradicts your earlier commitment to withdraw U.S. troops immediately. A coherent message from your Administration on troop withdrawal is crucial to advancing a comprehensive diplomatic strategy. We strongly support the withdrawal of American forces from Syria, and at the same time recognize that such a decision nevertheless presents risks that can and must be mitigated through the implementation of a coherent and well-thought-out plan.

We cannot cast a blind eye to the consequences of U.S. policies in Syria. We know that our fight against ISIS came at a dire price to many Syrian civilians and U.S. troops, most recently with the tragic death of 4 brave service members. In Raqqa alone, nearly 80 percent of the city was damaged and destroyed, predominantly by U.S. airstrikes. Aid organizations have reported that thousands of civilians were killed during the effort to liberate the city, yet few families have seen accountability. Your decision to freeze funds allocated for Syrian stabilization has also slowed essential livelihood and recovery activities in places like Raqqa, including the restoration of vital infrastructure. In the wake of reports that U.S. airstrikes in Syria have accelerated since your announcement, we want to ensure that U.S. forces are not simply being replaced by more bombs, particularly in urban environments that are at high risk for civilian casualties. The U.S. has both a moral and strategic obligation to help address the humanitarian crisis in Syria and avoid actions that exacerbate it.

We believe that your administration must prioritize a robust diplomatic and humanitarian strategy in Syria that works towards a sustainable peace plan. Prioritizing stabilization and reconstruction, as well as ensuring the access of humanitarian aid organizations to civilians, is vital to protecting the Syrian people and preventing a renewal of violence that could encourage the resurgence of extremist groups like ISIS. Consequently, the United States should use the full weight of its diplomatic influence and resources to advocate for a political settlement that prevents a resumption of violence in Syria, including in the northeast. Most immediately, the United States must use our leverage with Turkey to prevent further military incursions into Syrian territory, particularly those targeting Kurdish communities there. The U.S. should also be working to revive and strengthen a U.N.-led peace process to secure a ceasefire that protects our partners and ultimately results in a negotiated solution to the Syrian war. To achieve these goals, the United States must engage diplomatically with all parties, rather than linger on the sidelines.

Since Congress has a vital role in achieving our nation’s diplomatic, military, and foreign policy objectives and has the sole power to declare war, we urge you to immediately lay out for Congress your long-term national security, humanitarian, and political strategy in Syria. Specifically, we ask that you answer the following questions by January 31, 2019:

What are your political goals in Syria and what is your administration trying to achieve diplomatically?
What is your administration’s stabilization plan in Syria? Who will pay for it? What is the role of START Forward during the various stages of troop withdrawal? Who are they working with?  How will the U.S. help to safeguard access to essential humanitarian aid?
Does your administration have plans to transparently investigate and offer accountability for the civilian deaths and widespread destruction caused by the U.S.-led coalition bombardment of Raqqa, Mosul, and other cities?
Is the United States currently consulting with all of our international allies on diplomatic strategies to press for a ceasefire and a comprehensive solution to the crisis? 
Will the United States consider cutting off military sales or using other diplomatic leverage with Turkey to ensure Ankara does not invade Syria and target our partners, including the predominantly Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces?
Will you commit to the full withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Syria, or are you planning to leave residual forces to conduct train-and-equip programs or other assistance?
To what extent will the U.S. still conduct air strikes in Syria? What are diplomatic and non-military strategies the administration is employing to starve ISIS of revenue and recruits?

In conclusion, we request that your administration brief Congress and inform the American public of your diplomatic, political and humanitarian strategy in Syria without delay. We owe it to all Americans, especially our brave service members, to help secure a negotiated settlement that ends one of the largest humanitarian crises of our time.

Undercover Agents Target Cybersecurity Watchdog

NEW YORK—The researchers who reported that Israeli software was used to spy on Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s inner circle before his gruesome death are being targeted in turn by international undercover operatives, The Associated Press has found.

Twice in the past two months, men masquerading as socially conscious investors have lured members of the Citizen Lab internet watchdog group to meetings at luxury hotels to quiz them for hours about their work exposing Israeli surveillance and the details of their personal lives. In both cases, the researchers believe they were secretly recorded.

Citizen Lab Director Ron Deibert described the stunts as “a new low.”

“We condemn these sinister, underhanded activities in the strongest possible terms,” he said in a statement Friday. “Such a deceitful attack on an academic group like the Citizen Lab is an attack on academic freedom everywhere.”

Who these operatives are working for remains a riddle, but their tactics recall those of private investigators who assume elaborate false identities to gather intelligence or compromising material on critics of powerful figures in government or business.

Citizen Lab, based out of the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto, has for years played a leading role in exposing state-backed hackers operating in places as far afield as Tibet, Ethiopia and Syria. Lately the group has drawn attention for its repeated exposés of an Israeli surveillance software vendor called the NSO Group, a firm whose wares have been used by governments to target journalists in Mexico, opposition figures in Panama and human rights activists in the Middle East.

In October, Citizen Lab reported that an iPhone belonging to one of Khashoggi’s confidantes had been infected by the NSO’s signature spy software only months before Khashoggi’s grisly murder. The friend, Saudi dissident Omar Abdulaziz, would later claim that the hacking had exposed Khashoggi’s private criticisms of the Saudi royal family to the Arab kingdom’s spies and thus “played a major role” in his death.

In a statement, NSO denied having anything to do with the undercover operations targeting Citizen Lab, “either directly or indirectly” and said it had neither hired nor asked anyone to hire private investigators to pursue the Canadian organization. “Any suggestion to the contrary is factually incorrect and nothing more than baseless speculation,” NSO said.

NSO has long denied that its software was used to target Khashoggi, although it has refused to comment when asked whether it has sold its software to the Saudi government more generally.

___

The first message reached Bahr Abdul Razzak, a Syrian refugee who works as a Citizen Lab researcher, Dec. 6, when a man calling himself Gary Bowman got in touch via LinkedIn. The man described himself as a South African financial technology executive based in Madrid.

“I came across your profile and think that the work you’ve done helping Syrian refugees and your extensive technical background could be a great fit for our new initiative,” Bowman wrote.

Abdul Razzak said he thought the proposal was a bit odd, but he eventually agreed to meet the man at Toronto’s swanky Shangri-La Hotel on the morning of Dec. 18.

The conversation got weird very quickly, Abdul Razzak said.

Instead of talking about refugees, Abdul Razzak said, Bowman grilled him about his work for Citizen Lab and its investigations into the use of NSO’s software. Abdul Razzak said Bowman appeared to be reading off cue cards, asking him if he was earning enough money and throwing out pointed questions about Israel, the war in Syria and Abdul Razzak’s religiosity.

“Do you pray?” Abdul Razzak recalled Bowman asking. “Why do you write only about NSO?” ″Do you write about it because it’s an Israeli company?” ″Do you hate Israel?”

Abdul Razzak said he emerged from the meeting feeling shaken. He alerted his Citizen Lab colleagues, who quickly determined that the breakfast get-together had been a ruse. Bowman’s supposed Madrid-based company, FlameTech, had no web presence beyond a LinkedIn page, a handful of social media profiles and an entry in the business information platform Crunchbase. A reverse image search revealed that the profile picture of the man listed as FlameTech’s chief executive, Mauricio Alonso, was a stock photograph.

“My immediate gut feeling was: ‘This is a fake,’” said John Scott-Railton, one of Abdul Razzak’s colleagues.

Scott-Railton flagged the incident to the AP, which confirmed that FlameTech was a digital facade.

Searches of the Orbis database of corporate records, which has data on some 300 million global companies, turned up no evidence of a Spanish firm called FlameTech or Flame Tech or any company anywhere in the world matching its description. Similarly, the AP found no record of FlameTech in Madrid’s official registry or of a Gary Bowman in the city’s telephone listings. An Orbis search for Alonso, the supposed chief executive, also drew a blank. When an AP reporter visited Madrid’s Crystal Tower high-rise, where FlameTech claimed to have 250 sq. meters (2,700 sq. feet) of office space, he could find no trace of the firm and calls to the number listed on its website went unanswered.

The AP was about to publish a story about the curious company when, on Jan. 9, Scott-Railton received an intriguing message of his own.

___

This time the contact came not from Bowman of FlameTech but from someone who identified himself as Michel Lambert, a director at the Paris-based agricultural technology firm CPW-Consulting.

Lambert had done his homework. In his introductory email, he referred to Scott-Railton’s early doctoral research on kite aerial photography — a mapping technique using kite-mounted cameras — and said he was “quite impressed.”

“We have a few projects and clients coming up that could significantly benefit from implementing Kite Aerial Photography,” he said.

Like FlameTech, CPW-Consulting was a fiction. Searches of Orbis and the French commercial court registry Infogreffe turned up no trace of the supposedly Paris-based company or indeed of any Paris-based company bearing the acronym CPW. And when the AP visited CPW’s alleged office there was no evidence of the company; the address was home to a mainly residential apartment building. Residents and the building’s caretaker said they had never heard of the firm.

Whoever dreamed up CPW had taken steps to ensure the illusion survived a casual web search, but even those efforts didn’t bear much scrutiny. The company had issued a help wanted ad, for example, seeking a digital mapping specialist for their Paris office, but Scott-Railton discovered that the language had been lifted almost word-for-word from an ad from an unrelated company seeking a mapping specialist in London. A blog post touted CPW as a major player in Africa, but an examination of the author’s profile suggests the article was the only one the blogger had ever written.

When Lambert suggested an in-person meeting in New York during a Jan. 19 phone call, Scott-Railton felt certain that Lambert was trying to set him up.

But Scott-Railton agreed to the meeting. He planned to lay a trap of his own.

__

Anyone watching Scott-Railton and Lambert laughing over wagyu beef and lobster bisque at the Peninsula Hotel’s upscale restaurant on Thursday afternoon might have mistaken the pair for friends.

In fact, the lunch was Spy vs. Spy. Scott-Railton had spent the night before trying to hide a homemade camera into his tie, he later told AP, eventually settling for a GoPro action camera and several recording devices hidden about his person. On the table, Lambert had placed a large pen in which Scott-Railton said he spotted a tiny camera lens peeking out from an opening in the top.

Lambert didn’t seem to be alone. At the beginning of the meal, a man sat behind him, holding up his phone as if to take pictures and then abruptly left the restaurant, having eaten nothing. Later, two or three men materialized at the bar and appeared to be monitoring proceedings.

Scott-Railton wasn’t alone either. A few tables away, two Associated Press journalists were making small talk as they waited for a signal from Scott-Railton, who had invited the reporters to observe the lunch from nearby and then interview Lambert near the end of the meal.

The conversation began with a discussion of kites, gossip about African politicians, and a detour through Scott-Railton’s family background. But Lambert, just like Bowman, eventually steered the talk to Citizen Lab and NSO.

“Work drama? Tell me, I like drama!” Lambert said at one point, according to Scott-Railton’s recording of the conversation. “Is there a big competition between the people inside Citizen Lab?” he asked later.

Like Bowman, Lambert appeared to be working off cue cards and occasionally made awkward conversational gambits. At one point he repeated a racist French expression, insisting it wasn’t offensive. He also asked Scott-Railton questions about the Holocaust, anti-Semitism and whether he grew up with any Jewish friends. At another point, he asked whether there might not be a “racist element” to Citizen Lab’s interest in Israeli spyware.

After dessert arrived, the AP reporters approached Lambert at his table and asked him why his company didn’t seem to exist.

He seemed to stiffen.

“I know what I’m doing,” Lambert said, as he put his files — and his pen — into a bag. Then he stood up, bumped into a chair and walked off, saying “Ciao” and waving his hand, before returning because he had neglected to pay the bill.

As he paced around the restaurant waiting for the check, Lambert refused to answer questions about who he worked for or why no trace of his firm could be found.

“I don’t have to give you any explanation,” he said. He eventually retreated to a back room and closed the door.

___

Who Lambert and Bowman really are isn’t clear. Neither men returned emails, LinkedIn messages or phone calls. And despite their keen focus on NSO the AP has found no evidence of any link to the Israeli spyware merchant, which is adamant that it wasn’t involved.

The kind of aggressive investigative tactics used by the mystery men who targeted Citizen Lab have come under fire in the wake of the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse scandal. Black Cube, an Israeli private investigation firm, apologized after The New Yorker and other media outlets revealed that the company’s operatives had used subterfuge and dirty tricks to help the Hollywood mogul suppress allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Scott-Railton and Abdul Razzak said they didn’t want to speculate about who was involved. But both said they believed they were being steered toward making controversial comments that could be used to blacken Citizen Lab’s reputation.

“It could be they wanted me to say, ‘Yes, I hate Israel,’ or ‘Yes, Citizen Lab is against NSO because it’s Israeli,’” said Abdul Razzak.

Scott-Railton said the elaborate, multinational operation was gratifying, in a way.

“People were paid to fly to a city to sit you down to an expensive meal and try to convince you to say bad things about your work, your colleagues and your employer,” he said.

“That means that your work is important.”

___

Lori Hinnant and Nicholas Garriga in Paris, Aritz Parra in Madrid, Josef Federman in Jerusalem and Joseph Frederick in New York contributed to this report.

___

Online:

Emails and a transcript relating to the undercover operatives:https://www.documentcloud.org/search/projectid:42174-Citizen-Lab-Undercover-Op

The Permanent Temp Economy

[image error]

“Temp: How American Work, American Business, and the American Dream Became Temporary”
Purchase in the Truthdig Bazaar

“Temp: How American Work, American Business, and the American Dream Became Temporary”

A book by Louis Hyman

The title of Louis Hyman’s book, “Temp: How American Work, American Business, and the American Dream Became Temporary,” gives a glimpse of the specificity readers will find in this meticulous chronicle of the rise of temporary work, from post World War II to the present. Hyman is a thorough and fair-minded guide through the evolution of attitudes toward labor and the resulting societal upheavals. Because he tracks the slow but steady trajectory toward the gig economy from its first steps in recessionary 1958, much of his research will be surprising to those who are not MBAs or labor historians.

The U.S. enjoyed about 25 years of economic growth and relative stability after the Second World War, and the ’58 recession was short-lived. Still, it was that long ago that entrepreneur Elmer Singer began to publicly warn of the unlikely continuation of secure, full-time employment for all, and the perils of complacency that would descend on those failing to react to numerous signs threatening corporate vitality.

At first, Singer promoted his idea of temporary workers for use in emergency situations only, seemingly savant about what Americans would accept and how quickly. He understood that cost cutting is more profitable than customer growth, and his low-overhead vision of supplying a wide array of businesses with temporary employees in all kinds of circumstances began to take hold in the early ’70s. Singer also correctly read the country’s consistently narrow regard for women; he had the nerve to build a business that for years employed mostly “white-gloved” women, and call it Manpower. (At intervals, Hyman reminds readers of our discriminatory workplace history, including New Deal policies that instituted essential worker protections, except for men of color and all women.)

“Temp” serves up micro and macro views of postwar business theory and history, as well. Exhaustive in detail, and sometimes repetitive, Hyman charts seesaw economic cycles, more common since the ’70s, that link to morphing feelings about immigration, unions and business itself. These cycles also connect to the changing composition of the U.S. workforce, and the waxing and waning of various business sectors. The ups and downs led not only to worker insecurity, but to anxious owners, shareholders, CEOs and managers of large companies. In turn, that anxiety led—implicitly, if not explicitly—to the establishment and insurgence of McKinsey & Co., the executive consultancy firm.

McKinsey would go on to assist businesses all over the U.S., and eventually the world, in planned restructuring based on the analysis and recommendations of outside consultants. As Hyman notes, “The terror of restructuring, while scary for workers, was good for the consulting business. As executives cut workforces, management consulting grew.” The threat of becoming obsolete drove consultancies based on abstract ideas onto the list of Forbes’ top moneymakers. (That consultancies have prospered so long seems to defy the notion of the visionary CEO. Is corporate success as unpredictable as that of scriptwriting, about which William Goldman notoriously claimed, “Nobody knows anything”? Admitting that would surely rumple C suite confidence.)

Click here to read long excerpts from “Temp” at Google Books.

“Temp” is also a story of how U.S. business went from risk averse to risk prone, as corporate attitudes veered toward behavior that might be described as greedy-as-you-can-get-away-with. Hyman relays a would-be cautionary tale about small businessman James Ling, who bought up companies—often in businesses he knew nothing about—and issued debt against their assets. He and his company of ever-changing names parlayed financial schemes and luck to gleefully grow, but their debt eventually got out of hand, like mold, and his shoot-the-moon conglomerate fell apart.

According to Hyman, Elmer Singer and Marvin Bower, longtime heads of Manpower and McKinsey respectively, operated and grew their companies differently, but both were as committed to their ideals and principles as they were to success. Their companies outlasted them, though, and in general, business culture’s shift toward risk acceptance aligns loosely with changes in corporate ethics.

As ethics became less of a priority in business behavior, doors to new ideas of how best to increase profits opened wider. Hyman covers the rotating trends—from conglomeration to growth matrix to reacceptance of monopolies—that defied John Kenneth Galbraith’s theory of corporate stability through measured profit growth. (Hyman quotes Galbraith: “Are the capitalist and communist industrial systems really sisters under the skin?” Ideologically committed free-marketeers might be appalled by this idea, but Galbraith’s analysis that markets and capitalism are incompatible as practiced proved prescient.)

Hyman refers to many companies and corporations like GE, AT&T, Intel, and Hewlett Packard throughout the book, but he utilizes Manpower, McKinsey & Co. and their leaders as his primary labor-altering examples. Apt choices, they pioneered idea and data-driven bottom line efficiency, and their target sectors and growth parallel the expansion of inequality in the U.S. (Manpower pertains to the worlds of low- and mid-skilled workers, and McKinsey to highly educated executives.) Both companies thrived on turnover, as they continue to today, despite crises and reinventions along the way, and the fact that copycat companies followed in their paths and grew even bigger.

As the turned pages mounted, drawing me closer to stories of today’s extreme have-and-have-not tech world, it was clear that most consultancy research pointed to the same finding: companies would maximize profit by getting rid of people and/or outsourcing jobs to pay people less for their work. Their language of leanness was less indelicate and changed over time, with differences in emphasis like the power of CEO talent. Nevertheless, dumping employees from payrolls was the trend that has proved unstoppable, and will continue. Of course, there are reasonable applications for experts and temporary workers, and decent arguments can be made that the safety net benefits of all citizens are not fairly borne by private businesses. But to live, people need decently paying jobs.

So what will happen? With his historian’s hat on, Hyman claims to be agnostic about the long arc toward the entrenchment of gig work, and documents it in epic detail. He then turns to brief hopeful nostrums for remaking the temp work life into one of pragmatic and humanistic opportunity. This is understandable; our culture demands hope even when few solutions are likely, or even seriously contemplated. To his credit, Hyman ventures possibilities that both conservatives and progressives could consider, the most promising of which look back to FDR. Few in power today have any interest in historical successes, however, and lean often is mean. Surviving looks as if it will become more like a music-less, too-few chairs brawl, as corporations slip further and further away from responsibility or connection to people and planet.

Reading “Temp,” I thought frequently of “Working,” Studs Terkel’s remarkable investigation into the trammeled soul of American workers. A paragraph from his introduction to the chronicle foretells a worry of these temporary times, too:

“Perhaps it is this specter that most haunts working men and women: the planned obsolescence of people that is of a piece with the planned obsolescence of the things they make. Or sell. It is perhaps this fear of no longer being needed in a world of needless things that most clearly spells out the unnaturalness, the surreality of much that is called work today.”

 

The ‘Sympathetic Racist’ Returns to the Big Screen in ‘Green Book’

Among the numerous movies dealing with racial issues this awards season, “BlacKkKlansman” and “Green Book,” by filmmaker , lead the awards competition with six and five nominations respectively, including Oscar nods for best picture. As Lee has frequently pointed out in recent interviews, back in 1990 his inflammatory “Do The Right Thing,” which took a candid look at racial tensions one hot summer day in Brooklyn, N.Y., was snubbed by the Academy for Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. The Academy instead chose to honor “Driving Miss Daisy,” director Bruce Beresford’s adaptation of Alfred Uhry’s Pulitzer Prize Award-winning play about an elderly southern widow and her black chauffeur.

This year a similar face-off seems to be brewing between “BlacKkKlansman,” based on the memoir by Ron Stallworth about a black undercover cop who infiltrated the Ku Klux Klan, and “Green Book,” based on real-life jazz pianist Don Shirley’s 1962 tour through the deep South with his Bronx-born Italian American driver, Tony “Lip” Vallelonga. The former depicts various types of racists, ranging from bug-eyed Klansmen to well-meaning bureaucrats. The latter centers on an overeducated snob, played by , who won a Golden Globe and is nominated for an Oscar, and his lovable lug of a racist driver played by , also nominated.

One thing among many that “Green Book” and “Driving Miss Daisy” have in common is the portrayal of  what might be, and has been, called a “sympathetic racist.” It’s a figure not found in any of the movies made by people of color this year—“The Hate U Give,” “If Beale Street Could Talk,” “Sorry to Bother You”—or any other. Among white directors, on the other hand, it’s common in films that take race as a focus.

The character type has reliably appeared in a series of high-profile films, from “The Defiant Ones,” in which plays a sympathetic racist chained to fellow escaped convict , to Kramer’s “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” in which and have to decide if a kind and handsome doctor who works with the U.N. (again, Poitier) is good enough to marry their unaccomplished daughter. In more recent years, directed and starred as a sympathetic racist in “Gran Torino,” about a widowed vet rankled by his Vietnamese neighbors.

“We’re still living in divided times, maybe more so than ever,” Farrelly, who also directed movies like “Dumb and Dumber” and “There’s Something About Mary,” said as he accepted the Golden Globe Award for Best Picture Musical or Comedy, one of three wins that evening. “And that’s who this movie’s for. It’s for everybody. If Don Shirley and Tony Vallelonga can find common ground, we all can.”

Among those who agree are filmmakers , and . They joined actors and in endorsing the movie on Twitter. Other supporters include Henry Louis Gates Jr., and Willie Brown. Quincy Jones, who knew Shirley, publicly thanked Farrelly at a reception “for telling this story of our country’s not-so-distant history and capturing on film the ties that can bind us when we spend time listening, talking and living with one another.”

Early in pre-production, actor was called in by Participant Media’s , with whom she worked on “The Help,” and asked to look at the script. King said they needed a voice from the South, and Spencer, a native of Montgomery, Ala., was happy to oblige. She didn’t recommend any needed changes but became a sounding board for the creative team and was credited as an executive producer.

IndieWire’s Tambay Obenson called “Green Book” another example of what Spike Lee termed the “Magical Negro,” a character with mystical wisdom whose purpose is to transform the white man into a better person. Such examples occur in “The Green Mile,” “The Legend of Bagger Vance,” “The Help” and “Driving Miss Daisy.” The Grapevine’s Monique Judge was troubled by the figure of the white man as savior. Co-writers Nick Vallelonga, the real-life son of Tony, and Farrelly, who collaborated with screenwriter Brian Currie, argue that Tony was hired as a driver and a bodyguard, so obviously there were occasions where he saved Shirley. Other detractors include the Shirley family, who claim the depiction is highly inaccurate, with Shirley’s brother Maurice calling it “a symphony of lies.”

Not helping matters is an old tweet on Nick’s account, since erased, in support of then-candidate Trump’s claim that Muslims were dancing in the streets following 9/11. “100% correct,” Vallelonga reportedly tweeted. “Muslims in Jersey City cheering when towers went down. I saw it, as you did, possibly on local CBS news.” Vallelonga has since apologized in a statement, singling out Ali, “I especially deeply apologize to the brilliant and kind Mahershala Ali, and all members of the Muslim faith, for the hurt I have caused,” he wrote, adding, “I am also sorry to my late father who changed so much from Dr. Shirley’s friendship and I promise this lesson is not lost on me.”

A chameleonic actor known for nuanced performances, Mortensen imbues Tony with a dedication and love for his family, and a loyalty toward Shirley that tests and perhaps overcomes his deep-seated racism. Compare this portrayal with the fanatically comical racists in “BlacKkKlansman,” ranging from the rank and file to David Duke (Topher Grace), an articulate and polished figure of suitably Cro-Mag intellect. Then there’s Chief Bridges (), at the police station where Stallworth () becomes the first black cop to serve. Bridges welcomes him with open arms, sending a signal to the staff that the rookie is to be treated as an equal. But subsequent assignments and the chief’s attitude toward their investigation into the Klan reveal his underlying racism.

The racists in underrated “The Hate U Give” include a bug-eyed cop who shoots an unarmed black man in the back, among others. As the shooting is rehashed on the news and in political debate, systematic racism is laid bare. Even in a love story like “If Beale Street Could Talk,” systemic racism is an inescapable backdrop that profoundly impacts a young couple from Harlem.

“For, you see, he had found his center, his own center, inside him: and it showed,” author James Baldwin writes of his main character, Fonny, in the book on which the movie’s based. “He wasn’t anybody’s nigger. And that’s a crime, in this fucking free country. You’re supposed to be somebody’s nigger. And if you’re nobody’s nigger, you’re a bad nigger: and that’s what the cops decided when Fonny moved downtown.”

While racism is condemned in “Green Book,” “Driving Miss Daisy” and other titles directed by white people, those who practice it often go unpunished. Yes, Tony Lip takes two drinking glasses used by black handymen in his kitchen and throws them in the trash, but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad guy. Sure, kindly old Miss Daisy (), accuses her driver, Hoke (), of stealing, but still she’s a cute old gal who just doesn’t know better. The same sort of whitewashing can be found in the response of most urban liberals when asked why their parents voted for Trump. They’re not racist, they might explain, or if they are, they don’t have a hateful bone in their body.

“Today we have a cultural norm that insists we hide our racism from people of color and deny it among ourselves, but not that we actually challenge it,” writes sociologist Robin DiAngelo in her book “White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism.” “White progressives can be the most difficult for people of color because, to the degree that we think we have arrived, we will put our energy into making sure that others see us as having arrived,” she continues. “White progressives do indeed uphold and perpetrate racism, but our defensiveness and certitude make it virtually impossible to explain to us how we do so.”

Roughly a dozen years ago, journalist Carmen Van Kerckhove at Racialicious identified a trend she called “Hipster Racism,” where white progressives like Sarah Silverman believe they’re post-racial enough to wear blackface, or Amy Schumer, who has joked, “I used to date Hispanics, now I prefer consensual.”

At a “Green Book” post-screening Q&A in Hollywood, Calif., last November, while describing how conditions have changed since the Civil Rights era in which the movie’s set, Mortensen said, “For example, no one says n— anymore.” He has since apologized for using the word in a statement, saying, “[a]lthough my intention was to speak strongly against racism, I have no right to even imagine the hurt that is caused by hearing that word in any context, especially from a white man. I do not use the word in private or in public. I am very sorry that I did use the full word last night and will not utter it again.”

The episode occurred early in the movie’s awards campaign run and might have derailed its hopes, but among critics and awards-governing bodies, “Green Book” appears to be unsinkable. “Is this a perfect time for a movie like this? Yes,” Mortensen asked and answered himself in front of the press backstage at the Golden Globes in January, two months after the flap, as the movie became a resurrected campaign stalwart. “But any time, any generation, when a movie is this well made, this entertaining and also about profound issues, timeless issues, however you want to look at it, it is always going to be a good time to have a film like this.”

After 30 years in the business, for Lee it’s about time he received his first nomination as director. “Today is filled with love,” he told “The Hollywood Reporter” about watching the nominations. “But at the same time, I was watching the news before it came on and I can’t think about the 800,000 Americans who are now living in a desperate time, and I think this film deals directly with that and all the other crazy shit that’s happened in this country since ‘Agent Orange’ [President Donald Trump] got to the White House.”

As Shutdown Ends, Workers Worry About Their Future

Federal workers who have gone a month without getting paid during the longest government shutdown in U.S. history expressed relief Friday that a deal had been reached to end the impasse, but are worried they’ll be in the same spot in a few weeks.

Ivan Tauler and his wife spent an exhausting three weeks calling, researching and haggling to get relief from government agencies, schools, banks and utility companies to scrape by during the shutdown that caused him to be furloughed from his cartographer job at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in West Virginia.

For Tauler, the end of the shutdown was far from a cause for celebration. The deal announced Friday by President Donald Trump only reopens the government for three weeks while negotiations continue over the president’s demands for money to build his long-promised border wall.

“We won’t be spending money like we normally would,” said Melinda Tauler. “We will be more cautious about our finances than normal until we know that the government is not going to be closing every couple of weeks.”

Tauler was one of about 800,000 furloughed federal workers thrust into weeks of uncertainty and financial hardship — leading many to take out loans, apply for unemployment, do temporary jobs and launch online campaigns asking for donations.

The end of the 35-day impasse came on what would have been the second payday with no checks for federal workers. The deal includes back pay federal workers who have gone without paychecks, with Trump vowing that they will get paid very soon.

Alecia Lane, a management analyst with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from Laurel, Maryland, said she’s excited she’ll get a paycheck soon but said the only luxury spending she might do right away is taking her two sons, 12 and 8, to the movie theater.

Lane was among hundreds of federal workers who launched GoFundMe campaigns to get financial help during the shutdown. She needed help to pay her own bills and send money to help her autistic brother and mother who live in Kentucky. She said it was embarrassing to have to make that public plea.

“I’m saving every dime. I never want to be in this position again,” said Lane, a U.S Navy veteran. “I’m worried that we’ll be right back in this situation in three weeks. He (Trump) wants that border wall. To be honest: I was shocked that they even reached this deal.”

Lane scoffed at President Trump’s assertion in his Friday announcement that federal employees agreed with him and weren’t complaining.

“Who was he talking to?” Lane said. “Everyone was complaining, let’s be real.”

Single parent Leisyka Parrott, a Bureau of Land Management employee in Arcata, California, was driving with her son Friday when she heard a radio news broadcast about the deal to reopen the federal government for three weeks. Her cellphone immediately began buzzing with congratulatory text messages from friends, who know she has been furloughed from her job since Dec. 21.

Rebecca Maclean, a housing program specialist for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in Pittsburgh whose furlough began Dec. 21, was washing dishes and listening to NPR when the news broke of a deal to temporarily end the shutdown. She isn’t celebrating quite yet.

“Until (Trump) puts ink to paper, I’m not going to check my bank balance,” she said.

She and her husband have been grateful for the outpouring of support from neighbors. Some dropped off food. Twice, somebody anonymously dropped off grocery store gift cards on their front porch.

The Taulers were approved for food stamps and arranged for free breakfasts and lunches from the schools for their four children, and Ivan Tauler had already submitted his unemployment application.

He said the family is left with hard feelings for politicians and a deep desire to keep more money in savings.

“This seems to be a recurring theme so we’re definitely going to be prepared for it,” Tauler said.

___

Associated Press Writer Michael Kunzelman contributed to this report.

Study Shows Trump Is Stacking Courts With Ultra-Conservative Judges

A new Data for Progress study bolsters warnings that President Donald Trump’s judicial appointees are way further to the right politically than those nominated by past Republican presidents—yet Democrats in the Senate are approaching such appointments “as business as usual,” and infuriating progressive critics who call on them to “recognize the crisis.”

Data for Progress, as co-founder Jon Green outlined Thursday, analyzed data—compiled by political scientists Maya Sen of Harvard and Adam Bonica of Stanford—going back to the Nixon administration for district courts and courts of appeals appointees.

For those who hadn’t donated to campaigns, researchers examined other available information, such as “age, race, employment history, party of appointing president, and ideologies of home state senators, and the judiciary committee chair who oversaw their confirmation.”

The think tank found that “Trump’s appointments stand out as being conservative, white, and male relative to his predecessors’—though they do not seem to be significantly younger than the appointments made by earlier presidents. Over 90 percent of Trump’s appointments so far have been white and three quarters have been men, combining for over 70 percent who are both white and male.”

NEW: We teamed up with @DataProgress, aka @SeanMcElwee and @_Jon_Green, to measure just how extreme Trump's judges are. Today we're bringing you the results. Spoiler alert: they're VERY conservative. And very white. And very male. https://t.co/XVVK1xwfSu

— Demand Justice (@WeDemandJustice) January 25, 2019

“Overall, these data support the notion that Donald Trump is delivering for conservative activists through his judicial appointments, installing reliably Republican judges where he can,” Green wrote. “Moreover, they also show that in contrast to his slow pace in staffing some executive agencies, Trump has appointed judges at rates similar to his predecessors.”

As Brian Fallon, the executive director of the advocacy group Demand Justice, which commissioned the study, told Vox in a statement, “This analysis reveals how dangerously far to the right Trump has moved the federal courts in almost no time at all.”

Our study of Trump’s judges for @WeDemandJustice is live. @_Jon_Green finds that Trump is pulling the judiciary dramatically right. https://t.co/IcRMTfSATs pic.twitter.com/apAplJ0AjQ

— Data for Progress (@DataProgress) January 25, 2019

“Democrats in the Senate have been too slow to recognize the crisis that is underway, and continue to support many of these nominees as if they are within the mainstream ideologically,” Fallon charged. “These are not normal nominees, and Democrats can’t continue to treat this situation as business as usual.”

Democratic leaders have garnered intense criticism for helping Trump make good on his campaign promise to flood the federal court system with conservatives like Kyle Duncan—”a darling of right-wing social crusaders” whose appointment to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was approved by the Senate last April.

In October, after the hotly contested confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court despite multiple credible allegations of sexual assault, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) was sharply condemned for fast-tracking more than a dozen Trump appointees.

The GOP-controlled Senate is slated to consider dozens more judicial appointees in the coming months. The Data for Progress study follows a White House announcement on Tuesday that Trump plans to renominate 50 judicial appointees whose nominations weren’t addressed during the last congressional session.

Responding to the news, Demand Justice’s chief counsel Christopher Kang vowed that progressives will challenge the appointments. He told CNN: “Kavanaugh’s confirmation awakened progressives to the importance of our courts. Our courts will have the final word on many of Trump’s policies and will be his most lasting legacy—now we’re starting to fight like it.”

However, as Green warned, “with Republicans gaining two seats in the Senate, it is unlikely that Trump will moderate his appointment pattern over the next two years—and it is likely that Trump highlights his record of judicial appointments when rallying his base for re-election.”

Trump, Congressional Leaders Reach Deal to End Shutdown

WASHINGTON—Yielding to mounting pressure and growing disruption, President Donald Trump and congressional leaders on Friday reached a short-term deal to reopen the government for three weeks while negotiations continue over the president’s demands for money to build his long-promised wall at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Trump announced the agreement to break the 35-day impasse as intensifying delays at the nation’s airports and widespread disruptions brought new urgency to efforts to resolve the standoff.

“I am very proud to announce today that we have reached a deal to end the shutdown and reopen the federal government,” he said from the Rose Garden.

After saying for weeks that he would not reopen the government without border wall money, Trump said he would soon sign a bill to re-open the government through Feb. 15 without additional money for his signature campaign promise. He said that a bipartisan committee of lawmakers would be formed to consider border spending before the new deadline.

“They are willing to put partisanship aside, I think, and put the security of the American people first,” Trump said. He asserted that “barrier or walls will be an important part of the solution.”

But he hinted that he was still considering taking unilateral action if efforts to come up with money for his wall fail. “I have a very powerful alternative, but I didn’t want to use it at this time,” he said.

Overnight and into Friday, at least five Republican senators had been calling Trump, urging him to reopen the government and have the Senate consider his request for border wall money through regular legislation, according to a person familiar with the situation who was not authorized to discuss the private talks publicly.

The breakthrough came as LaGuardia Airport in New York and Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey both experienced at least 90-minute delays in takeoffs Friday due to the shutdown. And the world’s busiest airport — Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport — was experiencing long security wait times, a warning sign the week before it expects 150,000 out-of-town visitors for the Super Bowl.

Trump and the Democrats in Congress had remained at odds over his demand that any compromise include money for his coveted border wall.

The standoff became so severe that, as the Senate opened with prayer, Chaplain Barry Black called on high powers in the “hour of national turmoil” to help senators do “what is right.”

Senators were talking with increased urgency after Thursday’s defeat of competing proposals from Trump and the Democrats. The bipartisan talks provided a glimmer of hope that some agreement could be reached to halt the longest-ever closure of federal agencies, at least temporarily.

“There are discussions on the Senate side,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Friday morning as she entered the Capitol. “We are in touch with them.” Asked about Trump’s demands for border security measures as part of a bill temporarily reopening government, Pelosi said, “One step at a time.”

Pelosi was referring to a meeting Thursday between Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to explore next steps for solving the vitriolic stalemate.

Pressure has been building among both parties to reopen agencies immediately and pay hundreds of thousands of beleaguered federal workers while bargainers hunt for a deal.

Monday is the start of federal tax filing season. But fewer than half of the furloughed IRS employees recalled during the shutdown to handle tax returns and send out refunds reported for work as of Tuesday, according to congressional and government aides. The employees had been told to work without pay.

At the White House Thursday, Trump told reporters he’d support “a reasonable agreement” to reopen the government. He suggested he’d also want a “prorated down payment” for his long-sought border wall with Mexico but didn’t describe the term. He said he has “other alternatives” for getting wall money, an apparent reference to his disputed claim that he could declare a national emergency and fund the wall’s construction using other programs in the federal budget.

Contributing to the pressure on lawmakers to find a solution was the harsh reality confronting 800,000 federal workers, who on Friday faced a second two-week payday with no paychecks.

In an embarrassment to Trump, a Democratic proposal to end the shutdown got two more votes in the Senate on Thursday than a GOP plan, even though Republicans control the chamber 53-47. Six Republicans backed the Democratic plan, including freshman Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, who’s clashed periodically with the president.

The Senate first rejected a Republican plan reopening the government through September and giving Trump the $5.7 billion he’s demanded for building segments of that wall, a project that he’d long promised Mexico would finance. The 50-47 vote for the measure fell 10 shy of the 60 votes needed to succeed.

Minutes later, senators voted 52-44 for a Democratic alternative that sought to open padlocked agencies through Feb. 8 with no wall money. That was eight votes short. It was aimed at giving bargainers time to seek an accord while getting paychecks to government workers who are either working without pay or being forced to stay home.

Thursday’s votes came after Vice President Mike Pence lunched privately with restive GOP senators, who told him they were itching for the standoff to end, participants said. Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said their message to Pence was, “Find a way forward.”

Throughout, the two sides issued mutually exclusive demands that have blocked negotiations from even starting: Trump has refused to reopen government until Congress gives him the wall money, and congressional Democrats have rejected bargaining until he reopens government.

___

Associated Press writer Zeke Miller contributed to this story from Washington.

Police Release Video of Officers’ Fatal Struggle With Teen

SILVER SPRING, Md.—Officials have released body camera video of a deadly encounter between police and a black teenager who died after struggling with officers in a town on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, footage that fueled a civil rights group’s call for an independent investigation.

Greensboro Police Chief Mike Petyo released the footage after a county prosecutor announced Thursday that he isn’t asking a grand jury to consider criminal charges in the September 2018 death of 19-year-old Anton Black.

The video shows Black’s mother screaming after police chased her son to his family’s home, where an officer smashed a car window and shocked Black with a stun gun before the teen struggled with three officers and a civilian. The footage also captured how Black’s mother and officers reacted when they realized he stopped responding.

Caroline County State’s Attorney Joseph Riley said in a statement that his office “is not empowered to prosecute tragic acts.” An autopsy report, signed Wednesday by the state’s chief medical examiner, says Black’s congenital heart condition, mental illness, and stress from the struggle likely contributed to his death.

Lawyers for Black’s family vowed Thursday to ask the U.S. Justice Department’s civil rights division to investigate his death. The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland joined their call for a federal investigation or an independent investigation by the governor-appointed Maryland State Prosecutor, whose office investigates misconduct in office by public officials or employees.

The group said in a statement Friday that the “disturbing” video shows officers used excessive force on a man who shouldn’t have been arrested.

“The ACLU is outraged by the gross delay in the handling and release of information related to the autopsy and police body camera footage, which raises significant red flags that local law enforcement agencies have something to hide in Anton’s death,” the statement says.

Riley told The Baltimore Sun that his office’s investigation remains open.

“If I am provided new information,” he said, “that could potentially change my position.”

Family attorneys had urged Riley to convene a grand jury for the investigation. They claim police used excessive force on the teen and argue the autopsy report mischaracterizes his death as accidental.

“The autopsy raises serious questions about why such a high degree of force was used on an unarmed teenager on his own property who posed no threat to law enforcement or the public,” Timothy Maloney, one of the family lawyers, wrote in an email Thursday.

The encounter began when Greensboro Police Department officer Thomas Webster IV responded to a 911 call from a woman who drove by and said she saw the teenager dragging a 12-year-old boy down a street. Lawyers for Black’s family say he merely was playing with a longtime friend and wasn’t harming the child.

Petyo, the police chief, said the woman who called 911 didn’t know Black or the 12-year-old boy.

Webster told investigators he saw Black pin the 12-year-old against the hood of his patrol car, according to the statement from the state’s attorney. Black identified himself as the 12-year-old’s brother, but the body camera video shows the boy denying that.

The video then shows officers chase Black before he locked himself inside a car parked outside his family’s home. An officer used a baton to break the driver’s side window and then shocked Black with a Taser through the broken window before the teen got out and began struggling with the officers.

“Stop! You’re under arrest!” an officer yelled.

The body camera footage shows Black’s mother screaming her son’s name as she sees officers pinning him down outside her home.

“Anton, stop, baby!” she said after police handcuffed him.

“I love you!” he shouted.

“You’ll be better if you don’t fight. Calm down,” a man said off camera.

“This is a mental health emergency. We’re not treating this like a crime,” an officer says. “He’s going to be OK. We’re going to get him some help.”

About 30 seconds later, the officers turned the handcuffed teen onto his back and checked for a pulse.

“He’s breathing,” a voice says.

Nearly three minutes later, his mother points out that her son is “turning dark.” Officers removed his handcuffs and began performing CPR on him. Black later was pronounced dead at a hospital.

The medical examiner’s report says Black’s medical record shows he recently had been involuntarily hospitalized and diagnosed with bipolar disorder. The report describes his mental illness as a “significant contributing condition.”

Maloney and Rene Swafford, another attorney representing the family, said they are conducting an independent review of forensic and medical evidence. “In any event, Anton Black did not die because of any mental condition,” they said in a statement.

Webster was placed on administrative leave earlier this month. Petyo said Webster has returned to active duty following the decision by the state’s attorney, but the chief said the officer isn’t on a patrol assignment, in uniform, or interacting with the public.

Petyo said he will review the officer’s status once the department receives official notice of the prosecutor’s decision.

Former Sanitation Workers Say They Are Owed Wages

The temperature was barely above zero in the Bronx on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, but more than a dozen former garbage workers showed up outside the offices of Sanitation Salvage, once one of the major private trash haulers in the city. They carried signs and demanded wages they say they are owed by the company, which surrendered its license in November after a series of revelations about its troubled operations.

Andres Hernandez said he’d worked as a Sanitation Salvage driver for seven years. Manuel Matias said he’d started working at Sanitation Salvage at age 17 and was paid off the books for years. Alex Amante said the cold was all too familiar — he’d regularly worked the city’s streets at night in such temperatures, doing shifts that he and other workers said could be 18 or even 21 hours long.

The former Sanitation Salvage workers picked the day to protest intentionally. When King was assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee, in 1968, he’d come to the city in support of its sanitation workers, who were on strike over low pay and dangerous conditions following the deaths of two workers.

“All we want is for them to pay us what they owe us,” Hernandez said.

The former Sanitation Salvage workers said they and others were owed money from both their last weeks on the job in 2018 and for working off the books for years at a rate of $80 per night. In 2015, after an investigation, the U.S. Department of Labor concluded that Sanitation Salvage owed workers $385,000 in unpaid overtime accumulated over the previous three years alone, but the company never paid it.

The former workers’ demands have the support of Corey Johnson, the speaker of the New York City Council. When Sanitation Salvage declared it was out of the trash business late last year, Johnson publicly called on the city agency that oversees the industry, the Business Integrity Commission, or BIC, to “ensure that this private company pays any wages it owes to current and former employees before it shuts down permanently.”

In 2018, Sanitation Salvage was the focus of a series of articles by ProPublica exposing its history of safety issues and role in two recent deaths, claims of exploitation by workers, and its cozy relationship with the union representing those workers. The union, long run by a mobster, was seen by many of its ostensible members to be in league with Sanitation Salvage’s owners; in 2013, the National Labor Relations Board found that management unlawfully threatened to fire workers who opposed the union. The BIC eventually declared the company an “an imminent danger to life and property” and suspended its operations. Months later, following the company’s return to business, it surrendered its license for good.

Spokesmen and lawyers for Sanitation Salvage have repeatedly defended the company’s record, arguing it was unfairly run out of the industry by overzealous regulators looking to score political points with safety and labor advocates.

The company’s owners and lawyers did not respond to requests for comment on Monday’s rally and the claims of wages owed. The company has previously argued that the U.S. Department of Labor findings from 2015 were without merit.

Antonio Reynoso, the chairman of the City Council’s Sanitation Committee, has introduced a package of bills he says will provide greater protection to workers in the private trash industry. The legislation, which will be the subject of a hearing next Tuesday, would mandate that the BIC take action against union officials who have certain criminal convictions or associate with members or associates of organized crime or anyone convicted of a racketeering activity. Another of the measures would “require the Business Integrity Commission to refer labor and wage violation cases involving private carters to the New York State Attorney General, the United States Department of Labor, and other relevant city, state, or federal law enforcement agencies.”

Jane Meyer, a spokeswoman for the BIC, wrote in a statement: “Worker abuses are unacceptable and this administration is cracking down on bad actors in the trade waste industry. We have been working closely with the City Council to institute reforms, including the legislation currently before the Council that would give BIC more oversight over trade waste unions.”

The BIC has long had the power to refer any reports or evidence of wage and labor violations to state and federal authorities. In the months before suspending Sanitation Salvage’s license, the BIC said it had conducted an extensive audit and investigation of the company’s operations. The BIC’s spokeswoman said that the agency had “referred claims of unpaid wages at Sanitation Salvage to an appropriate investigatory body,” but she did not provide further details. The BIC said an earlier audit of the company’s dealings from 2013 to 2015 resulted in the agency fining Sanitation Salvage $85,000 for its failure to properly maintain books and records.

A representative from Reynoso’s office said the councilman thinks that the BIC “should already be referring out cases to the relevant enforcement agencies when they find wrongdoing” and that it is critical to codify this step into law. The representative said he was unaware if the BIC had referred claims of unpaid wages and financial irregularities at Sanitation Salvage to the state attorney general.

“If not, we would certainly push them to do so, as well as calling on the attorney general to ensure that those wages are recovered,” Asher Freeman, Reynoso’s legislative director, wrote in an email.

A spokesperson for the state attorney general, Letitia James, said James “will continue to look out for the rights of working people. If allegations of impropriety are brought to the Office of Attorney General, we will pursue the facts wherever they may lead.”

James, the former New York City public advocate, has long used the consulting firm Hamilton Campaign Network in her campaigns for office. Her campaign paid the firm roughly $2.4 million during her bid for attorney general last year. The head of that firm, John Emrick, is also a registered lobbyist for Sanitation Salvage. The Bronx hauler has paid Emrick’s lobbying firm, the MirRam Group, more than $120,000 since 2016 to lobby against a variety of pending city measures involving the private waste industry.

The spokesperson for James would not comment when asked if Emrick’s roles with the campaign and lobbying firms would present any kind of conflict for James if the issue were referred to her office.

Emrick did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

ProPublica’s investigation of Sanitation Salvage showed its drivers and helpers often worked punishing shifts of 18 hours or longer, racing to complete routes with 1,000 stops or more. The workers regularly picked up young men on the street to help work shifts, paid off the books and for little money. Mouctar Diallo, 21, was one such worker — what the company called a “third man.” Diallo, a Guinean immigrant, died on the job when he fell off a Sanitation Salvage truck in November 2017. The BIC eventually determined that both the driver and the helper on the truck lied to investigators at the scene when they said they had no idea who Diallo was and instead described him as a homeless man who had inexplicably jumped on the truck.

At the rally on Monday, Alexis Robinson said he, too, had been a “third man” and had worked several times with Diallo on a notoriously long nighttime shift that the company called Route 3. John Rojas, another off-the-books worker and Robinson’s cousin, said he began working at Sanitation Salvage after Diallo’s death. Route 3 became his route.

“The suicide route, we called it,” Rojas said.