Proposal, Argue Thyself

Tom Ammiano, the Democratic state Assemblyman of San Francisco, introduced a bill (AB889) protecting domestic workers during the last legislative session that I found to be one of the most effective proposal arguments I have ever been asked to consider.

Domestic workers include hired nannies, housekeepers, gardeners and other domestic help employed directly by the home. I was immediately engaged with Ammiano’s proposal because on the surface it was simply about protecting workers who are outside the realm of much occupational oversight by agencies that would protect individuals in the workplace. Protecting domestic workers by creating an effectual Bill of Rights for workers in the home that would include basic humane treatment of employees like adequate rest and meal periods, written 21 day notice before layoff, and a minimum wage requirement was an easy sell. As an audience I am already pro-labor so I was ripe for this proposal.

The proposal was even timelier and more convincing because it was released on the heels of the highly dramatic gubernatorial race between now Governor Jerry Brown and Republican front runner in the 2010 election, Meg Whitman. It is no surprise that much of the voting public found this argument to be particularly engaging because of the publicity surrounding Meg Whitman and the treatment of her hired help, which was highlighted during the campaign. Whitman’s family had hired domestic help and then fired the undocumented immigrant worker from Mexico when it was revealed to the press that she was not eligible to work in California. Through reporting in the local paper, I found out that Nicandra Santillan Diaz had been employed by the Whitmans for 9 years prior to the exposure and it was known by the family that she was not a documented citizen. Though Whitman referred to Diaz as a “member of the family”, she was promptly fired and her wages were withheld by Whitman.

Whitman was forced to pay up later on, and Diaz tale of woe doesn’t get much better following the campaign – but Ammiano clearly recognized the tenor and tone of public discourse regarding domestic worker’s rights and capitalized. He didn’t have to convince an audience that a problem existed because Whitman and Diaz clearly gave the problem all of the presence that was needed. AB889 just passed the Labor House Committee in the State Assembly on April 14, 2011, and is headed to appropriations…. so I guess I wasn’t the only one who was convinced.

Response to Mark Evans' "Best Argument"

While reading Mark Evans’ “Best Argument”  blog entry detailing ordeal of a sailor summoned before the Disciplinary Review Board on charges of false enlistment, I have to admit my brain went on its own Perry Mason exposition into the life and times of the SONAR Technician with 16 years in service.  Though Evans described a compelling argument by the sailor’s section Chief which saved the sailor’s career despite falsifying his enlistment, the sailor’s motives and subtexts for bailing on self-defense training in the first place raised more questions for me as a reader, than Evans put to rest with the description of the Chief's testimony of valuable experience and time in service.  

Don’t get me wrong, I am not arm-chair-quarterbacking the Chief or the DRB. However, while I imagined the situation and what kind of evidence might have been presented, I did begin to wonder what made the sailor want to avoid the training in the first place? Was the revealing  a domestic violence conviction worth avoiding the physicality of strenuous training? Did the sailor think the exposure to ground fighting or choke holds might stir his violent past behavior? Could the training spur on a re-introduction of violent behavior that is more detrimental to the family of a past offender than being without a job? All unknowns from my perspective, of course.

For the sake of argument – so to speak - I still agree that the Chief’s argument was convincing, but my mind keeps wandering back to the sailor’s original motivation and I’m not totally sold on his retention as the “best outcome”.