Daily Archives: March 29, 2017

Liat Ben-Moshe, Ph.D., assistant professor of disability studies at The University Of Toledo.

Liat Ben-Moshe, Ph.D., assistant professor of disability studies at the University of Toledo presented her lecture Epistemologies of Abolition as part of the Philosophy Speaker Series on Thursday, March 23 at Halle Library.

Moshes lecture focused on the institutionalization of disabled people, which is the movement of people outside of large residential institutions for people with intellectual disabilities and psychiatric hospitals and looking at these as forms of incarceration.

Moshe also lectured on how to respond to critiques of abolitionary movements and looking at the epistemological assumptions in those critiques. She focused on penal abolition, which tries to replace prison systems with more effective systems.

She referenced Viviane Saleh-Hanna, Ph.D., associate professor of criminology at the University of Massachusetts. Hanna describes penal abolition as not only a social movement to eliminate the penal system but a theoretical framework which re-conceptualizes crime, offenders, community and justice and a political strategy leading to safer communities that will no longer be based on punitive principles.

Moshe said that abolition is a political framework and agenda for action and an epistemology or study of knowledge and an ethical position. These movements strive to create non-carceral and non-segregationist societies. Carceral locales are a variety of enclosures such as psychiatric hospitals, detention centers and institutions for people with disabilities.

She touched on the various critiques of abolition. It does not focus on prescriptive or policy recommendations, it does not give solutions, but it does give a utopian vision of the world, and is unrealistic to espouse this worldview in the world we currently occupy.

She said that these critiques can be conceptualized as strengths and provide a unique strategy of epistemology and ethics to resistance to incarceration. She said that abolition as a radical epistemology can be constructed in two ways: As a counter hegemonic epistemology and as producing specific forms of knowledge. One can view abolition as an epistemology that is counter-hegemonic. Hegemonic discourse is the need to segregate others in the name of safety and punishment.

Abolition is counter-hegemonic in the vision it encourages. She said that epistemology is not just from erudite knowledge but subjective knowledge or knowledge that has been viewed as non-scientific. Abolitionist knowledge reconceptualizes what gets to be defined as a crime, who gets to be defined as criminal, and what is disability and rehabilitation. It also questions ideas of punishment.

She said that abolition is an attachment to the idea of knowing and needing to know that is part of knowledge and all economies. It is letting go of the definitive consequences of doing or not doing.

Moshe said that the goal of abolition is the process of trial and error. Abolition takes place when one breaks with the established order.

It is a goal and a mindset used to come up with new alternatives. Abolition efforts should take place when people are still enslaved. Dont wait until the time is right. Prisoners cant wait for a totalitarian government to be free from bondage. It is revolutionary. We need to imagine alternatives of a totalitarian government with a sense of urgency.

This sense of urgency enables abolitionism, as utopian epistemology, to become a model for political activity with a vision for the future. If prison systems were closed now, it would be better than the system that is already in place. The expectation of happiness is what gives the future promise. Constructing an optimistic future for those who are perceived to not have one can be reparative. It can give prisoners a reason to do better because the future will be better.

Moshe said that abolition is ethical, not just a tactic or a strategy. It is about creating a society free of a system of inequity, which produces violence, desperation and suffering. It goes to the root cause of issues.

Vanessa Thorburn, junior majoring in philosophy, said that she was very impressed with how Moshe gave new insight to epistemology.

Im new to the idea of epistemology. It was interesting to see it applied to sociohistorical institutions. I have been studying mass incarceration for a year, and I like how she presented it. Epistemology is a new way of approaching abolition epistemically, she said. I liked how she distinguished white washing abolition which defeats the purpose of abolition. This has been a present-day issue with liberation in terms of social justice.

Dean Adams, professor of gender studies at the University of Toledo, said that the lecture addresses big issues in our society that need to be addressed.

Its important to look at how systems of oppression connect to our carceral system and how those systems continue to place people of color and people with disabilities in prison to enhance and continue capitalism, he said. And these people are seen as disposable populations because they usually cant work or dont have jobs. If people of color are imprisoned it helps to create jobs for whites because they become prison guards.

Go here to read the rest:

Professor of disability studies speaks abolition of institutionalization - Eastern Echo

Marion Renault The Columbus Dispatch @MarionRenault

Sir Isaac Newton was in his 20s when he developed his theories on calculus, gravity and optics.

English physicist Paul Dirac was 31 when he won a Nobel Prize for predicting antimatter.

Albert Einstein introduced the worlds most famous equation, E=mc2, at 26. He later said that a person who has not made his great contribution to science before the age of 30 will never do so.

Especially in more abstract fields, people think the best work is done at earlier ages, said Bruce Weinberg, an Ohio State University economist. Thats not quite as clear a pattern as people think.

In fact, the average age of scientists in the United States is increasing, Weinberg and fellow OSU economist David Blau found in research published Monday. The average age of employed scientistsrose from 45.1 to 48.6 between 1993 and 2010.

The workforce as a whole is aging, Blau said. But (this rate) is pretty specific to academia.

At Ohio State, 37 percent of tenured or tenure-track STEM faculty members are 55 or older.

This is happening across the country, said Jan Weisenberger, senior associate vice president for research and a speech and hearing science professor at Ohio State.

The finding makes sense toOhio State astronomy professor emeritus Brad Peterson, who said there are incentives to delaying academic retirement. Through long careers, scientists maximize their expertise and professional connections.

You become a known quantity, said Peterson, who officially is retired but still teaches and works as a distinguished visiting astronomer for NASAs Space Telescope Science Institute.Scientists are curious, driven people. Any good research turns up two or three more research questions. Theres no end in sight.

The OSU economists dont yet know whether the graying research community means thatbudding scientists are missing out on opportunities or what the trend means for scientific creativity and productivity.

If there are more older researchers, and they were to retire, its hard to know how many slots that would open for younger scientists, Weinberg said.

The study, published this week in the journal "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences," analyzed data on the age, field of degree, job tenure, occupation and sector of employment of about 73,000 scientists. The pool spanned STEM fields from mathematicians to social scientists and included researchers at university labs and those working in the private sector for biomedical, pharmaceutical or tech companies.

The general aging of scientists and engineers can largely be attributed to Baby Boomers nearing retirement age, Blau said. That effect gradually will fade away.

Eventually the huge Baby Boom bulge will pass, he said.

But changes in retirement laws have contributed. Many professors have extended their careers since the 1994 abolition of mandated retirement.

According to the new study, the share of scientific workers 55 or older almost doubled between 1994 and 2010, from 17 percent to 33 percent. Over the same period, the share of all workers in that age bracket increased less, from 15 percent to 23 percent.

By age 70, most people have retired. Thats not necessarily true of science, Weinberg said. Weve observed a big pileup of people who didnt have to retire anymore.

Mary Ellen Wewers, a public-health professor emeritus at Ohio State, might be counted among them. She retired from her position as an associate dean for research but still teaches and is the co-principal investigator on a five-year, $18 million project on tobacco control.

That had always been my plan; I definitely didnt want to give up my research career, she said. I still have a lot of work thats important to get out there. I dont intend to retire from research any time soon.

The economists plan to continue studying what the advanced age of the scientific community means for its productivity.We dont know if they still are riding the arc of creativity or like hanging out in academia, Blau said.

Hazel Morrow-Jones, professor emeritus of city and regional planning, still works part time at Ohio State, but as a retiree, she now spends more time on her garden.

I was no longer concerned about establishing a reputation, or getting tenure, or the next promotion or getting a raise, she said. I could bring the most to the job.

.

.

mrenault@dispatch.com

@MarionRenault

Visit link:

Why are there so few young scientists? Average age in US on rise - The Columbus Dispatch

HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania The discovery of a cache of cannonballs left behind after the worst civilian disaster of the Civil War brought construction on a Pennsylvania apartment complex to a halt Tuesday while workers waited for the ordnance to be removed.

At least 20 cannonballs were unearthed Monday in Pittsburgh by a contractor on the site of the former Allegheny Arsenal, where a Sept. 17, 1862, explosion killed 70 mostly teenage workers.

There were too many cannonballs for the Pittsburgh Bureau of Polices bomb disposal unit to remove, so a specialty firm from Maryland was called in to clear the site, said Sonya Toler, a spokeswoman for the Pittsburgh Department of Public Safety.

They should be on the site today to begin the work, Toler said Tuesday in an interview.

Officials believe the cannonballs are stable, but have posted a 24-hour police guard on the site, Toler said.

Workers had been alerted of the possibility that ordnance would be found, and stopped when the first cannonball turned up in the bucket of a excavator.

Many of the victims of the arsenal were torn apart and burned beyond recognition by the blast, which killed the 13-year-old daughter of one of the plants supervisors, who had worked on the production line.

The disaster took place on the same day as the Battle of Antietam, which stands as the deadliest one-day battle of the war that led to the abolition of slavery in the United States.

Read the original post:

Cache of Civil War cannonballs found at Pennsylvania construction site - Bangor Daily News

The Coalition for Peace Action co-sponsored a Rally against Islamophobia and Bigotry at Trenton City Hall on Feb. 6. A wonderfully diverse group of 250 people attended, and heard speakers from area faith communities, Hispanic and civil rights groups, and political leaders including Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson.

What brought so many together on very short notice was a deeply troubling executive order by President Trump, immediately banning immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the U.S. Thankfully, a federal appeals court has stopped implementation of the order as of this writing.

While appropriate security measures, such as thorough vetting of those wanting to immigrate, should be used to keep the American people safe from possible terrorist attackers, over the past four decades not a single terrorist attack in the U.S. has been committed by anybody from the seven countries banned.

On the contrary, by alienating Americas most important allies in fighting terrorism, mainstream Muslims in the U.S. and abroad, President Trumps order is almost certainly making Americans less safe. Most of the terrorist attacks that have been discovered and stopped before they could take place were because Muslims of good will tipped off authorities in time.

I am reminded of a core teaching of Christianity, where Jesus says I was a stranger and you welcomed me. (Matthew 25:35). The Golden Rule means we are called to empathize with strangers (as immigrants are often viewed), and welcome them instead of excluding them. Think of the thousands of children who are refugees from wars, as in Syria. Jesus teaches that however we treat the stranger/immigrant, we are treating him.

Before September 11, 2001, I didnt know many Muslims. But since that horrifying terrorist attack among whose victims were numerous Muslims I have met many and not only learned about their great religion of peace, but also got to know them as wonderfully caring people. It is in welcoming and getting to know the stranger that we can experience the beloved community.

I also think about the Golden Rule when I hear alarm about North Korea or other rogue states seeking to obtain nuclear weapons. Certainly we in the Coalition for Peace Action, and all people of good will, are against such states having nuclear weapons. That is one reason we worked intensively to support the Iran Nuclear Agreement, which through peaceful means is preventing Iran from having enough nuclear weapons materials to make even a single warhead.

But 90 percent of the 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world today are possessed by the U.S. and Russia. The U.S. is planning to spend $1 trillion over the next 30 years to upgrade those to be deployed for another century, and Russia is also provocatively developing new nuclear weapons. More immediately worrisome, President Trump has been reliably quoted as saying, If we have nuclear weapons, why cant we use them?

If we dont want others from North Korea or Iran to have or use nuclear weapons, why are we planning to keep and even escalate them? If its morally imperative for the others to eschew nuclear weapons, why isnt it equally so for us? Im reminded of what Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount: First, take the plank out of your own eye, and then you can see to take the splinter out of your neighbors eye. (Matthew 7:5)

An important opportunity to restrain the possibility of the U.S. using its nuclear weapons is the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act (HR 669/S200) that was recently introduced in the U.S. Congress. This bill would require a Congressional Declaration of War, which explicitly authorizes use of nuclear weapons, before the president could use them first in a conflict. It is a sensible restraint on this most awesome of all decisions, whether to start a nuclear war which could still end all life on earth.

Another step forward is based on in Article 6 of the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, designed to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, in which the nuclear haves agreed to negotiate the elimination of their arsenals. Otherwise, there is a permanent double standard, and we arent treating the other as we want to be treated.

United Nations negotiations are about to get underway toward the goal of verifiable global abolition of nuclear weapons. Global bans on chemical and biological weapons were previously agreed to, and landmines were also globally banned.

As with the landmines ban, the countries that have nuclear weapons have so far not agreed to participate in the nuclear abolition negotiations. But eventually, the countries with landmines felt enough pressure to join the ban treaty, and the Landmines Ban Campaign won the Nobel Peace Prize. We can help generate enough pressure to also make that happen with a Treaty to Ban Nuclear Weapons.

Readers who want to work for welcoming the stranger, and toward global abolition of nuclear weapons are encouraged to visit peacecoalition.org or call the Coalition for Peace Action at (609) 924-5022.

The Rev. Robert Moore is Executive Director of the Coalition for Peace Action and Treasurer of the Princeton Clergy Association.

See more here:

Applying the Golden Rule to our current situation - Packet Online

After nine months of unresolved tripartite debates, Secretary Silvestre Bello issued Department Order 174. The Order has pleased no one.

The trade unions, which have been batting for the total prohibition of contractualization, were the most unhappy. The Order looks like a renumbered DO 18-A (issued by the Aquino Administration in 2011), which the unions want fully replaced. DO 174, like DO 18-A and the earlier DO-18-02 (2002) and DO 10 (1997), more or less reaffirm the legality of job and service contracting. However, DO 174 tries to tighten the rules governing the operations of manpower agencies and imposes higher renewal/registration fee (from P25,000 to P100,000) and proof of higher capitalization (P5,000,000). Rene Magtubo, the spokesperson of a labor coalition opposing the Order, claims that DO 174 does not cure the epidemic of contractualization. The unions wonder why the good Secretary has failed to exercise his power under Article 106 to strictly prohibit the following: labor-only contracting, contracting out jobs performed by union members and regular employees, fixed-term employment, contracting out regular jobs or functions as defined by the Labor Code, and agency hiring.

The employers, represented by the Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), have accepted DO 174 with some reservations, specifically on the additional rules on contracting and the proposed stricter enforcement and monitoring of labor compliance by employers and manpower agencies. ECOP explained that any measure that makes contracting difficult for business discourages investment and weakens job creation.

As to the leadership in the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), none is exultant over the release of DO 174. The Presidential pledge to end contractualization in three months, made in the heat of the electoral campaign in early 2016, was clearly mission impossible. Now the executive branch is telling the trade unions: go to the legislature and push for the enabling laws abolishing contractualization. Indeed, contractualization is a difficult nut to crack.

It is also difficult to define. The word contractualization does not appear in the Labor Code. However, it has become a union slang for any effort of employers to avoid the regularization of employees, especially the regularization of those doing tasks that are regular and necessary in the conduct of business. The avoidance measures take different forms: casualization of work or making regular work classified as casual, resort to five-month hiring (to avoid the regularization of probationaries within the six-month period as provided by law) or what is popularly called as endo system for the end-of-contract, the availment of the services of outside manpower agencies who deploy project workers who are declared to be agency employees (not workers of the contracting principals), and the excessive utilization of traineeship, apprenticeship and internship programs (meaning undertaking the programs only to avail of cheaper labor).

It is abundantly clear that the debate on the rules governing job/service contracting and the abolition of contractualization will continue even beyond the term of the Duterte Administration. Labor economists call the phenomenon of contractualization as labor flexibilization, which proliferates under a regime of flexible rules on the hiring and firing of workers. This flexibilization is justified by many employers and economic technocrats as necessary to enable business to survive in an increasingly competitive world under globalization. This argument raises the hackles of trade unions and workers not only in the Philippines but also all over the world, for contractualization is also a global phenomenon.

So what can the tripartite social partners labor, employers and government do? Can a tripartite consensus be forged on a truly win-win approach to the issue of contractualization?

The answer of the Philippine Employer-Labor Social Partnership, Inc. (PELSPI) is yes. As a backgrounder, PELSPI is a unique organization of employer-industrialists, trade union leaders and academics who are bound together by their joint commitment to the promotion of decent work for the workers, productivity for industry and competitive growth for our country. It is headed by former Senator Wigberto Tanada, Meneleo Carlos of the Bishops-Businessmen Conference and Jose Umali of the National Union of Bank Employees. In a series of workshops organized by PELSPI to clarify issues on contractualization, PELSPI came up with guiding principles that are worth restating here, namely:

1. As the Constitution states, all workers, regardless of tenure and status, have basic human and labor rights. These rights, such as those enunciated in the Labor Code as labor standards and workers basic freedoms, should be respected by all at all times. Any abuse of the rights of any worker, regardless of tenure and status, should not be tolerated. In short, all workers regular, probationary, casual, seasonal, project, apprentice/learner and term-based should enjoy the protection of the law and all the benefits accorded by law. A strengthened Labor Law Compliance System should be institutionalized and fully propagated, accompanied by awareness-raising and capacity building for all enterprises and workers.

2. The endo or 555 hiring system, whether done directly by the employers or undertaken by a third-party contractor or agency, should not be tolerated. There should be penal sanctions against the willful pre-termination of probationary status, including on-the-job training (OJT) and apprenticeship arrangements, which are done in order to avoid regularization.

3. The rules against prohibited labor-only contracting should be tightened and enforcement of the said rules strengthened. Any manpower or recruitment agency masquerading as a cooperative should be considered a labor-only contractor and should be blacklisted and prosecuted. The Department of Labor and Employment should also blacklist and prosecute all fly-by-night manpower and recruitment agencies, including those legitimately registered and yet are found to have violated labor laws.

4. Legitimate contractors or agencies should comply with all the pertinent labor laws (not only those listed in Articles 106-109 of the Labor Code) such as those listed in all the Books (1-7) of the Labor Code as well as the SSS, Philhealth and Pag-Ibig laws. They should treat all workers with dignity and respect the rights of all workers, including the right to organize and form unions, the right to consultation on personnel policies, the right to equal treatment/non-discrimination and the right to health and safety standards. No contractor or agency should be allowed to operate without any operational grievance machinery put in place to process workers grievances or complaints.

5. The right of all workers, regardless of tenure and status, to form unions or associations, including mutual aid associations and professional organizations, should be respected.

6. The countrys social partners should unite and work together in building a more progressive economy in line with the above-cited development framework of PELSPI so that the economy can provide more and decent jobs for all. Part and parcel of this economic upgrading is cooperation by all in the continuous upgrading of the skills, abilities and knowledge of all workers. An integrated human resource development is the key in building a competitive Philippine economy able to create decent jobs for all. Additionally and ideally, all workers should be able to move upward in the social and jobs ladder as they are able to acquire more experience and better skills and higher abilities and knowledge.

7. The tripartite industry peace councils in various regions and key industries should be strengthened and, in many places, reactivated or established. This is crucial since each industry has some unique structure that requires unique labor hiring and deployment arrangements such as the seasonal hiring of agricultural workers in some commercial farms during harvest or planting seasons. On the other hand, certain industries, which have developed tripartite agreements on how the outsourcing of work and the use of third-party contractor or agency can be regulated without impairing the job and union security of the regular workers, can serve as models for others in the conduct of social dialogue on outsourcing, job contracting and other related industrial relations issues.

The last point raised by PELSPI is the need for all sectors of society to unite in support of a stronger economy based on an integrated industrial and agricultural development program. Contractualization can only be tamed or minimized in a progressive, equitable and sustainable economy.

Original post:

Bello's travail: Cracking a nut called 'contractualization' - Business Mirror