By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

This past week, I heard Frances Perkins’ biographer, Kirsten Downey, speak at Columbia University. Perkins, the first female Cabinet member who served faithfully during all of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s four terms, got her professional start working for the National Consumers League. After hearing Florence Kelley, NCL’s first general secretary, speak at her college, Mt. Holyoke, Perkins was inspired to devote her career to improving the lives of American workers.

Perkins is credited with shepherding through many of the New Deal programs we now associate with the social safety net: Social Security, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, Medicare, and Medicaid. She, FDR, and other members of his Cabinet were accused of being socialists and communists, of orchestrating a government takeover and other calumnies from the right.

But an opinion piece I read this fall has me thinking about how Perkins and FDR might have been able to move legislation forward on health care reform. Jean Edward Smith wrote in the New York Times that:

… “President Obama’s apparent readiness to backtrack on the public insurance option in his health care package is not just a concession to his political opponents — this fixation on securing bipartisan support for health care reform suggests that the Democratic Party has forgotten how to govern and the White House has forgotten how to lead…. the principal legislative innovations of the 1930s were enacted over the vigorous opposition of a deeply entrenched minority. Majority rule, as Roosevelt saw it, did not require his opponents’ permission.”

Perhaps Smith is being a bit harsh on President Obama, but the difference in styles is interesting. Our President is intent on being a uniter — a good thing in a leader — but these days unity is pretty darn hard to accomplish. According to Smith, FDR didn’t aim for consensus with his enemies: “Roosevelt relished the opposition of vested interests. He fashioned his governing majority by deliberately attacking those who favored the status quo. His opponents hated him — and he profited from their hatred.” Add NCL’s Frances Perkins and Florence Kelley to the list of those vilified for their efforts to create a social safety net.

Unlike Obama, FDR didn’t seek to unite – he used his opponents’ vitriol to shore up his side of the argument. As Smith notes, “To Congress, he [FDR] boasted of having ‘earned the hatred of entrenched greed.’ In another speech he mocked ‘the gentlemen in well-warmed and well-stocked clubs’ who criticized the government’s relief efforts.” And his programs — Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance — to name the big ones — have stood the test of time. Most Americans couldn’t imagine this country without these essential social programs.

Smith concluded that “Roosevelt understood that governing involved choice and that choice engendered dissent. He accepted opposition as part of the process. It is time for the Obama administration to step up to the plate and make some hard choices.” That’s a tough statement but one worth contemplating as we move forward on health care reform.

Note: This blog posting was originally posted at Media Voices for Children, an Internet news agency for children’s rights.

By Reid Maki, Coordinator of the Child Labor Coalition

Most people don’t associate egregious forms of child labor with the United States. People tend to think that U.S. child labor laws have successfully done away with the worst forms of child labor. But there is a dirty little secret that not many Americas know: young children harvest fruits and vegetables on many of our farms.

Nightline, the ABC News show, highlighted agricultural child labor in an October 30th investigative report “Blueberry Children” that found several children under 12 in Michigan picking blueberries, including a 5- year-old. The children sometimes work till 9:00 p.m. One 11-year-old told reporters he was in his third year in the fields. Another small child talked about the danger when pesticides are sprayed nearby.

Josie Ellis, a nurse with Migrant Health, told Nightline that the fields in North Carolina, where she is based, are full of working children. She noted that the kids acquire severe rashes, respiratory illnesses, and neurological impairments from their contact with pesticides.

They also miss out on their childhoods because they are working long hours. “Play is something that migrant children know very little about. Work they know,” said Ellis. “We see frustration. We see really tired kids. We see depression in children….despair…the inability to dream…the inability to see past high school…the inability to see past junior high school….I think it’s shameful that our nation tolerates child labor,” added Ellis.

Recently, at a recent dinner in Washington, D.C. hosted by the National Consumers League, Norma Flores, a former child farm worker, now in her twenties, recalled her years in the fields. “I hated it,” said Norma. “I hated to work in the fields.  I hated getting sweaty and dirty. I hated getting blisters and cuts and sunburns. I hated finishing my row of work only to see there was no water to drink at the end. I hated to have to walk half a mile to go to a dirty portable toilet. I hated how the work affected me outside of the fields. I hated having to enroll in school late every year, to have to make up months of assignments and have to fight to get my school credits. More than anything, I hated knowing my parents needed me out there to make ends meet, because it meant I couldn’t say no. Even though I was only a kid, I knew I didn’t belong there. I knew I could do more than hoe weeds for 70 hours a week.”

The Michigan farm shown on Nightline is not an isolated example. The U.S. Department of Labor found eight other farms in Michigan with child labor or migrant housing violations. Earlier this year, nine farms in North Carolina and a farm in Vineland New Jersey were fined for child labor violations.

But these are example of illegal child labor—the problem is that there is a great deal of legal child labor in U.S. agriculture. Exemptions in U.S. child labor law allow kids who are 12- and 13-years-old to work. The law does not allow a 12-year-old to work for one hour in my air conditioned office making copies, but it allows a 12-year-old to work all day in a field in 100-degree heat performing work that would be too hard for many adult Americans.

In addition to the health problems already cited, the kids pay a very heavy price academically. The dropout rate fluctuates from 50 to 80 percent in most migrant communities. The kids are exhausted from work and migration. As Norma Flores noted, many leave their home school before the school year ends and return weeks after it begins in the fall. As they follow the crops around the country, some may enter other school systems, but they are often placed in the wrong classes or in the wrong levels. Understandably, these migrant students often become frustrated and discouraged, and often drop out.

Although some of the kids are immigrants from Mexico, more than half were born here in the U.S. and are American citizens. They are good kids trying to help their family escape poverty. The underlying problem is that adult farmworkers often do not earn a living wage, and they feel compelled to bring their children to the field with them to increase their income.

The working children—I discovered during field investigations—are more likely to wear little or no protective clothing to guard against the sun or pesticide contact. It’s not uncommon to see them working barefoot despite the presence of dangerous farm tools, pesticide residue, snakes, and scorpions.

In 2003, I joined Len Morris and Robin Romano of Galen films in South Texas when they filmed the U.S. farmworker section of their feature length documentary, Stolen Childhoods. We filmed and interviewed 9-year-old Mariela on her first day of work. In 90-plus degree heat, she stood there working beside her father, cleaning onion bulbs with giant adult-sized scissors. She was very ill with the flu or an allergic reaction to the onions, but her family needed the money, so she kept working. It’s hard to describe the amount of effort required to bend over and pick up an onion a thousand times a day. It’s exhausting work, extremely taxing for adults—and totally inappropriate for children.

The exemptions that allow these young children to work have been around since 1938 and the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The 22 members of the Child Labor Coalition (CLC), which I coordinate, believe it’s time to end this unfair treatment of farmworker children. Through the Children in the Fields Campaign, AFOP, the National Consumers League and the CLC have been working to pass the Children’s Act for Responsible Employment (CARE), which would close the exemptions and force the equal treatment of farmworker children.

The bill, introduced by Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) in September, would preserve an exemption for family farmers so their children could help  on the farm, but the children of migrant and seasonal farmworkers who work for wages would have to wait till they are at least 14 to work. The U.S. Department of Labor would evaluate the safety of agricultural jobs to determine if some can be performed by 14- and 15-year-olds. The CARE Act would also prohibit teens in agriculture from doing jobs recognized as very dangerous from doing those jobs until they were 18—the age limit in all other industries.

More than 20 national groups—Human Rights Watch, the American Federation of Teachers, the National Education Association, and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union among them—have signed on to endorse the CARE Act. Please help us. Call your Congress member and urge the passage of the Children’s Act for Responsible Employment—the CARE Act—today. The unfair treatment of farmworker children is intolerable in 2009 in America, and it must end!

By Courtney Brein, Linda Golodner Food Safety and Nutrition Fellow

Each year, dozens of American consumers fall ill – and half of those individuals die – from eating raw Gulf Coast oysters contaminated with Vibrio vulnificus bacteria, present in oysters harvested in the region during the summer months. These illnesses and deaths can be prevented, while still allowing consumers to enjoy oysters when the weather turns warm, with one simple measure: post-harvest processing. Vibrio vulnificus contamination is not simply a case of an upset stomach. I have read numerous horror stories of individuals who managed to survive oyster-induced illnesses, only to face fluid-filled blisters, significant skin loss, and multiple amputations. The National Consumers League and fellow members of the Make Our Food Safe Coalition today urged Congress to support FDA efforts to protect the public from contaminated oysters.

In October, the FDA announced that, as of 2011, oysters harvested from the Gulf of Mexico during the warmer months will have to be treated before reaching consumers, in order to kill the Vibrio vulnificus bacteria that are most prevalent at that time. Since 2001, the agency has expressed concern about the bacteria to the oyster industry and has made it clear that, if the industry’s voluntary efforts to reduce illness and deaths from contamination did not succeed, it would require post-harvest processing. In 2003, California began requiring post-harvest processing of Gulf Coast oysters sold in the state during the summer months; not a single person has fallen ill or died from consuming Gulf Coast oysters in California since.

The oyster industry, however, is exerting its powerful lobby to block these doable, life-saving requirements. Concerned about job loss in their home state of Florida, despite the fact that the FDA regulation will only affect a small portion of Gulf Coast oyster production, Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Representative Allen Boyd (D-FL) have each proposed legislation to hamper the FDA’s efforts. We understand that they are trying to protect a hometown industry, but NCL believes consumer health and safety must come first.

“I like raw oysters as much as the next person, but consumers should be able to enjoy the delicacy without putting their lives in danger,” stated Sally Greenberg, Executive Director of NCL. “Post-harvest processing is estimated to cost as little as 2 cents per oyster, and has little or no impact on flavor. The industry can, and should, implement this life-saving measure, which will only be necessary for less than one quarter of the Gulf Coast oyster harvest.”

Until the oyster industry starts processing oysters during the summer months, consumers will continue to fall ill and die. According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, since 2001, more than 250 individuals on vacation, celebrating special occasions, or simply enjoying a restaurant meal have ordered and consumed raw Gulf Coast oysters, and have become ill or died as a result. Even greater numbers have looked on as family members suffered after consuming contaminated oysters. As Vicki Peal of Florida, a tireless advocate for protective measures on oyster consumption, has stated, “Vibrio vulnificus is a deadly bacteria that eats you inside out like gangrene. Seventeen years ago I took my father out to a dinner of raw oysters that killed him. I had to watch that sweet kind man die like a dog. …Kudos to the FDA for finally requiring procedures to ensure the safety of Gulf oysters. And shame on any elected official who would get in the way of this overdue public health protection. The only good oyster is a safe oyster and FDA’s action will save limbs and lives.”

It is long past time that FDA, the consumer watchdog on the shellfish industry, stepped in with this important regulatory requirement. NCL applauds the agency for its efforts to make Gulf Coast oysters as safe as their colder water counterparts, no matter the season in which they are consumed.

By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

NCL joined a number of civil rights, labor, and consumer organizations recently to support legislation to curb the abuses in overdraft charges that banks have employed in the last few years.

According to the Center for Responsible Lending,

• More than 50 million Americans overdrew their checking account at least once over a 12 month period, with 27 million accountholders incurring five or more overdraft or non-sufficient funds (NSF) fees.
• Banks and credit unions collected nearly $24 billion in overdraft fees in 2008.
• Overdraft fee income for banks and credit unions rose 35 percent from 2006 to 2008.
• Overdraft loans cost consumers nearly $24 billion each year and are typically charged without consumers even knowing that they will be dinged for extra fees. These fees hit lower-income consumers and communities of color especially hard. The most common triggers of overdraft fees are debit card transactions that could easily be denied for no fee; in fact, until recent years, they most often consumer cards were rejected at point of sale if funds in their accounts were insufficient to cover the charge.

Yes, it could be embarrassing when you’re trying to buy something and your card is rejected, but its a lot cheaper than getting hit with a $34 overdraft fee, or multiple fees. Today, banks and credit unions routinely approve debit card overdrafts with no warning, charging a fee averaging $34 for an overdraft averaging only $17. The sad fact is that they force low-income families especially into a cycle of snowballing fees that eat up a large portion of their paychecks.

Fee-based overdraft coverage is, by far, the most expensive way to have an overdraft covered. But financial institutions like to make enrollment in overdraft coverage “automatic,” meaning, as soon as you get your card you’re signed up for the “coverage,” for which you can be charged $34 for every transaction where you don’t have funds in your account to cover the charges. Financial institutions were also found to be manipulating the order in which they post transactions to maximize fees.

So lawmakers have come in to address these abuses. We have bills in the House (HR 3904, Congresswoman Maloney (D-NY)) and Senate (S. 1799, introduced by Senator Dodd (D-CT )) establishing the following key reforms, among others:

• requiring that all overdraft fees be reasonable and proportional to the cost to the institution of processing the transaction;
• limiting the number of overdraft fees institutions can charge per month and per year, without preventing them from offering a lower cost alternative if they want to continue charging for overdrafts;
• requiring institutions to obtain consumers’ affirmative consent to fee-based overdraft coverage for debit card and ATM transactions;
• clarifying that overdraft fees are a finance charge under the Truth in Lending Act;
• requiring a real-time warning at an ATM before a cash withdrawal would trigger an overdraft fee; and
• prohibiting institutions from reordering transactions to maximize fees.

It’s a shame Congressional action is needed, but it is. I always ask myself why such companies couldn’t simply try to be honest brokers with their own customers, letting them know when they overdraw by rejecting the charge instead of taking them for hundreds of dollars to cover some charges, often very minor ones. By the way, the Center for Responsible Lending has great information on its Web site on this issue. CRL has led the charge on overdraft abuses and has a knowledgeable staff and a lot of good information on this issue. NCL is proud to join with CRL, labor unions, and other groups in support of these important bills.

by Reid Maki, Coordinator of the Child Labor Coalition

For the last several years, the National Consumers League (NCL) has warned parents and teens that traveling sales crews are too dangerous for young workers. The discovery last week of the remains of Jennifer Hammond, who was only 18 when she disappeared from a sales crew six years ago, heightens our concern about the safety of traveling sales crews for teen workers.

Jennifer Hammond was one of those teenagers who knocks on your door and tries to sell you magazines. In August 2003, co-workers at Atlantic Circulation, Inc. dropped Hammond, a native of Littleton, Colorado, off in a mobile home park in Milton, New York. She failed to show up at the designated pickup spot two hours later. Six years later, a hunter found some bone fragments and teeth in a forest in Saratoga County, New York and forensic specialists identified the remains as Hammond’s. Local police are investigating the case as a homicide.

Each year, traveling sales has consistently appeared as one of NCL’s list of “Five Worst Jobs for Teens.” Going door-to-door is a risky proposition these days and when you add doing it in an unfamiliar town without parental supervision, the dangers add up quickly. After reviewing this industry and scores of problems we’ve heard about over the years, NCL came to the conclusion last spring that under no circumstances should a minor be allowed to travel as part of a sales crew.

Members of sales crews are vulnerable to assault and exploitation from customers, fellow crew members, and their superiors. Over the years, we’ve heard and read many stories of crew members who were beaten because they wanted to leave their crews or did not sell enough magazines.

On October 15^th, the New York Times published a story about two young magazine salesman who were beaten with baseball bats and golf clubs in Lakewood, Washington simply because they wanted to quit. The police arrested six men in the attack.

Unscrupulous traveling sales companies charge young workers for expenses like rent and food that in some cases requires them to turn over all the money they earn from selling magazines or goods. When they try to quit or leave the crew, they are told they can’t. Earlier this summer, NCL received a phone call from a young man who quit his crew and found himself stranded 1,000 miles from home. He was broke and trying to hitch-hike home.

Disreputable companies have been known to seize young workers’ money, phone cards, and IDs and restrict their ability to call their parents. Drug use and underage drinking are not uncommon. Another New York Times report in 2007 found that crew members often make little money after expenses are deducted.

Teen sales crews are often crammed into poorly maintained, unsafe vans and driven by young distracted drivers. In November 2005, two teenagers were killed and seven were injured when the van they were riding in flipped near Phoenix, Arizona. A month earlier, 20-year-old, James Crawford, was ejected and killed from a van crash in Georgia. Eighteen young adults were crammed into the 15-passenger van when the driver fell asleep.

Unfortunately, Jennifer Hammond’s suspected murder is not the first associated with work in traveling sales crews: In November 2007, Tracie Anaya Jones, 19, a member of a traveling sales crew, was found dead of stab wounds in Memphis, Tennessee. Her killing remains unsolved and is featured on “America’s Most Wanted” Web site. In Rapid City, South Dakota in April 2004, a 41-year-old man was charged with murdering a 21-year-old woman who came to his home to sell magazines.

Clearly, these are extreme examples of what can go wrong, but there is ample evidence that there is much to be concerned about when one contemplates traveling sales work. Last month’s Times article on the beating of the two young salesmen, noted that Parent Watch, an industry watchdog group, is receiving about 10 emergency calls a day from crew members with problems.

In Wisconsin, a new law designed to protect young sales people will take effect next April. We’ll take a closer look at it in the days ahead….Stay tuned.

With the increasing need for H1N1 flu vaccinations, the popularity of H1N1-related flu scams has also increased. More than 75 Web sites have been found selling fraudulent products claiming to diagnose, prevent, or treat H1N1, a reminder that we need to be careful to check that all products are Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved. The products you buy may not only be without any real medicinal value, but could also harm your health. It’s a good idea to talk with your health care practitioner if you have questions about medications to treat or prevent the flu.

The FDA recently issued an alert explaining the steps they are taking to prevent H1N1 fraud, providing more information regarding what to do if you think you are being scammed, which products are FDA-approved, and which products have already been identified as scams. The FDA sent letters to the companies caught selling fake products, warning them to stop selling the fraudulent products or face legal action. The Kentucky Pharmacists Association has also released information regarding a specific site selling fraudulent “swine flu treatments.”

If you think you or someone you know has fallen prey to an H1N1 scam, you should contact the FDA immediately. For more information on counterfeit drugs and how to buy drugs safely see NCL’s Fraud Center’s Web site

By Courtney Brein, Linda Golodner Food Safety and Nutrition Fellow

Last week, the FDA announced its intent to crack down on Front-of-Package labeling touting the nutritional benefits of food products, a trend that has spread across the aisles of grocery stores in recent months. While easy-to-read, concise nutrition information can make it easier for consumers to choose healthy products, these claims can also be misleading – sugar-laden, nutritionally bereft cereals such as Cookie Crisp, Cocoa Krispies, and Froot Loops are currently self-identifying as “Smart Choices.” Such information on the front of a package proves particularly problematic because, as FDA research found, when food items contain Front of Package Labeling, consumers are less likely to read the full Nutrition Facts label.

The trouble with the current, “anything goes,” state of Front-of-Package Labeling became apparent this summer, when a consortium of big-name food manufacturers – including ConAgra, General Mills, and Kraft Foods – launched their Smart Choices Program, which identifies “healthy” options with a green checkmark on the front. The problem with “Smart Choices?” Many of the choices are not, nutritionally speaking, “smart” – as consumers, nutrition experts, and several elected officials have noted.

In September, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D–CT) sent a letter to FDA Commissioner Hamburg urging that the Administration investigate the “Smart Choices” program. Earlier this month, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal launched his own investigation.

Last Tuesday, Commissioner Hamburg shared the steps that FDA is taking to make Front of Package labeling an accurate, useful tool for consumers:

• FDA is examining existing Front-of-Package labels and identifying those that are false or misleading.
• FDA is drafting a new regulation that will provide a single set of science- and nutrition-based criteria for all Front-of-Package labels.
• FDA is launching a consumer research program to determine how consumers view these symbols and which provide the most useful nutritional information.
• FDA will work with manufacturers, retailers, and other parties to determine if a single Front-of-Package labeling system could be used, as it is in the United Kingdom.

NCL believes that when sugary breakfast cereals such as Froot Loops can be – and are – advertised as healthy options for the consumer, the time has come to impose some consumer-friendly standards. The National Consumers League applauds the FDA for demanding better truth in advertising and pushing for more accurate nutrition information. NCL will continue to support the agency in this work.

Also, in May, the FDA sent a letter to General Mills warning the company about its use of drug-like claims on Cheerios boxes, after the National Consumers League alerted the agency of the practice.

10/28 Update: Couldn’t attend? Read the transcript or watch the event at www.NextGenWeb.org.

By John Breyault, Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Mary Schapiro headlined a stellar group of panelists at Thursday’s AARP Solutions Forum on Fraud, which was held in collaboration with NCL.  We were especially pleased to hear the Chairman say that the SEC will soon be focusing

SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro at the Oct. 22 AARP / NCL Fraud Forum.

its efforts on a review of dodgy retirement products being sold to seniors.

“America’s future retirees deserve products that they can understand and evaluate,” Schapiro said. “This means that complex fee arrangements or product descriptions should be discarded in favor of simple, clear disclosure. Our future retirees should have access to products that will help them meet their retirement goals without imposing inappropriate risks.”

The Forum brought together more than a dozen experts on fraud affecting the biggest investments that most consumes make:  their homes, their cars, and their retirement savings.

Marietta Rodriguez, Director of National Homeownership Programs at NeighborWorks announced that on Monday, October 23, her organization will be launching a new Web site designed to “empower homeowners to protect themselves against loan modification scams, fund trusted help and report illegal activity to authorities.”  The site will be available in FIVE languages to help those consumers whose first language is not English avoid falling victim to these scams.

On a panel examining the threat of used car scams, John Van Alst of the National Consumer Law Center (whose report on used car scams is required reading) examined issues such as “yo-yo sales,” excessive and discriminatory dealer mark-ups, and the need for state laws prohibiting “as is” auto sales.

Len Bach, a volunteer with the AARP Free Lunch Monitoring Program was one of the highlights of the third panel of the day, entitled “Fighting Investment Fraud: Fostering Compliance and Assuring Enforcement.”  Mr. Bach, who has attended nearly a dozen of these seminars in an effort to root out hucksters, urged seniors who attend these events to “take the meal and split,” rather than engage with the scammers in the “critical” second meeting.  While the tone of the free lunches is usually “laid back,” the hard sell from the scammers comes in the second meeting, often in the senior’s home, where the scammer tries to sell them on often-fraudulent investments.  Andres Castillo, also of AARP, discussed AARP research showing that contrary to how they are often advertised, 100% of the free lunch seminars involve a sales pitch.

The highlight of the day was Chairman Schapiro’s remarks.  Before an audience of approximately one hundred attendees, she discussed a range of issues pertaining to the SEC’s role in fighting fraud.  She reaffirmed the Commission’s commitment to rigorous enforcement against scammers, discussed the reforms the agency has taken in the wake of the Bernie Madoff scandal, and announced a new investor education Web site – www.investor.gov – which launched on Thursday.  A full copy of the Chairman’s prepared remarks is available on the SEC Web site.  Video from the event will soon be available at www.nextgenweb.org.

By Reid Maki, CLC Coordinator & NCL Director of Social Responsibility and Fair Labor Standards

Rally against forced child labor before the Uzbekistan Embassy in Washington, DC.

There are a lot of countries in the world with egregious forms of child labor but only one where that child labor is forced by the central government. That country is Uzbekistan, where the government requires school children to suspend their education, leave school, and harvest cotton for several weeks each year. The work is arduous and the pay is miniscule.

Decades ago, Uzbekistan had tractors to harvest the cotton but the tractors fell into disrepair and instead of buying new machinery the government decided that it could save money by conscripting children to do the work.

On Wednesday, about 50 advocates and supporters gathered outside the Uzbekistan Embassy in downtown Washington, D.C. for a rally to tell the government of Uzbekistan that it’s time to stop exploiting its children to harvest it’s cash crop. The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the International Labor Rights Forum (ILRF), and the Child Labor Coalition (CLC) helped organize the event. The CLC, which has 22 members including the ILRF, is co-chaired by the AFT and the National Consumers League (NCL).

“Today, we are here to remind consumers that the cotton that goes into the clothes they wear may have been harvested by school children in Uzbekistan, where the government has replaced mechanical harvesters with the sometimes bloody fingers of small children and teenagers, who are forced to leave school and pick cotton,” noted NCL’s Sally Greenberg, also the co-chair of the CLC.

In a September LA Times editorial about Uzbekistan’s unacceptable use of children to harvest cotton, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) noted, “Consumers and companies in the West prop up this monstrous system by unwittingly purchasing cotton harvested by forced child labor. Supply chain analysts have determined that most Uzbek cotton is sold to countries in South Asia and Eastern Europe.”

Some of that may eventually end up in garments sold in the United States, Canada, and Europe, noted Greenberg, who acknowledged that some major companies—Gap Inc., Levi Strauss & Co., Limited Brands Inc. and Nike Inc., among them—have taken steps to eliminate Uzbek cotton from their supply chains.

The rally was timed to coincide with the cotton harvest season in Uzbekistan and with an Uzbek cotton fair, where the majority of cotton contracts will be signed this year, Bama Athreya, executive director of the ILRF told reporter Liza Casabona. “We are taking this action today to send a message to all those buyers,” Athreya said.

Antonia Cortese, secretary-treasurer of AFT, reminded listeners that Uzbekistan is violating the International Labour Organization’s conventions against the worst forms of child labor even though it has agreed to honor them. Cortese noted that teachers are conscripted to harvest the cotton along with the children.

Among the supporters at the rally was a young Uzbeki man who carried a hand-written sign that said, “I was a slave.” As a college student in Uzbekistan, he and his classmates had been forced to enter the fields. He spoke passionately about his memories of harvesting cotton, remembering clearly the painful fingertips from getting pricked as he picked the cotton. He said he’d heard about the rally while driving that morning and decided he had to take a stand against his government’s repressive policies. His sister who joined him initially became afraid of reprisals from the Uzbek government and retreated to the car, he explained.

Cortese and Greenberg tried to deliver hundreds of postcards of concern to the Embassy staff but no one would answer the door. The protest, which lasted about an hour, also featured speeches from and the AFL-CIO and the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society.

If you’re interested, you may want to check out the following links:

• Video from the rally
• More photos from the rally
• AFL-CIO NOW Blog post

The 22 members of the Child Labor Coalition have named the elimination of child labor in Uzbekistan’s cotton harvest as one of its priority areas for the year.

By John Breyault, Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud

Last November, the National Consumers League released its “Gift Card Holder’s Bill of Rights,” along with Consumer Action and the Montgomery County (Maryland) Office of Consumer Protection.  In that document, we enumerated ten pro-consumer steps that issuers of prepaid gift cards should take to help consumers during the holiday season.

We were pleased when in May of this year, President Obama signed into law the Credit CARD Act of 2009.  That Act, among its many pro-consumer provisions, included a number of new limits on gift cards.  Those limits included:

• Outlawing dormancy fees, inactivity charges or fees, or service fees unless the card has not been in use for 12 months since the date of purchase or the last time funds were reloaded onto the card.
• Preventing one that one such fee to be charged in a single month.
• Increasing disclosure requirements related to fees
• Prohibiting the sale of gift cards with expiration dates less than five years after the sale of the card or the date on which the card was last reloaded with funds

These provisions are set to take effect on February 22, 2010.

Last week, American Express, the largest issuer of the so-called “open loop” gift cards (also known an “universal” or “general purpose” cards — which can be used at any retailer that accepts credit cards), announced that the company would immediately eliminate all monthly fees on gift cards, including those that consumers have already purchased.

The American Express announcement was welcome news, addressing several of the provisions in our “Gift Card Holder’s Bill of Rights.”

On Wednesday, NCL testified at a hearing of the District of Columbia City Council on legislation proposed by Councilmember Mary Cheh that would strengthen gift card holder’s protections even further than the federal Credit CARD Act.  NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg recommended that the legislation implement a number of the “Gift Card Holder’s Bill of Rights” provisions, including:

• Capping the up-front fee on the sale of gift cards at $5 or 10% of the cards value, whichever is less
• Prohibiting any expiration dates on gift cards
• Making cards with less than $5 in value remaining redeemable for cash, without a fee
• Applying the unused funds from cards that accrues to state governments under unclaimed property laws to benefit consumers
• Protecting consumers from card issuer bankruptcy by segregating the funds from the sale of cards into separate trust accounts

We urged the District to take these pro-consumer steps, which would place it at the vanguard of states seeking to enact robust consumer protection laws in the gift card market.

NCL full testimony is available by clicking here.