Another Challenge for New York City Employees

     In this month's edition of The New York Observer, I observed (and agreed with) the article, "Risky Business".  Lets say your company pressures you to do something illegal, or you notice illegal behavior by your superiors.  If you resist your orders from them--or even complain about the legal ramifications--you can be fired by your employers... without any claim of wrongful termination!!!
     Researching beyond that article, I learned that in almost any other state in America, employees' rights are protected against such terror.  But not in New York.  NY's General Business Laws fail to protect people because they apply to deceptive practices--not the ones that are unfair or unconscionable.  Thus, acts deemed improper are not necessarily construed as deceptive.  NY courts limit protection to outright deceptions that do not rise to the level of fraud, but they fail to address acts that are wrongful or misleading (without outright deception).  NY also requires consumers/employees to prove negative "public impact".  That's quite a burden of proof!  Finally, punitive damages are limited to under $1,000, if the court finds the violation to be willful.  So, NY's legal system doesn't make it worthwhile either.  Clearly, it favors unfair business practices.

     Back in 2009, the Social Sciences College of Cornell Unvierstiy published a report on Unsafe, Discriminatory & Unfair Labor Practices that NYC workers faced daily.  Telling me something that I already know, it reported that NYC's restaurant industry has more employees than Construction, Hospitals, Securities, and Real Estate.  Being such a big enterprise, you might think that it took the best care of that large chunk of the local population.  (Just like other established nations do).  No, it doesn't.  Do you expect NYC to have adequate pay, health benefits, work breaks, and comfortable work environment?  Wrong!  That is an awful embarrassing shame.
     NY University's Center for Justice published a report: "Eployment and Labor Law Violations in New York City", saying that just like any greedy industry, restaurants cut costs by paying their workers less, making them work longer hours, and diminishing the quality of products.  (Similar to the dim years of the dirty Industrial Revolution--like Carnegie's steel foundries)!  Without the help of overpaid city government (they just gave themselves a pay raise that was way above the suggested level), working conditions continue to worsen.  The report quoted that only 13% of 537 workers earn a living wage (often denied overtime pay), while 73% don't get any sort of health benefits.  The persistent Human Trafficking allowed in New York City continues as a "feeder" of labor to many restaurants and construction entities... so they don't feel any desire to take care of their laborers.

     Lewis and I marvel at big luxury hotels that advertise top-tier accommodations/services... yet they employ the SAME types of low-level employees (probably paid as much as Holiday Inn employees).  

     Many years ago, Lewis worked as a waiter in Manhattan.  The restaurant owner confiscated all the staff's tips and used that money to pay her kitchen staff, who were illegal aliens.  Discovering that both illegal practices were long-standing, Lewis contacted his affluent family's lawyer, sued his boss, and won a tidy sum.  His ex-boss quickly fired the other servers who had agreed with Lewis.  Good for them to get out of such a horrid workplace... but was it fair for them to get fired because they spoke up about their illegal treatment?  Of course not.  But, NYC laws protect that kind of boss, instead of those kinds of swindled/pressured employees who sought to make things better.

     Back to the initial article, it cited how a bartender was fired for objecting to the bar's practice of pouring cheap vodka into bottles with pricey labels.  (The catering hall where I worked, many summers ago, did the same thing--while charging clients for "top shelf" liquor).  The bartender asked an employment lawyer if he had a wrongful termination claim.  In dozens of other states, the answer is Yes.  In New York, it's No.  Although pouring counterfeit drinks is illegal, it's perfectly legal for the dishonest bar to fire its employee for refusing to aid/abet in the scam.  Isn't that CRAZY?!
     The article mentioned a pharmacist who discovered that prescriptions were being filled at the pharmacy in her name without her knowledge.  Her legal advice was to simply quit, because if she complained and got fired, she wouldn't have a viable "wrongful discharge" claim--unless she had solid evidence/proof that patients had been given the wrong drugs or drugs not on their prescriptions.  That's the insanity when laws don't prosecute against illegal business practices or employee treatment.  
     Employees who refuse to participate in their employers' tax evasion aren't protected from employer retaliation in NY. Charities can fire clerks for not "cooking the books" (so do luxury retail stores, from my experience).  Compliance officers--of the city's burgeoning financial district--who object to prohibited trading practices can be fired.  If public health isn't threatened, it doesn't matter to Law Enforcement or Courts how illegal the business activity is.  If food tampering, cleanliness, prescriptions, financial transactions, and accounting are allowed to decline... that certainly sounds like a threat to public safety to me!  Of course, that's why America is plagued with snowballing corruption that occasionally makes global headlines: Housing Market Collapse, Contaminated Beef Recalls, Contaminated Ice Cream, Bankrupt Automakers, Bank Collapses, et cetera.

     Just another issue plaguing NYC jobs/employees... just like the ones listed in my previous blog entry:


http://halfwindsorfullthrottle.blogspot.com/2014/10/more-interviews.html

Men's Walking Sticks & Canes

     Tomorrow's Easter Parade on Fifth Avenue triggered my mind to consider all the dandies who will be brandishing vintage apparel.  Lewis and I attend services at St. Thomas Fifth Ave, so we'll witness some of the outfits.  We'll be dressed colorfully--since Easter is a joyful holiday that also celebrates Spring's rebirth of color--but not in vintage.  It brought to mind the resurgence of men's walking sticks (which sounds better than an "elderly" "cane").

While many think that men's sticks originated as "fashionista" items of the 1700s, 

they actually existed a century earlier (below is 1625).

But not before then... probably because mankind was barely surviving its own conquests/killing sprees. 

(those eras represented below)

So, lets blithely return to the 18th century, when sticks were en vogue.

     After the fall of the French monarchy, via its Revolution, all things "aristocratic" were extinguished... so as not to remind people of those abusive days.  Gone were the powdered wigs, lavish hairstyles, brocaded coats, and lace for men.

     However, walking canes successfully carried over into the 1800s.

1820s male attire gave "pliant canes" to young men (above) 

Men used them for hiking, gesturing, protection, or making a loud "stomp" on the floor to announce their arrival--or their applause.

Victorian men revelled in them: their sartorial tradition/mainstay

The turn-of-the-century Industrial Revolution carried them aboard steamships and railways (below)

Into the era of electricity, gents of the 1910s like Downton Abbey's earl (above) or JP Morgan (below) sauntered with canes.

They were so "necessary" for a complete outfit (like hats were), that males of all economic strata clutched them...

"Modern men" of the Roaring 1920s maintained their use.

Gentlemen of the 1930s carried them at their side (seen below and in many black/white old movies).

     Aside from film actors, famous detectives in literature accessorized with walking sticks: 

(opium using) Sherlock Holmes

Jeeves and Wooster

Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot 


and Thompson & Thompson from The Adventures of TinTin.

Brand icons like Mr. Peanut (Planters) and Mr. Monopoly sport walking sticks



They appear in the 1942 film Casablanca.

     But, after World War II, they must've been on the "checklist" of things to get rid of.  (Meanwhile--oddly--women's fashion returned to corsets of the Victorian era).  Since the 1940s, walking sticks have fallen to the wayside, used only for royal events or "morning dress" formal occasions.

Some transitioned into military swagger sticks

Or they're used annually by enthusiasts of vintage costume events

     Yet, I don't think you need spats (which I wear sometimes with my suits) or gloves to carry a walking stick.  They can be distinctive accessories in modern men's fashion.  There are many stylish ones:

For a gadget guy, they're very cool...

There are easy ways to store them, just like people use for bags...

They can be used for protection (both below):

Most impressively, thanks to today's open mix of styles, you can sport a stick without feeling like a fop.

Done the right way, they'll make a distinguished contribution to the fashion that people put their eyes on: like a flower in a lapel, a pocket handkerchief, jewelry, colorful socks, a hat with a brim, or a fragrance.  Moreover, they signify some confidence!