 |
|
|
|||||
The Senate was drawing closer to a vote on legislation to end the shutdown on Monday after a small group of Senate Democrats broke a 40-day stalemate late Sunday evening and voted with Republicans to move forward with reopening the government. It is unclear when the Senate will hold final votes on the bill, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he hopes passage will take hours, not days.” The American people have suffered for long enough. Lets not pointlessly drag this bill out, he said as the Senate opened on Monday morning. The legislation would still need to clear the House before the government could reopen. Speaker Mike Johnson urged lawmakers to start returning to Washington right now,” given travel delays, but he said he would issue an official notice for the House’s return once the Senate passes the legislation. We have to do this as quickly as possible,” Johnson said at a news conference. He has kept the House out of session since mid-September, when the House passed a bill to continue government funding. After weeks of negotiations, the moderate Senate Democrats agreed to reopen the government without a guaranteed extension of healthcare subsidies, angering many in their caucus who have demanded that Republicans negotiate with them on the Affordable Care Act tax credits that expire January 1. Thune (R-SD) promised a mid-December vote on the subsidies, but there was no guarantee of success. The final vote was 60-40. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York voted against moving ahead with the package, along with all but eight of his Democratic colleagues. We will not give up the fight, Schumer said, adding that Democrats have now sounded the alarm on healthcare. Still, an end to the shutdown could still be days away if any senators object and drag out the process. Thune was still working out concerns within his Republican conference about individual provisions in the underlying spending bills. One of those Republicans, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, had threatened to object to a provision championed by his home state colleague, former GOP leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, to prevent the sale of some hemp-based products. Paul said he was seeking an amendment to strip the language before a final vote. President Donald Trump has not said whether he will sign the package, but told reporters at the White House Sunday evening that it looks like were getting close to the shutdown ending. 5 Democrats switch votes A group of three former governorsNew Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, New Hampshire Sen. Maggie Hassan, and Independent Sen. Angus King of Mainebroke the six-week stalemate on Sunday when they agreed to vote to advance three bipartisan annual spending bills and extend the rest of government funding until late January. The legislation includes a reversal of the mass firings of federal workers by the Trump administration since the shutdown began on October 1. It also protects federal workers against further layoffs through January and guarantees they are paid once the shutdown is over. In addition to Shaheen, King, and Hassan, Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, home to tens of thousands of federal workers, also voted in favor of moving forward on the agreement. Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat, Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, and Nevada Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen also voted yes. The moderates had expected a larger number of Democrats to vote with them, as 10 to 12 Democratic senators had been part of the negotiations. But in the end, only five switched their votesthe exact number that Republicans needed. King, Cortez Masto, and Fetterman had already been voting to open the government since October 1. The agreement includes bipartisan bills worked out by the Senate Appropriations Committee to fund parts of the governmentfood aid, veterans programs, and the legislative branch, among other things. Democrats call the vote a mistake Schumer, who received blowback from his party in March when he voted to keep the government open, said he could not in good faith support it after meeting with his caucus for more than two hours on Sunday. Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats, said giving up the fight was a horrific mistake. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) agreed, saying that voters who overwhelmingly supported Democrats in last week’s elections were urging them to “hold firm. House Democrats swiftly criticized the Senate. Texas Rep. Greg Casar, the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said a deal that doesnt reduce healthcare costs is a betrayal of millions of Americans who are counting on Democrats to fight. Others gave Schumer a nod of support. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries had criticized Schumer in March after his vote to keep the government open. But he praised the Senate Democratic leader on Monday and expressed support for his leadership throughout the shutdown. The American people know we are on the right side of this fight, Jeffries said Monday, pointing to Tuesday’s election results. Healthcare debate ahead Its unclear whether the two parties would be able to find any common ground on the healthcare subsidies before a promised December vote in the Senate. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has said he will not commit to bringing it up in his chamber. On Monday, Johnson said House Republicans have always been open to voting to reform what he called the unaffordable care act, but again did not say if they would vote on the subsidies. Some Republicans have said they are open to extending the COVID-19-era tax credits as premiums could skyrocket for millions of people, but they also want new limits on who can receive the subsidies and argue that the tax dollars for the plans should be routed through individuals. Other Republicans, including Trump, have used the debate to renew their yearslong criticism of the law and called for it to be scrapped or overhauled. By Mary Clare Jalonick and Lisa Mascaro, Associated Press Associated Press writers Seung Min Kim, Michelle Price, Stephen Groves, and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.
Category:
E-Commerce
Recently, New York Times opinion columnist Ross Douthat moderated a debate on the Interesting Times podcast between Helen Andrews and Leah Libresco Sargeant, two conservative critics of modern feminism. The podcast received major blowback, starting with (but not ending with) the fact that the original headline of the conversation was “Did Women Ruin the Workplace?” Quickly, after the predictable backlash hit, the headline was changed to “Did Liberal Feminism Ruin the Workplace?” But the diversion didn’t help the conversation’s case all that much. While the headline was softened to perhaps dress up the discussion as an urgent political issue, mostly, it felt like intellectualized sexisma debate about women’s rightswhen the real question should be, wait, why are they up for debate anyway? If you could make it through the whole podcast, good on you. In truth, the question “Did women ruin the workplace?” felt like it was just waiting for Dolly Parton, Lily Tomlin, and Jane Fonda to burst through the office door and tie it to its desk chair. All About “Wokeness” Mainly, the debate revolved around wokeness. It started with Andrews, who recently wrote an article called The Great Feminization that criticizes women as being emotional and lacking logic, started talking about “wokeness” at work, and suggested that women are to blame for its presence in the office, noting that “the pathology in our institutions known as wokeness is distinctively feminine and feminized.” Andrews continued: “And that, in a very literal sense, our institutions have gone woke because there are more women in them than there used to be.” She also went on to talk about the uptick in sex scandals being reported, and how backward she finds it that we’re “suddenly” expected to “believe all women” regardless of how credible many of them can surely not be. The very boys club argument seemed to suggest that women in the workplace are complaining about innocent flirtations or, men just being men. For Andrews, the platform felt like a continuation of her article. She also talked about female toxicity, which she explained means things like gossiping, being unable to “deal with conflict directly,” and a host of other dated stereotypes she claimed are female traits. Sargeant pushed back on Andrews’ rhetoric several times, but she had her own troubling views about women in the workplace, too. Her take seemed to be more about the idea that no one should really expect total fulfillment at work, and if that’s the case, then women really shouldn’t bring their “woke feminism” ideas to work in the first place. “I think we make a mistake in seeing the workplace as the primary space we work out our cultural foibles,” Sergeant explained. Predictable Outrage The podcast did genuinely feel like it was better suited for an era when objectifying women at work was totally cool, a lack of DEI (another topic the guests railed into), and policies protecting women simply didn’t exist rather than an era where many are pushing to obliterate women’s rights in the office (and everywhere). Of course, like the overt sexism in even posing the question “Did Women Ruin the Workplace?”, the response has been just as direct. Almost instantly, the response pieces started circulating, critiquing, not just the host of the podcast, or its guest, but NYT for running such a clearly anti-woman article, which asked whether women ruined the workplace with all of their incessant needs, like to be viewed as equal human beings and all. In a Vanity Fair response piece, journalist Kenneal Patterson pressed that such a question is ludicrous in today’s world, and showcases fear around “the encroachment of liberal feminism in the workplace.” Patterson suggests that women are essentially being coerced into standards of womanhood dictated “by the patriarchy.” Patterson continued, “Women are losing the rights to their bodies, dignities, and beliefs every day. Starting an article with the headline Did Liberal Feminism Ruin the Workplace? does nothing more than appeal to those who try to keep lower-income women oppressed and drive young people into a tradwife future that keeps them caged.” On X, the podcast is being slammed, too. In a reshare of the article, X user and author Jess Davies wrote, “Dunno, I think the men who created hostile working environments through sexual harassment, sexist behaviours, unfair promotions and being inconsiderate of basic needs like maternity, childcare and womens health ruined the workplace.”Davies added, “But sure, its womens fault for speaking up.” Who did women ruin the workplace for? Surely, there may be a ton of people who do believe that women have ruined the workplace simply by being in them and demanding to be respected and treated fairly. So, a better question, perhaps, would be, who did they ruin it for? Surely, not their employers because in many regards, women are killing it at work. While glaring pay gaps still exist, women are outpacing men in terms of education, they hold an ever-rising share of high paying occupations, and, according to recent findings, are often held to higher standards than men in CEO roles, too. And while the tradwife trope may be preferred by men and certain groups of women, most modern women want to work. In fact, labor force participation has been rising for young women at the same time it is falling for young men. Women surely may have complicated the workplace for those who are worried about women getting ahead, who fear diversity, or who don’t want the boys club to change. As far as ruining it goes, were still waiting for the case to be made.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sonder Holdings said on Monday it will wind down its operations and file for bankruptcy one day after Marriott International abruptly announced that it had terminated its licensing agreement with the San Francisco operator of thousands of rental properties. The one-two punch of news has caused chaos for employees and guests alike. Shares of Sonder have plummeted more than 64% as of mid-day trading on Monday. In a statement Monday, Sonder said it expects to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and liquid its U.S. business, in addition to initiating insolvency proceedings in the international countries where it operates. We are devastated to reach a point where a liquidation is the only viable path forward, said Janice Sears, interim chief executive officer of Sonder. We explored all viable alternatives to avoid this outcome, but we are left with no choice other than to proceed with an immediate wind-down of our operations and liquidation of our assets. Neither Marriott nor Sonder immediately responded to a request for comment from Fast Company. Bethesda, Maryland-based Marriott said in a statement on Sunday that its immediate priority is supporting guests currently staying at Sonder properties and those with upcoming reservations and that it would contact guests who booked directly through Marriott channels to address their reservation and booking needs. Marriott remains committed to minimizing disruption to guests travel plans. EMPLOYEES, GUESTS IN CHAOS But the experiences of guests and employees alike indicate that this news has been nothing short of chaotic. On social media platforms including Reddit and LinkedIn, Sonder employees and guests recounted how the news of the termination of the Marriott partnership reached themwith some employees saying they learned their jobs had been terminated from news reports, while guests reported receiving notices that they had to vacate their rental immediately. One New York-based former Sonder employee, who asked to remain anonymous, said that she and her colleagues extended their shifts on Sunday to try to help guests and were on-site Monday cleaning things out and closing operations for the last time. She added that the now-former employees had no idea what would happen with their paid time off and sick time payouts. Another Sonder employee declined to comment about the situation amid a few developing scenarios that are currently taking place. On its website, Sonder said it has approximately 1,400 employees in more than 35 cities in 10 different countries. Meanwhile, guests have also been thrown into limbo during their stays. One Reddit user posted Sunday that they had been kicked out of a Sonder hotel mid-stay and weren’t allowed back in the room in the evening. The user didnt immediately respond to a request for an interview from Fast Company, but commented on another subreddit that after waiting on-hold with Marriott customer service for two hours, they had been refunded half of the $2,000 booking, along with a $50 credit for the inconvenience. Another Redditor posted Monday that the heating has been turned off and that theyve been asked to leave during a winter storm warning in Chicago. On LinkedIn, a woman shared that she had been staying at a Sonder location in London on Sunday night only to learn of the change from an email and note slipped under her door overnight. What a mess, she wrote. SONDERS WOES Financial woes for Sonder appear to have been too great for even a partnership with the worlds largest hotel chain to solve. The Marriott-Sonder partnership was announced in August 2024, and now the two companies are pointing fingers at each other, to some extent. Sonder has faced severe financial constraints arising from, among other things, prolonged challenges in the integration of the companys systems and booking arrangements with Marriott International, Sears said in the statement. Both Sonders CEO and CFO had left the company earlier in the year and the company had fallen into a pattern of reporting its earnings reports late. Sonder is also the latest bankruptcy victim that stems from the frenzy of special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) deals that began about five years ago. These so-called blank check deals saw a number of companies go public, only to later file for bankruptcy, including 23andMe and WeWork. The hotelier went public with a blank-check deal with Gores Metropoulos II in January 2022. FALLOUT FOR MARRIOTT Marriott, meanwhile, could emerge from the dissolution of this experimental partnership relatively unscathed. The company said the termination was due to Sonders default when it announced the news on Sunday. In a separate statement, Marriott scaled back its financial outlook for net room growth in 2025, to roughly 4.5% with the removal of Sonder rooms from its system, down from a prior forecast of approximately 5%. On Monday, Marriott announced a new agreement with Pacifica Hotels to convert two existing hotels in Osaka, Japan to its line of City Express Hotels by Marriott next year. Marriott shares fell about 0.2% in mid-day trading. And Jefferies analyst David Katz even upgraded his price target for the stock on Monday to $315, up from $308.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||