Consumer advocacy as needed as ever – National Consumers League

/in /by

By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

This Saturday’s New York Times is filled with interesting consumer stories, which–once again–confirm that the work consumer advocates do is just as important today as ever.

“Consumer Watchdog Is All Ears for Ideas,” talks about Elizabeth Warren and her work at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “After Long Battle, Safer Cribs” is a story about the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) efforts to ensure crib safety, and finally, “Food Companies Act to Protect Consumers from E.Coli Illness,” focuses on Costco and Beef Products Inc decision to test for six additional of the most virulent strains of E.coli pathogens in food.

The CFPB piece is about that new federal agency receiving multiple tweets from people who want it to develop protections that haven’t ever been available on financial transactions from federal agencies. Gail Hillebrand, the associate director of consumer education and engagement at CFPB, (and my former colleague at Consumers Union) said, “We are actively working toward simplifying credit card contracts.” Hallelujah! Its about time someone took at look at these documents that were drafted to confuse and confound, and blew the whistle on their purposeful obfuscation.

In the product safety arena, under new rules adopted by Congress, manufacturers of cribs must undergo 75,000 cycles of testing. It sounds onerous, but as CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum notes, “After dozens of babies had tragically been entrapped and died, and millions of defective cribs had been recalled, the actions of this commission to ensure the swift movement to market of only safer cribs undoubtedly was justified.” Commissioner Nancy Nord disagreed in the Times and said, “We rushed the standard out without doing the hard work upfront to understand the impact of regulation.”

As a rejoinder to Commisioner Nord’s skepticism, three families who lost babies in cribs that proved unsafe wrote poignantly, “You can’t tell the safety of a crib by looking at it, and you certainly can’t maintain it is safe because it met weak industry standards in place prior to 2010.” The new safety standards should address their well-founded concerns.

Finally, in the story on meat safety, one manufacturer and one retailer, Beef Products Inc. and Costco, are testing for six different strains of E. coli that food safety advocates have wanted for years. The Department of Agriculture has a proposal to require this type of testing but unfortunately, it has dragged its feet. This is a breakthrough consumer protection. Hats off to both companies for their leadership in putting consumer safety first. E. coli poisoning can cause serious illness in victims and is totally preventable with a “hold and test” policy that doesn’t ship the products until the testing on every batch is back and is found not dangerous to consumers.

All three pieces prove once again that there is room for stronger consumer protections in food safety, product safety, especially where children are involved, and in financial transactions for consumers.

Parents: Take control over your children’s use of technology – National Consumers League

/in , /by

From smart phones to tablet computers, to the hundreds of channels and thousands of on-demand video offerings on TV, consumers have never had more options for how to spend their time. For parents, however, the amount of content that is out there can often lead to anxiety – about what their children watch on TV, what Web sites they are visiting and who they are talking to from behind all those electronic screens. So what’s a concerned parent to do?

To address this issue, many communications carriers have created technology that gives parents control over their kids’ use of their devices and services. “Parental control technology” describes a wide variety of software and hardware solutions that parents and caregivers can use to restrict the content their children can access and the people they can communicate with.

The challenge is that, depending on the technology, medium, and service provider, parental control options vary quite a bit, so finding the most effective way to protect your children from adult content you’d rather not let them access can be tough.

To address this, NCL has created a new series of articles to help consumers navigate the landscape of parental control technology and find the options that are best for their families.

Best practices

Parents often worry that, compared to their tech-savvy teens and pre-teens, they have little hope of keeping up with their use of technology. The truth is you don’t have to be a computer or technical expert to prevent your young ones from accessing content that you deem inappropriate. Here are some basic rules of the road to keep your kids safe online.

  • Talk to your children so they know what is acceptable, what sites you want them to stay away from, and who they are allowed to text, for example. This will help both you and your and children start a dialogue about safe use of technology.
  • Find out where they’re hanging out online. Get familiar with the Web sites your child or teen visits. Have them show you their favorite sites and discuss what they like about them.
  • Make sure your children understand that they should never give out identifying information about themselves, friends, or family members. This includes names, addresses, phone numbers, where you work, email addresses, passwords, social security numbers, and credit card numbers.
  • Create a technology “inventory.” Parents should know what technologies their children are using and what those devices are capable of. For example, does the families’ cable television service include on-demand content (potentially with access to adult programming)? Do the children’s cell phones include an Internet browsing capability? Are parental controls on the Internet browser’s software enabled?
  • Set up your computer in a central, open location, like the living room or kitchen, so Internet use can be supervised.
  • Create a family agreement for Internet use that includes items such as hours of use, what sites can be accessed, and what sites are off-limits.
  • Tell your children that if someone they are talking to online harasses, bullies, or makes them uncomfortable in any way, they should talk to a parent, teacher, or an adult they trust.

Every family is unique. We all have our own set of criteria for what we are comfortable with. Not all of these suggestions will apply to your family situation, and they are not intended to be a complete list of all available options. Hopefully, this can at least serve as a starting point to begin a conversation about safe practices for going online, watching TV, and connecting with others.

Parental controls and wireless phones

Many parents have come to the decision that their kids need access to wireless phones – for safety and peace of mind. Luckily, most carriers offer a variety of helpful features that give parents and caregivers a say in what their children see and do with their souped-up phones.

The use and accessibility of smartphones has skyrocketed in recent years, as more and more Americans now turn their wireless device to access the Internet. The ability to immediately access the Internet while on the go marks an important shift in the way we log on, and parents often worry that smartphones are just another way for their young ones to access inappropriate content, connect with strangers, and make unauthorized purchases—all while outside of the home. Luckily, most carriers offer a variety of helpful features that give parents and caregivers a say in what their children see and do with their souped-up phones.

Purchase blocker: prevents users from making purchases that are direct-billed to the account holder, such as ringtones, downloads, applications and games.

Content filters: Similar to blocking sites and services on your home computer, many wireless carriers offer content filtering features that help block access to mobile sites with mature content as well as filter out inappropriate sites from search results. Some carriers, such as Verizon, have created their own rating system of mobile content. Verizon offers three content settings: appropriate for ages seven and up, 13 and up, and 17 and up. These three setting are all easy to change and reset as your child grows and matures.

Usage restrictions: allow parents to set caps on the number of text messages or downloads allowed over a set period, as well as restrict when the phone can be used, who can be called or texted, and what kinds of content can be accessed online. Other restriction features include the ability to set a dollar limit on monthly downloadable purchases, selecting the amount of web browsing/data usage allowed per billing cycle, and creating lists of pre-approved “favorites” and blocked numbers for you child’s phone.

When your child begins to approach the monthly text, download, or talking limits, companies like AT&T will send an advance warning. Once a limit is reached, there will be a notification that the action is restricted and that the service will be stopped until the start of the next usage period. Depending on your wireless carrier, some of these features may cost a small monthly fee.

Family location services: Worried about where your kids are? Almost all major wireless carriers provide a tracking service that lets you know where your family members are. Using your phone or home computer to log on, you can set up certain boundaries for where you expect your child will be. When they move outside the arranged area with their phone, you can receive text or email alerts. You can also receive daily notifications at set times, assuring you that your child arrived home safely after school or other activities. All carries charge an extra monthly fee for this tracking service.

To find more about what options are available on your plan and carrier, contact your wireless service provider directly. For more general information on wireless parental controls, visit the Online Mom.

From phones to TV and computers, make sure your young ones understand that parental controls are not about punishment—they’re about safety. Talk to them about the importance of using the web responsibly instead of simply implementing tough restrictions. Teaching your kids about online safety can be a great opportunity to discuss good decision-making and time management skills. The Internet is an incredible tool that offers an amazing wealth of information and ideas. Go explore!

What are your kids watching?

Many shows on television, whether on broadcast or cable networks, are for adult eyes only. Like with their use of the Internet, there are a variety of different ways you can keep your children from stumbling across explicit or violent content.

Many shows on television, whether on broadcast or cable networks, are for adult eyes only. Like with their use of the Internet, there are a variety of different ways you can keep your children from stumbling across explicit or violent content.

Television

As parents are well aware, the Internet isn’t the only place where kids can be exposed to inappropriate content. Many shows on television, whether on broadcast or cable networks, are for adult eyes only. Like the Internet, there are a variety of different ways you can keep your children from stumbling across explicit or violent content.

Since 2000, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has required that all televisions larger than 13 inches be equipped with what’s called a V-chip. A V-chip lets parents and caregivers block programming that they don’t want children to watch. All television programs are assigned a rating according to a system established by the television industry, which appears onscreen during the first 15 seconds of the program. The rating is encoded with the program before it airs. Parents can use their television set’s remote control to program the V-chip to block programs that carry certain ratings. The current rating system deems what’s appropriate as follows:

  • TV-Y: All children.
  • TV-Y7: Children 7 and up.
  • TV-G: General audience – suitable for children and adults.
  • TV-PG: Parental guidance suggested – violence, sexual situations, coarse language and/or suggestive dialogue.
  • TV-14: Parents strongly cautioned – intense violence, sexual situations, coarse language and/or suggestive dialogue.
  • TV-MA: Mature Audience Only – graphic violence, explicit sexual content and/or offensive language.

For more information on the V-chip, including specific instructions on how to program your V-chip at home, visit the FCC guide by clicking here.

Cable and satellite TV programming

If your family has cable television, you have even more options on how to block access to programs you deem too mature for young eyes. Almost all cable and satellite providers give you an option of creating a PIN you can use to block programs in three different ways:

  • by channel
  • by rating
  • by time period

Depending on your service provider, you may also have the option of blocking specific programs (by date, time, and channel), adult titles in programming guides, and movies that receive certain MPAA ratings on premium movie channels.

For example, Verizon FIOS TV and AT&T U-verse allow users to

  • Selectively block programming by channel or rating.
  • Selectively block Pay-Per-View and On Demand purchases.
  • Set up user-defined PINs (to purchases and block programs.)
  • Hide adult programming from the TV Listings.

For more detailed information, visit the National Cable & Telecommunications Association’s site on getting started with parental controls.

Managing where they are surfing

The Internet is a powerful learning tool. It provides a world of information that is instantly available 24/7. However, the wide-ranging and anonymous nature of the Internet brings with it risks—from explicit or inappropriate content to predators lurking in chat rooms and using instant messaging services. Due to the Web’s potential dangers, many service providers offer free tools and software to help restrict certain types of content and features to keep young Web users safe.

Internet service providers (ISPs)

Web providers like Verizon, AT&T, and Comcast offer such free parental control features as the ability to:

  • Get a Web activity report that shows you all the Web sites your children visit or attempt to visit. You can check out the sites your kids have visited and block specific sites or types of sites you don’t want them going back to.
  • Create unique profiles for different family members with individualized online usage limits. This can be useful if you have children of different ages. One master account can be used to manage the settings of several “subordinate” account users.
  • Block access to certain Web tools such as instant messaging, gaming, chat rooms, and message boards, allowing parents to keep better track of what their children are saying and to whom.
  • Remotely manage your account with the ability to change parental control settings from any computer with Web access, whether in or outside the home.
  • View your child’s online activities as they happen with real-time Web tracking features
  • Allow young Web users to request permission to visit unauthorized Web sites for an adult to approve.
  • Receive a tamper controls alert if someone other than you tries to change the control settings.
  • Set up a timer that limits the amount of time users can spend online.
  • View search monitoring results that track the words and phrases your children search for online to help learn about what they are interested in. This way you can find out if they are trying to seek out blocked or inappropriate content.

To get more detailed information about exactly what controls are available to you, and what the system requirements are, the best bet is to contact your service provider directly. To lean more about the different Internet provider options, visit the Safe Families site here.

Internet browsers and search engines

While Internet service providers offer a variety of great parental control options, you can also set up similar controls on the Web browser (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Google Chrome, etc.) level. Most browsers let you restrict access to certain sites or pre-approve a list of sites your child has the ability to access. For example:

  • Safari users can create child user accounts that let you choose between three levels of Internet access:
    1. give your children unrestricted access to all sites
    2. a setting that only blocks access to certain restricted sites
    3. an option that only lets children access sites you that you have pre-selected. Email and chat features can be set up so that young users can only chat and email with contacts you know and trust. Weekday and weekend computer time limits can be put in place as well.
  • Firefox and Chrome have no built-in parental control features. But, if your computer uses one of these browsers, you can download extensions such as ProCon (which blocks accidental visits to adult sites), LeechBlock (which sets up time limits for different users), and FoxFilter (which blocks content based on user-defined criteria). To learn more about different extension options, click here.
  • Search engines like Google and Bing have “safe search” settings that screens for sites that contain explicit sexual content and deletes them from your search results. This can be a great option since kids often stumble upon inappropriate content by accident when searching seemingly innocent terms.

This is not an exhaustive list of the available browser and search options, but is intended to give you an idea of the types of useful features that are available. At the very least, almost all browsers will give you the option of blocking access to restricted sites, whether it’s a feature that’s available out of the box, or if it’s an extension you have to download.

Consumer advocates urge USDA to declare ‘big six’ E. coli STECs adulterants in beef – National Consumers League

/in /by

July 14, 2011

 

Contact: NCL Communications, (202) 835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC — STOP Foodborne Illness (STOP, formerly S.T.O.P. – Safe Tables Our Priority), the National Consumers League (NCL), the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and the Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention, applauded today the announcement by Beef Products, Inc. (BPI) to voluntarily expand the company’s “hold and test” program to include the six additional strains of E. coli identified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as harmful pathogens in the food supply. The groups expressed hope that BPI’s decision to begin voluntarily testing and holding for other pathogenic E. coli strains in addition to E. coli O157:H7 will inspire the Obama administration to take additional steps to protect public health and cause the meat industry to cease their opposition to ensuring a higher level of protection for consumers.

FSIS has proposed declaring these strains as adulterants and requiring industry to sample and test for these pathogens and hold the product until final laboratory results declare the product has no detectable level of E. coli O157:H7 and these other six pathogenic strains of E. coli. The Office of Management and Budget has sidelined the proposal since January 2011.

“We now know that other strains of E. coli produce the powerful Shiga toxin, are similar to E.coli O157:H7 in virulence, and are much more prevalent than we once thought.” said Chris Waldrop, Director of Consumer Federation of America’s Food Policy Institute.  “It’s time for the Obama Administration to declare these additional six strains adulterants, require robust sampling protocols by the entire industry and require all companies to hold product from commerce until a negative test result is determined.”

The six strains of non-O157:H7 Shiga-toxin producing E. coli, or non-O157 STEC identified by the CDC as responsible for the majority of the non-O157 illnesses and deaths are O26, O111, O103, O45, O121 and O140.  These strains, like O157, have the ability to cause Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS) which is life-threatening.  Unlike other pathogens, such as Salmonella, it only takes a very small number of these STEC organisms to cause illness.

“These strains of E. coli have been identified for years as causing serious illness and even death to consumers.  We have been pressing FSIS, members of Congress and anyone else who will listen about the need to keep these pathogens out of the food supply,” states STOP Foodborne Illness president, Nancy Donley.  “What is it going to take to get FSIS to do the right thing and declare these six identified strains as adulterants and enact programs and standards to prevent them from reaching the marketplace?  We are encouraged to see a company like BPI taking the bull by the horns and independently test for these killer pathogens before being required by government, but we need the entire industry involved and that will only happen when government mandates it.”

“We appreciate that one member of the beef industry is taking a leadership role,” said Sally Greenberg, Executive Director of the National Consumers League.  “BPI is well equipped to do this, and will be able to apply their experience with sampling and hold and test for E. coli O157:H7 with the Big Six STECs.”

“A robust sampling program is essential to effective verification that food safety controls are working,” says Sarah Klein, an attorney with Center for Science in the Public Interest.  “We’re pleased that the company is expanding their testing to include additional E. coli hazards and urge them and FSIS to consider antibiotic-resistant Salmonella known to cause illness as well. Consumers deserve protection from all of these hazards, and companies should pursue every approach to provide it.”

“Non-O157 STECs can have a significant public health impact. Many of those sickened will suffer secondary life-long medical complications. We must start tracking and condemning products contaminated with E. coli strains that cause human illness,” notes Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention’s CEO, Barbara Kowalcyk.  “Unfortunately, a USDA proposal to declare the Big Six as adulterants in meat and poultry products has languished in the White House Office of Management and Budget. We have the technology to test for these pathogens. FSIS can and should immediately begin monitoring for the Big Six in meat and poultry products.”

While the consumer groups do not endorse companies or products and are not familiar with the specific test to be used nor the sampling protocol, the groups are pleased that BPI is taking this step to hold and test for non-O157:H7 STECs and encourage others in the industry to do the same. The consumer groups strongly urge OMB to finalize FSIS’ proposal to immediately declare the “Big Six” non-O157 STEC adulterants and put a robust and meaningful testing regiment in place.

# # #

The Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to preventing foodborne illness through research, education, advocacy and service.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest is a non-profit consumer advocacy and education organization that focuses largely on food safety and nutrition issues. It is supported principally by the 850,000 subscribers to its Nutrition Action Healthletter and by foundation grants.

The Consumer Federation of America is a nonprofit association of nearly 300 consumer groups that, since 1968, has sought to advance the consumer interest through research, advocacy, and education.

The National Consumers League is the nation’s oldest consumer organization, representing consumers on marketplace and workplace issues.

STOP Foodborne Illness is a national nonprofit public health organization dedicated to the prevention of illness and death from foodborne pathogens by advocating for sound public policy, building public awareness and assisting those impacted by foodborne illness.

Contact:

Barbara Kowalcyk, Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention, 724-58-0767

Sarah Klein, Center for Science in the Public Interest, 202-332-9110

Chris Waldrop, Consumer Federation of America, 202-797-8551

Sally Greenberg, National Consumers League, 202-835-3323

Nancy Donley, STOP Foodborne Illness, 773-269-6555

New bill addresses confusion over meaning of “4G” – National Consumers League

/in /by

By Larry Rose, NCL Public Policy Intern

You’ve probably heard the term “4G” being mentioned a lot recently. And, if you’re like most consumers, you probably have no clue as to what that means. In theory, a fourth generation, (4G) wireless network is a network that offers significantly greater speed than the third generation (3G) wireless networks that most smartphones run on.  The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) used to define 4G services as broadband technology that has a speed exceeding 100 M bit/s.  ITU later changed the definition of 4G to any form of mobile broadband that marks a meaningful improvement over 3G services. This definition is vague and allows the telecommunications industry to refer to many different types of mobile broadband as “4G.”

The four largest members of the telecommunications industry all provide services that are advertised as being “4G.” However, these four companies use the term “4G” to refer to three different types of mobile broadband technology. AT&T and T-Mobile advertise their Evolved High Packet Speed Access (HSPA+) networks as being “4G” despite the former company considering its HPSA+ network to be a mere “transition” to “true” 4G technology.  On the other hand, Verizon uses the term to refer to its Long Term Evolution (LTE) network, which typically provides faster speeds than the HPSA+ network. Sprint markets its WiMax technology as “4G” despite being somewhat slower than Verizon’s LTE network. These three services are considerably different from one another from a technological point of view, but they all operate under the same marketing label.  This creates difficulties for consumers who are trying to determine which wireless service to purchase.

Fortunately, consumers have found themselves a champion in Congress. Last month, Representative Anna Eshoo of California introduced H.R. 2281, the Next Generation Wireless Disclosure Act.  This bill requires wireless service providers to disclose information about the speed, reliability, price, network management policies and the terms of the wireless service, as well as costs for the service that are not included in the stated price and the technology used to provide the service. The bill would also direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to create a side-by-side comparison of the speeds and prices of the 4G services provided by the top 10 U.S. wireless carriers.

The telecommunications industry isn’t pleased with this bill. According to the CTIA, the bill adds unnecessary regulation at a time that Congress should be focused on finding more spectrum to devote to 4G technology.

A study from Nielson found that only two out of five consumers understand what the term “4G” actually means. 27% of respondents incorrectly believed that Apple’s iPhone 4 offers 4G technology . That false assumption was most likely aided by the fact that a previous version of the iPhone was called “iPhone 3G,” after the type of mobile broadband that it used.

Last week, NCL, joined the ranks of Consumers Union, Public Knowledge, Media Access Project and the New America Foundation’s Open Technology Initiative in endorsing the Next Generation Wireless Disclosure Act. In an economy where many consumers rely on mobile broadband for Internet access, it is essential that consumers know what type of mobile broadband service they are purchasing.

NCL statement on Senate Commerce Committee Cramming Report and recent FCC proposal to address mystery fees – National Consumers League

/in /by

July 13, 2011

Contact: NCL Communications, (202) 835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC–The following statement is attributable to National Consumers League Executive Director Sally Greenberg:

Chairman Rockefeller’s report on the impact of cramming on landline phone bills confirms our fears about the extent of the problem. As reported by the Federal Communications Commission, this is an issue that touches tens of millions of households, with few even aware that they are victims. At a time of economic distress, it is unacceptable that billions of dollars in cramming charges are being siphoned out of consumers’ pockets. That the nation’s telecommunications carriers were aware of the problem, and indeed may have profited from this fraud belies the futility of voluntary industry efforts to address cramming.

The FCC’s proposed rules to increase disclosure requirements and require free third-party billing blocking do not go far enough. For more than a decade, consumers have been asked to rely on weak regulatory safeguards and voluntary industry standards for protection from cramming. As Chairman Rockefeller’s report vividly illustrates, these half-measures are not working.

Third-party billing on landline phone bills is a relic of a previous telecommunications era that scam artists are exploiting to steal billions from consumers. We see few legitimate reasons why a consumer would need to have a charge for a product or service billed on a landline phone account. It is for these reasons that NCL is calling on Congress to pass national legislation modeled on Vermont’s recently enacted law that prohibits third-party billing on landline phone accounts, with few exceptions.

Cramming fraud has gone on long enough and cost consumers far too much. Where federal regulators and the telecommunications industry have failed in protecting consumers, Congress must act.

NCL’s letter to Chairman Rockefeller regarding this issue is available here.

Consumer who have been victims of cramming fraud are encouraged to file a complaint with NCL’s Fraud Center at www.fraud.org.

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

The good banker – National Consumers League

/in /by

By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

One of the best brains on financial reform is, in my view, Joe Nocera. He writes for the NYTimes and is a frequent guest on NPR. Nocera recently wrote a NY Times piece about a man he calls “the good banker.” Why does this man, Robert Wilmers, CEO of M& T bank, earn Nocera’s respect? Wilmers is a unique critic of his profession. I find that folks in the business community that are capable of self-criticism are rare indeed; most want to ignore or overlook the bad practices that are perpetuated by their companies.

But Wilmers finds plenty of fault in the banking business and it bothers him that bankers have fallen to the “third worst profession” in the public’s mind. He says that much of the money banks earn comes from trading profits “rather than prudent extension of credit that furthers commerce.” We agree. Wilmers believes that derivatives helped bring about the financial crisis and should be regulated. We agree. He says that bank executives are wildly overpaid. Boy, do we agree with that. He says that the biggest banks, the Too Big to Fail Banks – were operating in an “unsafe business model.” We agree.

I’ve said in previous blogs that I wish banks would make money the old-fashioned way – extend loans at 6 or 7 percent and pay depositors 2-3 percent interest. But that’s not big bucks, so that business model – while still in use – is sidelined. Instead, banks use excessive fees – $39 overdraft charges, fees for going over your spending limits – often paid by those with the most limited incomes–the stuff that Elizabeth Warren calls “tricks and traps” – are used to make their executives rich. Or they trade in derivatives and earn big fees for the transactions.

Nocera notes that in 2007, the chief execs of the Too Big To Fail Banks made, on average $26 million. That’s more than double the compensation of the top nonblank Fortune 500 executives. Wilmers himself made $2 million, a great salary by any standard but reasonable relative to his performance (in 30 years he built the bank from a $2 billion operation to assets of $68 billion today).

Wilmers also believes that Glass Steagall Act – the Depression era law that separated commercial and investment banks – should never have been abolished. I couldn’t agree more. The repeal of Glass Steagall is one of the worst disasters of deregulation. Nocera quotes from Wilmers speech at his company’s annual meeting. He said he wants to find “ways to continue to attract deposits, make sound loans and grow in accordance with our historic credit quality standards.”  Someone should give this very unusual CEO an award!

Online auction scams: Scammers set their sights on sellers – National Consumers League

/in /by

PayPal appeals to many consumers by offering a safe, hassle-free way to purchase items online without handing over personal information, such as credit card numbers, to merchants. Unfortunately, enterprising scammers are impersonating PayPal to take advantage of that trust and swindle unwary online sellers.A victim from Texas, who we’ll call Jane, recently contacted NCL’s Fraud Center. As a seller at an online auction site, Jane had done everything right. She listed a woman’s Rolex watch on eBay and was notified that a buyer named Joy Morgan had won the item for $3,800. Jane then received an email, purportedly from PayPal, stating that, in order to get paid, she first needed to send the Rolex in the mail and email the buyer the tracking number. Susan was initially uneasy about sending a valuable item to a buyer without receiving any payment, so she called the number provided in the email and spoke with what she thought was a PayPal representative that assured her that it was a standard procedure for all first-time sellers. Jane sent the item but, after not receiving any money in her account, contacted PayPal’s main customer service line. That’s where she heard the bad news: she had been scammed. Both the official looking email, complete with PayPal logos, and the friendly customer service representative she initially spoke with were frauds. Jane is out close to $4,000 and has little hope of ever getting her money back.

Scammers have become extremely sophisticated with the tools they use to trick consumers into opening their wallets. NCL’s Fraud Center has received reports of scammers creating realistic looking Web sites, emails, and hotlines all designed to fool unsuspecting consumers into believing they are dealing with a legitimate business. Don’t be fooled! Use caution and common sense with any online transaction.

Double-check the company’s information. A familiar name or brand on an email, in a letter or mentioned over the phone doesn’t guarantee that the deal is legitimate. Crooks often pretend to be from well-known companies to gain people’s trust. Find the company’s contact information independently, online or through directory assistance, and contact it yourself to verify the information.

Understand how online auctions works. Make sure you know the procedures regarding the payment and delivery of purchased items. If you get an email or call asking you to do something outside of standard operating procedures, it should be an immediate red flag.

Understand PayPal’s procedures. According to PayPal’s fraud FAQ, emails from PayPal will always address you by your first and last name or the business name associated with the account. Watch out for emails addressed to “Dear PayPal User” or “Dear PayPal Member.”

Inform auction sites and payment services about suspected fraud. They may have policies to remove sellers or buyers from their sites if they use “shills” or don’t live up to their obligations. Forward fraudulent PayPal emails to spoof@paypal.com.

Try mediation to resolve disputes. Not all problems are due to fraud. Sometimes people simply fail to hold up their side of the bargain in a timely manner or there may be an honest misunderstanding. Some auction sites provide links to third-party mediation services that help users resolve disputes. There may be a small fee that is usually paid by the party who requests the mediation.

Check out the seller or buyer Most auction sites have feedback forums with comments about the sellers based on other people’s experiences, but many sites also allow sellers to review buyers, which can provide pertinent information about a buyer who consistently creates payment issues and who is best avoided.

Farmworker Bill vetoed by CA Governor Jerry Brown – National Consumers League

/in /by

By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

When a politician who has championed the cause of farmworkers vetoes a bill that would help this vulnerable group of workers organize, something is very wrong. But that’s just what happened this week. California’s Governor Jerry Brown on Tuesday vetoed the “Fair Treatment for Farm Workers Act”. The bill would have allowed farmworkers to form or affiliate with a union via a petition, rather than through an election held in the workplace, where employees are too often subject to intimidation by bosses.

Three decades ago, Brown signed a bill to give agricultural workers the right to unionize by secret ballot. So what happened in the ensuing 30 years?  In his veto message, Brown said that while he was sympathetic with the aims of the bill, he feared it could adversely affect the framework of the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act. That’s dubious. The process the bill would have enabled is called “majority signup election” and also known as “card-check.” It also would have allowed the union to bargain for employees without holding an election, by simply collecting signatures from a majority of workers on cards saying they wanted representation. It’s the same argument opponents of the Employee Free Choice Act, the federal legislation backed by unions, used to tamp down support.

The farmworker proposal has been the top legislative goal for years for the United Farm Workers. Brown has spoken– more like bragged – about his friendship with the UFW’s founder and labor icon, Caesar Chavez. Chavez is likely rolling over in his grave after his old friend and champion vetoed this bill.

This is both a sad day for farmworkers and a lost opportunity. California could have lead the way for other states, but instead a governor who was once their champion has failed them. NCL knows from experience that the cause of farmworkers—and their children—flies under the radar. We’ve taken a lead in pushing for the Children’s Act for Responsible Employment (CARE), which would help get children out of the fields and into schools. Farmworker conditions continue to be among the worst in America. These men and women—and children—often spend 12 hour days in the hot sun picking our fruits and vegetables so Americans can have healthy produce on their tables. They live in substandard housing, get no health care, pension or sick leave.

“What never changes in politics is power. Gov. Brown accepted the arguments made by the powerful agribusiness lobby and rejected the cause of powerless farm workers,” United Farm Workers President Arturo Rodriguez said in a statement.

If we can’t count on one-time allies like Governor Gerry Brown to defend the cause of farmworkers, the status of working men and women is more dire than I had thought.

NCL endorses Next Generation Wireless Disclosure Act – National Consumers League

/in /by

July 7, 2011

Contact: NCL Communications, (202) 835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League (NCL) today announced its endorsement Representative Anna Eshoo’s Next Generation Wireless Disclosure Act. NCL applauded the bill’s pro-consumer goal of increasing transparency in the market for “4G” mobile broadband service.

“Consumers are relying more than ever – and in some cases exclusively – on their mobile broadband devices to get online,” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “Confusing coverage maps, data caps, and pricing plans full of ‘mouseprint,’ too often leave the average consumer at the mercy of wireless carriers’ marketing hype. Representative Eshoo’s bill would do much to provide some sorely-needed clarity for shoppers in this market.”

The wireless broadband market is awash in technical jargon like LTE, WiMAX and HSPA+, all claiming to provide “4G” service. Representative Eshoo’s bill would help consumers make sense of these new technologies by requiring carriers to provide consumers with important information, including guaranteed minimum data speeds, network reliability, coverage area maps and pricing. This information would be made available on bills and at the point of sale to help consumers more effectively comparison shop and evaluate the level of service they are receiving. The bill would also require the Federal Communications Commission to review the speed and prices of the top 4G wireless data providers to help consumers better compare services.

“Ubiquitous, always-on mobile broadband access is becoming indispensable to millions of consumers,” said John Breyault, NCL Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud. “It’s high time that consumers get some measure of certainty that what’s being advertised to them is what they will get when they sign up for service. Representative Eshoo’s bill would go a long way towards giving consumers that peace of mind.”

NCL’s letter of support to Representative Eshoo is available by clicking here.

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Massey Energy case makes clear: miners need more protections – National Consumers League

/in /by

By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

In the 1890’s in America, mine workers faced harsh working conditions. There were few safety mechanisms on machines, pay commonly amounted to less than one dollar for a 12 to 14-hour workday, and mine owners commonly paid their employees in scrip, company-printed money, only usable at company-owned stores, where prices were significantly higher. And especially important to NCL’s history, many mine workers were children, with mine owners commonly hiring boys as young as ten years of age to work in the mines.

Thanks to decades of battles to get union representation by the United Mine Workers union and its many hard-fought battles, conditions have improved in the mines and mineworkers are well paid. But the lives of mineworkers are still too cheap.

Last week, federal investigators looking into the mine explosion in April of last year in West Virginia found that Massey Energy, the owner of the mine where 29 men were killed in an explosion, kept accounts of hazardous conditions out of official record books where inspectors would see them. For example, one internal report from March 1, 2010, shortly before the accident, noted a problem with water sprayers, while the official report stated flatly “none observed” in the column for hazardous conditions.

After the mine disaster, a lot negative information came to light about Don Blankenship, owner of Massey Mines – including how he undervalued the safety of miners, was obsessed with output, checking on mine production every several hours. Now we learn that Massey Mines kept a set of internal books where safety hazards were recorded, out of sight of state inspectors, and off the official books that the law required them to keep.

We owe a debt of gratitude to the team of federal investigators, who spent a year sifting through more than 84,000 pages of documents, interviewing 266 people and examining evidence at the Upper Big Branch mine, where the explosion occurred.

Kevin Stricklin of MSHA, the federal agency responsible for mine safety, at a press conference this week, gave a stinging indictment of Massey practices, saying the federal investigation by more than 100 people had been able to rule out the company’s assertion that the explosion on April 5, 2010, happened because of an event beyond its control: a huge inundation of gas.

His findings matched those of the earlier report, conducted by a former federal mine safety chief which said that coal dust had been allowed to accumulate, spreading what had been a small ignition of methane through the mine and creating the deadliest mine blast in 40 years. Stricklin said this wasn’t simply a theory, “This is our conclusion.”

Falsifying records is a felony under federal mining laws. Though two people have been indicted in the mine explosion, Massey managers, including the former chief executive, Don Blankenship, have not been charged. 18 Massey executives have refused to be interviewed for the federal investigation, invoking their Fifth Amendment rights. Stricklin’s report found that Massey managers also pressured workers to omit dangerous conditions from the official books, Mr. Stricklin said that workers who tried to report risks were intimidated.

What can we do in the future to prevent negligent anti-union mine owners like Don Blankenship from exposing coal miners – who work under very dangerous conditions in the best of times – from continuing to operate? After all, the negligence killed 29 men working in the mine. Federal criminal indictments might help – and once these findings make their way to the US Attorney’s office – prosecutors should press charges against any and all officials whose actions put coal miners at risk.