WEST TERRE HAUTE, Ind. (AP) — A leak has led to an explosion at a plant that turns coal into gas in western Indiana and authorities say two people have been killed.

Payonk says operations at the plant near a Duke Energy power station have been halted because of the explosion.

This happened Monday. It’s not an unusual story. Workers get killed too often in this country.

On Tuesday, Democratic lawmakers called for tougher punishments for companies that do not follow safety standards and people end up injured or dead.

It’s about freakin time!!

The maximum penalty for a safety violation is $70,000 and the most an individual or individuals can get in prison is six months. That’s all the lives of workers are worth?

The Associated Press reported yesterday that a bunch of senators were calling for more than a slap on the wrist for employers.

“If you improperly import an exotic bird, you can go to jail for two years. If you deal in counterfeit money, you’re looking at 20 years,” said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. “But if you gamble with the lives of your employees and one of them is killed, you risk only six months in jail.”

There were 5,840 fatal work injuries in the U.S. in 2006 — a fatality rate of 4.0 per 100,000 employed workers — the most recent numbers available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. OSHA said that the fatality rate was the lowest since the BLS instituted its Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries in 1992.

OSHA officials argue that this is all about politics:

“Election-year political theater cannot mask the truth that under this administration, workplace illness, injury and fatality rates are the lowest in OSHA’s history,” said Edwin G. Foulke Jr., assistant secretary of labor for OSHA.

What Foulke fails to mention is that labor advocates have said OSHA’s policing of the workplace has also diminished under the Bush Administration.

From the New York Times last year:

That response reflects OSHA’s practices under the Bush administration, which vowed to limit new rules and roll back what it considered cumbersome regulations that imposed unnecessary costs on businesses and consumers. Across Washington, political appointees — often former officials of the industries they now oversee — have eased regulations or weakened enforcement of rules on issues like driving hours for truckers, logging in forests and corporate mergers.

Since George W. Bush became president, OSHA has issued the fewest significant standards in its history, public health experts say. It has imposed only one major safety rule. The only significant health standard it issued was ordered by a federal court.

I’ve written often in this blog about worker safety. Here are links to some past posts.

The only way to get employers watching out for their workers is making penalties more severe when they break the rules. Corporations and the people that run them are more often driven by the bottom line. That’s just the way it is. If we want to make worker safety a priority we can not count on individuals always doing the right thing. I’m old enough now to realize there have the be checks and balances, and that means making companies write bigger checks when they throw safety out the window.

I had lunch with some savvy Corporate types from a financial services company yesterday, and we got on the topic of the younger generation.

The one guy at the table talked about how his older, teenage daughter wants to become a doctor but she’s never worked a day in her life. He wondered how she was going to handle being thrown into the work/grind mixture when she goes for her internship at a big hospital in a big city.

And from there, the conversation turned to how so many young workers today expect not to pay dues and just sail through their careers.

This morning, I see a story in the Wall Street Journal about how employers are paying younger workers to volunteer. Why? It can help attract Gen Y workers.

Employers are bending over backwards to attract these employees. In one case a hiring manager told me her firm sends care packages to college students’ homes to butter up the parents.

There’s a lot of hand-holding that goes on with this generation, my lunch mates and me surmised.

So, are Gen Ys just babies? I asked this question of my intern, Katherine Guiney, who is 20.

“We are babies,” she agrees. “We had it easy. We live in suburbia and our parents do everything for us.”

Is that a bad thing?

“Not necessarily,” she says. “As long as you realize it.”

So, who’s going to run the country in 20 years?

I can’t really defend how we’ve run this place…war, global warming, the biggest gap between rich and poor in our history.

Maybe Katherine and her buddies will do better.

Last August, Angela Coletti left economically depressed Detroit for a job in Los Angeles as a field marketing manager for an automotive company.

“I love the sunny weather in Southern California, but miss the warm friendliness and reasonable cost of living of the Mid-West,” she laments.

Coletti is one of many workers out there who found they had to look for greener pastures if they wanted their careers and lives to flourish. But she faces a problem many employees today face — she still can’t sell her home.

“Regrettably, I am renting now in Santa Monica, CA. I have a condo in suburban Detroit that has been on the market for the last eight months. Approximately 95% of my current income goes towards my Detroit mortgage and LA rent. There is very little disposable income at this time. Renting in LA is not a choice, but rather a necessity. I would prefer to buy and enjoy the benefits of home ownership in LA, but the market is simply too inflated and beyond my reach as a single member household.”

Unfortunately, Coletti isn’t alone. I address the issue of relocating in today’s job and housing market in my MSNBC.com column today.

So how do you know if you should start packing your bags?

Roberta Chinsky Matuson of Human Resource Solutions offers these questions to ask yourself:

1. Do I have enough money in the bank to support myself in case my search
takes longer than expected? If not, what is my plan to earn money while
looking for work?
2. Do I really want to live in this part of the country? It is important
to think about how well you will fit into your new environment. I know many
southerners who flew back home after one winter in the northeast.
3. Is this a move my family is willing to make? It is one thing to pick up
and move when you are single. It gets a lot more complicated when other
family members are involved.

One of the hardest things you’ll ever do in your life is move. Trust me. I have moved many times when I was single and then many times after getting married, and then having kids. IT WAS HELL!

I don’t regret any of those moves, even though they were so difficult. Sometimes you have to get up and go, for work, for family, for a better life.

Believe it or not, my husband and I are contemplating yet another move next year.

I’m not tied to any one location. That may be the way my parents brought us up. My mother and father both were forced to leave their homeland of Istanbul, Turkey, and come to a totally unknown place, for them, the United States.

My father always said it was the best decision he ever made even though it was probably his toughest decision.

The main thing is to make the move with intelligence. Do your homework. Make sure the town is right for you. Find a job you’ll love, or at least sort of enjoy.

And think about the economics of moving before you rent the U-haul.

Coletti is happy she made the move but she would have done some things differently:

“Although I did receive a modest relocation allowance, I wish I would have pressed the issue of my home in Detroit. My company has a policy of providing limited relocation assistance to new hires, but if I had to do it again, I would have asked for a conditional arrangement. Perhaps to revisit a home repurchase option after 6-8 months of employment, contingent on my performance reviews, which fortunately, have been very favorable.”

So don’t rush to split your town. Use the Internet for all its worth..research, network, compare towns, etc.

And don’t be afraid to move on, even though, as Coletti points out you’ll endure some pain:

“Like my European ancestors in the 1920s, I feel like moving for the sake of opportunity requires a personal sacrifice of leaving behind family and friends.”

I remember going to Atlantic City casinos with my parents years ago. It wasn’t fun. I’m not much of a gambler, and I really hated being in a fog of smoke.

The more gamblers lost, it seemed, the more they would chain smoke. I couldn’t even imagine being a casino employee and having to breathe in that smoke day in and day out.

Well, many of the workers were sick of it as well, and they’ve been fighting for a long time to get a smoking ban. Yesterday, they won the battle.

The Atlantic City Council unanimously approved the ban after major opposition from casino owners, and the hair-man himself, Donald Trump.

From a Philadelphia Inquirer story:

The Casino Association of New Jersey, which represents the interests of the city’s 11 casinos, declined to comment on the council’s late-afternoon vote.

But at least one casino mogul, Donald J. Trump, whose name is emblazoned on three casinos here, said the full smoking ban would further cripple Atlantic City’s struggling casino industry against new neighboring competition.

“It’s too bad,” Trump said of the vote. “It will put Atlantic City at a competitively negative advantage, and it’s unfortunate.”

The ordinance now goes before Atlantic City Mayor Scott Evans to sign.

Evans has stated his “wholehearted support” for the measure, which restricts smoking to nongaming lounges - similar to ones found in many U.S. airports. He has 20 days to sign the bill, which would take effect Oct. 15.

Workers are obviously happy about the decision too. Also from the Inquirer:

Kim Hesse, a dealer at Caesars, gave up smoking in 1988 and decided to lead a healthier life. But, she said, her job got in the way.

“Every time I went to work, it defeated my efforts,” said Hesse, who started dealing at age 18, straight out of high school. “As soon as you walk into the casinos, [the smoke] would hit you like a wall.

“You feel like a human filter - that the casinos have no other filtration except us,” she said.

Like many of her dealer brethren, Hesse became active in the fight for a full smoking ban about two years ago and joined forces with local health organizations, including the American Cancer Society.

Their cause was aided by the United Auto Workers, which stepped in on their behalf in December. The UAW has been trying to unionize all Atlantic City dealers for the last year.

It’s great news for workers no matter what Trump thinks because at least now they will live a bit longer.

I have to disclose something here. My father smoked most of his life until he finally gave into his three little daughters who kept begging him to quit.

After nearly 20 years of not smoking, my dad was diagnosed with lung cancer anyway. He had done the damage after a lifetime of smoking. It was too late for him. Well, maybe we were lucky enough to have a few extra, precious years with him because he did quit.

Anyway, smoking devastated our family because we lost the greatest man in the world.

I think Atlantic City gamblers will still make the trek to the casino mecca. Unfortunately, Trump can find solace in a bad economy that typically gets desperate people looking for Lady Luck to shine down on them.

This will probably be the first generation that constantly apologizes for growing old.

Lately, it seems, quite a few Baby Boomers have been whining about the youngsters in the workplace that don’t respect them, and how employers are brushing them aside for the hipster Gen Ys.

I just got this letter from Linda N., a reader of my MSNBC.com column:

I am too young to retire and it seems too old (60) to be employed. I have a degree in Legal Studies and would prefer to be employed. But seeking employment in various fields, has been a challenge.

Our nation USA appears to be partial to youthfulness.

Is there any company that are more forgiving towards Baby Boomer?

What’s happened to this generation that once had a “screw you” establishment mentality? So many seem to be curling up in a ball waiting to be kicked in the ass by Corporate America.

We don’t like who we are. We don’t like the way we look. We’re spending more money than any generation on facelifts, hair dyes and youth-enhancing drugs…Viagra anyone?

What ever happened to the precious gift of knowledge that only comes with age? My parents generation never tried to be like their children, or their children’s children. They were proud of who they were and knew we were all looking up to them.

Look, I’m not stupid. I know there’s age discrimination in the workplace, along with a host of other biases. But no one likes a worker with his or her tail between their legs.

You need to stand up proud if you’re going to demand respect.

Women especially need to heed this advice. Forget about the myth that men age with dignity and women just shrivel up. That’s a line Madison Avenue wants you to believe so you can open up that expensive pocketbook you got from T.J. Maxx and give them all your money for phony youth serums.

There is nothing I like more than a women who walks around an office with confidence, proud of her gray hair and the wisdom she has that she knows no one else can match.

Linda N., there are companies in Corporate America that want confident women and men who can do the job. You chose the companies you’d like to work for and show them your background, your experience, and let hiring managers know what you can do to help their business.

And this should be your mentality — “Let’s see which company will be lucky enough to get me.”

I get tons of emails about companies going green, green jobs, green ways to commute, etc.

I usually just hit the delete button, but not last week when an email showed up in my mailbox about a union that was going green.

My first thought was: “why the heck is a union using it’s valuable time worrying about the environment when workers’ paychecks are declining and most working stiffs are worried about losing their jobs in this economy?”

The email was from the Service Employees International Union and it details a host of things its leadership wants to do in order to help the world become a green place.

If I had gotten the email from any other union — say the United Auto Workers, which has seen its membership decimated and its members put through the ringer — I would have gone ballistic in this blog, mocking any initiative that doesn’t help its members shore up their livelihoods.

But the SEIU, with its 1.9 million members, has actually been one of the few unions in this country that is growing.

Do they have the luxury to focus on “green” and not just wage and hour issues? I’m not sure. But I’ll give them a bit of leeway here.

Basically, they want a bit of “green” language in their local contracts for members. And some of what they propose will also help workers themselves, well, more directly than helping cut down on overall pollution for the earth.

Here is some of what the SEIU proposes:

Public transportation benefits to decrease automobile use.

Replacement of toxic cleaning supplies to protect workers, land and water.

Encouragement of daytime cleaning to reduce nighttime energy use in buildings.

Establishment of labor-management environmental committees for ongoing monitoring of environmental issues in the workplace.

All these sound reasonable, but the SEIU leadership has to convince management and their own members, that pushing these issues during contract negotiations is critical. Typically, such negotiations are contentious enough as both sides battle over money and benefits. So, adding “green” demands will probably stir up the pot even more.

“We need to do a whole education thing with our members about this,” says Gerry Hudson, SEIU’s executive vice president. “We need to do something about climate change. We can use our bargaining power to be helpful.”

The green initiative will kick off with a resolution at the SEIU’s convention in June, and Hudson is hopeful the proposal will get some momentum coming out of the convention that will lead to pilot projects after the November election.

That’s when he believes dialogue involving climate change throughout the country will “heat up.”

How many times do I have to say it…network, network, network.

Networking is how you find a job today folks. You’re in trouble if you’re just sending out resumes and waiting for a reply. (OK, maybe a tiny group of you out there have landed a job recently by doing this, but it’s not the norm.)

Everyone else needs to take out their socialization hat and start shaking some hands, real and virtual hands.

A recent study adds fuel to the Internet social/professional networking fire for job seekers.

Staffing company Robert Half International surveyed 150 top dogs at large companies and found 62 percent of those polled believe sites like LinkedIn will be a useful tool for them in the next three years, and 35 percent said social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace will also be a resource for them.

Executives were asked, “Which of the following technology tools do you believe will be most useful in your firm’s recruiting efforts in the next three years?”:

· Professional networking sites: 62%
· Social networking sites: 35%
· Video resumes: 20%
· Second Life: 7%
· None of these: 15%
· Other/don’t know: 10%

“Maintaining and developing professional contacts has always been a vital job search strategy, and networking websites are another vehicle for doing so,” said Max Messmer, Robert Half International’s CEO and author of Job Hunting For Dummies®, 2nd Edition. “Networking sites can be used to identify new career opportunities, create online profiles that highlight one’s skills and experience, and build a roster of business contacts over time.”

I know quite a few people that have yet to join any of these sites and I always tell them, “do it now!”

I know, there are some issues with these sites. They have technological glitches, and often you get tons off useless emails, or dumb trivia games your friends want you to play. But it’s time to join the cyber networking party already.

I’ve written before about how hiring managers want a known entity these days, especially during tough economic times. They want a recommendation, or at least some sort of connection to you. What better way that finding someone they know in your LinkedIn or Facebook contact list?

Eat, Pray, Scam

Fast and easy money is great
Especially when you’re in a bind

The emails promising wealth
Are nothing but bonafide scams.

This week in my MSNBC column, I delve into the work-at-home scams that are sweeping the nation.

I get tons of emails from stay-at-home moms and dads, disabled individuals, and people desperate to make some extra cash in the tough economy, wondering how they can get a work-at-home gig that pays them enough money to make ends meet. They wonder if the unreal offers they get via email, or read about on job boards, or in magazines or the local paper, are really real.

I hate to say it folks, but according to the experts such as Christine Durst, founder of RatRaceRebellion.com one out of 48 work-at-home opportunities are legitimate.

And the Better Business Bureau has a whole list of scams that are out there, scams that were popular years ago but have resurfaced in this Internet age.

Lots of people ask me where they can find legitimate work-at-home opportunities but as a journalist I can’t suggest particular companies. But I can say, finding a work-at-home gig is just like finding any other job. Companies looking to hire folks don’t send unsolicited emails to people looking to give them a job. You should be looking for companies you’ve heard about, or at least someone you know has heard about.

And never, never, never pay money upfront to get a job. Employers pay you, not the other way around.

So print out my poem and keep it with you when that unbelievable offer comes your way. And say “no” to becoming a sucker.

UPDATE
Since I work from home, my schedule is somewhat flexible. Not that I ever can take advantage of it.

Well, this morning I actually am taking advantage of it. I volunteered to go on my son’s field trip to a state park. This is unusual for me. I rarely get involved with anything at my childrens’ schools. It’s a sore point with me. I wish I had time to do more of it.

Recently a good friend of mine actually conjured up horrific mommy guilt juices in me when she said, “you have to volunteer at school. It’s important for your kids and their success at school.”

Ugh, I couldn’t believe how horrible her words made me feel. We constantly get letters home from the teacher and emails from other parents asking us to do this and that at the school. Sometimes I feel like I’m a failure as a mom because I just don’t have the time to spend time in my son and daughter’s classes.

Even though people think I have a lot of leeway in my job because I’m essentially my own boss, that’s just not the way it is. I work more hours now than I ever did as a regular rank and file employee, and the key problem when you for yourself — if you don’t work you don’t get paid.

So, I’m always amazed when people who get a regular paycheck don’t take advantage of or ask for flex time.

People in professional positions tend to ask for flex time more than those in technical or clerical jobs, according to a new survey by Seattle-based Institute for Corporate Productivity. That blew my mind a bit because it’s typically those in lower level, grunt positions that need the flex time most.

Here’s some other interesting findings from the survey, that polled 560 employers across the country:

73% of the 560 responding organizations offer “flextime” (flexible start/end times), while 60% offer part-time work opportunities and 33% provide a compressed workweek option.

Seventy-six percent report that flex work arrangements boost employee morale and 64% say they bolster retention rates. Overall, flexible work options are becoming more common in companies.

Forty five percent of the companies polled report that such option are expected to grow over the next year. Just 7% forecast a reduction in flex work programs.

Measuring the viability of flexible work arrangements is also a priority, the study shows. Sixty eight percent of respondents have established deadlines for flex workers and 64% keep close tabs on those project deadlines. Daily/weekly project status reports are required by 43% of responding organizations, and 27% require periodic status meetings.

Respondents thought that younger employees were more likely to request such arrangements than older workers, and women were seen as more likely to request them than men.

Well, surprise, surprise. Women ask for flex time more often. Sorry guys, but women still do tend to get the biggest share of the family responsibilities no matter how many hours they put in to their daily grind.

What has happened to the school system in our country? I never remember my mom or dad volunteering at my school. They came to spring concerts and the occasional field trip, but volunteering in class the help the teacher out? No way. Actually, being immigrants, they probably wouldn’t have been much help since their English wasn’t great.

It seems odd. Women are working more today than ever and women are being asked to spend more time in the school system. How do we jive this? How do you all do it?

UPDATE:
So, I’m back from the field trip.

Even though I was supposedly taking time away from work, and my blog, while on the field trip with my son Cheiron, I still couldn’t leave my reporter’s hat in the office.

At one point, I was alone with my son’s kindergarten teacher so I figured I’d ask her about parents who don’t ever have time to volunteer in the class and how that impacts your children. She said, “I don’t think it really matters at all if you do things with them at home in the evening and on the weekends.” Being a teacher, she added, she rarely has time to do things in her kids’ classes. Wow, I never thought of that. How do teachers who have children volunteer at their kid’s school?

OK, I felt a bit better. And I really felt better when I saw my son smiling at me on the bus, proud to have his mommy with him.

If there were a nuclear holocaust chances are we’d see tons of layoffs at corporations.

DUH!

Yesterday, the CEOs of Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal called, “Some Myths About Airline Mergers.”

The two men, Richard Anderson from Delta and Doug Steenland from Northwest, are on the hot seat trying to explain to the nation — regulators and legislators in particular – why a merger between the two airlines is good for anyone aside from the two CEOs and their pockets.

Many analysts believe the merger will be bad for customer service and really bad for the workers at the two airlines.

Indeed, one of the unions involved has vowed to kill the deal, because they believe they’ll be shafted if the marriage between the airline giants is allowed to happen.

In the opinion piece, the CEOs try to dispel all the fears out there, but their attempt seems disingenuous.

They try to make their points in a myth-reality format.

The first myth: “Airline mergers cause big job losses.”

The reality, according to them: “Bankruptcies and high oil prices have caused significantly more job losses than mergers.”

This comparison is ridiculous.

There are lots of things that cause layoffs but we’re talking about this particular merger. It’s like saying, “It’s a myth that a spicy burrito will really aggravate my peptic ulcer because chocolate and fried foods will cause more aggravation.”

Do they think we’re stupid?

The CEOs even throw in Sept. 11 in there as having been an even bigger layoff inducer. I think that’s a cheap shot.

People, we’re talking about a merger between Delta and Northwest. Let’s stick to the merger facts Jacks.

When airlines merge, and when companies of all sorts for that matter merge, layoffs are inevitable. That’s why mergers happen, so they can cut costs. Costs, at least a big chunk of costs at most corporations, are tied up in workers. You have to pay workers to work for you. That fact hasn’t changed, yet.

The next worker myth: “This deal will jeopardize employees’ benefits.”

Reality, they say: “The merger will create a financially stronger airline, better positioned to protect jobs, compensation and benefits. Delta and Northwest worked side by side with their employees to obtain passage of the Pension Protection Act of 2006, to make pension funding more affordable. The transaction will make employee pensions and benefits more secure.”

First of all, if you don’t have a job you don’t get benefits — well unless you’re a CEO with a golden parachute.

And as for the Pension Protection Act, it did little to shore up traditional pensions for workers in the United States. The Act did more for retirement plans such as 401Ks, where employees take on more of the risk, than pensions that pay out guaranteed amounts when workers retire.

This quote from the Wall Street Journal in 2006 referring to the Act:

“We don’t know whether it’ll make benefits more secure or hasten the demise of defined-benefit plans,” Alicia Munnell of Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research.

Haven’t these CEOs been reading all the stories about underfunded or frozen pensions? Hello?

At this point, the proposed merger just doesn’t look good for workers, or passengers for that matter, says Thomas Kochan, a professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management.

“I think it’s going to fail unless the parties involved first put together a comprehensive strategy for all the labor and employment issues,” he says. “Both companies have deep employee relations problems.”

(See my story in MSNBC.com about labor strife in the airline sector.)

The notion that the deal won’t lead to layoffs or more employee strife “is ludicrous,” he adds.

If the deal goes through as is, Kochan surmises it will be followed by years of worker-management fighting; and that won’t help customer service that’s for sure or the companies’ stock prices.

So, if investors think they’ll be getting a good deal for this marriage, think again, he cautions.

“My view is government shouldn’t approve this without a business plan or commitment by the company and labor leaders saying ‘here’s how were going to work out these issues.’”

It’s time for some real reality.