“I’m fighting for my life here,” said William Parker a 74 year old, former General Motors employee.

Yesterday, GM pulled the rug out from under him when the auto giant announced it would eliminate health benefits for retired, salaried workers over 65.

I’m not kidding folks. Just like that, he lost his GM health care benefits that he has relied on. It’s horrible timing because Parker has cancer and a new cancer drug he’s been taking will now cost him $2,700 a month, not the $50 he was paying thanks to his GM coverage, according to an article in the New York Times today.

GM’s move is part of an overall cost cutting effort to help the financially troubled automaker, and it’s the latest in the type of worker screwing that’s been going on in this country.

“Yes we promised you health benefits Mr. Parker,” said the company. “Sike! We had our fingers crossed.”

That’s really the bottom line. There are no guarantees you’ll have health benefits, a pension. It’s all just a house of cards ready to collapse.

Health care coverage has been the target of many companies in the United States. Many younger workers are lucky if they get bare-bones plans, and older workers who are retired and those who are struggling with illnesses are at risk of losing it altogether.

There is Medicare of course, but according to Fidelity Investments, even with that coverage, the out of pocket costs for a 65 year old couple can top $200,000.

So, the way I see it, we’re dooming this population of hard workers to a life of money woes in their supposed Golden Years.

That is, of course, the workers who were not members of the corner office. Those top dogs are golden when it comes to their health upon retirement thanks to lucrative packages they’ve secured for themselves, on top of the obscene pay these executives have pocketed.

I’m assuming GM’s CEO Rick Wagoner will hold on to his benefits when he heads for the rocking chair.

It seemed like things were getting better Rick. After a pay cut, the executive got a 33 percent pay hike this year for a grand total of $2.2 million a year, not including benefits.

I guess it wasn’t rosy for every one, especially not for people like Parker:

“G.M was good to me and I hate to be bitter. But I don’t know what the hell I’m going to do.”

Indeed, this nation has to figure out what it’s going to do.

Workers in the private sector should be crossing their fingers right about now. A bill just passed in the House to give federal employees four weeks off paid when they have a child or adopt.

The bill was introduced by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), Steny H. Hoyer (D-MD), and Tom Davis (R-VA), and it now goes to the Senate where Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), much talked about as a possible running mate for Obama, is sponsoring the bill.

If enacted it could become a template for the nation’s workforce at large.

“The federal government may refer to its leave policies as ‘family-friendly,’ but the reality is that it’s forcing many of its employees to choose between their paycheck and their new child,” says Rep. Maloney. “As the nation’s largest employer, the federal government should be setting a national standard with workplace policies that are truly family-friendly. If President Bush supports family values, he will reevaluate his misguided veto threat of this important legislation.”

I’ve written about the paid family leave debate going on right now in this country. As you can imagine, many businesses are fighting these proposals because they fear it will impact there businesses negatively.

I’m admittedly torn about this issue. Paid leave would be a great benefit for workers who are struggling to care for family and stay productive at work. But businesses, small firms in particular, could find themselves short handed when workers take advantage of what could be a future perk. I write about this conflict today in my MSNBC.com smallbiz blog.

Unfortunately, the realities of life come and bite us on the ass too often. Where family is concerned, we have to give all our priorities. I’m not talking about being there for a soccer game, or having tea with a parent. I’m talking about needing time to care for a loved one who’s sick, or who has just come into the world.

Too many workers don’t have the luxury of taking time off unpaid, or quitting their jobs to become stay-at-home parents. Some workers would face financial ruin at a time when they need to be strong and help a family member.

I wonder if Ed McMahon asked American Family Publishers for an advance on his pitchman pay. He’s been fighting foreclosure on his mansion in Beverly Hills.

You guys might think I’m crazy even suggesting he ask his employer for financial help but maybe I’m not that wacky.

Turns out some employers are actually helping their financially strapped workers. There was a great story in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that talks about how some companies are offering financial aid to employees who face foreclosure and a host of other financial problems.

At a time when corporate boards are paying out big bucks to dead CEOs, it’s nice to hear the working stiffs are being given a helping hand now and then:

In the wake of the mortgage crisis, a small but growing number of workers are getting help avoiding or coping with foreclosure from an unlikely source: their employers. So far, a handful of companies — from small manufacturers to large companies like home-financing behemoth Fannie Mae — are offering assistance, such as interest-free loans, grants and support in securing rental properties. They’re also beefing up their employee-assistance programs, or EAPs, and adding more educational seminars on personal finance.

A January survey of 329 human-resource professionals showed that in 2007, 20% of employers said they received more requests from workers for pay advances than the year before, reports from the Society of Human Resource Management. Thirty-nine percent of respondents also saw an uptick in withdrawals from retirement savings — widely seen as an indicator of financial woes.

Folks, what do you have to lose. Check out what your company has to offer. Many firms have always offered a host of services through EAPs that range from emotional help to credit counseling. It has always perplexed me that many employees never take advantage of such services. These programs are there for workers. Your employer counts the money laid out for such offerings as part of your compensation people.

And I’ve written recently on how many bosses are more open to allowing their workers to telecommute because of skyrocketing gas prices.

Obviously, you can pull money out of your retirement fund, and some employers are offering hardship withdrawals as an option. But most financial planning experts say this can come back to haunt you in the long run. It’s for retirement stupid!

My husband and I tapped into a 401K many years ago to help pay for a home and when he left that employer we got nailed with a huge tax bill and unreal penalties. It wasn’t worth it in hindsight.

Asking for a raise is probably a smarter idea.

I know, I know, it’s a tough economy and many employers are putting the clamp down on increases. But that’s what every employee thinks, so they may not be pressuring their managers for a pay hike, opening up the door for you. Supervisors usually have a pool of money they can divvy up among workers, and the managers I’ve talked to all say “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.”

So start squeaking people.

I’m not naive here. I know there will be lots of supervisors who couldn’t care less if you’re struggling to keep your home, or fighting off personal bankruptcy. But before you go groveling to a rich sibling, or generous friend, check out what your company has to offer.

There’s this insane idea that women can do it all on their own.

You know what I’m talking about moms out there. You keep piling on the responsibilities at work and at home and then you wonder what the “F” is going on.

Recently a friend of mine lost it because she was so overwhelmed.

Why? Because she got home from work and no one had picked up groceries. It doesn’t seem like a tragedy? BUT IT WAS DAMN IT! That’s the whole point. Women do too much and we suck at expecting others to help out. Since she usually does most of the things around the house, plus work like a dog at her career, they expected her to do it all.

A study I recently came across shows how much we suck at this.

The survey, by staffing company Adecco USA, asked working parents a host of work-life balance questions, and I was shocked to see that men expect their firms to be doing more to help them achieve that balance. Fifty five percent of the dads polled said they thought their firms could be doing more, compared to 49 percent of moms. And 45 percent of fathers thought becoming a parent impacted there careers, versus 41 percent of mothers who thought so.

For both these questions I would have expected closer to 100 percent of working moms to answer “yes, yes, yes”.

Come on gals out there. We have to stop thinking, without us the world will stop spinning. How come moms everywhere aren’t ranting and raving about how today’s workplace does not accommodate working parents? And hello!!!! Every woman I speak with knows becoming a mom did a number on their careers in some way.

But here we are telling a pollster that it’s not that bad.

“The perception that the work/life balancing act is mainly a female struggle no longer holds up in today’s workplace,” says Rich Thompson, Vice President of Training & Development for Adecco Group North America.

Sorry Rich. I agree that men are picking up more of the slack, but alas, it still is largely a “female struggle.”

But what I find most disturbing about this survey is that women don’t expect more, not just at home, but of their employers. Maybe that’s why work-life balance perks have not become widespread in the work world, because the people that need them the most aren’t outraged or demanding enough. Maybe it will take more men struggling with this balancing act to finally transform the workplace.

I’m having one of those mornings when little makes sense.

At a time when companies are cutting back on leave for working parents and a growing number of Americans are losing their jobs, why would intelligent men and women agree to give CEOs of major companies money after their dead.

The men and women I’m talking about are the board members of large corporations that approved so-called death benefits for top executives. The Wall Street Journal found these lavish payouts after reviewing federal filings and reported on these shocking perks yesterday.

You still can’t take it with you. But some executives have arranged for the next best thing: huge corporate payouts to their heirs if they die in office.

Take Eugene Isenberg, the 78-year-old chief executive of Nabors Industries Ltd. If Mr. Isenberg died tomorrow, Nabors would owe his estate a “severance” payment of at least $263.6 million, company filings show. That’s more than the first-quarter earnings at the Houston oil-service company.

These payouts are known as “golden coffins” and they really make you wonder whether “supply side economics” really does lift all boats.

Lately it seems the average worker is sinking when you look at stagnant wage increases among the rank and file, and continued reductions in benefits, everything from healthcare to time off.

Employees are paying more than ever for the health insurance they get from their employers, if they get any coverage at all. And paid leave benefits are few and far between. Indeed, a story in today’s Wall Street Journal talks about how maternity leave is the latest benefit to be hacked and slashed in the workplace.

At a time when many consumers are scrambling for cash, working parents face an added source of pressure: a squeeze on maternity-leave pay and time off.

Employers are cutting back on post-childbirth pay for mothers and offering shorter leaves, on average, for both moms and dads, compared with a decade ago. This comes despite research showing attentive nurturing has particular developmental power in a baby’s first year, and that longer leaves can ease postpartum depression in some mothers. The pattern heightens the need for parents to plan carefully for time off post-childbirth.

Unfortunately, if your employer doesn’t give you some paid time off to have a baby or care for a sick relative you’re on your own. The United States is one of only a few industrialized nations that does not mandate paid family leave. The other nations that join us in this distinction include Liberia, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland.

So, instead of just ranting about the lack of fairness in today’s workplace, there are things we can do if we’re employees that need help when it comes to caring for loved ones, or when we lose our jobs.

Three states, including California, New Jersey and Washington, now have paid-family- leave legislation on the books, and a host of other states are considering it. Also, federal bills are circulating right now that call for varying amounts of leave. I wrote a story about this recently for MSNBC.com. Workers who want to see this mandated should call their local and state representatives and tell them they want to see this become the law of the land.

And right now, the House Democrats are on the verge of presenting a bill to extend umemployment benefits for workers who have lost their jobs in this tough economy. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer from Maryland is pushing this extension so get on the horn to your Congressmen and women if you think this is a good idea.

Even if you think government should stay out of the mandating business and let the economic engine take care of itself, you should make your voices heard.

While I can’t help but think such benefits will really help lift all boats down the line, we always need healthy discourse in order to make the best decisions.

I’m sure the board members locked in those wood-paneled rooms at corporations deciding whether to pay out millions to dead executives missed out on healthy discourse.

Let’s just hope they don’t decide to bury some workers with the dead CEOs to accompany them into the after worklife.

Today is the last day of school for my son and daughter. They are happy about it. But it was me, their mom, that was dancing around the kitchen this morning and singing about the last day of school as I made them French toast.

Why? No homework for two and a half months!

OK, I don’t actually do their homework but my husband and I have to spend time with the little buggers every day and help them out with assignments or go over them. It’s tough on some days when you’re so burnt out from work you can barely make dinner.

And jeez, the homework they do doesn’t seem like what we did in school many moons ago. My daughter Circe does math in a whole new way. And honestly, I was never that good at doing my homework when I was in school. I actually hated homework. And it didn’t help that my older sister Vaso had a bulging brain.

That’s why I was intrigued when I heard about a tutoring benefit semiconductor giant Intel recently started offering its employees.

“All children of Intel’s U.S.-based employees in grades 4-12 now have free access to Tutor.com, an innovative education service that Intel Capital invested in last year. Intel kids can log on to Tutor.com seven days a week, 11 a.m.-10 p.m. Pacific Time, and connect with a professional tutor for help tackling homework and studying multiple subjects,” according to an Intel spokeswoman.

This is brilliant, I thought. I must talk to a worker that used the service.

The company connected me with father of four, Mark Dominguez, a technical program manager in the sales training group.

Talk about a man who needs homework help.

I asked him what he thought when Intel announced the new bene:

“Are you kidding me, I did a back flip,” he recalls.

The system is simple, students interact with the tutor via online chat and a whiteboard they can both write on.

So far, Dominguez’ 13 year old son Kyle is the only one that has used the service and it’s worked out great.

“The whole idea is that they complete homework as soon as they get home from school,” he explains. But unfortunately, he and his wife, who both work, aren’t always there to help them when they hit a homework snag.

Kyle did indeed hit a snag with his 7th grade algebra homework recently and the cyber tutor was there to help.

The huge value of the service, as Dominguez sees it, is “immediate access to somebody familiar with high school math, versus mom or dad saying ‘let me see if I can find that brain cell.’”

Hey, that brain cell is harder to find these days for many of us tired, working moms and dads.

Kudos to Intel for providing something that may seem small to some, but big to toiling parents.

Many of you have asked me how you go about getting your boss to let you work from home.

It’s hard to just walk into your boss’ office and ask for what you want out of the blue. But you all now have a great conversation ice breaker — GAS PRICES.

Hello, this is the best excuse ever to ask for a day or two of telecommuting. Gas prices are skyrocketing and I bet your manager is also feeling the pinch. So get all your arguments together and ask to speak with her boss about the issue.

Make a case for why you can do your job at home and even do it better than if you were in a busy, noisy, distracting office. And make sure to sprinkle the conversation with information about how much more you’re paying a month because of higher gas prices.

There is no guarantee he or she will agree, but why not ask? Come on. This is the perfect time.

I address the issue today in my MSNBC.com column and I also offer tips on how to ask for the coveted work-at-home days.

Here’s to driving less and working more! Oh yeah. Forgot to tell you that. If you work from home, expect to work more than you ever have. I’m on the clock 24/7, so make sure you set boundaries.

If you decide to ask your boss I hope you’ll share your story here…whether you get a yes or no.

Are they kidding me!?

From 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. yesterday, Starbucks shut down 7000 plus stores in the United States to “energize” its work force.

OK, at that time, they probably will have to pour a lot of serious espresso into their workers to get them moving, since that’s about the time employees are saying “see ya later buddy” and heading home to their loved ones.

I love how management at major companies think all they have to do is take three hours and then, suddenly, the downturn will head for an upturn. And, it’s all about those lazy, unenthusiastic workers. All we have to do is “energize” them and suddenly Wall Street will throw bails of money at us.

I think it’s an interesting stunt but getting workers motivated is about treating them right and getting them excited about how great a company is. Starbucks sort of had that, until they got so big it was like taming a global octopus. Have you been to a Starbucks on the New Jersey turnpike lately…it’s like the Wild West of hack baristas. My mom paid for a nearly $5 latte with $20 bucks and she got back $5 as change. When she asked for the rest of the cash, she was practically run out of the place.

An email to Starbucks got her a $10 certificate to Starbucks and an explanation that the company didn’t really own those Starbucks on the Pike. A third party supposedly managed those coffee shops and Starbucks just sold them its name.

OKAY, this is the problem folks. A company getting too big for itself.

Workers don’t know what storyline to follow because there really isn’t a storyline anymore.

The CEO Howard Schultz thinks a three-hour, almost bedtime story will help reinvigorate the caffeine giant but he may be dillusional:

“We are passionate about our coffee. And we will revisit our standards of quality that are the foundation for the trust that our customers have in our coffee and in all of us,” Schultz wrote in a memo titled “Howard Schultz Transformation Agenda Communication #8.”

You want passion from your workers, earn it. Unfortunately, committing three hours to the effort is like Starbucks coffee lately — weak, cold and limp on the foam.