Nigerian Student Changes The Game When Illustration Of A Black Woman’s Womb Goes Viral

Shannon Dawson
Sun, December 12, 2021

Black Baby Illustration

Source: Courtesy of @ebereillustrate / @ebereillustrate

A medical student and illustrator from Nigeria sparked a wide conversation about the lack of diversity in medical industry textbooks from an eye-catching illustration posted to his social media account.

25-year-old Chidiebere Ibe, a first-time student at Kyiv Medical University, drew an image of a pregnant Black woman’s womb– a diagram that is rarely seen in the medical industry. Ibe’s stunning illustration quickly went viral with many people noting how most, if not all medical diagrams, appear to depict white women. Ibe’s drawing has since sparked an outpour of support from social media users and has amassed over 95,000 likes on Instagram– something the young medical student said he “never expected.”

“The whole purpose was to keep talking about what I’m passionate about –– equity in healthcare — and also to show the beauty of Black people,” Ibe told the HuffPost UK. “We don’t only need more representation like this — we need more people willing to create representation like this.”

Black social media users have been pouring into the medical illustrator’s comment section expressing their gratitude for the inclusive image. One Instagram user commented:

“I’ve literally never seen anything like this! Keep doing what you’re doing! You should make a textbook! Too much? A reference book! A pamphlet! Whatever it is, this should be produced. I’m nowhere near the medical field, but I’m an educator who loves information soooo…I’d buy it!”

Another social media goer chimed in; “This is amazingly beautiful! Thank you for sharing! As a Wombman and a Holistic Doula, I would love to share your illustration with all of my clients! Do you offer prints for sale?”

While supermodel Noami Campbell simply wrote:
“Thank You”.

The passionate illustrator, who hails from Ebonyi State, Nigeria, taught himself how to draw during the Coronavirus lockdown period. Artnet News reported that Ibe is currently the chief medical illustrator and creative director at the Journal of Global Neurosurgery. He dreams of becoming a pediatric neurosurgeon someday and hopes that his illustrations can be used to save lives.

“Textbooks are essential to medical training,” Ibe wrote on his YouTube channel. They walk medical trainees through conditions they will encounter during their practice. The skin is an important organ that protects us and can signal when something is wrong in our body. Yet, most medical illustrations are on the Caucasian skin. This lack of diversity has important implications for medical trainees and their future patients because many conditions and signs look different based on the patient’s skin color.”

RELATED CONTENT: National Birth Equity Collaborative Pens Open Letter To Vice President Kamala Harris

Ibe also told Artnet News that the lack of diversity in the medical illustration world could potentially lead to a misdiagnosis or insufficient treatment plan for Black people. Ibe noted that “the lack of understanding of how diseases can appear for Black patients can lead to “mortality, childbirth pains,” and “communication problems.”

According to the Association of Medical Illustrators, there are 2,000 trained medical illustrators in the world, many of whom are white and male. A study conducted by the University of Wollongong in Australia found that out of more than 6000 medical images found across 17 anatomy textbooks published between 2008 and 2013, only 36 percent of the bodies depicted were female– a majority being White. 3 percent of the drawings depicted disabled bodies and only 2 percent captured elderly people.

“Historically [medical illustrations] have always featured white able-bodied male figures and still do in the present day,” Ni-Ka Ford, diversity committee chair for the Association of Medical Illustrators told CNN. “Bias towards one body type in medical illustration marginalizes everyone else.”

Ibe has created a GoFundMe to help with his education fees and to hopefully bring more awareness to the lack of diversity and equity within the health care industry.

RELATED CONTENT: Health Care Is Self-Care: 5 Critical Screenings Women Should Prioritize

Candle Factory bosses to workers before

tornado: 'If you leave, you're more

than likely to be fired'

Deon J. Hampton

Mon, December 13, 2021

MAYFIELD, Ky. — As a catastrophic tornado approached this city Friday, employees of a candle factory — which would later be destroyed — heard the warning sirens and wanted to leave the building. But at least five workers said supervisors warned employees that they would be fired if they left their shifts early.

For hours, as word of the coming storm spread, as many as 15 workers beseeched managers to let them take shelter at their own homes, only to have their requests rebuffed, the workers said.

Fearing for their safety, some left during their shifts regardless of the repercussions.

At least eight people died in the Mayfield Consumer Products factory, which makes scented candles. The facility was leveled, and all that is left is rubble. Photos and videos of its widespread mangled remains have become symbols of the enormous destructive power of Friday’s tornado system.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said Monday that 74 people were confirmed dead in the state.

McKayla Emery, 21, said in an interview from her hospital bed that workers first asked to leave shortly after tornado sirens sounded outside the factory around 5:30 p.m.

Image: Satellite images show the Mayfield Consumer Products candle factory and other nearby buildings before, on Jan. 28, 2017, and after, Dec. 11, 2021, the tornado struck. (MAXAR Technologies via Reuters)

Employees congregated in bathrooms and inside hallways, but the real tornado wouldn’t arrive for several more hours. After employees decided that the immediate danger had passed, several began asking to go home, the workers said.

“People had questioned if they could leave or go home,” said Emery, who preferred to stay at work and make extra money. Overtime pay was available, but it wasn’t clear whether those who stayed were offered additional pay.

Supervisors and team leaders told employees that leaving would probably jeopardize their jobs, the employees said.

“If you leave, you’re more than likely to be fired,” Emery said she overheard managers tell four workers standing near her who wanted to leave. “I heard that with my own ears.”

About 15 people asked to go home during the night shift shortly after the first emergency alarm sounded outside the facility, said another employee, Haley Conder, 29.

There was a three- to four-hour window between the first and second emergency alarms when workers should have been allowed to go home, she said.

Initially, Conder said, team leaders told her they wouldn’t let workers leave because of safety precautions, so they kept everyone in the hallways and the bathrooms. Once they mistakenly thought the tornado was no longer a danger, they sent everyone back to work, employees said.

Anyone who wanted to leave should have been allowed to, Conder said.

Elijah Johnson, 20, was working in the back of the building when several employees wanting to head home walked in to speak with supervisors. He joined in on the request.

“I asked to leave and they told me I’d be fired,” Johnson said. “Even with the weather like this, you’re still going to fire me?” he asked.

“Yes,” a manager responded, Johnson told NBC News.

Johnson said managers went so far as to take a roll call in hopes of finding out who had left work.

Company officials denied the allegations.

Image: A rescue worker and a cadaver dog arrive at the Mayfield Consumer Products candle factory in Mayfield, Ky., on Dec. 11, 2021. (John Amis / AFP via Getty Images)

“It’s absolutely untrue,” said Bob Ferguson, a spokesman for Mayfield Consumer Products. “We’ve had a policy in place since Covid began. Employees can leave any time they want to leave and they can come back the next day.”

He also denied that managers told employees that leaving their shifts meant risking their jobs. Ferguson said managers and team leaders undergo a series of emergency drills that follow guidelines of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

“Those protocols are in place and were followed,” he said.

A 24-hour hotline is available as of Monday for employees to call about hazard pay, grief counseling and other assistance, he said.

Autumn Kirks, a team lead at the factory who was working that night, denied Monday afternoon on MSNBC that people’s jobs were threatened if they didn’t go in.

But another employee, Latavia Halliburton, said she witnessed workers’ being threatened with termination if they left.

“Some people asked if they could leave,” but managers told them they would be fired if they did, she said.

The first tornado warning passed without any damage, but several hours later, another warning was issued. Once the second tornado siren sounded sometime after 9 p.m. Friday, Conder and a group of others approached three managers asking to go home.

“‘You can’t leave. You can’t leave. You have to stay here,’” Conder said the managers told her. “The situation was bad. Everyone was uncomfortable.”

Mark Saxton, 37, a forklift operator, said that he would have preferred to leave but that he wasn’t given the option.

“That’s the thing. We should have been able to leave,” Saxton said. “The first warning came, and they just had us go in the hallway. After the warning, they had us go back to work. They never offered us to go home.”

As the storm moved forward after the second siren, the employees took shelter. The lights in the building started to flicker.

Moments later, Emery, who was standing near the candle wax and fragrance room, was struck in the head by a piece of concrete.

“I kid you not, I heard a loud noise and the next thing I know, I was stuck under a cement wall,” she said. “I couldn’t move anything. I couldn’t push anything. I was stuck.”

Emery, who was trapped for six hours, had several chemical burn marks on her legs, her buttocks and her forehead from the candle wax. She also sustained kidney damage, her urine is black, and she still can’t move her legs because of the swelling and from having been motionless for so long.

Employees who wanted to go home early said they were mistreated.

“It hurts, ’cause I feel like we were neglected,” Saxton said.

Amazon Can’t Keep Busting Unions Forever

BY SONALI KOLHATKAR

 DECEMBER 10, 2021
Facebook

TwitterRedditEmail

The National Labor Relations Board, or NLRB, just ruled that a historic union vote among Amazon warehouse workers in Bessemer, Alabama was not valid.

The highly-publicized vote resulted in a resounding defeat for the union in March 2021, with more than 70 percent of those voting choosing against union membership. The union accused Amazon of engaging in “efforts to gaslight its own employees” and filed a petition in April to nullify the vote.

After investigating, the NLRB agreed. Federal officials decided that Amazon interfered so blatantly in its workers’ ability to vote that a second election is now in order.

The ruling detailed how Amazon defied NLRB guidance and set up a vote collection box right outside the warehouse entrance, giving workers the impression that it was involved in the vote counting.

The company also distributed “vote no” paraphernalia to workers in the presence of managers and held what the NLRB called “captive audience meetings” with small groups of workers —  “six days a week, 18 hours a day” — and blasted them with anti-union messaging.

The company “essentially hijacked the process and gave a strong impression that it controlled the process,” concluded NLRB regional director Lisa Henderson. In a separate decision, the NLRB also determined that Amazon illegally fired two employees last year who were agitating against unfair labor practices.

It’s no wonder that the election turnout was low.

Yet Amazon has already begun paving the way for more interference. According to Reuters, it’s again “forcing thousands of employees to attend meetings” and “posting signs critical of labor groups in bathrooms.”

This aggressive pushback against a unionizing effort at a single warehouse indicates Amazon’s absolute determination to deny workers a say in their labor conditions.

And it’s no mystery why.

A study of 20 years of wage data for the retail industry found a clear and growing advantage for unionized workers compared to non-union workers, with the weekly wage gap between the two groups increasing from $20 in 2013 to $50 in 2019.

You can see the difference firsthand for Amazon’s workers in Europe. There, Amazon’s workers are already unionized — and actively demanding better wages and working conditions.

In November unionized Amazon workers in Germany walked off their jobs for higher pay. Last year, Italian workers went on strike for 11 days to win an extra five-minute break. And during the early months of the pandemic, French unions successfully demanded that Amazon suspend activity at its warehouses in the interest of worker safety.

This sort of progress is exactly what Amazon wants to avoid in the United States, where numerous studies have detailed how the company mistreats its workers.

One investigation by the New York Times earlier this year found extremely high employee turnover at the company’s Staten Island warehouse. The paper found that although managers keep careful track of nearly every conceivable aspect of employee efficiency and productivity, there were few if any records of employee health — including COVID-19 infections.

Amazon can afford to do better.

While Bessemer warehouse workers were being bombarded with anti-union propaganda, the company was practically minting money with record profits. And now, with a do-over on the horizon in Alabama, American workers are increasingly intolerant of suffering poor labor conditions and low wages while their bosses rake it in.

A wave of strikes and mass resignations this fall impacted Amazon’s ability to hire more workers. And another union, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, has vowed to engage in organizing efforts aimed at Amazon.

Amazon’s workers have made the company one of the most valuable on earth — and their CEO the second-wealthiest man on this planet. They deserve to have their voices heard.

Sonali Kolhatkar is the founder, host and executive producer of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show that airs on Free Speech TV (Dish Network, DirecTV, Roku) and Pacifica stations KPFK, KPFA, and affiliates. 

UPDATED

Amazon's casualties in Illinois aren't an isolated incident


The site of a roof collapse at an Amazon.com distribution centre a day after a series of tornadoes dealt a blow to several U.S. states, in Edwardsville, Illinois, U.S. December 11, 2021.

 REUTERS/Drone Base

Bryan Menegus
·Senior News Editor
Mon, December 13, 2021

Tornadoes ripped through six states on Friday, killing dozens. Among the dead were six workers at an Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville, IL, which collapsed while they sheltered inside. The incident is now the subject of an OSHA investigation.

The mass casualty event is likely Kentucky's "deadliest tornado system in state history," according to ABC. The twisters also touched down in December, well outside the normal tornado season. While this may have been an unusually extreme weather event for many reasons, Amazon's decision to schedule its orkers during potentially deadly conditions isn't. Reportedly, at the time the cyclone touched down in warehouse's parking lot — producing winds estimated at 155 miles per hour — the facility was not only operating, but undergoing a shift change.

Amazon operates a staggering number of fulfillment, sortation and delivery centers across the country, and as a result, some of them are bound to be taken by surprise by the forces of nature. Excessive snow on the roof of one warehouse in Pennsylvania resulted in an evacuation when workers noticed the it buckling. Two contractors were killed by a collapsing wall when a tornado touched down without warning in Baltimore.

But the National Weather Service had been warning of possible tornadoes 36 hours ahead of the deaths in Edwardsville; the morning before the storms it cautioned of the "likely threat" of "damaging winds in excess of 60 mph." Edwardsville is in what FEMA categorizes as Wind Zone IV, the part of the country at the greatest risk of tornadoes.

Amazon is perhaps better known in media coverage for its punishing productivity goals. But its operating standards have produced a pattern of incidents where workers were expected to clock in during extreme weather events. Warehouses stayed open during tropical depression Ida in September, the torrential rains of which caused widespread flooding and led to 14 deaths in New York. Some of Amazon's drivers told me they were delivering packages through the floodwaters of hurricane Irma back in 2017.

The Camp Fire of 2018 was the deadliest and costliest wildfire in California's history. Smoke from the destruction also briefly made Sacramento the most polluted city on earth. Despite air quality warnings being issued for the city on November 8th, an Amazon warehouse there did not send its workers home until the afternoon of the 10th.

By far, however, the most pervasive issue across Amazon's warehouses has been extreme heat. Workers in the Pacific Northwest were expected to report for duty during a historic heatwave this past summer which was eventually deemed a mass casualty event. Specifically, a worker complained that some areas of a warehouse in Kent lacked fans, and estimated temperature inside hit 90 degrees. New York warehouse workers also reported fainting and excessive heat around the same time. In May of this year, excessive heat led to a death inside the company's Bessemer, Alabama warehouse.

These are only some of the most recent examples. Workers have been lodging similar complaints for at least a decade about dangerous temperatures inside Amazon's facilities in Chicago, Portland and Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley, among others. Even when immediate symptoms like fainting, vomiting or heat stroke are not present, long term heat exposure can exacerbate existing health problems such as heart conditions and asthma.

None of this speaks to criticisms of Amazon's safety measures related to COVID-19, or its objectively sky-high injury rate compared to other warehousing operations.

What's concerning is that, according to the overwhelming majority of the scientific community, severe winds, rain and heat are likely to get worse due to man-made climate change. Amazon, however, has not offered a satisfactory explanation for why it continues to schedule shifts during potentially deadly weather, nor would it provide Engadget with any details of the extreme weather plan in effect at the Edwardsville facility.

“We’re deeply saddened by the news that members of our Amazon family passed away as a result of the storm in Edwardsville, IL," an Amazon spokesperson told Engadget. "Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their loved ones, and everyone impacted by the tornado. We also want to thank all the first responders for their ongoing efforts on scene. We’re continuing to provide support to our employees and partners in the area.”

It's 'inexcusable' that Amazon asked staff to work during severe weather that collapsed a warehouse roof in Illinois, union says

insider@insider.com (Isobel Asher Hamilton) 

© Provided by Business Insider Emergency vehicles surround the site of an Amazon distribution warehouse with a collapsed roof, after storms hit the area of Edwardsville, Illinois, US December 10, 2021. REUTERS/Lawrence Bryant

At least six Amazon workers died after the roof of an Illinois warehouse fell in on Friday.

Officials said the collapse was due to the warehouse being hit by a severe weather event.

The head of a major workers' union said it was "inexcusable" Amazon required staff to work.

Amazon should not have had staff working at an Illinois warehouse when a tornado caused its roof to collapse, the head of a major workers' union said.

The roof of the facility in Edwardsville fell in on Friday evening, leaving at least six workers dead. Local officials said the collapse was caused by extreme weather events.

"Time and time again Amazon puts its bottom line above the lives of its employees. Requiring workers to work through such a major tornado warning event as this was inexcusable," the president of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Stuart Appelbaum, said in a statement released Saturday.

"This is another outrageous example of the company putting profits over the health and safety of their workers, and we cannot stand for this. Amazon cannot continue to be let off the hook for putting hard working people's lives at risk. Our union will not back down until Amazon is held accountable for these and so many more dangerous labor practices," he added.

An Amazon spokesperson told the Associated Press when a site is made aware of a tornado warning, all employees are notified and directed to move to a shelter, but declined to answer, when asked by AP, when it warned employees.

Edwardsville fire chief James Whiteford said during a press conference on Saturday that a shift change had been underway when the collapse took place, Insider's Bethany Dawson and Kelsey Vlamis reported.

Amazon did not immediately respond when contacted by Insider for comment about Appelbaum's statement.

The RWDSU was involved in an effort earlier this year to unionize a warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama.

The workers in the Bessemer warehouse voted against forming a union with the RWDSU in April, but the National Labor Relations Board ordered a second election for workers in November saying Amazon had made "a free and fair election impossible."

Amazon was not the only employer to have staff working during the severe weather events that ripped through Arkansas, Illinois, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri this weekend. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said he fears over 50 workers at a candle factory may be dead after it was hit by a tornado on Friday.

OSHA probes Amazon's fatal warehouse collapse

Rebecca Klar 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is launching a probe into the fatal collapse of an Amazon facility in Illinois after it was hit by a tornado, the agency said Monday.

© AP Photo/Jeff Roberson OSHA probes Amazon's fatal warehouse collapse

OSHA has had compliance officers at the complex in Edwardsville, Ill. since Saturday to provide assistance, according to agency spokesperson Scott Allen.

Six people died and one was transferred to a regional hospital after a tornado hit the 1.1-million-square-foot delivery station center on Friday, according to officials.

OSHA has six months to complete its investigation, including issuing citations and proposing monetary penalties if safety or health violations are found, Allen said.

An Amazon spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the probe.

After news of the six fatalities broke, spokesperson Kelly Nantel said the company is "deeply saddened by the news that members of our Amazon family passed away as a result of the storm in Edwardsville, IL."

"Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their loved ones, and everyone impacted by the tornado. We also want to thank all the first responders for their ongoing efforts on scene. We're continuing to provide support to our employees and partners in the area," Nantel said in a statement.

Worker groups including the Athena Coalition and Warehouse Workers for Justice have criticized Amazon's handling of the situation, calling for an outside investigation.

"Given Amazon's history having workers work through emergency conditions across the country, as well as normal disregard for worker safety, we require immediate answers from @Amazon," the Athena Coalition tweeted.

The National Weather Services issued a tornado warning at 8:06 p.m., about 23 minutes before the tornado hit Edwardsville. The storm prediction center had issued a tornado watch for Madison County around 5:20 p.m., according to Mark Britt, a meteorologist at the National Weather Services based in St. Louis.

Amazon spokesperson Alisa Caroll said the onsite team at the facility "immediately moved to ensure all team members went to the designated shelter in place locations," when the tornado warning came in from local authorities.

The Hill pressed Carroll for details as to how many workers were on site at the time and how many made it to shelter in place, but the spokesperson did not immediately respond with the information.

The station opened in July 2020 and employs about 190 people across multiple shifts, according to Amazon.

An Amazon driver died while sheltering in the warehouse bathroom when a tornado hit, his colleague said

sbaker@businessinsider.com (Sinéad Baker)

 The site of partially collapsed Amazon distribution center after a tornado in Edwardsville, Illinois. 

REUTERS/Drone Base

Austin J. McEwen is among the six people killed after a tornado hit an Amazon warehouse in Illinois.

Brian Erdmann told Reuters that McEwen was sheltering in the bathroom when it happened.

Erdmann said he likely only survived because he was out making a delivery.

An Amazon driver died while sheltering in the warehouse bathroom as a tornado hit Illinois, his colleague told Reuters.

Austin J. McEwen, 26, was one of at least six Amazon employees who died after a wall and a roof collapsed on Friday night, trapping workers inside.

"He was my friend and he didn't make it," Brian Erdmann said of McEwen in an interview with Reuters.

Erdmann said he was on his way to the warehouse to make a delivery when the tornado hit, so he was not harmed.

"If I would have got back 45 minutes earlier, I probably would have been at the same place. I would have been right there with him," he said.

Amazon did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

Amazon staff have complained about the company's cellphone ban when speaking to Bloomberg after the disaster.

Multiple tornadoes hit Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee.

Kentucky has been the most impacted. Gov. Andy Beshear said on Sunday that at least 80 people were killed, and the death toll could exceed 100.

He then said, according to the BBC: "We're still hoping as we move forward for some miracles to find more people."

Amazon employees speak out against controversial phone ban after deadly tornado kills at least 6 warehouse workers in Edwardsville, Illinois

Bethany Biron
Sun, December 12, 2021

Workers remove debris from an Amazon Fulfillment Center in Edwardsville, Illinois, on December 11, 2021, after it was hit by a tornado.Tim Vizer/AFP via Getty Images

Amazon workers are pushing back against a phone ban after six employees died when a warehouse collapsed in Illinois.

The long-running policy had been relaxed during the pandemic, but is being reinstated around the country.

"After these deaths, there is no way in hell I am relying on Amazon to keep me safe," a staffer told Bloomberg.

Amazon employees are speaking out about the return of a controversial mobile phone ban after devastating tornadoes ripped through the Midwest on Friday, destroying an Illinois warehouse and killing at least six employees.

Though the e-commerce giant had previously relaxed its strict rules prohibiting phones on the warehouse floor during the pandemic, it has been slowly reintroducing the ban across the country, Bloomberg reported. Amazon initially revoked the protocol to allow for staffers to get in touch with loved ones or health care providers in case of emergency.

However, as the ban returns to Amazon locations, several employees told Bloomberg they are once again questioning the policy and expressing fear for their safety after the collapse of an Edwardsville, Illinois, warehouse left at least six workers dead and an unknown number missing on Friday.

Edwardsville officials reported that a wall the size of a football field and the roof above it collapsed at the warehouse when severe storms hit the region, leaving an unidentified number of Amazon employees trapped among the rubble.

Rescue crews arrived on the scene immediately, where one worker was airlifted to a nearby hospital and 45 staffers were evacuated from the ruins, according to Edwardsville fire chief James Whiteford. Whiteford said he expects the recovery effort to continue for an additional three days.

In Kentucky, which bore the brunt of the tornadoes, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said on Sunday he feared at least 80 people were killed, but the death toll may surpass 100. In addition to Illinois and Kentucky, the storms also tore through parts of Arkansas, Tennessee, and Missouri.

Amazon staffers speaking to Bloomberg expressed concern that banning phones would leave them incapable of quickly calling for help or accessing information about imminent storms or other dangerous conditions that might put them in peril.

"After these deaths, there is no way in hell I am relying on Amazon to keep me safe," an Amazon worker from a nearby facility in Illinois told Bloomberg. "If they institute the no cell phone policy, I am resigning."

"After this, everyone is definitely afraid of not being able to keep their phones on them," another worker told Bloomberg. "Most employees that I've talked to don't keep their phones on them for personal conversation throughout the day, It's genuinely for situations like this."

Warehouse Workers for Justice, an organization that works to organize Amazon workers in Illinois, said in a statement that it is calling on state legislators to hold a hearing to ensure all facilities "are places of safety for workers and that no family has to worry whether or not their loved ones will make it home from work after an extreme weather event."

"While natural disasters are not controllable, Amazon's preparedness and safety protocols are," Warehouse Workers for Justice said in the statement.

Amazon did not immediately respond to Insider's request to comment on the phone ban and if it has plans to readjust the policy. In a statement yesterday, a representative for Amazon said the company was "deeply saddened by the news" of the Illinois warehouse.

"Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their loved ones, and everyone impacted by the storm," the Amazon representative said. "We also want to thank all the first responders for their ongoing efforts on scene."

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos wrote on Twitter on Saturday night that he was "heartbroken over the loss," a statement that came following criticism that the executive had been late to comment on the tragedy. Earlier in the day, Bezos shared a photo to Instagram with the Blue Origin space crew, the next team to board the New Shepard rocket.

"All of Edwardsville should know that the Amazon team is committed to supporting them and will be by their side through this crisis," Bezos wrote on Twitter. "We extend our fullest gratitude to all the incredible first responders who have worked so tirelessly at the site."

Read the original article on Business Insider

#CRYPTOZOOLOGY #CRYPTID

#Bigfoot Apparently Lives In These Caves & You Have To Sign A Waiver To Go Visit Them

Morgan Leet 

NARCITY

If you're super brave you can go and explore these caves in Canada which are in Sasquatch territory.

© Provided by Narcity

The caves, in Hope, B.C., are actually a series of tubes that are connected above ground, according to the Atlas Obscura website, and you can go and hike through them. Beware though, because the area has been cited as a place to see the legendary Bigfoot.

The website said that in B.C., there have been over 200 reports of Bigfoot (or Sasquatch) sightings. Although there isn't any actual proof of it, there must have been enough sightings in this area to name them Sasquatch Caves.

The caves are on private property, owned by the Holiday Motel & RV Resort, but you can still access them for free.

You do have to sign a waiver at the hotel though, adding to the slightly creepy vibe of the adventure.

Lots of people have set out to explore the caves, so you can do your research before you head out.

In this YouTube video that shows two people going into the caves, the girl said: "If there were such thing as a Sasquatch, it would probably live here."

So, if you are keen to spot one of these creatures for yourself, this might be just the place to go and do it.



The video shows the pair going deep into the caves, looking at drawings and markings on the wall along the way.

There is also a warning on the trail. If the waiver didn't put you on edge, this might.

If you dont chicken out though, it looks like a pretty fun place to go.

Make sure you go prepared if you venture into the caves, and good luck finding Bigfoot!
Sasquatch Caves

Where: 63950 Old Yale Rd., Hope, B.C.

Why You Need To Go: To brave the caves and try to catch the Sasquatch by surprise!

Website

This article’s cover image was used for illustrative purposes only.

Before you get going, check our Responsible Travel Guide so you can be informed, be safe, be smart, and most of all, be respectful on your adventure.

Free expression is not in opposition to equality — it is essential to attain it, new book argues

 


Dilemmas of Free Expression, edited by University of Waterloo political scientist Emmett Macfarlane, is a new book that explores the contemporary issues surrounding free expression in Canada — issues that consistently make headlines in Canada, and abroad. This excerpt is an edited version of the introduction to the book, which is published by the University of Toronto Press.

Among the panoply of traditional civil rights, freedom of expression stands as the alpha and omega. Rights like the right to protest, freedom of association, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press quickly disintegrate into charred vessels absent the foundation provided by free expression.

Other rights, like the right to vote, similarly hinge on our ability to freely communicate, argue, debate, and advance ideas. And where would equality rights or other values related to the cultivation of a just society be without free expression?

As the Supreme Court of Canada enunciated in one of its earliest judgments under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, “the freedom to express oneself openly and fully is of crucial importance in a free and democratic society,” and as such it is “an essential value of Canadian parliamentary democracy.”

The protection of free expression is integral, the Court outlines in another judgment, for seeking and attaining the truth, for participation in social and political decision making, and for “diversity in forms of individual self-fulfillment and human flourishing.”

What, then, to make of a contemporary context in which free expression is seemingly under threat on a variety of fronts and in which public discourse around free speech itself appears increasingly polarized along ideological lines?

A gamut of political and social issues related to free expression demonstrate quite clearly that the limits of the right are no more easily identifiable now than they ever were. Some of this is the direct result of new challenges and technologies.

Aside from the plethora of substantive legal and policy issues at stake, one of the animating features of this collection is recognition that the quality of public debate around free expression has generally been poor, and that in the news and social media terrains it has felt very much like a pitched ideological battle.

On the far right, provocateurs seek to win a perverse form of free speech martyrdom when politicians, organizations, or university administrators overreact and censure or investigate controversial or discriminatory messages.

Notorious public figures like Jordan Peterson, a University of Toronto professor who garnered media coverage after questioning whether human rights law would require him to use the preferred pronouns of trans people, and Ezra Levant, who was subject to complaints for publishing anti-Muslim cartoons, have developed a degree of fame for having been on the wrong end of attempts at censorship, be it by universities or human rights tribunals.

They have developed a fan base that treats them as champions of free speech, although caution is warranted when it comes to viewing their broader advocacy as genuine. It is not uncommon to see people of their ilk lash out at mere social criticism for their speech, or in some cases even call for, or engage in, attempts at censorship themselves.

There are, it sometimes seems, few principled commentators who speak out against censorship regardless of whether the content of the expression aligns with their ideological world views. I was one of those who spoke out when administrators and faculty at Wilfrid Laurier University famously hauled Lindsay Shepherd, a teaching assistant, before them for questioning after she showed a tutorial group a clip (featuring Jordan Peterson) of TVO’s current affairs program The Agenda discussing the use of non-binary pronouns.

Yet it is also important to acknowledge how disingenuous and hateful some of the expression at the centre of these controversies can be. For example, the debates prompted by the Peterson and Shepherd incidents over the use of preferred pronouns of trans people call into question people’s very identities, and arguably their human dignity.

In some ways, understanding what prompted this debate is perplexing, because it evinces an unwillingness to treat people with basic respect (one honestly wonders when or how someone could be forced to use a particular pronoun to refer to someone rather than simply using their name – the controversy itself has an incredibly manufactured feel to it).

It is also a discourse filled with, to put it diplomatically, misleading statements about the law. Peterson, for example, mischaracterized a federal law (claiming the human rights legislation could send him to prison) that did not even apply to his situation as a university employee, where relevant provincial law, not federal, would apply.

Yet far-right discourse is not the only culprit degrading the quality of debates on free expression. Some self-styled progressives have contributed to the illiberal sentiment that the promotion of free speech is itself a nefarious thing. There are even efforts among some to equate speech with violence (something the Supreme Court has appropriately rejected).

Fundamental to this view is the idea that permitting the free expression of offensive or hateful views is antithetical to equality. Yet there seems to be little recognition that allowing for limits on offensive speech empowers some authority – be it the state, university administrators, or some other person in power – to draw lines of acceptability in a context where there will be widespread disagreement about what counts as hateful.

More fundamentally, the deleterious effects of weakening speech protections are just as likely to be turned against equity-seeking and historically oppressed groups than they are to work in their favour. It results in the sort of culture that spurred Dalhousie University to launch a disciplinary investigation against a student for the crime of speaking out against “white fragility” because other students found it offensive.

By setting free expression in opposition to equality, certain progressives forget that the fight for the latter is contingent on the former: free expression is what enables the calling out of white supremacy and racist policies, and it is of course core to the right to protest. In short, free expression is perhaps the most important tool in the arsenal for those who would fight on equality’s behalf.

Instead, from some progressive circles there is a knee-jerk desire to censor and sanction controversial, hateful, or otherwise offensive opinions and forms of speech. Beyond eroding a principle that equality seekers themselves depend on, this has also directly contributed to the martyrdom and rising profiles of people like Levant, and in so doing creates a broader political culture in which free speech is increasingly seen to be associated with the right wing of the ideological spectrum.

The tactic continuously backfires because its most common impact is to bring more media attention to the speaker and the offensive views that those trying to censor or deplatform wanted to quash in the first instance. More importantly, the belief that expression should be regulated on the basis of content implies that there are decision makers who can be trusted with the authority to decide what views are acceptable.

This is not a problem limited to speech deemed unlawful; it applies as much, if not more often, firmly within the boundaries of lawful speech. In 2017, Andrew Potter, then the director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada, penned an op-ed after a traffic jam on a Montreal highway left hundreds of people stranded in their cars overnight.

In his essay, Potter decried a “mass breakdown in the social order” and wrote that “Quebec is an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society.” Political elites in Quebec, including Premier Philippe Couillard, condemned the op-ed. Potter soon “resigned.” If the Quebec establishment can exert enough pressure on McGill University that the institution would fire an established academic and writer like Potter over an allegedly offensive op-ed, why would we think individuals facing systemic forms of oppression would not be even more vulnerable to such tactics?

Indeed, we see across North America that it is not just far-right forms of expression resulting in rings and censorship on university campuses.

The public debate over free speech too often seems to boil down to the charge of “you can’t say that” or the defence of “my free speech.” There is no sense on one side that social criticism in the face of unpopular speech is free speech.

There is no sense on the other side that in a free and democratic society one must learn to live with the right of others to express themselves, not only in saying things you disagree with but also in saying things that might make you angry or sad. This is not an argument for free speech absolutism. Indeed, there is no such thing as a free speech absolutist.

Instead, any assessment of the legitimacy of particular restrictions on free expression depend on the purpose, context, and nature of the limit. In a free and democratic society, limits on speech should come with a high justificatory burden. When limits are established, and especially when those limits are not content-neutral, empowering state officials or similar actors to draw lines within the bounds of the law on the permissibility of certain forms of expression is an exercise fraught with difficulty.

This is true even when the purported aim of regulation is to enhance free expression. For example, the Province of Ontario recently mandated, under threat of funding cuts, that every publicly funded university and college develop a “free speech policy” based on the University of Chicago Statement on Principles of Free Expression.

The move is designed to ensure that post-secondary institutions remain places for open discussion and free enquiry, that ideas and opinions not be censored based on their offensiveness, and that members of the community not be permitted to obstruct or interfere with the freedom of others to express their views.

On the surface, the free speech policy enacts basic rules any sensible university administration would already have in practice in order to protect free expression as a value concomitant with the university’s wider mission. Yet the policy has come under criticism for threatening free expression, particularly as it relates to an implicit desire to quash protests against controversial speakers.

Since peaceful protest itself is a protected form of expression, balancing the interests at stake is exceedingly difficult. When does a protest become so disruptive as to prevent the free expression of ideas by members or invitees of the university community? And why do we think university administrators – or the provincial government, for that matter – are capable of identifying that line?

What is needed are forward-looking appraisals of ways to confront challenging moral issues, policy problems, and controversies that pay heed to the fundamental right to free expression.

A 4-Day Workweek Is Being Tested All Over Canada Right Now & Here's How It's Going

4 DAY WORK WEEK,4 HOUR DAY,40 HOURS PAY    

Helena Hanson

 Narcity

Employers and employees are testing out a four-day workweek across Canada and it sounds like many of the pilot projects are going really, really well.

One of the first places in Canada to formalize a longer weekend was the Nova Scotia municipality of Guysborough.

The region implemented a four-day workweek back in 2020 for around 60 employees in the town. The schedule allows them to take either Monday or Friday off every week.

In October, the municipality's chief administrative officer Barry Carroll told Narcity that the nine-month trial went so well that councillors approved a policy to keep the shorter schedule in place for another year. They expect it’s likely to become permanent, eventually.

"I'm seeing people have a bounce in their step. It seems like they have something to work for and they want to be successful," he said. "They see the advantages of having that extra day."

He added, “A big, big positive coming out of this is that our sick leave in the organization is way down compared to what it was.”

"The morale boost in our workplace alone has been enough to warrant what we've done," he concluded.

Over in Ontario, the township of Zorra began testing a similar schedule in September 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, the eight-month initiative allowed municipal staffers to take Monday or Friday off each week.

Don MacLeod, Zorra's chief administrative officer, told Narcity at the end of October that employees are really enjoying the change to their schedules.

"[...] Definitely from a work-life balance [perspective], I think everyone loves it," he confirmed. "We do have a couple of employees that have kids, so they find it's one less day of daycare for them."

He added that, “There hasn't been any negativity that I've seen personally or heard from members of council.”

It's not just towns scrapping the traditional 9-to-5, either. Ottawa-based tech consultancy firm Iversoft launched an optional four-day workweek in 2020 to give staff more flexibility.

Similarly, Toronto roofing company Situra took the plunge in April 2021 and now says its employees are more "relaxed" and "happy."

Another Toronto business owner, Jamie Savage, described her recruitment company's move to a four-day workweek as "hands down the best business decision I've ever made."

In B.C., the CEO of YLaw says a reduced workweek has meant her company’s “revenues have skyrocketed,” while another business in the province implemented a similar schedule and promised to pay staff exactly the same amount.

On an even broader scale, some countries are testing out a regular long weekend. It’s being discussed in Belgium and trials have already started in places like Spain and Iceland.

Although Canada has not shared any plans to implement a national version of a shorter workweek, Ontario's Liberal Party has actually promised to launch a four-day workweek pilot project if they get elected in June 2022.

In September, an Indeed study found that around 50% of small, medium and large companies in Canada would consider testing it out.

IWW.ORG

Women's team players, US Soccer extend labor deal 3 months


The U.S. Soccer Federation and the union for its women's national team agreed to a three-month extension of their labor contract through March, a move announced on the same day players filed a brief asking a federal appeals court to reinstate their equal pay claim.

As part of the extension, the sides agreed the federation will stop paying the salaries of national team players in the National Women's Soccer League. The allocation system of national team players had been in place since the league started play in 2013.

“USWNT players will have no restrictions as to the league in which they play club soccer,” the union for the women's national team said in a statement Monday. “Players who choose the NWSL will sign directly with the NWSL/an NWSL club and will be employed by the NWSL.”

The NWSL Players Association is attempting to negotiate an initial labor contract with the league, which has been dealing with sexual harassment allegations that led to the resignation of Commissioner Lisa Baird in October.

The extension gives more time for negotiations during the leadup to regional qualifying for the 2023 Women's World Cup, scheduled for July 4-20.

Players led by Alex Morgan sued the USSF in March 2019, contending they have not been paid equitably under their collective bargaining agreement compared to what the men’s team receives under its agreement, which expired in December 2018. The women asked for more than $64 million in damages plus $3 million in interest under the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner in Los Angeles granted a summary judgment to the federation on the pay claim in May 2020. The judge ruled the women rejected a pay-to-play structure similar to the one in the men’s agreement with the USSF and accepted greater base salaries and benefits than the men. He allowed their allegation of discriminatory working conditions to go to trial, and the sides reached a settlement on that portion.

“The district court erred as a matter of law in holding that the women could not establish a prima facie case under the Equal Pay Act because their overall and per-game compensation was greater than the men’s,” lawyers for the players wrote in a reply brief filed Monday with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. “The Equal Pay Act asks whether the rate of pay -- not the total compensation -- is equal. And here, the rate analysis must account for the fact that the players are paid not only to play, but to win,”

The court asked the parties on Nov. 23 to review dates for possible oral arguments in Pasadena, California, from March through May. The case will be assigned to a three-judge panel.

The USSF said the women accepted a labor contract with greater guaranteed pay than the men and additional benefits.

"U.S. Soccer remains committed to equal pay for our senior national team players and ensuring that they remain among the highest-paid in the world,” the federation said in a statement.

The USSF said on Sept. 14 it had offered identical contracts to the men's and women's unions, which are separate and have no obligation under federal labor law to agree to similar terms. The federation met jointly with the unions on Nov. 29 and was set to meet with the women's union Monday.

“We’ll continue to encourage both our USWNT and USMNT to come together around one table to agree on a path forward that benefits everyone,” the USSF said.

The USSF says it cannot control the prize money give to federations by FIFA, soccer’s governing body.

FIFA awarded $400 million in prize money for the 32 teams at the 2018 men’s World Cup, including $38 million to champion France. It awarded $30 million for the 24 teams at the 2019 Women’s World Cup, including $4 million to the U.S. after the Americans won their second straight title.

FIFA has increased the total to $440 million for the 2022 men’s World Cup, and its president, Gianni Infantino, has proposed FIFA double the women’s prize money to $60 million for the 2023 Women’s World Cup, in which FIFA has increased the teams to 32.

Under their labor contract, U.S. men got $55,000 each for making the 2014 World Cup roster, then split $4.3 million for earning four points in the group stage and reaching the knockout stage. That calculated to just under $187,000 per player.

The U.S. women split $862,500 for making the roster and $2.53 million for winning the 2019 World Cup, which came to $147,500 per player. If they had performed equivalently to the men, the bonus for each under their deal would have been $37,500. The women also receive payments for a post-World Cup tour that they split: $350,000 per game if they won, $300,000 if they finished second and $250,000 if they were third.

The deals also have different bonus structures for qualifying.

Molly Levinson, spokeswoman for the players, said “despite much lip service to equal pay, USSF and its leaders ... did not and have not offered to pay women players equally.”

“USSF has failed to fix a culture that has been broken for decades that intentionally devalues women,” Levinson said.

Ronald Blum, The Associated Press

TRUMP FASCISM
AP seeks answers from US gov't on tracking of journalists

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Associated Press sought answers Monday from the Department of Homeland Security on its use of sensitive government databases for tracking international terrorists to investigate as many as 20 American journalists, including an acclaimed AP reporter.

In a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, AP Executive Editor Julie Pace urged the agency to explain why the name of Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Martha Mendoza was run through the databases and identified as a potential confidential informant during the Trump administration, as detailed in a report by Homeland Security's inspector general.

“This is a flagrant example of a federal agency using its power to examine the contacts of journalists,” Pace wrote. “While the actions detailed in the inspector general’s report occurred under a previous administration, the practices were described as routine.”

The DHS investigation of U.S. journalists, as well as congressional staff and perhaps members of Congress, which was reported by Yahoo News and AP on Saturday. It represents the latest apparent example of an agency created in the wake of the 9/11 attacks using its vast capabilities to target American citizens.

DHS prompted criticism from Congress and elsewhere in July 2020 w hen it deployed poorly or unidentified agents in military-style uniforms to sweep people off the streets of Portland, Oregon, and hustle them into unmarked cars during protests outside the federal courthouse in the city.

This latest revelation prompted Sen. Ron Wyden to call on DHS to immediately turn over the inspector general report to Congress.

“If multiple government agencies were aware of this conduct and took no action to stop it, there needs to be serious consequences for every official involved, and DHS and the Justice Department must explain what actions they are taking to prevent this unacceptable conduct in the future,” said Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who has long sought more oversight of government surveillance.

CBP said in a statement over the weekend that its vetting and investigative practices are “strictly governed” and that the agency doesn't investigate without a legitimate and legal basis to do so.

Mayorkas and DHS had no immediate response to the letter from Pace, which called for “assurances that these improper practices and apparent abuse of power will not continue going forward.”

That would be in line with recent order from Attorney General Merrick Garland prohibiting the seizing of records of journalists in leak investigations. That followed an outcry over revelations that the Justice Department under former President Donald Trump had obtained records belonging to journalists, as well as Democratic members of Congress and their aide s and a former White House counsel, Don McGahn.

During the Obama administration, federal investigators secretly seized phone records for some reporters and editors at the AP. Those seizures involved office and home lines as well as cellphones.

The DHS inspector general report that revealed the most recent disclosure of investigations of journalists also stemmed from a Trump-era leak investigation.

The IG was looking into the actions of Jeffrey Rambo, a Border Patrol agent who was on temporary duty with a Customs and Border Protection unit in the Washington D.C. area in 2017 when he accessed government travel records as part of a leak investigation involving reporter Ali Watkins, who was with Politico at the time and now writes for The New York Times.

The inspector general opened its investigation after media reports exposed Rambo and his investigation of Watkins.

In the course of its investigation, the IG learned from Rambo that he had routinely run checks on journalists and others, including congressional staff, while working at the CBP unit, the Counter Network Division.

Rambo told investigators that he queried its databases about Mendoza before trying to establish a relationship with her because of her expertise in writing about forced labor, an area of concern for CBP because it enforces import restrictions. The AP reporter is a known expert on the subject who won her second her second Pulitzer Prize in 2016 as part of a team that reported on slave labor in the fishing industry in Southeast Asia.

The AP, in a separate statement from the Pace letter, also sought an explanation for the use of the databases to investigate Mendoza and other journalists.

“We are deeply concerned about this apparent abuse of power,” the AP said. “This appears to be an example of journalists being targeted for simply doing their jobs, which is a violation of the First Amendment.”

The inspector general referred its findings to a federal prosecutor for possible charges of misusing government databases and lying to investigators, but the Justice Department declined to prosecute Rambo and two other Homeland Security employees.

Ben Fox, The Associated Press