Business

(NEW YORK) — Earlier this week, the California General Assembly passed a bill that alters the Golden State’s new law raising the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20 an hour, which goes into effect on April 1.

Assembly Bill 610, written by Assemblymember Chris Holden to amend the Labor Code section of Assembly Bill 1228, clarifies “the scope of fast food restaurants and fast food restaurant workers covered by its terms.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed AB 1228 into law last September, which will apply to fast food chains with more than 60 locations nationally beginning next month.

California bill adds exemptions for fast food restaurants raising minimum wage

AB 610 adds exemptions for a wider array of establishments that would not be considered “fast food restaurants” and therefore would not be affected by implementing increased wages if Gov. Gavin Newsom passes this new bill.

“This bill would exempt additional restaurants from the definition of ‘fast food restaurant,’ including such restaurants in airports, hotels, event centers, theme parks, museums, and certain other locations, as prescribed,” the legislation states.

Among the proposed exemptions are restaurants located in office buildings or within a campus of buildings “primarily or exclusively by a single, for-profit corporation and its affiliates” that “primarily or exclusively serves employees of that corporation or its affiliates rather than the general public” and is “part of, or subject to, a concession or food service contract covering the building, group of buildings, or campus.”

“AB 610 makes technical amendments to clarify that certain workers at restaurants that are operated in conjunction with larger enterprises, many of whom have historically established compensation and working conditions in excess of the new standards set by AB 1228, do not fall within the fast food industry covered by the law,” Holden stated in a bill analysis last month.

According to Holden, certain workers at those establishments already have unions and may be making more than the $20 minimum set to be imposed by AB 1228.

“Examples include fast food workers at San Francisco International Airport who have wages starting at $22.50 per hour, plus benefits,” he said, speaking with ABC Sacramento affiliate KXTV. “Fast food workers at casinos who make $23 per hour, plus benefits.”

Exemptions under scrutiny

The exemptions have come under scrutiny from Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher, Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones and other Republican lawmakers in the state, who sent a letter to Newsom earlier this month asking for records to be released to learn about how certain exemptions were determined.

Gallagher voted no on AB 610 on Monday. The assembly passed the bill by a margin of 55-5, sending the bill forward to Newsom.

“I guess it was a bit of a protest vote because of how shady the process surrounding AB 1228 was,” he said, speaking with KXTV. “There’s been all these exemptions, you know, the one that got the most attention was Panera-gate.”

Under the new law, any establishment that “operates a bakery that produces for sale on the establishment’s premises bread” is exempt from the $20 minimum, so long as it “produces for sale bread as a stand-alone menu item,” but not “if the bread is available for sale solely as part of another menu item.”

The carve-out attracted criticism after Bloomberg News reported in late February that Newsom had allegedly pushed for the exemption to benefit one of his political donors, Greg Flynn, who is a Panera Bread franchisee in the state.

Last month, a spokesperson for Newsom told the Los Angeles Times that Panera would not be exempt from the $20 minimum.

The rep called the Bloomberg report “absurd” and told the LA Times that after its legal team reviewed the legislation, “it appears Panera is not exempt from the law” as the restaurant’s bread dough is mixed off-site.

In a press conference on Sept. 28, 2023, Newsom also stated that carving out the exemption for bakeries was just part of “the sausage making” in politics.

A representative for Newsom did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.

Flynn, meanwhile, has denied requesting any special carve-outs, telling CNN in a statement that his restaurant locations will raise the minimum pre-tip wage to $20, regardless of any exemptions.

“At Flynn Group, we are in the people business and believe our people are our most valuable assets. Our goal is to attract and retain the best team members to deliver the restaurant experience our guests know and love,” he said.

ABC News has reached out to Flynn for additional comment.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The UnitedHealth Group — one of the nation’s largest health care providers — said it is making progress in its recovery from one of the worst cyberattacks on a health care system in United States history, its CEO said earlier this week.

On Feb. 21, UnitedHealth Group announced a hacking group called ALPHV — also known as “BlackCat” — breached its system. Its subsidiary Change Healthcare was hit hardest by the attack.

“Change Healthcare can confirm we experienced a cybersecurity issue perpetrated by a cybercrime threat actor who has represented itself to us as ALPHV/Blackcat,” according to a statement on UnitedHealth Group’s website.

Change Healthcare processes 15 billion health care transactions annually and touches 1 in every 3 patient records, according to a letter sent to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services from the American Hospital Association. 

“These transactions include services that directly affect patient care and pharmacy operations,” and the attack “imposed significant consequences on hospitals and the communities they serve,” according to the letter.

Pharmacy, medical claims, and payment systems were targeted by the attack.

Change Healthcare will release medical claims software, which will be available to thousands of customers over the next several days. The company restored its electronic payments platform and 99% of its pharmacy network services are back, according to the statement from UnitedHealth Group.

UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty said in a statement Monday that it is continuing to “make significant progress in restoring the services impacted by this cyberattack.”

“We know this has been an enormous challenge for health care providers and we encourage any in need to contact us,” Witty said.

The company has paid more than $2 billion to assist health-care providers who’s finances have been impacted by the attack, Witty said.

Last week, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights said it is investigating the breach.

“Given the unprecedented magnitude of this cyberattack, and in the best interest of patients and health care providers, OCR is initiating an investigation into this incident,” a letter written by OCR’s Director Melanie Fontes Rainer. “OCR’s investigation of Change Healthcare and UHG will focus on whether a breach of protected health information occurred and Change Healthcare’s and UHG’s compliance with the HIPAA Rules.”

The American Hospital Association called the cyberattack “the most significant and consequential incident of its kind against the U.S. healthcare system in history.” The association said that the attack made it challenging for hospitals to provide patient care, complete prescriptions, submit insurance claims, and receive payment.

Some of BlackCat’s operations were disrupted by the FBI in December of 2023, and was responsible for such hacks as the MGM hack which shut down operations primarily along the Las Vegas strip at MGM properties.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Some of the world’s largest companies and richest people are fighting over a question that will help shape the future of AI: Should firms reveal exactly how their products work?

Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, upended the debate in recent days by opting to release the computer code behind his AI chatbot, Grok.

The move contrasts with the approach taken by OpenAI, the company behind popular AI text bot ChatGPT. OpenAI, part owned by tech giant Microsoft, opted to release comparatively few details about the latest algorithm behind its products.

Elon Musk did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment. Neither did OpenAI.

In a statement earlier this month, OpenAI rebuked claims that the company has kept its AI models secret.

“We advance our mission by building widely-available beneficial tools. We’re making our technology broadly usable in ways that empower people and improve their daily lives, including via open-source contributions,” the company said. “We provide broad access to today’s most powerful AI, including a free version that hundreds of millions of people use every day.”

Here’s what to know about Grok, why Elon Musk disclosed the computer code and what it means for the future of AI:

What is Musk’s AI chatbot, Grok?

Last year, Musk launched an artificial intelligence company called xAI, vowing to develop a generative AI program that competes with established offerings like ChatGPT.

On several occasions, Musk has warned against risks of political bias in AI chatbots, which help shape public opinion and risk the spread of misinformation.

However, content moderation itself has become a polarizing topic and Musk has voiced opinions that place his approach within that hot-button political context, some experts previously told ABC News.

In November, xAI debuted an early version of its first product, Grok, which responds to user prompts with humorous comments modeled on the classic sci-fi novel Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.

Grok is powered by Grok-1, a large language model that generates content based on statistical probabilities learned from scanning vast amounts of text.

To access Grok, users must first purchase a premium subscription to X, the social media platform owned by Musk.

“We believe that it is important to design AI tools that are useful to people of all backgrounds and political views. We also want to empower our users with our AI tools, subject to the law,” xAI said in a blog post in November. “Our goal with Grok is to explore and demonstrate this approach in public.”

Why did Musk make the code openly available?

The decision to release the code behind Grok touches on two issues important to Musk: The threat posed by AI and an ongoing battle with rival company OpenAI.

For years, Musk has warned that AI risks significant societal harm. In 2017, he tweeted: “If you’re not concerned about AI safety, you should be.” And more recently, in March 2023, he signed onto an open letter warning of the “​​profound risks to society and humanity” posed by AI.

In remarks on Sunday, Musk appeared to frame the open-source decision as a means of ensuring transparency, protecting against bias and minimizing the danger posed by Grok.

“Still work to do, but this platform is already by far the most transparent & truth-seeking,” Musk said in a post on X.

The move also relates directly to a public feud between Musk and OpenAI.

Musk, who co-founded OpenAI but left the organization in 2018, sued OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman earlier this month, alleging the company abandoned its mission of benefiting humanity in a sprint toward profits.

Days after filing the lawsuit, Musk said on X that he would drop the case if OpenAI changed its name to “ClosedAI.”

In a statement earlier this month, OpenAI said it plans to move to dismiss all of Musk’s legal claims.

“As we discussed a for-profit structure in order to further the mission, Elon wanted us to merge with Tesla or he wanted full control. Elon left OpenAI, saying there needed to be a relevant competitor to Google/DeepMind and that he was going to do it himself. He said he’d be supportive of us finding our own path,” OpenAI said.

What are the stakes of the fight over open vs. closed source AI?

The debate over whether to release the computer code behind AI products divides along two competing visions of how to limit harm, remove bias and optimize performance.

On the one hand, proponents of open source say that publicly available code allows a wide community of AI engineers to identify and fix flaws in a system, or tailor it for a purpose separate from its originally intended function.

In theory, the open-source code offers programmers an opportunity to improve the security of a given product while ensuring accountability by making everything visible to the public.

“Whenever somebody’s creating a piece of software, there can be bugs that can be exploited in ways that can cause security vulnerabilities,” Sauvik Das, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University who focuses on AI and cybersecurity, told ABC News. “It doesn’t matter if you’re the most brilliant programmer in the world.”

“If you open source, then you have an entire community of practitioners who poke holes and gradually over time build up patches and defenses,” Das added.

By contrast, supporters of closed source argue that the best way to safeguard AI is to keep the computer code private so it stays out of the hands of bad actors, who might repurpose it for malicious ends.

Closed-source AI also affords a leg up to companies who may want to capitalize upon advanced products unavailable to the wider public.

“The closed-source systems are more difficult to redeploy for nefarious reasons simply because they already exist and there are only certain things you can do with them,” Kristian Hammond, a professor of computer science at Northwestern University who studies AI, told ABC News.

Last month, the White House announced it was requesting public comment on the benefits and dangers of open-source AI systems. The move came as part of a sweeping set of AI rules issued by the Biden administration through executive order in October.

Das, of Carnegie Mellon, said the open-source release by Musk may be motivated by both public and personal interests but the move has sparked a much-needed conversation about this facet of AI safety.

“Even if the motives aren’t necessarily totally pure, the fact that this is raising public consciousness around this idea of open versus closed — and the benefits versus the risks of both — is exactly what we need in society right now in order to raise public awareness,” Das said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Federal Reserve held interest rates steady on Wednesday, opting to keep rates highly elevated as progress toward lower inflation has stalled. The move pushes back rate cuts that the central bank expects to make some time this year.

The Fed Funds rate remains between 5.25% and 5.5%, matching its highest level since 2001.

The decision arrives roughly a week after fresh inflation data showed inflation ticked up in February, the latest sign that progress toward cooling prices had struck a rough patch.

Inflation has fallen significantly from a peak of 9.1% but it remains more than a percentage point higher than the Fed’s target rate of 2%.

The move affords the Fed additional time to observe price movements before going forward with interest rate cuts.

Addressing House members at the Capitol earlier this month, Fed Chair Jerome Powell reaffirmed the Fed’s plans to cut rates this year but cautioned that the central bank first wants to see inflation fall lower.

“The economic outlook is uncertain, and ongoing progress toward our 2% inflation objective is not assured,” Powell told lawmakers.

This is the fifth meeting in a row at which the Fed has left rates unchanged, marking a prolonged pause of the aggressive rate hiking cycle that started in March 2022. The next rate decision will take place at the beginning of May.

Alongside stubborn inflation, the economy has largely defied expectations of a slowdown imposed by elevated borrowing costs. That combination of elevated price increases and stronger-than-expected economic performance puts the central bank in a difficult position.

Interest rate cuts would lower borrowing costs for consumers and businesses, potentially triggering a burst of economic activity through greater household spending and company investment.

But the Fed risks a rebound of inflation if it cuts interest rates too quickly, since stronger consumer demand on top of solid economic activity could lead to an acceleration of price increases.

U.S. job gains far exceeded expectations in February, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data earlier this month showed.

The U.S. added 275,000 jobs in February, surpassing predictions of about 200,000 jobs added, but marking a substantial decline from the hiring of roughly 350,000 workers in January, according to BLS data.

The S&P 500 — the index that most people’s 401(k)’s track — reached a record high earlier this month.

Attitudes about the economy have improved in recent months. Consumer sentiment inched lower in February but preserved much of the large gains achieved in previous months, a University of Michigan survey found.

Still, some areas of the economy have cooled.

The housing market has slowed substantially due in large part to soaring mortgage rates.

The average interest rate for a 30-year fixed mortgage has soared to 6.74%, rebounding after a steady decline at the end of last year, according to a report from Freddie Mac on Thursday.

Taken together, economic performance has not shaken the Fed’s steadfast pursuit of lowering inflation down to its goal of 2%, Powell told federal lawmakers last week.

“We remain committed,” Powell said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Federal Reserve is set to announce an interest rate decision on Wednesday, revealing its latest move in a yearslong battle to dial back price increases.

The decision arrives roughly a week after fresh inflation data showed inflation ticked up in February, the latest sign that progress toward cooling prices had struck a rough patch.

Inflation has fallen significantly from a peak of 9.1% but it remains more than a percentage point higher than the Fed’s target rate of 2%.

The Fed is expected to leave interest rates unchanged at its meeting on Wednesday, keeping borrowing costs at their current level of between 5.25% and 5.5%, the highest level since 2001.

The move would afford the Fed additional time to observe price movements before undertaking interest rate cuts expected later this year.

Addressing House members at the Capitol earlier this month, Fed Chair Jerome Powell reaffirmed the Fed’s plans to cut rates this year but cautioned that the central bank first wants to see inflation fall lower.

“The economic outlook is uncertain, and ongoing progress toward our 2% inflation objective is not assured,” Powell told lawmakers.

Alongside stubborn inflation, the economy has largely defied expectations of a slowdown imposed by elevated borrowing costs. That combination of elevated price increases and stronger-than-expected economic performance puts the central bank in a difficult position.

Interest rate cuts would lower borrowing costs for consumers and businesses, potentially triggering a burst of economic activity through greater household spending and company investment.

But the Fed risks a rebound of inflation if it cuts interest rates too quickly, since stronger consumer demand on top of solid economic activity could lead to an acceleration of price increases.

U.S. job gains far exceeded expectations in February, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data earlier this month showed.

The U.S. added 275,000 jobs in February, surpassing predictions of about 200,000 jobs added, but marking a substantial decline from the hiring of roughly 350,000 workers in January, according to BLS data.

The S&P 500 — the index that most people’s 401(k)’s track — reached a record high earlier this month.

Attitudes about the economy have improved in recent months. Consumer sentiment inched lower in February but preserved much of the large gains achieved in previous months, a University of Michigan survey found.

Still, some areas of the economy have cooled.

The housing market has slowed substantially due in large part to soaring mortgage rates.

The average interest rate for a 30-year fixed mortgage has soared to 6.74%, rebounding after a steady decline at the end of last year, according to a report from Freddie Mac on Thursday.

Taken together, economic performance has not shaken the Fed’s steadfast pursuit of lowering inflation down to its goal of 2%, Powell told federal lawmakers last week.

“We remain committed,” Powell said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The push in Washington, D.C., for a potential TikTok ban has drawn mounting scrutiny toward the app over data privacy risks tied to Chinese-owned parent company ByteDance.

In making their case, some critics point to an allegedly tamer version of the app in China, suggesting that ByteDance unleashed a more potent product in the U.S. to hook consumers and vacuum up their data.

Experts who spoke to ABC News, however, downplayed the content-related differences between TikTok and its Chinese counterpart, Douyin, saying the distinctions largely owe to stiff regulations in China centered on youth social media use and political dissent.

The differences between the two apps highlight a comparatively permissive legal environment for social media in the U.S., protecting free expression but also leaving some users — especially young ones — vulnerable to addictive behavior, the experts said.

TikTok did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment. In response to a previous request, TikTok condemned the push for a possible U.S. ban as an infringement on the right to express oneself freely.

“This legislation has a predetermined outcome: a total ban of TikTok in the United States. The government is attempting to strip 170 million Americans of their Constitutional right to free expression. This will damage millions of businesses, deny artists an audience and destroy the livelihoods of countless creators across the country,” a TikTok spokesperson said.

TikTok has faced growing scrutiny over fears that user data could fall into the possession of the Chinese government and the app could be weaponized by China to spread misinformation.

There is little evidence that TikTok has shared U.S. user data with the Chinese government or that the Chinese government has asked the app to do so, cybersecurity experts previously told ABC News.

The version of Douyin used by Chinese adults resembles U.S.-based TikTok, except for some propaganda in favor of the Chinese Communist Party and a lack of alternative viewpoints on hot-button topics, said Kaiser Kuo, the host of “Sinica Podcast,” a U.S.-based podcast on current affairs in China.

“It’s essentially the same stuff,” Kuo told ABC News. “It’s shredding guitarists and funny skits. People showing off the material accouterments of life. People doing clever recipes.”

“It’s people doing dance moves or unboxing or whatever the hell you find on TikTok here you find there, except that it’s censored,” Kuo added.

More noticeable differences between TikTok and Douyin arise when the respective apps are looked at through the lens of young users, some experts said. In the U.S., children experience the same version of TikTok as adults, while children in China see a modified version of Douyin that includes more educational content, they said.

In recent years, China has cracked down on internet use among children. In 2021, the Chinese government enacted a law calling for “the creation and broadcast of online content conducive to the healthy growth of minors.”

That same year, Douyin imposed a 40-minute daily limit for users under 14. Last year, Chinese regulators introduced a rule that would limit children under age 18 to two hours of smartphone screen time each day.

“There are very different laws about how companies in China can target children,” Aynne Kokas, a professor of media studies at the University of Virginia and author of Trafficking Data: How China is Winning the Battle for Digital Sovereignty, told ABC News.

“The U.S. regulatory environment is highly permissive and allows for profoundly addictive apps to emerge,” Kokas added.

Due to comparatively strict data privacy regulations in China, ByteDance accesses less user data from Douyin than from TikTok, Kokas said. However, she added, Chinese privacy protections limiting corporate conduct do not bar the government from accessing a wealth of data.

“That’s a really important caveat,” Kokas said.

While Congress has yet to regulate youth social media use, lawmakers in some states have begun to push for reforms. In June, Connecticut amended its data privacy law to mandate online platforms undertake child safety assessments and assist young users in staying away from damaging posts. Legislators in a handful of states have followed suit with similar proposals.

Mark Jia, a professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, pointed out “substantial similarities” between TikTok and Douyin overall, except for some differences tied to e-commerce and search functions.

But, he added, a prevalence of educational content on the youth version of TikTok likely stems from strict regulations and demand for such videos among children preparing for high-stakes, competitive exams.

The content on the children’s version of Douyin results from “top-down pressure from authorities, as well as bottom-up demand from its users,” Jia said.

While acknowledging similarities between TikTok and Douyin, experts who spoke to ABC News differed over the threat to U.S. security posed by TikTok.

Kokas, of the University of Virginia, said dependence upon TikTok for U.S. economic activity and political dialogue could end up “fundamentally destabilizing.” By contrast, Kuo, of the “Sinica Podcast,” dismissed the backlash against TikTok as a “moral panic.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Easter is on the horizon, but the price of chocolate may leave a bitter aftertaste for some people leading up to the sweet holiday.

Two popular chocolate brands recently indicated they may raise prices on products again due to the rising cost of cocoa, which has gone up following torrential rain in major cocoa-growing regions that affected production.

Executives from Hershey and Cadbury each pointed to possible additional price hikes in recent earning calls, identifying rising cocoa costs as a main culprit behind the increases.

“Given where cocoa prices are, we will be using every tool in our toolbox, including pricing, as a way to manage the business,” said Michele Buck, president and CEO of the Hershey Company, in a Feb. 8 earnings call.

Hershey has already raised prices on some grocery and food service items this year, with the latest increase last month, according to executives.

Mondelēz International, the company behind Cadbury chocolates, announced the possibility of a similar price hike for its products in a fourth quarter earnings call in late January.

Dirk Van de Put, CEO of Mondelēz International, called rising cocoa prices one of the “issues” on the company’s mind and identified the “need to price as needed.”

According to Van de Put, the price of Mondelēz chocolate increased 12% to 15% in Europe last year.

ABC News has reached out to Mondelēz International and The Hershey Company for comment on the possible price increases.

The price of cocoa had skyrocketed to around $8,000 per metric ton as of Monday, more than doubling the price of cocoa from one year ago, according to Trading Economics.

In February, the International Cocoa Organization issued its first quarterly predictions for the year, forecasting “significant declines in [cocoa] production” due to “unfavourable weather conditions and diseases.”

It also noted that “old trees in these countries are producing with lower yields.”

“The low availability of cocoa beans has led to significant increases in cocoa prices. With costs of raw materials increasing, this is likely to affect the operations of processors,” the organization stated.

“Compared to the 2022/23 season, global cocoa supply is anticipated to decline by almost 11% to 4.449 million tonnes. Global cocoa demand is projected to decrease by almost 5% to 4.779 million tonnes,” the organization noted.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — More than 70 businesses across the country shut their doors Monday in a show of solidarity to call for federal paid family and medical leave.

The day of action coincided with Women’s History Month, highlighting the value of investing in women in the workforce.

“This is an action meant to signify the value of women’s underpaid, unpaid care and work, and to show what will happen, a symbolic look, if more women are pushed out of the workforce because the United States does not pass paid leave federally,” said Dawn Huckelbridge, founding director of Paid Leave for All, the campaign behind the day of action.

Currently, there are no federal laws in the United States that require employers to provide paid days off. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2023, just 27% of civilian employees — private industry and state and local government workers — had access to paid family leave benefits.

The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act, or FMLA, entitles some employees to unpaid family and medical leave, up to 12 weeks within a 12-month period. According to the BLS, 90% of civilian employees had access to unpaid family leave in 2023.

Universal paid leave was on the table at the federal level in 2021 with the Build Back Better Act, which passed the House of Representatives but failed in the Senate.

While the Paid Leave For All Campaign calls for federal paid leave for all employees, the campaign has pushed for family and medical leave to support mothers and parents in particular.

Jeanelle Teves, chief commercial officer at parenting solutions company Bugaboo, was among those whose companies participated in Monday’s day of action. She said it was her own experience as a new mother coming into the corporate workforce that informed her passion for creating a supportive environment for parents in the workplace.

“My hope on a greater scale is that every parent has access to that — that financial security and really that time off as they ease into parenthood,” Teves said. “My goal on a deeper level is that this empowers more women to stay in the workforce and to believe that parenthood and motherhood will not come as a compromise to their career.”

Huckelbridge said that there are still some disparities in access and use of paid family and medical leave for women of color. She said that federal paid leave could help address such issues.

According to a 2011 BLS survey, Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic workers were less likely than their white non-Hispanic counterparts to have access to paid parental leave, with 35.7% of Hispanic workers and 42.5% of non-Hispanic Black workers having access to paid parental leave versus 44.7% of white non-Hispanic workers.

“Our economy has been held up by women, particularly women of color, and yet it is women and women of color who continue to be undervalued and underpaid — and a big part of that puzzle is a lack of paid leave. Too often the burden of caregiving falls on women — falls on women of color — again, disproportionately,” Huckelbridge said.

Participants in Monday’s day of action emphasized the importance of investing in employees through paid leave, but also pointed out that not all businesses are equipped to do so on their own.

Dr. Manju Dawkins, founder and CEO of Thimble Health, a health care business focused on solutions for alleviating needle fear and pain, spoke about difficulties she faces as a small business owner.

“One of the most important things to recognize about this movement is that it’s not about putting the onus on businesses,” Dawkins said. “As a small business owner, I’m also very sensitive to that. It’s really hard to keep a business afloat. And so this is really something that the federal government should support, because it is good for the country.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Target has brought a change into what was considered a quicker alternative for its customers to make purchases at its stores.

The retail corporation announced Thursday via press release that it would switch its regular self-checkout to express self-checkout. The new concept would be reserved for customers with 10 items or fewer.

The change was brought into effect as of Sunday, March 17, at most of the company’s 2000 locations nationwide.

In the release, the company noted that customers began to rely heavily on the self-checkout during the pandemic as it offered them a contactless option.

Speaking to “Good Morning America,” Dominick Reuter, a senior reporter at Business Insider said the change would yield quite a few challenges.

“One of them is this funny little notion called partial shrink,” he explained. “Which is when a shopper perhaps either accidentally or intentionally doesn’t scan all of the items in their order. So, some of the stuff goes out the door without having been paid for.”

Prior to implementing the new self-checkout concept, Target had tested out the program at about 200 of its stores last fall, according to its release.

The company said it saw the effect it brought to the stores, telling, “GMA,” “We did see a reduction of theft in our test stores, but the program wasn’t directed in targeting theft even though we did see it was reduced.”

Target added the swap out was introduced to help improve efficiency and customer experience.

The change comes after other retailers such as Dollar General and Walmart also pulled out some of their self-checkout stands in stores recently.

Last week, Dollar General announced it would remove the options entirely in 300 of its “highest shrink” stores.

Meanwhile, some customers had voiced their opinions on social media after Walmart scaled back its self-checkout options, with one frustrated user calling out the company on TikTok.

In a statement to ABC News, Walmart explained, “During these times of limited access, some stores are designating select self-checkout stations for Walmart+ customers using our Scan and Go service and Spark drivers for quicker access and delivery services.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A push to slash the standard workweek from 40 hours to 32 achieved a breakthrough this week, gaining a foothold in the Senate with a proposal that would require businesses to offer the 32-hour workweek but preserve employee pay.

The bill, put forward by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., drew praise from labor advocates who tout the benefits of the reduced hours not only for workers’ wellbeing but for the productivity benefits enjoyed by their employers.

However, political analysts who spoke to ABC News cast doubt on the measure’s chances of passage in a divided Congress where opposition from Republicans is all but certain and even the extent of support among Democrats remains unclear.

“It’s so hard to get anything passed, especially when you have such high levels of polarization. It doesn’t take a lot to stop legislation,” Richard Hall, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan, told ABC News.

“You’d have to imagine a very different political world than what we have now,” Hall added.

Proponents of the measure point to the output gains generated by workplace technology, including recent improvements in automation and artificial intelligence.

The standard 40-hour workweek became a federal requirement in 1940, when rudimentary machinery made for diminished worker productivity. Today, much more output can be achieved in fewer hours, advocates say.

A study out of the United Kingdom last month found nearly 9 in 10 companies opted to retain a four-day workweek after participating in a temporary pilot program.

Support for the measure in Congress, however, remains scant. The proposal made by Sanders on Wednesday carries the support of just two other lawmakers, California Democrats Sen. Laphonza Butler and Rep. Mark Takano.

“I don’t see this current iteration of the law getting through Congress,” Lynne Vincent, a professor of industrial and labor relations at Syracuse University, told ABC News.

A near-identical bill proposed by Takano in the House last year gained the support of just seven colleagues in that chamber.

Some Republican lawmakers voiced opposition to the newly announced measure in a hearing of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions on Thursday.

The proposal amounts to an effective pay increase forced upon businesses, Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said, predicting that the 32-hour workweek would “destroy some employers.”

“They would ship those jobs overseas or they would automate to replace those workers for whom they have an increased expense, or they would dramatically increase prices to stay afloat,” Cassidy added.

Sen. Mike Braun, R-In., said a 32-hour workweek could be appropriate as a voluntary policy adopted by some large businesses, but he expressed strong opposition to a federal requirement.

“I disagree with trying to do anything from this place that would impose upon the preponderance of businesses out there where I just don’t think they could survive,” Braun said.

The push for a shortened workweek has gained momentum in recent years, driven in part by the rise of employee flexibility during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Spain, Iceland and South Africa are among the nations that have implemented a trial of the four-day workweek for select companies and workers.

Belgium enacted a law in 2022 that requires employers to offer full-time workers a right to request a four-day workweek.

At the state level, lawmakers in Massachusetts introduced a bill last year that would provide employers with a tax credit if they shift at least 15 workers to four days a week without cutting their pay.

In California, lawmakers have introduced a bill that would set the standard workweek at 32 hours.

“Reducing the number of working days is not a new idea,” Vincent said. “We have evidence from different sectors and countries that this can work.”

Still, Vincent added, the measure stands little chance of passage under the current Congress. “Whenever there’s anything related to a large change, it’s going to meet a lot of resistance,” Vincent said.

For the bill to reach President Joe Biden’s desk, it would need to garner majority support in the Republican-controlled House as well as a filibuster-proof 60 vote approval in the Senate. If the measure were to reach Biden, it remains unclear whether he would sign it.

“It will never get through Congress — not in my lifetime,” Tracy Roof, a professor of political science at the University of Richmond who focuses on labor issues, told ABC News. “Maybe it will happen in my children’s lifetimes.”

ABC News’ Leah Sarnoff contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.