that is a statement from jo cox's sister, kim ledbetter.ccess to broadband and wi—fi services. a deal between the government and the church of england aims to make it easier to put masts in church spires. a church spire can often be the highest point of a village and given that the church of england has more than 16,000 buildings of different kinds, government ministers are hoping these will give the perfect infrastructure to help more parts of the uk get better signal. they say this deal will make it better for vicars and bishops to get this technology installed, and there is cash to be made. the rental is typically between £5,000 and £10,000 which can be equivalent, or more, to a normal income for a church for a year. now, conservationists may not like the idea of a mobile phone mast being bolted onto their local church. however, the government argues in many cases, the technology can be hidden within the spire. they will be rolled out over the next five years and both parties will be hoping this signals better mobile phone coverage and i

. >> my name is phil ledbetter. i'm the father of denise ledbetter. i'm a widower, and i live with them. as a young soldier, age 17, waiting to go to the aleutina islands, i had the opportunity to explore san francisco, and i ma marvelled that i could go down market street, it reminded me of where i was born. it's a shame to see this building go down, rather than keeping in touch with the buildings already existing on liberty and castro streets. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is scott simons. i'm appearing on behalf of a neighbor who couldn't be here today, kathrin tailor. i live at 783 castro. more in keeping with the architecture of the neighborhood. i would further request that the new building also have a peaked roof to better blend with the neighboring homes, and the need for variances be removed. and she also provided some pictures of the existing structure, and the different residence that's there right now. that's all. >> you have 30 seconds. i didn't know if he was finished. >> i think he's finished. >> my name

lily think this afternoon, ledbetter's case was a sterling example of that. ily was an area manager at a goodyear tire plant. there in d working only woman doing that job. co-worker put in her mailbox some numbers, and she recognized what it was, the pay that all the area anagers were receiving, and recognized immediately that she was being paid less than any of the men. less than the person recognize job.trained to do the she brought a discrimination and she nst goodyear, verdict. substantial it was a jury trial. when the case got to the supreme it on the dismissed late.ds that she sued too the law title 7 requires that days of ain within 180 incident.iminatory well, lily had let the system go two decades and didn't complain. course, if she had, first how could she? salary for ave the years, but assuming that she did and she complained at the first paid tion that she was less, the defense is clear, the oh, it would have been, had nothing to do with lily being a woman. do the job as t well. then, when she's done the ob year after year and gets good performanc

and i think this afternoon, lily ledbetter's case was a sterling example of that. lily was an area manager at a goodyear tire plant. she started working there in 1978 the only woman doing that job. one day, a co-worker put in her mailbox some numbers, nd she recognized what it was, it was the pay that all the area managers were receiving, and lily recognized immediately that she was being paid less than any of the men. ndeed less than the person she had trained to do the job. o she brought a discrimination suit against goodyear, and she did win a substantial verdict. it was a jury trial. when the case got to the supreme court, they dismissed it on the grounds that she sued too late. the law title 7 requires that you complain within 180 days of the discriminatory incident. well, lily had let the system go on for two decades and didn't omplain. but of course, if she had, first how could she? she didn't have the salary for years, but assuming that she did nd she complained at the first indication that she was paid less, the defense is clear, the defense would have bee

unionized, there would not have to be a ledbetter act. we are becoming a class system because of people like you and the lawyers and corporate america. you have been unionbusting since and the middle class has been squashed. with the republican policy -- it there.ill leave this idea that you want to be a union buster? about whetherot unions are good or bad. we will have unions. they will just have to operate with money people voluntarily give them, which is what every other group in society has to do. every other advocacy group has to use money that people want to give. have hadctor unions special privilege and no one else has, to force people to give them money. -- all this case is is about making them play by the same rules. center, ise liberty this the first type of this case? guest: we are involved in a wide variety of cases related to the first amendment. we fight special privileges the government gives to anybody. that is established players in politics, or unions. i can add only thing is this is going to affect public sector unions

i was here to vote on the lily ledbetter fair check, or fair pay legislation. still stand behind what we did on that great occasion. i was here to vote on a good many pieces of legislation, but i must tell you, mr. speaker, i'm very proud to have been here today to see the honorable nancy pelosi as she took a stand for those who cannot be here to stand for themselves. e took a stand for the dreamers. and not only did she speak for them and stand up for them, she also literally took a stand on her feet for more than eight hours in heels. mr. speaker, that is a part of history that i will forever remember and i'm proud to have not in the room for the entirety of the time, i must tell you. a good many of us were afforded the opportunity to go in and out. but she stood there for not in the the entirety of the eight hours and spoke eloquently about the needs of the dreamers. spoke eloquently about the things they have done to make our country a better place. spoke eloquently about how america the beautiful is a more beautiful america because they re here. i'd like t

unionized, there would not have to be a ledbetter act.e are becoming a class system because of people like you and the lawyers and corporate america. you have been unionbusting since and the middle class has been squashed. with the republican policy -- it there.ill leave this idea that you want to be a union buster? about whetherot unions are good or bad. we will have unions. they will just have to operate with money people voluntarily give them, which is what every other group in society has to do. every other advocacy group has to use money that people want to give. have hadctor unions special privilege and no one else has, to force people to give them money. -- all this case is is about making them play by the same rules. center, ise liberty this the first type of this case? guest: we are involved in a wide variety of cases related to the first amendment. we fight special privileges the government gives to anybody. that is established players in politics, or unions. i can add only thing is this is going to affect public sector unions o