It’s a Terrible Sign When More Nonprofit Employees Join Labor Unions

Are labor unions really necessary today? A growing number of nonprofit employees think they are. That should serve as a wake-alarm for the nonprofit sector. It’s a terrible sign that should concern everyone involved in the charity sector.

A new report in the Star Tribune reveals that the staff at the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, the largest statewide nonprofit association in the country, has scheduled a vote to unionize in April. Staff at Minnesota’s Walker Art Center and Jewish Community Action have already unionized.

Dan Sassenberg, CFRE, Director of Advancement Services at Luther Seminary, shared the Star Tribune article on LinkedIn.  He identified a number of issues facing nonprofit employees, particularly fundraisers, that a union might be able to help address:

The expectation that folks work 45-60 hours every week (I have been given this expectation); non-transparent, inadequate benefits and pay; organizations refusing to cut ties with racist and sexist donors; expecting responses to emails on the weekend; sometimes extensive after-hours work engagements with no downtime during the week to compensate; folks fearing that they can’t be seen to be away from their desk unless they have a donor visit on the calendar; no professional development, etc.”

Amber Davis, a Nonprofit Services Assistant at MCN, told the Star Tribune that the unionization effort has been a “long time coming” and enjoys majority support. She says that reasons the staff seeks to unionize “include limited transparency on policy changes, dismissive behavior toward workers, and high turnover.”

While Davis and Sassenberg have identified some legitimate concerns that nonprofit employees have, it is nevertheless unfortunate that this is leading to growing interest in unionization when there is a better solution: more effective management.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should let you know that I have mixed feelings about labor unions. Historically, they have often been corrupt, racist, controlling, violent, and over-reaching. On the other hand, they have struggled successfully for a shorter workweek, better pay, and safer working conditions, among other important things.

As the labor movement has scored major successes, as government legislation has changed workplace conditions, and as companies have grown more responsive to their employees, people have been less interested in being part of a labor union. According to 2020 data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 6.3 percent of private-sector workers are members of a union, down from 16.8 percent in 1983. That would seem to indicate that the vast majority of Americans do NOT think unions are necessary to worker wellbeing.

While the overall private-sector unionization trend has been downward, the fact that the nonprofit sector is witnessing greater interest in unionizing is troubling because it indicates that something is wrong with employer-employee relationships as Davis and Sassenberg have observed.

I believe, based on personal experience, that labor unions, while they can be useful, should NOT be necessary. If employers build strong, caring relationships with employees and are responsive to their needs, employees will not see a need to unionize. Employers should seek to build healthy organizations by ensuring employee satisfaction. Let me tell you my story.

Shocking Fundraising Behavior from Nonprofits Captures Media Attention

Nonprofit hospitals across the country have made disturbing news headlines recently. Sadly, while medical staff continue to provide heroic patient care, many of the recent news stories deal with unethical fundraising behavior that puts all nonprofits at risk. Consider these two items:

• Hospitals across the country have given major donors special, early access to the COVID-19 vaccine.
• In a story unrelated to the coronavirus, one hospital fundraising office has offered medical staff bonuses for referring “Grateful Patient” prospects.

While those news items involve healthcare organizations, all charities should be concerned. Let me explain. When some nonprofits behave badly, it reflects on the entire nonprofit sector with the potential to erode public trust and, therefore, support. There is ample research, as well as anecdotal evidence, that reveals that the fundraising efforts of virtuous charities can be harmed by the unethical behavior of unrelated nonprofit organizations.

Let’s look more closely at what has occurred recently:

MAJOR DONORS GIVEN EARLY ACCESS TO VACCINE

Initial excitement over the release of COVID-19 vaccines has given way to frustration as only 18 percent of the US population has received the first dose with confusing sign-up procedures and long lines greeting many people.

“But one group has gotten a head start in receiving the coveted shots: people who’ve donated money to hospitals distributing the vaccine,” according to a report in MarketWatch.

Ethical_Decision_Making_Article.28164930 AFP statement major donor vaccinations Feb 2021 final AFP Statement Grateful Patient Fundraising March 2021 final

According to reports, hospitals across the nation have been giving favorable treatment to major donors including Storment Vail Health (Kansas), Overlake Medical Center (Washington), Hunterdon Medical Center (New Jersey), MaineGeneral Health (Maine), and Garnet Health (New York).

Authorities in New York have launched a probe into Garnet’s actions to determine if any laws were broken. While evaluating whether or not laws were broken, it is important for us to also consider whether the actions of Garnet and other hospitals are ethical or unethical.

“As we see numerous reports of line jumping and favoritism, any situation that could lead to distrust in the fairness of the vaccine allocation process needs to be proactively managed. Redeploying staff to help with vaccination is reasonable, but care should have been taken to avoid [MaineGeneral Health] fundraising staff connecting with prior donors on this,” Holly Fernandez Lynch, an ethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, told the Bangor Daily News.

The Bangor Daily News added, “Medical ethicists said there were many good reasons for MaineGeneral and other hospitals to test processes before opening wider clinics, but even well-intended efforts involving philanthropy staff and donors can be seen negatively.”

Medical ethicists weren’t the only ones to weigh-in on the situation. The Association of Fundraising Professionals, the largest community of charities and fundraisers in the world, has released the following statement from President and CEO Mike Geiger, MBA, CPA:

The idea of hospital systems, or any charity, ignoring protocols, guidance or restrictions—regardless of origin—and offering certain donors and board members the opportunity to ‘skip the line’ and receive vaccinations ahead of their scheduled time is antithetical to the values of philanthropy and ethical fundraising….[emphasis added]

Offering vaccinations to major donors, and not to populations with the greatest need … destroys public trust—to say nothing of the possible impact on constituents of the charity who don’t receive the appropriate vaccinations or medical attention in time.…

AFP, and the 26,000 members in our community around the world who represent nearly every charitable cause imaginable, condemn this activity in the strongest manner possible. It is unethical and inequitable, and we call on all health systems and all providers of vaccinations to deliver this service in a manner that is fair and equitable for the people they serve and consistent with procedures developed by the Centers for Disease Control and all applicable levels of government.”

Some hospitals around the country have behaved unethically, violated the law, or both. However, even those who may have a legitimate explanation for their actions and who have done nothing wrong may still be giving the appearance of having done something unethical involving their interactions with major donors. That’s still a big problem. As the AFP Code of Ethical Standards states clearly:

What is Life’s Most Persistent and Urgent Question?

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a remarkable, historic civil rights leader whose wisdom and mission remain relevant in the 21^st century.

I am writing this post during the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service, a national holiday in the United States. This occasion reminds me of when I first learned about King. I was a first-grade student when King was murdered on April 4, 1968. Until then, I had never heard of him.

When my elementary school closed for a day of mourning in King’s honor, my mother explained to me who King was, why he was important, and that he had been assassinated. Mom also had to explain to me what the word “assassination” means. Even at six-years-old, I recognized the horrific irony of killing a man who advocated non-violence, and I wept.

In 2015, the kind folks at the Association of Fundraising Professionals – Memphis Chapter invited me to speak at their conference. My hosts were gracious, and they took wonderful care of me. Knowing my interest in King, they even provided me with a ticket to visit the National Civil Rights Museum at the Lorraine Motel during my extended stay. The site is where King was killed. Stepping into King’s motel room was moving. Touring the Museum was eye-opening, even for someone knowledgeable about the civil rights movement. I encourage you to visit Memphis and the Museum.

As I’ve said, King remains relevant after more than a half-century following his death. Consider this quote from King:

Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?'”

It’s a great question. It’s one that those of us working in the nonprofit sector answer every day. It’s one that every person who engages in philanthropy answers with their actions.

If you can respond to King’s question in a meaningful way, you should feel proud. It may not always feel like it, but you are making a difference. You are living a life worth living. As King said:

Amy Coney Barrett Knows Something You Need to Know

This post has nothing to do with politics or judicial philosophy. Instead, I want to share an important story I heard during the US Senate hearings for Amy Coney Barrett. The hearings ultimately led to her confirmation as Associate Justice to the US Supreme Court with the support of a majority of Americans. That story can help you ensure the happiness of your donors, which could result in better retention and upgraded support.

Amy Coney Barrett being sworn in before the US Senate Judiciary Committee.

Laura Wolk, a former student of Barrett’s at the University of Notre Dame, testified during the final day of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. Wolk, who is blind, said that she uses adaptive technology and alerted the law school of her needs in advance of her attendance. Unfortunately, the University did not provide the needed accommodations, and Wolk’s own computer was failing. As she struggled to keep up, she grew increasingly frustrated. Not knowing where to turn, she approached Barrett, one of her professors, to ask for assistance navigating the University’s system.

A retinal disease in her infancy caused Wolk’s blindness. By the time she went to law school, she was certainly accustomed to having to be her own advocate. She didn’t expect much from Barrett, but any help would ease her burden. Wolk described Barrett during their meeting:

She sat silently, listening with deep attention as I explained my situation. She exuded calm and compassion, giving me the freedom to let down my guard and come apart.”

Wolk shared what happened when she finished explaining her situation:

‘Laura’, she said, ‘this is no longer your problem. It’s my problem.’” (3:00 minute mark)

Wolk said she expected to be directed to bureaucratic channels. Instead, Barrett made her feel comfortable to share all of her challenges and, then, she solved the problems. Wolk went on to graduate law school, clerked for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and now has a successful practice.

So, what does this story have to do with fundraising? Plenty!

If a donor comes to you with a question or problem, resist thinking of it as an interruption to your day. Instead, of passing them off to someone else or quickly brushing them aside, take the time to really listen. Don’t offer an automatic, institutional response. As an alternative, offer a warm, compassionate response. If it’s within your power, take on the donor’s issue as your own.

What might this look like?

Imagine you’re at your desk working on the final touches of your fundraising report to the board as your deadline draws near. Your phone rings. You answer, and are greeted by a donor. The donor wants to know how to make a gift of appreciated stock to your organization before the end of the year. Here are some courses of action you could take:

1. You can put the donor on hold and transfer her to your assistant.
2. You can direct the donor to your organization’s website where the instructions exist.
3. You can thank the donor, commiserate about the somewhat complex process, explain the process to the donor and, then, offer to email a summary of the instructions to the donor, perhaps with a link to the appropriate web page as well.

While Option 1 would let you get back to your board report more quickly, which option would make the donor feel most loved? I believe the best course of action is Option 3.

If your donor feels you truly care about him, he will be more likely to care about your organization. He’ll be more likely to renew and upgrade support. Yes, loving your donors takes more time and effort, but it will yield powerful results.

What should you do?

When someone approaches you with a question, challenge, or problem, follow these five steps:

Avoid Costly Mistakes and Raise More Money

A traditional formula for fundraising success involves having the right person ask the right person, in the right way, for the right gift, for the right project, at the right time. Another way for you to raise more money for your nonprofit organization is to avoid making mistakes that could prove costly by putting potential support in jeopardy.

The public’s trust in the nonprofit sector has been on a steady decline over the past several years. At the same time, the number of charity donors has been decreasing.

So, what can we do to rebuild donor confidence, and inspire much-needed support?

I’ll answer that question in a FREE webinar hosted by the Association of Fundraising Professionals – Delaware, Brandywine Chapter. Here are the details:

Avoid Costly Mistakes & Raise More Money

• Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2020

• Networking Time: 9:30 AM to 10:00 AM (EDT)

• Program Time: 10:00 AM to 11:15 AM (EDT)

• Audience: This webinar is open to AFP members and non-members everywhere.

• CFRE Credits: This webinar qualifies for 1.25 CFRE education points.

• Registration: Click here to register for this FREE webinar. Space is limited.

During the webinar, I’ll cite real-world examples to identify seven common fundraising mistakes that can prove costly to your organization. You will get simple tips for avoiding those mistakes, and you will receive a decision-making model to help you avoid or minimize countless other pitfalls.

By avoiding mistakes and more consistently making solid decisions, you will be able to enhance the confidence that the public has in your organization and, therefore, you’ll raise more money.

Will Move to Dissolve the NRA Hurt Your Nonprofit?

This post is about the attempt of New York’s Attorney General to dissolve the National Rifle Association. However, this is NOT a political post. Whether or not you support the NRA, the legal fight over its future has potential implications for your nonprofit organization. Let’s take a closer look.

Doug White, a philanthropy advisor, author, and teacher, writes:

In a 169-page document made public earlier today (you can read the entire lawsuit here), [New York Attorney General] Letitia James alleges that NRA insiders have violated New York’s nonprofit laws by illegally diverting tens of millions of dollars from the group through excessive expenses and contracts that benefited relatives or close associates. The suit alleges that longtime CEO Wayne LaPierre and three other top officials ‘instituted a culture of self-dealing, mismanagement, and negligent oversight at the NRA,’ failed to properly manage the organization’s money and violated numerous state and federal laws.

The lawsuit asks for a dozen measures to be taken. The first one: ‘Dissolving the NRA and directing that its remaining assets and any future assets be applied to charitable uses consistent with the mission set forth in the NRA’s certificate of incorporation.’”

White further notes that the legal action has been filed against the 501 (c)(4) organization, and not against any 501 (c)(3) organizations related to the NRA.

So, how could the case of the NRA affect your nonprofit organization?

Erosion of Public Trust: The mere accusations against the NRA, whether or not they are ultimately proven in court, have the power to not only erode confidence in the NRA, they have the potential to erode trust in all nonprofit organizations. If that happens, it could make fundraising more difficult. A special report in 2018 from the Better Business Bureau’s Give.org found:

While the majority of respondents (73 percent) say it is very important to trust a charity before giving, only a small portion of respondents (19 percent) say they highly trust charities and an even smaller portion (10 percent) are optimistic about the sector becoming more trustworthy over time.”

Enhancement of the Public Trust: On the other hand, New York’s action could enhance the level of trust people have in the nonprofit sector. If the Attorney General can prove her case, it would show the public that government officials are exercising appropriate oversight of the nonprofit sector which could elevate the public’s confidence that their donations to any nonprofit will be used appropriately. We know there is a correlation between the level of trust people have and the likelihood they will give as well as the amount of their giving.

Impact on Support to Controversial Organizations: If New York succeeds in liquidating the NRA, it will have the power to disburse the organization’s assets as it sees fit. How will this affect support to other controversial nonprofits if donors know that their donations could be redistributed by the state? It’s possible that this could result in more cautious behavior by donors.

What Can You Learn from the Moral Failing of the NAACP?

While the recent moral failing of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is distressing to all who oppose bigotry, the situation offers seven important lessons for every nonprofit organization.

Before I get to those critical lessons, let me offer you some background.

It’s been 75 years since the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau as well as the other concentration and extermination camps run by the Nazis to murder Europe’s Jewish population and others. Now, three-quarters of a century later, liberals and conservatives continue to find common ground by embracing anti-Semitism.

For its part, the NAACP has failed to fire Rodney Muhammad, President of the NAACP Philadelphia chapter, following his anti-Jewish social media posting in defense of anti-Semitism. The NAACP headquarters has not apologized for Muhammad’s comments, nor has it insisted that he apologize. Nationally, the NAACP’s inaction shows it condones anti-Jewish rhetoric while, at the local level, Muhammad and his board have turned the Philadelphia chapter into a hate group.

On July 24, 2020, the news website BillyPenn first reported on Muhammad’s anti-Semitic Facebook post from July 23:

[On] Muhammad’s public Facebook page, the meme referenced the backlash against Eagles wide receiver DeSean Jackson, actor/rapper Ice Cube and comedian/TV host Nick Cannon, who have all attracted attention recently for advancing theories that blame Jewish people for the plight of Black Americans. Cannon and Jackson have since apologized for their recent posts, while Ice Cube doubled down.”

Muhammad shared the meme as a defense of sorts on behalf of Jackson, Cannon, and Ice Cube:

The post included a caricature of a Jewish man wearing a yarmulke and pressing a large, bejeweled hand down on a faceless mass of people. Similar caricatures trace back to before the Holocaust, and were often used to depict Jews as a force of greed and oppression. Next to the image was a quote falsely attributed to French philosopher Voltaire: ‘To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.’”

After being questioned by a BillyPenn reporter, Muhammad removed the post while denying any memory of having shared it. Later, he issued defensive statements that were devoid of apology. The closest he came was an expression of “regret.”

In the meantime, a number of community and religious leaders have called for Muhammad to either resign or be removed from his position. For example, Gov. Tom Wolf, Attorney General Josh Shapiro, and State Sen. Anthony Williams joined the calls for Muhammad’s removal. While the Pennsylvania NAACP condemned Muhammad’s action, Kenneth Huston, President of the state conference, said that he was powerless to take any action which would have to come, instead, from national headquarters.

Unfortunately, the NAACP national office delayed its response by more than a week. Furthermore, its tepid statement supported Muhammad. Making matters worse, the NAACP headquarters has apparently failed to provide any direction to the Philadelphia chapter, according to WHYY:

Bishop J. Louis Felton, first vice president of the Philadelphia branch, said in an email that local leadership has not gotten any direction from the NAACP national office on the issue. ‘Congratulations on actually getting a response from the National office, as we certainly could not,’ said Felton.”

The Jewish Exponent reported on some of the community reaction:

‘We are truly saddened,’ the Pennsylvania Jewish Coalition said in a statement, ‘by such a prominent leader’s rejection of this alliance and inexcusable failure to recognize his own role in perpetuating racist stereotypes.’ The Philadelphia Muslim Jewish Circle of Friends, convened by the American Jewish Committee, asserted that Muhammad’s actions were ‘in direct violation of the very principles upon which the NAACP was founded.’”

So, what can we learn from the NAACP’s moral failing?

Avoid the 7 Deadly Sins of Fundraising [WEBINAR]

I don’t have to tell you that these are troubling times. We’ve had to cope with coronavirus (COVID-19), the economic fallout from the pandemic and, now, the heart-wrenching killing of George “Perry” Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police officers.

As nonprofit managers and fundraising professionals, we have a choice: We can allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by the horrible events of 2020, or we can continue to do what we always do and help those who depend on us. While the suffering around us pains me, I take some solace in knowing that. like you, I am a member of a noble profession that seeks to make the world a better place. We are needed now more than ever.

That’s why I want to invite you to join me and your nonprofit colleagues for a webinar to help you be more of the fundraising professional you aspire to be. The program is hosted by the Association Fundraising Professionals – Greater Philadelphia Chapter. Here are the details so you can register now:

Avoid the Seven Deadly Fundraising Sins and Raise More Money

Date: Tuesday, June 9, 2020

Time: 1:00 – 2:30 PM (EDT)

Description: Surveys show that the public’s trust in the nonprofit sector has been on a steady decline for years. At the same time, the number of charity donors has been on the decline and, in 2018, total giving fell by 1.7% in inflation-adjusted dollars.

This webinar will use real-world examples cited by the Association of Fundraising Professionals and pulled from news headlines to illustrate seven deadly fundraising sins involving: conflicts of interest, gift restrictions, accountability, tainted money, donor privacy, compensation, and cooking the books. By reviewing these examples, you’ll be better able to avoid making the same mistakes.

Because there are more than seven sins to avoid, you’ll also get a decision-making model to help you sidestep blunders, build trust, and raise more money.

Tickets: $15 (members), $40 (non-members)

Registration: Webinar seating is limited, so register now by clicking here.

As I have written previously:

Free Help to Protect Children During a Crisis

Almost every April, I devote one blog post to stopping child sexual abuse. It’s a significant departure from the nonprofit and fundraising topics I typically write about. So, let me tell you why I do it.

First, April is Child Abuse Prevention Month, and I want to support that initiative.

Second, many years ago, I served on a jury that heard a child sex abuse case involving a little boy and his step-grandfather. I’ll spare you the horrifying, nightmarish details. Suffice it to say, we found the step-grandfather guilty. When my jury service was completed, what I had heard continued to haunt me.

Before the trial, I assumed that child molesters and rapists were either priests or trench-coat wearing guys in vans. I also believed that incidents of such abuse were relatively rare. The news media coverage at the time would lead most people to a similar belief. However, during the trial, I learned differently:

• 1 in 10 children will be sexually abused before turning 18;
• 1 in 7 girls, and 1 in 25 boys are sexually abused before turning 18;
• 20 percent of sexually abused children are under age 8;
• 90 percent of children know their abuser (in other words, the abuser is not a stranger);
• 50 percent of sexually abused children under the age of 6 were abused by a family member (the younger the child the more likely the abuser is a member of the family).

As I continued to process my jury experience, I researched the organizations that were addressing the issue. As a result, I became closely involved with the work of the Philadelphia Children’s Alliance, a regional child advocacy center. PCA does fantastic work bringing justice and healing to sexually abused children.

I also became acquainted with Darkness to Light^®, which provides superb training programs and funds scholarly research related to the issue of child sexual abuse. Now, I want to make you aware of one particular FREE, 30-minute online training that D2L is offering: Protecting Children During a Crisis.

As the D2L website says:

Coronavirus: 20 Survival Tips for You and Your Charity

When you and your staff and colleagues are healthy, you’ll all be better able to raise more money for your charity and help those your nonprofit organization serves. Unfortunately, the risk of coronavirus (COVID-19) threatens both our physical and mental health. So, to reduce your stress level and help keep you physically healthy, I want to share 20 useful survival tips with you.

However, before I share those important tips, I want to acknowledge that it has been several weeks since I’ve posted. In a future post, I’ll explain the reasons for my break. For now, I just want to thank you for your patience and for continuing to be a loyal reader.

Okay, here are 20 things you can do to protect yourself, and folks you care about, from coronavirus (and other viruses):

Tip 1: Do NOT be stupid. A survey by 5WPR found that 38 percent of American beer drinkers will not buy Corona beer, supposedly in part, because of fear it is linked to the virus. However, many of those surveyed never consumed Corona beer in the first place. So, let’s look at what Corona drinkers said. Among those who drink Corona, the survey found that four percent would no longer drink the product at all while 14 percent said they would not do so in public. To be clear, Corona beer and the coronavirus have nothing to do with one another. My friend Linda Lysakowski jokingly suggested that people might also have been afraid of Lyme Disease since Corona beer is often consumed with a lime wedge; again, one doesn’t have anything to do with the other. It’s important that we think clearly under normal circumstances; it’s especially critical now.

Tip 2: Wash your hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. Wash them often. Not only will this help protect you from coronavirus, washing will also protect you from other viruses including the common cold, norovirus, and flu.

Coronavirus image from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Tip 3: Hand sanitizers are good at killing bacteria. But, they do NOT kill all viruses. Don’t rely on them. Wash your hands often with soap and water.

Tip 4: Stop shaking hands when you greet people. Instead, fist bump, elbow bump, nod, or bow. This will help protect you and the other person from any number of infections including coronavirus. Refusing to shake hands is not rude. Instead, it’s being caring and considerate. Remember, people can be contagious without exhibiting any symptoms themselves.

Tip 5: If you cough or sneeze, do so into a tissue and then through away the tissue. Then, wash your hands. Alternatively, cough or sneeze into the crook of your arm.

Tip 6: Clean the surfaces of commonly used or touched objects and surfaces. For example, clean your cell phone with an alcohol wipe periodically. Wipe down your computer keyboard with a sanitizing wipe. Do the same with office and home doorknobs. You get the idea.

Tip 7: If you are sick, stay home. Whether you have coronavirus, a cold, or the flu, stay home so you won’t infect co-workers or the general public. As a manager, do not reward sick people for coming to work while punishing sick people for staying home. Years ago at my company, we had a new manager who came to us from billionaire Ross Perot’s company, Electronic Data Systems (EDS). She encouraged us to change our sick-day policy which granted staff a limited number of use-it-or-lose-it sick time. Instead, she proposed we adopt the EDS policy of unlimited sick time. While I was skeptical, we tried it. The result was that our employee absenteeism rate plummeted. The primary reason the policy worked was that it encouraged ill people to remain home rather than come into the office where they would infect colleagues.

Tip 8: Whenever possible, use the self-checkout at stores. Cashiers can help spread disease through their interactions with multiple people.

Tip 9: Avoid touching your face. Viruses on your hands can be transferred to your nose, mouth, or eyes and infect you. This is more difficult than you’d expect. We touch our faces surprisingly often during the course of a day. Minimizing face touching takes practice.

Tip 10: Minimize use of air travel, cruise travel, and public transportation. A number of large companies have banned non-essential travel. As I sat down to write this piece, the latest company to announce this step was J.P. Morgan. Airlines are already seeing a drop in ticketing and, therefore, are canceling flights.