This is an important event that we should keep our eyes on and consider for future action when we have the time.
San Francisco Local Hiring Law Offers Challenge to Labor
San Francisco Local Hiring Law Offers Challenge to Labor
Last week, the strongest local hiring ordinance in the country became law in San Francisco. Our new local hiring ordinance, sponsored by Supervisor John Avalos, will eventually mandate that 50% of jobs generated by City funded projects go to San Francisco residents. Although the new law covers all City funded projects, including those in Hetch Hetchy, the Port and the Airport, it does not cover projects funded through other sources, such as State or Federal grants. Despite strong opposition from the leadership of some labor unions and politicians in San Mateo County, the law is a very positive first step in addressing some of the work and housing imbalances in the region. The fact is, San Francisco has been exporting its working class for decades.This is a complex issue – part of the exodus of working class folks has been due to the gradual loss of manufacturing that resulted from the shutting down of the Shipyard at Bayview-Hunter's Point, and the global trend of exporting blue collar jobs from already developed countries to places like China and India. The new jobs gener ated in the San Francisco Bay Area and other metropolitan areas around the country have tended to require higher levels of skills and education.
The other push prompting the exodus of the working class from San Francisco has been the high cost of housing. Many of the people still employed in construction or manufacturing have moved to places that have cheaper housing and better schools. The fact that wages in San Francisco tend to be higher means that San Francisco is putting in additional dollars into the economies of its neighbors. Additionally, many of those neighbors consistently fail or refuse to shoulder their fair share of affordable housing production.
The fact that the local hiring ordinance passed with an 8-3 vote at the Board of Supervisors and that Mayor Newsom chose not to veto it also points to a more significant problem for labor: The loss of residency in San Francisco by union members comes at a political price. When union members no longer vote here, send their children to local schools, participate in the PTA's, go to church, know their neighbors and can influence their opinions– they lose political power in the City. That political power cannot be recreated by the leadership of the labor unions alone.
Real political power is embedded in all of the relationships and social capital that all the individual union members possess and that can be harnessed through collective action, both inside the shop and outside in the community.
Our new local hiring ordinance therefore presents a challenge for organized labor (to be fair, both the Carpenter's local 22 and The Northern California District Councils of Carpenters and Laborers went on record supporting this ordinance). The challenge is to organize the unemployed and the unorganized. This will require a fundamental change in the strategy pursued by the leadership of some unions, and a concerted political education and training of the existing membership and staff, particularly around issues of race, but the payoff is potentially great.
The other challenge this ordinance presents is to the affordable housing movement in San Francisco, which has been largely silent during this debate. For decades, affordable housing production in San Francisco has been funded by Federal and State dollars. Starting in 2002, with the passage of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, San Francisco began to match those sources with local funding. The affordable housing movement has defined affordable housing as that housing produced by non-profit developers, and permanently restricted to be affordable to folks earning 50% of the Area Median Income as determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The problem with that is this 50% number excludes those earning prevailing wages, and most people who work as teachers, nurses, police officers or firefighters do not qualify. The affordable housing movement must therefore now expand its definition of affordable housing to include laborforce housing production and financing. Just as labor has something to gain by organizing new members locally, the affordable housing movement stands to gain power by including labor and its thousands of members among its allies to push for an expanded universe of housing options for San Francisco's working class.
Lastly, there is an additional role for labor to play in this new scenario: for many years, until very recently, the Housing Investment Trust of the AFL-CIO has been absent from investment in San Francisco housing. By investing pension fund Capital into San Francisco housing again, labor could influence affordable housing production, and insure project labor agreements with unions for those projects – a win-win for labor and the affordable housing movement. In fact, this type of collaboration could be crucial to rebuilding the power of labor in San Francisco and the strength of low-income communities that are slated for redevelopment in Bayview-Hunter's point.
Myrna Melgar is the former Director of Homeownership Programs at the Mayor's Office of Housing. She also worked as an organizer for the AFL-CIO, and a researcher for the United Brotherhood of Carpenters Local 210 in Norwalk, Connecticut.
The other push prompting the exodus of the working class from San Francisco has been the high cost of housing. Many of the people still employed in construction or manufacturing have moved to places that have cheaper housing and better schools. The fact that wages in San Francisco tend to be higher means that San Francisco is putting in additional dollars into the economies of its neighbors. Additionally, many of those neighbors consistently fail or refuse to shoulder their fair share of affordable housing production.
The fact that the local hiring ordinance passed with an 8-3 vote at the Board of Supervisors and that Mayor Newsom chose not to veto it also points to a more significant problem for labor: The loss of residency in San Francisco by union members comes at a political price. When union members no longer vote here, send their children to local schools, participate in the PTA's, go to church, know their neighbors and can influence their opinions– they lose political power in the City. That political power cannot be recreated by the leadership of the labor unions alone.
Real political power is embedded in all of the relationships and social capital that all the individual union members possess and that can be harnessed through collective action, both inside the shop and outside in the community.
Our new local hiring ordinance therefore presents a challenge for organized labor (to be fair, both the Carpenter's local 22 and The Northern California District Councils of Carpenters and Laborers went on record supporting this ordinance). The challenge is to organize the unemployed and the unorganized. This will require a fundamental change in the strategy pursued by the leadership of some unions, and a concerted political education and training of the existing membership and staff, particularly around issues of race, but the payoff is potentially great.
The other challenge this ordinance presents is to the affordable housing movement in San Francisco, which has been largely silent during this debate. For decades, affordable housing production in San Francisco has been funded by Federal and State dollars. Starting in 2002, with the passage of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, San Francisco began to match those sources with local funding. The affordable housing movement has defined affordable housing as that housing produced by non-profit developers, and permanently restricted to be affordable to folks earning 50% of the Area Median Income as determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The problem with that is this 50% number excludes those earning prevailing wages, and most people who work as teachers, nurses, police officers or firefighters do not qualify. The affordable housing movement must therefore now expand its definition of affordable housing to include laborforce housing production and financing. Just as labor has something to gain by organizing new members locally, the affordable housing movement stands to gain power by including labor and its thousands of members among its allies to push for an expanded universe of housing options for San Francisco's working class.
Lastly, there is an additional role for labor to play in this new scenario: for many years, until very recently, the Housing Investment Trust of the AFL-CIO has been absent from investment in San Francisco housing. By investing pension fund Capital into San Francisco housing again, labor could influence affordable housing production, and insure project labor agreements with unions for those projects – a win-win for labor and the affordable housing movement. In fact, this type of collaboration could be crucial to rebuilding the power of labor in San Francisco and the strength of low-income communities that are slated for redevelopment in Bayview-Hunter's point.
Myrna Melgar is the former Director of Homeownership Programs at the Mayor's Office of Housing. She also worked as an organizer for the AFL-CIO, and a researcher for the United Brotherhood of Carpenters Local 210 in Norwalk, Connecticut.
