Showing posts sorted by date for query MIGRANT WORKERS. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query MIGRANT WORKERS. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Friday, December 05, 2025

 

Seafarers from Eternity C Return Home After Months in Houthi Captivity

seafarers released from captivity
The 10 crewmembers and a security guard reached Oman after being held by the Houthis since July (Foreign Ministry of Oman)

Published Dec 4, 2025 3:45 PM by The Maritime Executive


Government officials in Oman and the Philippines confirmed the release of the seafarers who had been rescued from the sinking bulker Eternity C in July after sustained attacks by the Houthis over two successive days. A salvage team sent by the vessel’s operator had been able to rescue some of the seafarers, while the Houthis reported retrieving the others and taking them to Yemen.

The Sultanate of Oman’s official statement said the release was part of its sustained humanitarian efforts. It confirmed that the release had taken place on Wednesday, December 3, in Sana’a, Yemen. The crew was then transported aboard a Royal Air Force of Oman aircraft, arriving late in the day in Muscat, the capital of Oman.

The freed crewmembers were met by Omani government representatives as well as Hans Leo Cacac, Secretary of Migrant Workers of the Philippines, and the ambassador from India. The Philippines had earlier announced that it expected the release this week after having worked closely with the Omanis.

Since the beginning of the incident, there has been confusion over the number of individuals in the custody of the Houthis. The Philippines acknowledged nine of its citizens, and the Houthis said 10 were released. The Omanis said it was a total of 11, but only mentioned citizens of the Philippines and India. The other was a Russian. The difference in count appears to be due to the fact that one person was a security guard aboard the vessel.

The Department of Migrant Workers announced its nine citizens had arrived in Manila today, December 4. President of the Philippines Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. posted a message of thanks to the Omanis and their efforts, and highlighted the country’s commitment to its citizens. Cacdac in Oman also emphasized the strong relationship between the two countries.

Agence France-Presse is reporting that the release of the crewmembers was part of a larger deal negotiated by the Omanis. AFP says 35 Yemenis stranded aboard were returned home traveling on the plane when it was inbound to Sana’a.

The Eternity C was one of the two vessels the Houthis attacked in July when they resumed the so-called “maritime blockade.” They asserted the ships being targeted were part of companies that were continuing to trade with Israel and call in Israeli ports. The militant group announced an end to its attacks after the peace agreement went into effect to stop the Gaza War.

Thursday, December 04, 2025

 

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Few weeks ago, the World Health Organization (WHO) Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus had said: “Violence against women is one of humanity’s oldest and most pervasive injustices, yet still one of the least acted upon. No society can call itself fair, safe or healthy while half its population lives in fear. Ending this violence is not only a matter of policy; it is a matter of dignity, equality and human rights.”

A woman’s right to live free from violence is upheld by international agreements such as the legally binding UN treaty, formally called as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) 1979, as well as by the 1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, among others.

But recent data shows that despite violence against women and girls being the most persistent and under-addressed human rights violations and crises, the number of women who experience it in their lifetime, has NOT changed much in last 26 years (since 2000).

1 in 3 women continue to experience partner or sexual violence during their lifetime – year after year – with barely any change in this figure since 2000The annual decline has been abysmally and painfully too slow: 0.2% over the past two decades. These figures are under-reported ones because of high degree of stigma, fear and other barriers girls, women and other people in all their diversities face in reporting gender-based violence. Emotional violence is among the least reported.

Not all countries have comprehensive legislation addressing domestic violence

Of the 165 countries with domestic violence laws, only 104 countries have comprehensive legislation addressing domestic violence. However, the countries with domestic violence legislation have lower rates of intimate partner violence than those without such legislation (9.5% compared to 16.1%).

Not just we are lagging in comprehensive legislations in every country to eliminate all forms of sexual and gender-based violence, but even funding is on a rapid decline for initiatives addressing gender equality.

Despite mounting evidence on effective strategies to prevent violence against women, the new WHO report warns that funding for such initiatives is collapsing – just as when humanitarian emergencies, technological shifts, and rising socio-economic inequality are further increasing risks for millions of women and girls. For instance, in 2022, only 0.2% of the global development aid was allocated to programmes focused on prevention of violence against women, and funding has further fallen in 2025.

Right to health and gender equality are fundamental human rights

Dr Tlaleng Mofokeng, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health said in SHE & Rights (Sexual Health with Equity & Rights) session: “We must invest in equity. Resourcing the movement is key, and that investment must be comprehensive and unrestricted and it should not be conditional – it should not be that I will get this funding if I do not support the rights of sex workers or if I do not support the rights of migrant people. It means that maternal health, sexual and reproductive health and rights, and universal health coverage must not be competing agendas. They are all-encompassing and they are part of the same promise of human dignity.”

“We do not speak about the right to health as an ‘abstract right’, but as a fundamental human right. Human rights are a living testimony to justice, to bodily autonomy, and to equity. We have explored what it means to operationalise these rights, what it means to build health systems that are comfortable, inclusive and gender responsive, and rooted in human rights. We must acknowledge that challenges remain; some are emerging as part of a new global reality as it unfolds across many regions around the world and anti-rights narratives and aggressive policies are gaining ground. Access to sexual and reproductive health and rights are being restricted in ways that we have not seen before. Healthcare workers and human rights defenders around the world are being silenced, and evidence-based policies are being replaced by ideology,” added Dr Tlaleng Mofokeng.

1 in 4 countries faced backlash against women’s rights in 2024

“In 2024 alone, nearly 1 in 4 countries experienced a backlash against women’s rights. The urgency to act, and to act together has never been greater. Around the world sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are under threat. Regressive policies and shrinking solidarity are rolling back hard-won gains, especially for women, girls, and marginalised communities. The Right to Health is a legal obligation grounded in international human rights law, and it must be protected, implemented, and enforced for the wellbeing of women and all gender diverse peoples,” said Alison Drayton, Assistant Secretary General, CARICOM, Guyana. CARICOM is an intergovernmental organisation in the Caribbean focused on economic integration and cooperation among its member countries.

Agrees Dr Haileyesus Getahun, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Global Center for Health Diplomacy and Inclusion (CeHDI): “Right to health is not merely an obligation, it is a commitment, and it was enshrined in several international laws, and the main one being the International Covenant on the economic, social, and cultural and rights, which was signed by 174 countries. It entails deep commitment and obligation by the governments to (i) respect that governments will not interfere in any way in the enjoyment of the life course of their citizens; (ii) be committed and obligated to make sure to not bring any harm into this enjoyment, and (iii) governments should place everything needed from administrative systems to ensure that this right to health is enjoyed by every person in their country.”

Ahead of UHC Day on 12th December, Dr Getahun said: “Right to Health is a gateway to universal health coverage which contains every service and every need of everyone, without any gender discrimination – and sexual and reproductive health are integral part of that right.”

When SRHR is not rooted in UHC then it takes a toll on the bodies of women and girls

“Right to health for girls and women in marginalised communities still feels a very distant dream. Despite SRHR being so critical, lifesaving and crucial for everyone, especially for young girls and women, it is not a priority yet in those communities. I think it is because it is not just a health issue, but a very patriarchal and gender justice issue,” said Aysha Amin, Founder Baithak, Pakistan “When SRHR is not integrated as a right in universal health coverage or as a priority, it takes a toll- and most of the toll is on the bodies of young girls and women. And those are the voices that are missing in decision making spaces.”

“Also, SRHR is not there, especially for communities that are affected by climate disasters- like rural communities that are mostly impacted by the brunt of these disasters. When medical health facilities are washed away with floods, women are forced to give birth in very unsafe conditions, in make shift emergency rooms, (which is a very serious encroachment upon their dignity, safety and health); adolescent girls are forced to manage their menstruation without any access to facilities for water, sanitation and hygiene – putting them at risk of infections, as well as gender-based violence. And that is the cost we pay by not having SRHR integrated into policy,” added Aysha Amin.

“Access to quality healthcare should not be a privilege – it is a human right. And I think by working in partnerships we can achieve that. Brazil has made great strides towards achieving universal health coverage through primary healthcare, and community-based approaches. The most important thing that we have done in the past several years is to strengthen the government’s connection with the population we serve and their needs. We need to listen to the people we are working for and offering healthcare services, including SRHR for the women and girls. We need to go to the communities, listen to their needs and take those lessons into account. By listening, we can find our methods to achieve every choice that our population needs to have, including methods to protect from sexually transmitted infections (STIs). This is an important reminder for all of us who work in this and other fields that we need to listen to the people we are working with and to take those lessons into account,” said Dr Ana Luiza Caldas, Vice Minister of Health, Brazil.

Ending violence against women and girls is not merely an obligation but human rights imperative

To accelerate global progress and deliver meaningful change for the lives of affected women and girls, we call for decisive government action and funding to: scale up evidence-based programmes (especially those which are community-led) to prevent violence against women and girls; strengthen survivor-centred health, legal and social services; invest in data systems to track progress and reach the most at-risk groups to protect them from sexual and other forms of gender-based violence; and enforce laws and policies empowering women and girls.Email

Shobha Shukla is the award-winning founding Managing Editor and Executive Director of CNS (Citizen News Service) and is a feminist, health and development justice advocate. She is a former senior Physics faculty of prestigious Loreto Convent College and current Coordinator of Asia Pacific Regional Media Alliance for Health and Development (APCAT Media) and Chairperson of Global AMR Media Alliance (GAMA). She coordinates SHE & Rights Media Initiative (Sexual health with equity and rights). Follow her on Twitter @shobha1shukla or read her writings here www.bit.ly/ShobhaShukla)




German Unions and the Working Poor

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Ever since Shipler’s Pulitzer Prize-winning The Working Poor: Invisible in America (2004), the term working poor has entered the realm beyond industrial sociology.

Put rather simply, the working poor are workers whose income has fallen below the poverty line. They work but remain under the poverty threshold. They work but are poor – these are the working poor.

In Germany, these are workers with an income of €12.50 [$13] in 2022. These workers make up a whopping 19% of all workers in this country – almost every fifth job.

In a long-awaited and very recent decision, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on November 11, 2025, only partially upheld Denmark’s lawsuit and annulled two provisions in the EU Minimum Wage Directive.

These were criteria for determining and updating wages, and a provision that prevents a reduction in wages. According to the judgment, the EU’s Minimum Wage Directive stands.

German trade unions were relieved by the ECJ’s explanations on the application of the EU Minimum Wage Directive. It is clear that European governments remain obliged to decisively improve collective bargaining. Germany’s government has to do some homework. Three tasks are issued for Germany to beef up low wages:

  1. Laws to support the working poor must come without restrictions.
  2. More generally binding collective agreements (the Allgemeinverbindlichkeitserklärung or AVE) are needed. An AVE is a very specific peculiarity of German labor law. According to German law, such an AVE is issued in accordance with §5 of Germany’s Collective Agreement Act. It means that a collective bargaining agreement becomes binding for all employers and employees not previously bound by collective agreements within an industry and the scope of a collective agreement. In other words, an AVE extends a collective bargaining agreement to all workers in an industry.
  3. Working and labor relations without collective bargaining or an AVE must finally come to an end.

Since German collective agreements cover significantly less than 80% of all workers, Germany’s government is obliged to finally submit an action plan to increase collective bargaining rights.

The EU’s Minimum Wage Directive is intended to protect workers from poverty and to promote appropriate minimum wages and collective bargaining standards. The EU still does not set a minimum wage, but it does provide – among other things – a reference point of 60% of a median wage. This should guide EU member states.

Germany’s minimum wage will increase in 2026: €13.90 per hour (January 1, 2026) and €14.60 (January 1, 2027) – even though German trade unions argued that it requires €15 per hour. This was not quite reached. A survey conducted by Forsa (June 2025) showed that two thirds (66%) of Germans support a minimum wage of €15 ($17.50].

Overall, the balance sheet for Germany over the past 10 years is rather modest compared to other EU countries. Germany’s low-income workers have benefited in particular. In East Germany, the increase has been substantial. The minimum wage has helped reduce wage inequalities across various regions of Germany.

This is by no means self-starting. If there are only small increases, as is currently the case, this weakens the positive effect of the minimum wage. Stronger increases are needed.

While wage development in the lower income range almost stagnated between 2008 and 2013, there were significant increases after the introduction of the minimum wage in 2015, especially in Eastern Germany.

The working poor in Germany are not just individual cases. There is a structure of low-wage employment in Germany. Those affected by low wages are not a homogeneous group. On the contrary, certain employment groups carry a particularly high risk of earning only a low hourly wage.

This is particularly pronounced among mini-jobbers at 80.8% of a full income. They have a much higher low-wage risk than full-time workers. The next groups are part-time workers. At about 23.8%, women have a higher low-wage risk than men at 14.6%. Temporary employees are significantly more often affected by low wages, and the same applies to non-permanent employees.

Age also continues to influence the risk of low wages. About half of all workers under the age of 25 earn an hourly wage below the low-wage threshold. For older workers – over the age of 54 – the low-wage risk is slightly above average at just under 22%. Migrant workers also face an above-average low-wage risk at 29.5%.

On the other hand, workers with an academic degree (8%) have a significantly lower risk of low wages than workers with vocational training. However, workers with other qualifications carry a much higher risk of low wages.

Despite the high low-wage risk among low-skilled workers, 57% of low-wage earners had completed vocational training and another 14% even had a university degree. The vast majority of low-wage workers had a medium or high skill level. A little more than one quarter of low-wage workers have no formal qualification.

Women accounted for around 60% of all low-wage employees. The majority of low-wage earners come from the middle-age groups (25–54 years: 54%). However, the share of older people (from age 54) is 29.5%.

Low-wage jobs in Germany are by no means limited to part-time employees and mini-jobbers. Most of Germany’s low-paid workers have completed vocational training, are employed on an indefinite basis, or work full-time. This indicates that low-wage jobs are by no means confined to the fringe. Instead, these workers at the very bottom can be found in standard forms of employment. In other words, the precariat is advancing into standard employment.

While being part of Germany’s low-wage sector, migrant workers assure the prosperity of Germany. Yet even cleaners struggle for dignity. These migrant workers – while ensuring Germany’s prosperity – live in barracks and sleep in their cars. Those who are cheated out of their wages are threatened and beaten. Recently, Germany’s influential “Deutschlandradio” called it “Germany, Your Slaves” – Deutschland, Deine Sklaven.

Migrant workers in Germany’s low-wage sector are considered invisible. They are confined to the lowest level of the pyramid. Capitalism produces a hierarchical labor market, hierarchical workplace structures, and hierarchical work regimes.

Yet, in Germany’s low-wage sectors, it is the migrant who makes the hotel beds, washes towels, cleans offices, brushes toilets, sterilizes surgery theatres, works as a window cleaner, labors in aged-care facilities, empties rubbish bins, and cares for the elderly and the lodgers. Low-paid migrant workers dig up asparagus, harvest strawberries, and pick apples.

They build apartments, pave sidewalks, clean universities, wash your car, clean street furniture, deliver parcels, cool airline food, and scrub shopping-mall floors. They slaughter pigs, cut up chickens, flip burgers, make kebabs, do the checkout at petrol stations, and disassemble turkeys.

They wash and care for old people who are no longer able to do it themselves. They rush through warehouses and deliver the pizza, jeans, and Christmas presents.

Behind these statistics are real lives and real work situations of migrants who labor in different industries in Germany’s low-wage sector. Just as Pulitzer Prize winner Shipler says in Invisible in America, those who clean up Germany’s Stadtbild and feed Germany’s growing number of elderly in care homes are Germany’s invisibles – they have no voice.

Yet they come from Poland, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, and many other countries.

Even though Germans often do not see them – or do not want to see them – migrants work in many industries, including construction and slaughterhouses, assuring that even the neo-Nazi AfD voter can have his beloved Schnitzel and Hackbraten, as well as keeping Germany’s infamous Autobahn highways free of snow and ice.

Virtually all of this underpins Germany’s position as one of the world’s great economies – third place after the USA and China. Measured by GDP, it stands at 5 trillion US dollars (2025).

Meanwhile, corporate managers have invented a sheer endless number of employment-contracts to ensure low-wage workers remain confined to the precariat – outsourcing and subcontracting being only two examples. They work in what Germany’s foremost investigative journalist, Günter Wallraff, called in 1983 Ganz Unten – “down there.” The condition of Germany’s working poor is by no means a new issue.

Then as now, working conditions are defined – impressively and comprehensively – by discrimination, racism, xenophobia, fear, fraud, wage theft, violence, and human trafficking. This is part of everyday life in Germany’s low-wage sector and for far too many migrant workers.

Many of those affected live in the shade – far removed from the glittery world of the neoliberal “winner takes it all” society. Germany’s working poor slog along – often under very poor, unhygienic, illness-causing, and inhumane conditions.

They live in cramped, sometimes unsanitary accommodation, working in areas where occupational safety regulations are given little consideration. Thanks to the triumph of the neoliberal anti-state, “less bureaucracy,” “eliminate red tape,” etc. ideology, workplace inspections are rare, if they happen at all.

Meanwhile, health insurance is often insufficient, irregular, or simply non-existent. No help in the case of illness or accident. More often than not, the boundaries between legal and illegal business are blurred – this too is nothing new in capitalism, as Friedrich Engels noted in his 1844 classic on the condition of the working class, generally defined by exploitation.

This occurs not just in the mentioned industries, but reflects structural conditions that are, seemingly, very difficult to change, as the working poor are hit with a triple whammy:

  • Education: poor education (not knowing their rights);
  • Insecurity: frequent job changes due to high insecurity; and
  • Threats: threats by their bosses – which, in the case of migrant workers, include threats of deportation.

Yet there are strategies of open and covert resistance, such as:

  1. Evidence: collecting evidence (wagetheftisacrime.com, photographing timesheets, etc.);
  2. Online: exchanging information via WhatsApp groups or Facebook forums;
  3. Information: gathering information on minimum-wage law;
  4. Unions: calling local trade unions or NGOs (e.g., Amnesty International); and
  5. Solidarity: creating solidarity among co-workers – what Pyotr Kropotkin once called “mutual aid.”Email
avatar

Thomas Klikauer has over 800 publications (including 12 books) and writes regularly for BraveNewEurope (Western Europe), the Barricades (Eastern Europe), Buzzflash (USA), Counterpunch (USA), Countercurrents (India), Tikkun (USA), and ZNet (USA). One of his books is on Managerialism (2013).

Source: Non Profit Quarterly

I have lived all my life in Los Angeles, but I have never seen anything like the level of destruction we experienced this past January due to the fires that ripped through our neighborhoods. In real time, I saw the devastating impact of climate change. At the same time, landlords across the city were spiking rents because the wellbeing of their tenants was last on their list of considerations.

Unfortunately, while moments of crisis make visible so many amazing acts of solidarity, generosity, and support from people looking to help those in need, they also present us with the ugliest side of greed and profit-seeking under our capitalist system.

It’s the need to respond to this greed that’s leading more and more tenants to join tenant unions and demand that public officials pass legislation that protects against price gouging and price fixing. Rent control is one key policy that can protect tenants, but ultimately we need solutions that put land and housing into social ownership. And the success of these efforts starts with all of us, collectively, as tens of millions of people who make up our renter nation fight for housing as a human right.

A Pattern of Vulture Capitalism

Grotesque approaches from private equity companies and investors in times of profound tragedy and chaos did not appear out of nowhere in 2025. We have seen this movie before. After the foreclosure crisis–induced Great Recession, the United States experienced one of the biggest-ever wealth transfers from families to Wall Street. We saw it yet again during the COVID-19 pandemic as families struggled to keep up with rents and mortgages in the face of widespread job losses.

Banking on disasters as opportunities to make profits at the expense of the planet and marginalized communities has become the norm in a pattern of vulture capitalism. Increasingly, a small number of large corporations are using their financial capital to acquire our cities’ remaining affordable housing stock.

The constant land grabs consequently give these large corporations expanded control. To date, traditional private market solutions have not relieved the problem. This is not by accident. It is by design.

As long as we continue to treat housing as yet another Wall Street lever for profit generation, those with financial power over the market will continue to make massive windfalls through the current system, and we will continue to be unable to solve this housing question.

The Roots of US Tenant Organizing

In 1872, Friedrich Engels published his pamphlet, The Housing Question, writing that “the housing shortage is no accident; it is a necessary institution, and it can be abolished together with all its effects on health, etc., only if the whole social order from which it springs is fundamentally refashioned.”

The economic concept of supply and demand encourages us to believe that the only way out of the housing crisis is to build more housing. But after 150 years of building housing, the question Engels wrote about in 1872 troubles us still. It turns out that while building new affordable and accessible housing is necessary, it is insufficient to solve our housing crisis.

To help those who are most marginalized, we must also focus our attention on preserving the remaining affordable housing stock we have.

Tenant fights and organizing efforts have occurred in the United States since the turn of the 20th century. New York perhaps best encapsulates the success of tenant organizing efforts during that period, with a series of successful rent strikes and eviction blockades throughout the state, leading to policies that improved the living conditions of low-income tenants living in slum dwellings. One key policy win was the passage of rent control in 1920.

During World War II, rent control became national policy (and remained in effect until 1947), but New York has been one of only a handful of states that have maintained the policy since then. Two other states—California and Oregon—have passed statewide rent control guidelines. There are also several municipalities that have similar policies in place.

The Pandemic Lights a Fire

During the COVID-19 pandemic, tenant organizing expanded rapidly, as millions of people mobilized when faced with the threat of eviction. Tenants galvanized to advocate for rent cancellation and eviction moratoriums to maintain their housing during the pandemic, and organized for stronger renter protections for the long haul.

Organized tenant efforts became part of the national conversation. For example, Moms for Housing in Oakland, CA, drew attention to and challenged the notion of a housing shortage when they occupied vacant units owned by a real estate investment firm. Due to their action, they were able to move in, and the units were ultimately placed in a community land trust. More recently, in 2024, local tenant unions joined forces in forming the national Tenant Union Federation.

Rent control remains a central tactic to protect tenants from landlords who spike rent without remorse or concern for tenants’ health and wellbeing. Rent control is also a key mechanism that tenant unions and organized groups can use to fend off speculation in their neighborhoods.

Rent control fights are inherently fights against corporate control. In concrete terms, it is a government program that limits the amount of money a landlord can demand for leasing a home. Rent control laws are usually enacted by municipalities, and the details vary widely, but all are intended to keep housing affordable.

As demonstrated in the Swing State Housing Poll, conducted by Right to the City Action and the Center for Popular Democracy, rent control is wildly popular. According to the US Census, nearly half of all renters (21 million families) are housing cost-burdened, meaning they spend over 30 percent of their income on housing; over half of those renters (12.1 million families) are severely cost-burdened (paying more than 50 percent of their income on rent), according to a 2025 Harvard study. Many families facing such constraints are put in the impossible position of making life-or-death decisions each month to either pay rent, feed themselves, or cover their medication.

Until policies like rent control are implemented across the United States, housing will remain widely unaffordable. The fight for rent control is worthwhile, not only because it ensures that rents are capped to maintain affordability, but also because it weakens large investment firms’ interest in distressed housing assets. If we can cap the rents of our units, we can limit the profits of these companies, and that is an important step to enable advocates to advance our society toward a more just system where housing is treated as a human right.

A housing supply strategy that does not rely on “the market” is required to at least supplement private housing.

A Social Housing Vision

Controlling rent is only a first step. Many conventional economists say that rent control discourages private landlords from building. The data are less clear on this point than many landlord advocates claim. What is clear is that both in cities that have rent control policies in place and those that do not is that the cost of housing is far too high for far too many US families. The market system of housing supply is not working, period. This means a housing supply strategy that does not rely on “the market” is required to at least supplement private housing.

Social housing is a public option for housing that has three key qualities: It is permanently affordable, protected from the private market, and under democratic community control of the residents who live there. There are various models of social housing such as public housing, community land trusts, and housing cooperatives. In all forms, public backing is critical in order to bring social housing to scale.

In Los Angeles, tenants have been at the forefront of some of the most innovative social housing initiatives in the country. In 2022, voters in Los Angeles approved the ballot initiative known as Measure ULA (United to House LA), which has already collected $375 million through a “mansion tax.” This imposes a 4 percent tax on property sales over $5.1 million and a 5.5 percent tax on sales over $10.3 million, with the goal of investing a substantial portion of that money into affordable and social housing solutions.

In February 2025, in Seattle, voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 1A, which authorizes a 5 percent tax on employee compensation over $1 million per year to fund social housing citywide and is expected to generate about $53 million annually.

Policy wins such as those in Los Angeles and Seattle will make it possible for resident-owned housing cooperatives and homes stewarded by community land trusts (CLT) to become a much larger percentage of overall available housing. In other words, public funding can allow social housing to be built to scale.

In Los Angeles, ULA funds can be used both to support housing preservation, such as tenant acquisitions for distressed properties at risk of being flipped, as well as build new housing for some of the city’s most vulnerable residents—like farm workers, day laborers, and restaurant workers—and others, including teachers and nurses.

While most cities have yet to achieve policy gains like these, ground-up tenant organizing efforts elsewhere provide guidance and inspiration for what is possible. A well-known example is the Sky Without Limits Cooperative in Minneapolis, MN.

After close to a decade of organizing and court dates, the residents of the five buildings that make up Sky Without Limits were finally able to remove their landlord and buy the building, allowing residents to collectively manage and make decisions about their own homes.

For years, these tenants (who would eventually become housing co-op co-owners) in Minneapolis fought to have their slumlord make repairs to their almost uninhabitable units. With support from their sister organization, United Renters for Justice/Inquilinxs Unidxs, residents of the five buildings created bylaws and agreements for their housing cooperative. The city’s land bank, supported by the nonprofit Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) Twin Cities, raised the capital, and the tenants are currently in the process of raising $2 million to take direct ownership and transition the buildings to community housing co-op control.

Projects like Sky Without Limits give us a glimpse into what it will take to establish governing structures and decision-making practices where residents are involved, leading the strategies and developing the best infrastructures for them. Democratic governance is at the center of these solidarity economy models. Within this alternative economic system, we can tap into our biggest advantage: ourselves, the people that make up the renter nation within the United States.

But as we attempt to move away from the extractive toward the regenerative, we will need both the private and public sectors to play a role in providing the resources and policies to move toward a more solutions-oriented approach to solve our modern-day housing question.

A People-Centered Strategy

We cannot transform our current housing system without tenant organizing. We know tenants are best positioned to bring the solutions and strategies required to reinvent our housing system and have a more harmonious relationship with the land.

From policy fights at City Hall to the development of resident-owned and -controlled property management companies that prioritize transformative justice practices instead of punitive measures to ensuring residents have all the amenities they need to thrive, tenants are rising and putting new ideas and strategies to the test.

While our movements have yet to build the level of connection to the land needed to prevent the continued natural resource extraction, we are seeing organized tenants take the fight to both the public and private sectors through strategies to stem the loss of the limited affordable housing stock that still exists in our cities.

The formation of strong tenant unions that enact policy change at all levels of government to ensure renters are protected from speculative practices weakens the financial sector’s hold over the market.

These vital wins and long-term fights will lead to new opportunities to get creative and try alternatives that shift the current economic system to one that centers solidarity—on the path toward a more social and democratic land and housing system.Email

Fernando X. Abarca is a Salvadoran American housing justice organizer based in Los Angeles/Tongva Lands, CA. He is currently the loan fund organizer for Right to the City Alliance.