INTRODUCTION

Climate change is the issue that looms over all others. A livable planet is prerequisite to every policy goal. Without one, nothing else matters. Yet humanity has generally failed to meet the moment. Our addiction to growth, creature comforts, and heavy industry — most pronounced in the West — is driving us to the abyss. We live for the day, and forfeit tomorrow. As a result, our planet is hurtling toward irreversible tipping points — and may have already passed them. 

Our recklessness has eliminated entire species of animals and insects critical to our ecology, created countless climate refugees in parts of the world having already endured generations of colonized existence, and cost us billions (if not trillions) of dollars. Yet the political class has done little to mitigate this crisis. Many summits have passed. Task forces have convened. And what we have to show for it is the Paris Agreement— an unambitious, largely unbinding pledge that’s proven ineffective.

Climate change is a global problem. As such, it calls for international collaboration — especially between the world’s two biggest emitters, the United States and China. So far, that has been lacking. America has been all too happy to jettison cooperation for a policy of saber rattling and encirclement. Not only is the United States continually announcing the construction of new bases in the Asia-Pacific region, it pushes forward in a Cold War logic of seeking to humiliate China rather than honoring its basic needs and interests. Infamously, America sacrificed climate talks through Nancy Pelosi inflaming tensions over Taiwan and blatantly violating established precedent in US-China relations. Unfortunately, this has become the norm. The Americans would seemingly rather destroy the globe if it means winning a few political skirmishes with China and the Chinese people.

Such antagonism is incredibly distressing. As the world’s two largest emitters, the two powers should be working together to prevent and even reverse ecological breakdown. Quite literally everything depends on it. Instead, the U.S. has continued its ravaging of the environment for short-term economic gain when in fact, it should not only be working with China, but learning from the ways it has mitigated carbon emissions over the last few decades. It is clear Washington will not lead us into a more sustainable future. Beijing might.

UNCLEAN HANDS

In the 10 years since negotiators drafted the Paris Accords, the United States has been an unmitigated climate disaster. Less than a year after drafting, Americans elected a president who called climate change a Chinese hoax. Trump, once assuming power, began his regime by withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. The United States stood alone as the only “major emitter… to repudiate the agreement.” Of course, Trump was not done. He then moved to the domestic front. Trump allowed oil and gas drilling in wildlife refuges, coastal waters, and other formerly protected areas. A particularly sweeping executive order directed all federal departments to eliminate any rules restricting energy production. Further orders sought to accelerate “approval and construction of fossil fuel projects by limiting state environmental reviews.” And this just scratches the surface. A Pulitzer-winning environmental reporter described the first Trump administration as a “relentless drive toward fossil energy development.”

During those dark years, the White House suppressed “climate and related science” to conceal the harm of its boneheaded policies. The administration infamously “edited a major Defense Department report to downplay its climate findings.” It altered the contents of government websites to reduce public access to scientific data. While hiding the truth, Trump also muddied the waters via his own “climate denial and denigration of renewable energy.”

After him came Joe Biden, who supporters heralded as the first climate president. It was not to be. He let the world know early on that environmentalism was categorically not “his thing.” In March 2021:

Biden approved the Willow Project — an Alaska oil drilling venture of appalling scope. The development includes 200 oil wells connected by multiple pipelines.

Under Biden, the Department of Interior “auctioned an Italy-sized chunk of the Gulf of Mexico for drilling.” Biden also reopened “massive tracts of the Gulf for extraction.” Amazingly, the rate at which his administration approved oil permits actually outpaced Trump. Not to be outdone, Trump’s second term has arguably been the greatest calamity of all.

In Trump’s first 100 days this year, he instigated more rollbacks of environmental rules than during his entire first term. After Biden reentered the Paris Agreement, Trump again withdrew. He has earmarked massive expanses, including in the Arctic, for new drilling. After erroneously declaring a national “energy emergency,” Trump exempted dozens of coal-fired power plants from clean air rules. He also blocked “the approval of new solar projects and wind turbines, which he has called ‘ugly’ and ‘disgusting.’” In September, Trump revoked the $7,500 federal tax credits for electric cars. Analysts fear this could spell “big trouble” for the industry and, by extension, the environment.

The pace of destruction has been frenetic. On March 12th alone, “Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency… announced 31 actions” revising pollution standards projected “to save 200,000 lives.” The agency’s head, whose job is to protect the environment, celebrated “driving a dagger into the heart of… climate change.” And the worst is likely yet to come. “[T]he pressure on our regulatory system and our democracy will… ramp up,” said Michael Burger, a climate law scholar.

STARK CONTRAST

In addition to their climate malfeasance, radicalized Republicans are rabidly sinophobic. Relative to the current administration, previous American diplomats were sometimes more neutral on China. Just two years ago, special envoy on climate John Kerry advocated “genuine cooperation” between America and China on environmental issues. “China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world,” he stressed. “It’s clear that we have a special responsibility to find common ground.”

Naturally, the backlash from what became the new guard was fierce. Republican representative Michael McCaul of Texas criticized Kerry’s willingness to negotiate, labeling China “not an honest broker.” McCaul’s colleague Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, representing the far-right Freedom Caucus, attacked Kerry for caring about climate change at all. Perry dubbed global warming “a problem that doesn’t exist.” He then accused the scientific community of “grifting” — lying for pecuniary gain. Of course, this is not just false but highly hypocritical. If anyone is grifting, it’s Perry himself. His denialism probably has something to do with the massive bribes he gleefully accepts from the fossil fuel industry. Unfortunately, inmates like him are now running the asylum.

But the rot has infected members of both parties. Yes, Kerry has had lucid moments. But, overall, he too has a deeply flawed climate record. Under Barack Obama, Kerry abetted an administration which took “disastrous steps that worsened the climate crisis.” This included lifting “the ban on exporting crude oil… thanks to… multiyear lobbying efforts… by… industry groups.” Kerry was hardly a bulwark against special interests trying to destroy the environment.

Kerry also actively supports fracking, which belches methane — one of the most dangerous greenhouse gases — into the atmosphere. Moreover, as recently as 2020, Kerry led the advisory council of a bank that dumped massive sums into fossil financing. That’s not all. Kerry is notoriously weak on climate mitigation funds, insisting the United States can’t afford to assist the developing world. While special envoy on climate under Joe Biden, he said “under no circumstances” would America pay any climate reparations. This contradicts the advice of experts, including economic anthropologist Jason Hickel, who see reparations as necessary for ecological justice.

Yet, in a country as environmentally disastrous as the United States, Kerry seems like a climate hawk. America is history’s worst carbon emitter by far. Today, it ranks among the top per capita emitters according to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The United States also finds itself toward the very bottom of the Sustainable Development Index (SDI).

Compare that to China. UNEP data shows that China’s per capita emissions are 40% less than America’s. China also ranks 21 spots above the United States in the SDI. And the country is taking considerable steps to further green itself.

In the first four months of 2023, China added a whopping 62 gigawatts of solar and wind capacity. No other country has made comparable strides, with 80 percent of China’s new power capacity coming from renewable sources. China alone accounts for over 35 percent of all global investment in the transition to clean energy in 2021. These facts have led scholars, including the University of Michigan’s Tom Lyon, to remark that “green is everywhere in China.”

Rather than resting on its laurels, the Middle Kingdom is upping the ante. Even otherwise unsympathetic observers, including the capitalist press, cannot help but marvel. The Economist recently acknowledged that “[t]he scale of the renewables revolution in China is almost too vast for the human mind to grasp.” By the end of last year, “the country had installed 887 of solar-power capacity — close to double Europe’s and America’s combined capacity.” In 2024, it deployed over 24 million tons of steel to build new wind turbines and solar panels. This “would have been enough to build a Golden Gate Bridge on every work day of every week that year.”

Yet there is great room for improvement. Despite historic expansions in clean energy, China remains heavily dependent on dirty sources for its energy demands. Coal still comprises a majority of its energy production. Air pollution is consequently a major problem in Chinese cities. Sulfates fill the skies, typically tracing to coal and fuel oils. Their concentration peaked in the early 2010s, which commentators dubbed an “air-pocalypse.” But China got serious. As The Economist reports:

[C]hemical devices were installed to remove sulphur from the flue gases pumped out by power stations. These steps, along with others, greatly improved air quality in Chinese cities. Its citizens’ lungs are much the better for it, and their lives the longer.

But China’s “war against pollution” is far from over. When it comes to the most harmful particulate matter, China still vastly overshoots World Health Organization standards. This causes a slew of health problems including even premature deaths. Much of the blame for that, however, lies with the United States and its rich allies. As Roger Bybee, a Milwaukee-based freelance writer, explains in his article ‘Scapegoating China,’ “U.S.-based corporations, their contractors, and other Western multinationals… are responsible for a majority of China’s fossil-fuel effluents.” Economist Rob Larson makes a similar point in his book Bleakonomics. American multinationals, he writes, play a “crucial role in exporting polluting industries.” Consequently, residents of major Chinese cities often wear face masks to avoid inhaling harmful amounts of toxic smog.

But at least they wear them, rather than turning masks into a political maelstrom — as was, embarrassingly, the case here. The Trump administration demonized masking and vaccines, continuing its push against the latter to this day. China, meanwhile, treated the pandemic with requisite seriousness. It was easily the world’s largest producer of personal protective equipment, generously exporting excess supply to help other countries cope. While COVID ravaged America, and arguably still does, China conquered it — with a tiny fraction of the death rate. On public health, Beijing showcased its immense superiority.

Many have dubbed tensions between these two great powers, the United States and China, a “New Cold War.” This New Cold War mirrors the old one. In years past, for all its flaws, the Soviet Union led on guaranteeing basic social rights. Citizens enjoyed free college and healthcare alongside universal housing which basically abolished homelessness. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union’s Western counterparts — namely, the United States — spread death and destruction abroad as greed ran rampant domestically. The difference could not have been clearer. 

We see this contrast today too. As the United States descends into fascism, embracing old ways of thinking, China is revolutionizing itself for humanity’s betterment. The Middle Kingdom is greening industry, innovating technologically, and continues opening itself to the outside world. For all its flaws, chief among them cowardice (or indifference) amid Zionist criminality, China is leaping into the new age. In the New Cold War, it is plainly the preferable option. The choice is between civilization and barbarism. Socialists the world over should act accordingly.

LESSONS

There is much to learn from China’s successes. For one, they show the power of innovation. A common narrative in the West is that China is merely an appropriator, and not an originator. China, the story goes, ruthlessly poaches Western technology with little regard for intellectual property because it cannot solve problems itself. But “any doubts about China’s ability to produce… innovative solutions have been disproven with its rapid uptake of green technology.”

Look no further than its booming vehicle industry. Over the years, more than 500 electric car companies have sprouted in China. Although, for efficiency’s sake, that number is rapidly falling due to consolidation. China manufactures over 70% of the world’s electric cars and accounts for 40% of global exports. This is thanks partly to generous government subsidies and otherwise supportive policies to buttress that critical sector.

And that brings us to another common Western common narrative. It is the idea that capitalism promotes innovation better than any other economic system, with socialism paling in comparison. Yet China’s immense environmental progress was produced by a careful series of five-year state plans guiding a largely socialist economy. The ruling Communist Party does not allow the country to fall prey to the anarchy of the market. Its planning outlines $16 trillion of investment to reach carbon neutrality by 2060. A particularly noteworthy proposal is China’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action Plan. It “aims to vigorously develop green finance… and integrate biodiversity data into… environmental disclosures and sustainability reports.”

There is a lesson here for the United States. More state intervention in the economy can work wonders, and breathe new life into this decaying power. The tools to do so already exist. One is the Defense Production Act, a congressional response to Harry Truman’s 1950s call to supply the Korean War effort. Today, the Defense Production Act is a powerful tool in the presidential arsenal to mobilize private industry to fulfill social priorities. 

Namely, “the executive branch could use the Defense Production Act… to accelerate the clean energy build-out.” Importantly, it could do so while bypassing Congress and subfederal authorities and “without regard to the limitations of existing law.” The ability to override contrary “federal, state, and local laws that privilege corporate short-termism” is bursting with promise.

But none of that matters absent the requisite political will. The United States remains committed to the path of climate doom. A bold transition to renewables is not on the horizon. The Green New Deal, though blindingly necessary, is nothing more than a few bits of paper. America is refusing to face the growing environmental crisis that threatens organized human life as we know it.

Therefore, the global masses — especially in developing nations, which are most at risk — look to China for vision and leadership. And the reason is clear. In staking our collective future, Beijing — and its commitment to expanding green energy — is a safer bet and steadier hand. There is no debate. And there never was.

Issue 7, the first of which we are publishing with a preview in this format, is the Ballot and the Rebellion. To receive a bimonthly full copy of the magazine issue delivered to your door knowing your funds directly support the independent media we represent, you can subscribe here.

Working Mass is a project of union members and members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) in Massachusetts and beyond. We cover strikes, new organizing, and contract campaigns, as well as labor strategy, the reform movement, and socialist politics.

Strikes in the Air, Welcome to Issue 7:

In this issue, organizers debate electoral strategy, from cadre candidates to victory infrastructures, in articles written in between and around clocked-in shifts and showing up day after day for fellow workers on the picket line of the Red Cup Rebellion.

Espresso machines are rusting from disuse, but the fire of solidarity is still running hot.

Note from the Managing Editor

I’m honored to serve as the new managing editor of this publication. I’m from a union family, raised by IATSE rank-and-file worker leaders and United Brotherhood of Carpenters (UBC) union craftsmen, but what led me into labor was my own conditions – when seventy-hour weeks caught like a prairie fire and fanned into a strike. My coworkers and I organized to contract ratification and strike authorization as rank-and-file members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and Campaign Workers Guild (CWG). These left me with a sense of the electric possibilities of collective action, which socialist struggle only showed an even farther horizon for. The Triangle chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) elected me twice to co-chair the chapter; most recently, I have been active in and served as co-chair of the Somerville branch of Boston DSA.

Experiences on the shopfloor and in organizational leadership leave me with a conviction: politics happens at the base, and radiates up. The places where people spend their time and experience exploitation and domination — including the workplace and home — are the places in which the politics that boil into the class forces shaping electoral landscapes are struggled for and over.

In solidarity,

Travis Wayne

Issue 7 Contributors: Terence Cawley, Maritza S, Matt Wolfinger, Jake S, Ric Blair, Jackie Wilson, Dalton Galloway, Carlos B

1. Starbucks Workers United Supermajority Authorize ULP Strike for November 13

2. WPI Resident Advisors On Strike Against Destructive Restructuring and Unionbusting

3. Winning Online: 5 Digital Tactics That Powered Connolly and Zohran To Victory

4. The Starbucks Strike and the Long Memory of the Kitchen

5. Cross the Finish Line, Not the Picket Line – Newton Runs 5k to Support Striking Starbucks Baristas

Opinion Pieces

1. Electoral Strategy With Every Canvass An Organizing Moment

2. A Revolution Requires Revolutionaries, Not Candidates

3. Oppositional, Independent, and Socialist Candidates

The post Announcing Issue 7: The Ballot and the Rebellion appeared first on Working Mass.

Hey everyone!
There’s a good cover and interview with a few people from SYR DSA around the topic of ICE contracts. If you’re interested in reading more, feel free to check out this blog:
Local advocates want to ‘melt’ Syracuse’s links to ICE. Will lawmakers listen?

by Rosa

Author’s Note: the statement below was read at Speak to County on December 9, 2025. County Executive Bello put forth legislation that would opt the county out of a statewide short term rental registry which would track the number and location of these rentals to analyze their effects on housing and rental prices. Shortly before the legislature vote, it was revealed that AirBnb had been lobbying the County for months, even providing draft legislation to opt out. Ultimately that night, the Monroe County Legislature voted 21-8 to opt out of the registry.

As any millennial will tell you, owning our own house one day is becoming more and more a dream than an achievable goal. You can put in an offer at full asking price, waive inspections, and still lose to a higher bidder. It’s not just housing prices that have skyrocketed, rent has also increased drastically. The average rent for a 1 bedroom in Rochester has almost doubled since I started renting: I can assure you my salary has certainly not doubled.

Most people in my neighborhood, homeowners and renters alike, have lived there for decades. I’m a newer resident at only 6 years there. It’s a place where community has been built. A few years ago, a house across the street from me went up for sale. The price was actually affordable! But a healthcare worker at the nearby hospital, or a young family never moved in. No one moved in. A company in California bought the house for tens of thousands over asking, an all cash offer. Now the house sits vacant most of the time. It’s listed on Vrbo: one week there is almost as much as I pay for a month in rent.

This is not the only house in my neighborhood that’s been converted to a short term rental, but truthfully, I have no clue how many there are. And neither will you, without a short term rental registry. 

In a year where the County is set to lose over $100 million in federal funding, why would the County opt out of an opportunity to ensure it’s receiving the taxes it’s owed by Airbnb or Vrbo? There’s a reason these companies are lobbying for the County to opt out: they don’t want to pay their fair share. They don’t want us to know how they’re harming our housing market by driving up rental and housing prices. They don’t want us to truly understand the scope of the damage they’re doing to the social fabric of our communities. We are losing neighbors, we are losing our communities, but all Airbnb and Vrbo care about is hiding their profits and avoiding taxes. Vote NO on opting out of the registry.

The post Opt Out of Short-Term Rentals, Opt In to the Registry first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

Last November, more than 138,000 Seattleites cast their vote for self-declared socialist Katie Wilson, electing her mayor over incumbent Bruce Harrell on the promise of transformational change that would see Seattle become a city for working families. Just as in New York City where DSA member Zohran Mamdani won his mayoral race with more than 1.1 million votes, her victory reflects the aspirations of millions of people across the United States to put an end to the inhuman cruelty of our decaying capitalist system and build a socialist society that will meet the needs of working people. 

Mayor Wilson’s first two weeks in office have not lived up to this aspiration. Instead, an embarrassing contrast between Mayor Wilson and Mayor Mamdani has become evident to observers in Seattle on the issue of homelessness. Since taking office, Mayor Wilson’s Office noted that they have overseen more than 100 sweeps of unhoused Seattleites since she took office two weeks ago, breaking up tents, stealing personal possessions that cannot be carried, and leaving those left behind to look for shelter during the coldest months of winter. This is a direct continuation of the policies of the Harrell Administration that spent tens of millions on sweeps while homelessness increased year after year. 

Meanwhile in New York City, Mayor Mamdani has declared an end to sweeps. Instead of wasting city revenue to harass homeless New Yorkers, he started his term in office running to the frontlines in the war against displacement by directing his city government to intervene in a bankruptcy proceeding affecting over 5000 rent stabilized units. His decisive use of public power forced the responsible slumlords to commit to repair these units to a habitable standard to prevent yet more New Yorkers from being pushed out onto the streets. 

As Wilson rightly noted during her campaign, Harrell’s sweep campaign occurred even as shelter capacity in Seattle decreased. No significant increase in shelter capacity has happened since Wilson became mayor, but she has chosen to continue this same campaign unabated. So far, Wilson’s marquee effort to address the shortage of livable shelter for thousands of Seattleites has been to declare the creation of an “interdepartment team” to ‘identify’ ways to expedite shelter development in the next two to twelve months. That the Mayor would work overtime to complete 100 sweeps in two weeks while the idea of her plan to build more shelters remains months away is a catastrophic mismatch in priorities that betrays the will of voters who sought an end to the Harrell administration’s casual cruelty towards the unhoused. 

Mayor Mamdani’s actions reflect what socialist governance actually looks like: ending the corrupt relationship between city governments and the landlords who are the root cause of homelessness by using public power to defend the dignity and wellbeing of everyday people. Mayor Wilson’s governance on the issue of homelessness is not socialist; so far, it is a continuation of the capitalist status quo that views the unhoused as problems rather than people. 

Seattle DSA joins the call of homeless advocates demanding she change course by declaring an immediate moratorium on encampment sweeps and reallocate the City’s sweeps budget towards shelter and social housing development that will actually address the crisis of homelessness. 

By: Jake S

WORCESTER, MA – On Monday, January 10, North Atlantic States Carpenters Union Local 336 members gathered against a 10-year real estate tax exemption and state tax credit eligibility proposed by Worcester City Manager Eric Batista for Menkiti Group, a Washington DC developer.

They object on the grounds that Menkiti has broken the city’s Responsible Development Ordinance – a list of requirements to be eligible for such exemptions – through its hiring of Barber Drywall. The company has been cited five times over the past two years for ordinance violations relating to wages and hours. Tax exemptions and credits like these amount to a publicly-funded subsidy granted to developers by the city.

Menkiti is seeking the exemption for a project which would convert the upper floor of an office building on Main Street into market-rate apartments. Only five of the 48 planned units will be available to tenants making no more than 60% area median income, according to Chief Development Officer Peter Dunn in communication with Worcester City Council.

Ahna Wowk-Aposhian, a journey-level carpenter and 5-year member of the union, told Working Mass that union carpenters weren’t being “prioritized” by City Hall, despite their best efforts to support ostensibly pro-labor candidates.

[Local] 336 has spent countless hours, countless days interviewing candidates, holding political actions, going to rallies, holding signs, and being told over and over again that Worcester government and City Council values the Carpenters union and is on the side of union labor. And with this fourth proposed non-union high-rise [project] — it really is the last straw, it does feel a little insulting at this point.

Candidates that we endorse signed pledges to back union projects and union work, and we haven’t seen that. [The City hands out subsidies to] developers that hire contractors who violate multiple labor laws, who engage in wage theft against their lowest-paid workers, who do not hold themselves to any kind of OSHA standard. Union work across the board is safer, it pays better, it has more protections [for workers].

Union carpenters vocalized the need to improve wages, hours, and working conditions for all workers, and that their union exists to pursue just that. When asked more about the value of her union, Ahna said being a member:

offers a quality of life that’s absolutely unheard of for someone of my age bracket and background. As a 37-year-old, I have a pension, I have annuity, I have a guaranteed retirement. I don’t worry about breaking my leg and not being taken care of; my wife doesn’t have to worry about her healthcare. I know that if I experience workplace discrimination, the full force of the union will come down like a hammer – there are so many people to back you up.

Carpenters stood out in the leadup to a Zoning Board meeting regarding the project and subsequently entered the meeting to voice their concerns. Rather than reject the City Manager’s proposals, Worcester City Council on Tuesday delayed the agenda item until its next meeting scheduled for today: January 20. 

Carpenters Local 336 will return to City Hall in the leadup to the meeting.

Not the First Time

As Ahna alluded to, this wasn’t the first time Carpenters Local 336 demanded change in the city’s distribution of subsidies (and not even the first time in relation to Barber Drywall). Back in May, several building trades unions across Worcester and Fitchburg – including the Carpenters – stood outside of 446 Main Street, the glass high-rise that houses the Worcester office of Synergy Investments.

Synergy had made the decision to hire NEI General Contracting for a similarly subsidized project to the tune of nearly $6.5 million in tax exemptions.

NEI and contractors it planned to hire had previously been charged with 37 minimum wage violations; 39 pay violations; and $15,000 in penalties for retaliating against employees who filed suit over alleged wage and hour law violations (including threats relating to immigration status), according to a press release provided by the unions. 

Such infractions, the unions stated, were clear violations of municipal development ordinances, and should prohibit subsidy projects from being awarded to these contractors. Those violations occurred over the course of other projects receiving combined millions of dollars in tax exemptions and credits.

“They cheat, they don’t pay their people the right wages, they don’t pay the right overtime, they undermine the building trades, and then they get tax money,” said Michelle Arnold, a journey-level carpenter and 8-year member of Local 336. 

These contractors have a history of doing this. We’ve built all kinds of buildings in this town, and we’re very disappointed the town would let these contractors not play by the rules. It takes money off everybody’s checks – union and non-union. Non-union workers are the ones working for these contractors, and they’re getting cheated.

When asked more about the role of her union, Michelle said:

Because of the union, we have a 5-day workweek; because of the union, we have safety protocols and fair wages. We can bring charges to shady contractors and help the people that aren’t getting paid the right way. Unfortunately, that sort of thing happens a lot more than people want to think, and most of the time, it flies under the radar.

She noted events like this could bring more attention to these issues of the building trades, and recalled her fellow union members joining nurses every day on the picket line of Worcester’s historic strike against St. Vincent’s Hospital. “Working people supporting working people can have a big impact. Everybody wants to earn a paycheck; everybody wants a fair wage for their time.”

Dan Mulcahey, Vice President of the Worcester-Fitchburg Building Trades Council (WFBTC) and a member of Sheet Metal Workers Local 63, agreed.

For union workers, if you show up on time and do your job, you get the proper training you need to get licensed in your trade when you’re just starting out, you get job security throughout your career, and you get to retire with dignity when you’re done.

“There’s a lot of development going on right now in the city of Worcester,” remarked Jorge Rivera, President of the WFBTC. “We’re pro-development – but it’s gotta be the responsible type of development.”

Synergy Investments has continued to be the beneficiary of that nearly $6.5 million in tax subsidies for its project – despite the protestations of the building trades unions – which was to turn the eleven-story tower at 1 Chestnut Place into 198 market-rate apartments.

To city and state governmental bodies, both Synergy and Menkiti’s business practices appear to qualify as “responsible development.” The question that Worcester’s working-class residents might ask is: “responsible to whom?”

Jake S is a member of Worcester DSA and a contributing writer to Working Mass.

The post Bad Blueprints: Worcester Building Trades Challenge Subsidies to Developers appeared first on Working Mass.

Events & Actions

Tuesday, January 20 (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM): No War No ICE March (in person at Civic Center Plaza, 335 McAllister St)

Tuesday, January 20 (6:00 PM – 7:00 PM): Social Housing Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Tuesday, January 20 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM):   Public Transit Meeting (zoom)

Tuesday, January 20 (7:00 PM – 8:30 PM): EWOC Fundamentals of Workplace Organizing Training (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Wednesday, January 21 (6:00 PM – 7:30 PM): What Is DSA?  (in person at 1916 McAllister)

Thursday, January 22 (6:30 PM – 7:30 PM): Public Bank Meeting (zoom)

Thursday, January 22 (6:30 PM – 9:00 PM): DSA Board Game Night (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Thursday, January 22 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM): Immigrant Justice Working Group Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Friday, January 23 (9:30 AM – 10:30 AM): District 1 Coffee with Comrades (in person at Breck’s, 2 Clement St)

Friday, January 23 (7:00 PM – 9:00 PM): Maker Friday (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Saturday, January 24 (11:00 AM – 1:00 PM): Physical Education + Self Defense Training (in person at Kelly Cullen Community, 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Saturday, January 24 (11:00 AM – 1:00 PM): Public Bank Lit Drop – Bayiew (in person at 1801 Palou Ave)

Sunday, January 25 (11:00 AM – 1:00 PM): Public Bank Lit Drop – Excelsior (in person at 579 Madrid St)

Sunday, January 25 (5:00 PM – 6:00 PM): Tenderloin Healing Circle Working Group (zoom)

Monday, January 26 (6:00 PM – 8:00 PM): Tenderloin Healing Circle (Kelly Cullen Community, 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Monday, January 26 (6:30 PM – 7:30 PM):   DSA Run Club (meet at front of McLaren Lodge, JFK Dr)

Monday, January 26 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM): Labor Board Meeting (zoom)

Tuesday, January 27 (6:30 PM – 7:30 PM): Ecosocialist Bi-Weekly Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Wednesday, January 28 (6:00 PM – 7:00 PM): Social Committee Meeting (zoom)

Wednesday, January 28 (6:45 PM – 8:30 PM): Tenant Organizing Working Group Meeting (zoom and in person at 438 Haight St)

Thursday, January 29 (6:00 PM – 7:00 PM): Education Board Open Meeting (zoom)

Thursday, January 29 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM): ICE Out initiatives orientation (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Sunday, February 1 (1:00 PM – 2:30 PM): What Is DSA?  (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Sunday, February 1 (1:00 PM – 2:00 PM): SF EWOC Lead Generation Strategy Session (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Monday, February 2 (6:30 PM – 8:00 PM): Homelessness Working Group Regular Meeting (zoom and in person 1916 McAllister St)

Monday, February 2 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM): Labor Board x SF EWOC Local Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Check out https://dsasf.org/events for more events and updates.

Game Night

Join us for a casual night of board and card games at 1916 McAllister St on Thursday, January 22, 6:30 – 10:00 PM! Feel free to bring your favorite game(s) or play one of ours. Light refreshments will be provided.

Maker Friday

Come make with us on January 23rd from 7:00 PM to 9:00 PM at the 1916 McAllister office! We’ll be making buttons and zines. Masks required and provided. All are welcome, no experience necessary, see you there!

Emergency Tenant Organizing Committee (ETOC) Fundamentals of Tenant Organizing Watch Party

Join DSA SF’s Tenant Organizing Working Group for the Emergency Tenant Organizing Committee (ETOC) Fundamentals of Tenant Organizing course. We will gather to watch this training over four Saturdays in February. The first session is Saturday, February 7th 11:00 AM – 2:00 PM at 1916 McAllister St.

Reportback: EWOC Fundamentals of Workplace Organizing

Last Tuesday, we held our second session of the four-week-long Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee (EWOC) course Fundamentals of Workplace Organizing. Our group met in person at 1916 McAllister to watch the course plenary before diving into a discussion about the material we covered. This week’s topic was “The Organizing Conversation” and we heard from an organizer from Louisville discussing her experiences with remote work, organizing a workplace at the pre-majority phase, and finding issues to rally around. A key focus of the plenary and the breakout discussion that followed was the need for relationship building to create a solid base for future organizing conversations so that labor leaders can understand their coworkers motivations and values. The group identified how differences in temporal (e.g., shift work) and spatial structure (e.g., remote work) of the workplace may present barriers to relationship building, but also identified different means by which these barriers can be overcome.

The next session will take place on Tuesday, January 20th at 7:00 PM, hosted at 1916 McAllister St. It’ll cover the steps of the arc of the campaign: choosing demands that are widely and deeply felt by their coworkers, targets that have decision making power, and escalation tactics that build confidence in the organizing campaign.

If you’d like to get involved with the SF local chapter of EWOC, reach out to the lead coordinator Caitlin S or email labor@dsasf.org. EWOC is a standing topic at meetings of the Labor Board, which are held every other Monday at 7:00 PM, both in-person at 1916 McAllister and over Zoom. Anyone is welcome to attend, and we’re always looking for people interested In workplace lead canvassing, organizer trainings, and volunteer outreach. If you’re interested in organizing your workplace and would like to be connected with an EWOC organizer, fill out the request form here.

Behind the Scenes

The Chapter Coordination Committee (CCC) regularly rotates duties among chapter members. This allows us to train new members in key duties that help keep the chapter running like organizing chapter meetings, keeping records updated, office cleanup, updating the DSA SF website and publishing the weekly newsletter. Members can view current CCC rotations.

Interested in helping with the newsletter or other day-to-day tasks that keep the chapter running? Fill out the CCC help form.

Trump's “One Big Beautiful Bill” enacted a novel policy: no tax on tips. It may look like a win for tipped workers, but who really benefits?

The post What “no tax on tips” means for workers appeared first on EWOC.