Case Study: LA County Uses Equity Principles to Transition Away from Fossil Fuels

Pam Sornson, JD on February 4, 2023

Pam Sornson, JD

February 7, 2023

One of the barriers impeding progress from inequitable practices to fairer conventions is the presence of a false dichotomy: ‘There is no other way to do what we’re doing now, so there’s no reason to change our current practices.’ This position prioritizes the status quo over social and economic advancement, regardless of the actual opportunity to make meaningful change. It is just one of the obstacles to full social equity that Los Angeles County (County) is tackling in its strategy to transition away from fossil fuels.

 

Developing a Comprehensive Strategy for a Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels in Los Angeles County

In 2021, the County elected to combine its focus on both the development of fair work opportunities with its goal of transitioning away from its reliance on fossil fuels. The initiative embraces the need for a switch to renewable, sustainable fuel sources while also minimizing the negative impact of the challenges that will undoubtedly arise in related industries as those transformations evolve.

The strategy follows the County’s adoption in 2019 of its ‘OurCounty’ sustainability plan. Considered one of the most progressive sustainability plans in the country, the OurCounty initiative couples a forward-thinking definition of ‘equity’ with 12 sustainability goals. Achieving all 13 objectives will help the County realize its ultimate goal: a healthy, thriving, financially secure economy that provides stability and mobility for all County communities.

 

First: Use the Achievement of ‘Equity’ as a Driver Toward Justice

The OurCounty plan begins with its definition of ‘equity,’ which it parses into four integral aspects:

Procedural equity embraces and engages local and regional stakeholders in developing region-wide plans, strategies, and actions to ensure all interests are recognized and represented.

Distributional equity oversees the distribution of county assets across all sectors of its constituents, with a focus on populations with the highest needs.

Structural equity institutionalizes accountability at all levels of leadership to witness, acknowledge, and reconstruct existing cultural and historical dynamics that prioritized privileged groups and caused chronic and cumulative disadvantages to subordinated populations.

Transgenerational equity considers the long-term impact of current decisions to prevent them from inappropriately burdening future generations with unnecessary and preventable consequences.

The definition seeks to address the multiple negative ramifications of previous governmental and social actions that have wreaked havoc on the region for decades. By incorporating these aspects into the overarching OurCounty plan, Los Angeles County can capture, embrace, and build on the assets, abilities, and skills of all its diverse populations in its quest for a more productive and inclusive economy.

 

Second: Knit Equity Principles into Each of the 12 Strategic ‘Clean Energy’ Goals

The goals describe how the County intends its residents to live and work as it weans off its reliance on oil and gas resources:

Goal 1:  Residents will thrive in place with adequate access to natural resources (clean water, air, and soil) in safe and secure housing and communities. This goal aims specifically at the County’s former practice of ‘redlining’ home mortgage loans by minorities to keep them out of predominantly white neighborhoods.

Goal 2:  Communities will attain a healthy and resilient physical infrastructure that respects the importance of proper interior insulation from heat and cold and an external tree canopy that cleans the air and provides shade.

Goal 3:  The County’s land use and development activities will be based on sustainable principles and won’t unnecessarily or inappropriately displace settled communities.

Goal 4:  Homeowners and businesses will be encouraged to embrace renewable resources for every possible purpose. The initiative builds a new reliance on ‘green’ energy as it moves away from petroleum products.

Goal 5:  The goal recognizes and seeks to heighten protections for the County’s physical and geographical assets, including its islands, mountains, beaches, and coastlines. Human encroachment and poor ecological management practices threaten the health and welfare of the diverse flora and fauna of the region.

Goal 6:  All County residents will enjoy the use of its parks, recreational areas, and public lands, which will be adapted to facilitate the access by all, regardless of ability.

Goal 7:  Eliminating County-based fossil fuel production refineries and related services will also eliminate the threat of – and actual – pollution that those now generate. Replacing them with renewable options will result in cleaner air, reduced wildfire threats, and the amelioration of ongoing concerns posed by climate change.

Goal 8:  A clean, convenient, and affordable public transportation system will enhance mobility options for all County inhabitants, increasing their quality of life while reducing the County’s dependence on cars.

Goal 9:  This goal tackles concerns that arise when the current overuse of finite resources taxes their availability in the future. Water, in particular, is becoming more scarce for a variety of reasons, which compels better management of it for both today’s and tomorrow’s consumers.

Goal 10:  Affordable food that is accessible, healthy, and safe should be available to all. This goal will help develop a sustainable food delivery system for all the County’s residents.

Goal 11:  Ensuring accountable actions and decisions by public policymakers mandates that all the County’s diverse communities have a voice and presence in those discussions, their implementation, and management. This principle is especially significant in areas that have been marginalized by previous inequitable conventions.

Goal 12:  Embrace and build on assets and inputs offered by all affected County populations, including the public, private, and non-profit sectors. The combined effort of the collaborative, inclusive partnership will enhance and improve the lives of all County dwellers while creating a clean and sustainable future for the region.

 

As the community evolves in this post-COVID era, it has the opportunity to develop resources that are newly revealed by that pandemic and those that will replace practices that are now obsolete in the current economy. Building the equity lens into the strategy provides not just more assets to include in the process (those of previously marginalized populations) but also new, fairer avenues to correct decades of previous transgressions. By adopting the ‘Just Transition’ strategy, Los Angeles County sets itself – and its communities – up to be leaders for the country and world in achieving a safe, fair, and clean economy that supports all its constituents.

 

The Economic Cost of Inequity

Pam Sornson, JD on February 4, 2023

Too many people remain unaware of the negative impact that inequitable actions have on the economy. Long-entrenched cultural ‘norms’ embedded in mainstream practices and services erode the foundational quality of life for those who suffer discrimination and those who remain ignorant of implicit yet very real biases. These unjust behaviors will continue unabated unless the community makes a concerted effort to reveal them, discuss them, and change them. By doing so, everyone in society will benefit, not just those who will (finally) be treated with the respect and recognition that they have always deserved.

 

Shining a Light on Inequity

Images of racism – especially violence against Blacks and other people of color – play out on television monitors with increasing frequency. Women continue to struggle to earn as much as men for doing the same work. The ethics, skills, and talents of people ‘of an age’ or with different abilities go unnoticed or disregarded in favor of other, often less qualified labor candidates. Two and a half centuries of flawed beliefs and systems have rooted these discriminatory behaviors in all sectors of society and in every industry. Yet, they all have adverse economic effects that impact everyone, not just the oppressed. Until the community faces and addresses them, it will continue to suffer those unnecessary financial losses.

Discrimination Against People of Color

By one economist’s reckoning, the economic cost of racism against black Americans is an estimated USD $16 trillion accrued over just the past 20 years. In addition to wage disparities, this community also suffers from discriminatory lending practices, limitations on education capacity and availability, and reduced access to well-paying employment. The impact on the rest of the community is significant, especially in light of the fact that the US gross domestic product (GDP) in 2021 was $21 trillion. Harnessing the resources lost due to the financial deficit caused by racism against Black Americans would be enough to pay off half of America’s 2022 $31.5 trillion national debt.

Discrimination Against Women and Differently Gendered

The ‘gender gap’ also costs the country a pretty penny every year. A Center for American Progress article asserts that women earn just $0.83 for every dollar paid to a man in 2022. Women of color earn less than that. These factors remain consistent even though the capacities of women to attain education and careers have significantly increased over the past 30 years.

The reasons for this type of economic disparity are many. Women continue to shoulder most of the homemaking and child-rearing duties, which are most often not compensated and cut into their capacity to earn money. When they do work for compensation, their occupations often require inflexible or longer hours than those demanded of men. Not least impactful is the fact that many trades remain gender-segregated and have much higher populations of male workers than they do women workers. Consequently, women of all colors experience higher levels of poverty than men.

Discrimination Due to Ageism

Despite their decades of experience and skill building, workers aged 45 and over continue to experience a consistent pattern of bias, at least in the seven countries recently surveyed by McKinsey. Their study revealed that of all the unemployed laborers in those OECD countries (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), 40 to 70% were older than 45 years. Of those, 63% had been unable to find work in over a year, versus 36% of people under 45. The loss of this workforce cohort group is significant; it is the most educated labor population in history and enjoys the best healthcare outcomes ever recorded. The productivity and expertise resources that remain untouched in this group are immense and could, if harnessed, unleash an unrivaled economic boom capable of lifting thousands (if not millions) of people out of poverty.

Discrimination Against the Dis- and Differently-Abled

In many cases, people with disabilities or who are differently abled are barred from or face challenges to gainful employment because the world still does not see them as valuable employment assets. A 2017 study by the Office of Disability Employment Policy found that only one in five people with disabilities (20.1%) were employed, compared to almost 70% (68.6%) of non-disabled people of the same age. These populations also face challenges attaining higher education, financial stability, and optimal health because of their differing intellectual, physical, or developmental capabilities. In some cases, the inability to work is because the occupational opportunity is simply not physically set up to accommodate the needs of a differently abled person. In other cases, employers, businesses, and industry sectors have not designed their facilities to accommodate a differently abled workforce. Despite the passage of the 1990 adoption of the Americans with Disabilities Act, people in this population are twice as likely to be impoverished as those workers with conventional capacities. Further, this group is also subject to significant additional costs to manage their condition, known colloquially as the “crip tax,” which compounds the difficulties of their plight.

Each of these individual groups harbors immense talents, skills, and abilities that could add millions or trillions of dollars to local, regional, and national economies. These potential assets are ignored, however, not for any valid reason, but because society has arbitrarily deemed them to be less than optimal as workers.

 

While certainly not alone, America holds a unique position in the world because, in many cases, its racial and other biases are so widely publicized. In fact, a recent exposition by the World Economic Forum cites the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmad Arbery as examples of global systemic racism. A 2019 study found that a staggeringly high percentage of Americans still don’t recognize the size, scope, or importance of the yawning gap of economic inequality that exists in their country. The economic casualties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic open up the opportunity for the United States to begin shrinking this gap to harness these invaluable human resources for the benefit of their communities and the nation.

 

 

 

 

 

Exploring ‘Essential’ Inequities

Pam Sornson, JD on January 17, 2023

Pam Sornson, JD

January 17, 2023

So here’s the conundrum: ‘essential‘ means ‘absolutely necessary’ and ‘indispensable,’ as in ‘an essential element must be in place, or disaster may/will follow.’ At the same time, what type of element is deemed ‘essential’ often depends on who makes that determination. As the global industrial complex restructures in the wake of COVID’s massive economic overhaul, more entities – businesses, industries, and governments – are applying the lessons learned throughout that era. They are now re-imagining how they identify, estimate, and then compensate those workers whose efforts genuinely keep the world moving forward – those who have been deemed ‘essential.’

 

What Work is Actually ‘Essential’?

Just a precursory view of how individual states define ‘essential’ within their borders reveals how people across the country differ in their opinion about that status. Granted, at the beginning of the pandemic, no one was certain about anything, especially not about how to respond to or mitigate the viral threat. Every government agency at every level was struggling to determine what needed to be done and who would be doing it. Adding to the national quandry was the fact that each state is unique – they all have their individual economies, populations, and regional characteristics, so no single state-based response to COVID was going to work for all states. It’s interesting, then, to look back and see the decisions made in the separate states about what services or products were ‘essential’ to them:

In late March 2020, of the 17 states that had then issued stay-at-home orders, only one elected to close its liquor stores because they were deemed non-essential. Pennsylvania closed its alcohol supply centers at the end of business on March 17th after those businesses racked up almost $30 million in sales the day before.

At the same time, ironically, Pennsylvania also determined that its medical marijuana dispensaries were “life-sustaining” and, therefore, essential. Most states that had legalized the drug also kept their suppliers open.

In Arizona, the Governor declared that the sport of golf was ‘essential’ to the state so all of its courses could remain open. Notably, Arizona’s golf industry accounted for just $2.2B in state revenues in 2019, just a small percentage of that state’s annual ~$320B GDP. The Governor, himself a golfer, stated that retaining recreational activities with appropriate safety guidelines (social distancing, in this case) facilitated the mandate.

Even gun stores were deemed ‘essential’ in some places but not in others. In California, while the state’s list of essential services did not specifically include gun shops, regional law enforcement agencies were making their own decisions about what would happen in their county. In San Diego County, they were open, while, just 120 miles away in Los Angeles, they were not.

The seemingly arbitrary determination of “essential” poses significant challenges at both the state and federal levels, as both government systems struggled to appropriately allocate funding to address COVID’s challenges.

 

Inequitable Pay + Inequitable Risk

The chaos created around the country by the ‘what is essential?’ question revealed a larger, more insidious reality. In many cases, those jobs that were ultimately deemed ‘essential’ were also often considered ‘menial’ and, therefore, were at the bottom of the pay rate scale. Workers in these lower economic tiers, therefore, were expected to continue working through the health crisis even though doing so exposed them to a potentially lethal virus. When those workers are also non-white, the risks posed to them by the virus multiply:

Based on 2018 data reflecting 152 million workers, while 31% of Hispanic workers and 33% of black workers were performing essential services, only 26% of white workers had the same occupation.

Black workers were particularly vulnerable to developing severe illnesses caused by COVID-19. Long-standing inequities in healthcare access by this population have resulted in the rise of several comorbidities that can complicate or conflate the severity of a COVID infection.

Workers on these lower economic tiers were also less likely to have a safety net of sick days or paid time off, so not working because of illness wasn’t often an option.

One in seven of them lacked healthcare insurance.

One in three was living in a household that earned less than $40,000 per year.

According to Chicago’s School of Public Health, numerous reports released at the beginning of the pandemic indicated that essential workers:

were more likely to be [non-white],

had lower levels of education,

were paid less than white workers, and

often lacked health insurance.

So how is it that the country that puts such a high value on the labor produced also puts such a low value on the person who’s performing it?

 

Should ‘Essential’ Also Mean ‘Highly Valued’?

The substantial wage and occupational inequities exposed by the pandemic reveal a long history of devaluing America’s non-white workforce. According to some economists, poor working conditions and circumstances for women and people of color are the consequence of labor laws written and passed to establish that reality. According to them, society has chosen this inequitable environment because it facilitates the enrichment of certain social classes at the economic expense of others.

 

The good news is that society can also change its priorities to reverse and repair these ‘essential inequities.’ Government review of fundamental economic principles – such as how to value labor – can develop policies to increase minimum wage levels and provide all workers – especially essential ones – with more protections against occupational threats such as those posed by COVID-19. Expanding tax options such as the Earned Income Tax Credit can help workers keep more of their earnings in their own pockets.

In short, the COVID-19 pandemic is giving society the opportunity to re-determine how it demonstrates its value for its labor force.

 

 

The Impact and Import of ‘Essential’ Workers

Pam Sornson, JD on January 17, 2023

Pam Sornson, JD

January 17, 2023

Millions of ‘essential’ workers are now seen as the unsung heroes of the COVID-19 pandemic, having risked their lives to ensure that social, safety, and economic systems remained functional throughout that global ordeal. However, despite the incalculable value they delivered, in many cases, the average compensation rate to these workers is at the lowest end of the pay rate scale.

That reality begs a question: if these roles are truly essential to the survival of the community, then why isn’t that value reflected in how much workers get paid for their labor? The clarification of which services are deemed ‘essential’ to the country’s security revealed the significance of today’s wage disparities and how America (the world?) assigns value to the effort of its workforce.

 

Essential Effort is Not Equitably Rewarded

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced America (and the world) to the concept of ‘essential workers,’ those people whose jobs and efforts are deemed “critical to ensuring the continuity of critical functions in the United States (U.S.).” Their significance to national safety and security was made evident when state and local governments issued blanket ‘stay at home’ orders to mitigate the spread of the disease. While most people followed that mandate, civic leaders quickly realized that not everyone could stop working. Some occupations were determined to be integral to societal functions, and those functions could not stop regardless of the severity of the COVID-19 threat. Accordingly, governments made an exception to the ‘stay at home’ rule and allowed these workers to return to their workplaces and jobs.

What surprised many people, however, was the scope and depth of the job classifications that were deemed ‘essential.’ Across virtually every industry, almost half (47%) of all employees performing essential services were earning less than $15 per hour. In many cases, these jobs didn’t require significant education or skill; instead, workers provided physical labor to perform routine tasks. Cashiers, janitors, and stock clerks, three very familiar ‘essential employee’ examples, averaged just $12 per hour, yet their effort facilitated fundamental economic, sanitation, and supply chain services that supported the entire state.

 

 

16 Sectors – Three Priorities

In total, the government identified 16 ‘Critical Infrastructure’ sectors, each of which supplied vital social and community services. Workers were asked to continue to work in these roles throughout the pandemic so there would be no interruption in the nation’s foundational infrastructure operations. And because of the crucial nature of their occupation, government leaders organized their activities into three categories to prioritize the allocation of the first COVID vaccines as those became available.

1a – Healthcare Workers

The Healthcare and Public Health Sector was first on the list of essential services because its activities protect the country from many potentially disastrous hazards, including natural disasters, terrorism attacks, and infectious disease outbreaks. Not surprisingly, this massive workforce was prioritized at the front of the ‘essential service’ line. That line included anyone who labored in any type of health management facility, including paid and unpaid workers and those whose activities were not directly in contact with potentially infected persons.

A notable feature of this sector, however, and one that is relevant to ‘how we value labor’ is the fact that the vast majority of facilities delivering healthcare services of any kind are privately owned. In all corners of the country, access to healthcare services is available only because private organizations have created those resources.

Consequently, the value of the labor provided at those facilities was not established based on its “essential” nature but instead on conventional labor market supply and demand principles.

1b – Non-Healthcare, Frontline Responder Workers

Employees who were deemed second in priority as “essential workers” were those providing emergency services. This population is the frontline workforce of Fire and Rescue Services, Emergency Management, public works, and law enforcement personnel who are first called and first to on the scene of potential disasters. During COVID, these people were exposed to the virus during the course of their work performance, and they were often compelled to work in close proximity to infected persons. Again, like healthcare personnel, they were mostly employed by privately owned companies which were the entities that established their economic value.

1c – Infrastructure Sector Employees

This category of workers encompasses those occupations that provide fundamental support efforts to maintain the local community. Until this pandemic, society hadn’t acknowledged the immense value to the economy that these workers offered; they certainly weren’t classified as ‘essential.’ However, as the “stay at home” order was extended over time, the absence of these workers and the labor they performed was keenly felt by virtually everyone, everywhere. Industries and businesses that maintain this foundational infrastructure workforce include those in water and waste management, food services, transportation and logistics, housing and shelter, information technology and communications, finance, energy, law, media, and non-health-related public safety. And again, most of the employers of these workers are in the private sector and use those metrics to establish and compensate for the relative value of their workforce.

 

The essential services produced by the other sectors are also significant and also, often, not recognized for the foundational benefits they provide:

The chemical sector, which produces, uses, stores, and transports potentially toxic chemicals and materials.

The commercial facilities sector, which provides gathering spaces for large numbers of people and operates on the principle of open public access.

The critical manufacturing sector, which encompasses the development and implementation of metals and machine production.

The dams sector, which administers and controls the country’s water supply.

The defense industrial base sector, which spans the globe and enables the development and delivery of military weapons systems.

The energy sector, which includes oil, gas, renewable, and other energy sources. More than 80% of this essential service is privately owned.

The government facilities sector, which includes all facilities owned or leased by the nation’s government systems.

The nuclear energy sector, which includes almost all of the country’s civilian nuclear infrastructure.

 

These next few years will be pivotal for the country as it transitions from the pre-COVID/COVID era into a decidedly different post-COVID economy and community. One key lesson learned throughout the pandemic was that the economic allocation of value on a person’s work effort does not always adequately describe the societal value that action provides. Looking forward, it may be more advantageous to employees, businesses, and the community as a whole to value the labor performed by its workforce as much by the social significance it represents as well as by the time and training needed to accomplish the task.

Social Value: Labor Valued by Benefits Conferred

Pam Sornson, JD on January 2, 2023

Pam Sornson, JD

January 3, 2023

Another aspect of defining the ‘value of labor’ is to explore the benefits that ‘work effort’ convey to society. In addition to generating revenues for companies and workers, the labor involved in building businesses, industries, etc., brings fundamental taxation revenues and resources for the community as a whole. From that perspective, the value of labor might be measured by the quality of a community’s fundamental infrastructure systems.

 

Comparable Labor Metrics: All or Just Paid?

Commercial and industrial economic resources, however, flow from paid labor. How does society measure labor that isn’t compensated? How does it evaluate the value of goods and services contributed simply because offering them is deemed a moral imperative?

Innumerable global, regional, and local nonprofit agencies provide invaluable services and products to their communities with no (or few) expectations of financial compensation from beneficiaries. Feeding and sheltering the unhoused, maintaining public land for public use, and furnishing counseling and support for disenfranchised citizens are just a few examples of ‘labor’ performed for the public good and not for compensation or another recompense. Other community members cover the costs they incur as an added element to the service. Appraising the benefits conveyed through the outputs of volunteer effort, then, often requires measuring their impact on both their target populations and the communities in which they live. So how does a society describe the ‘worth’ of these services when their delivery conveys uncompensated benefits in pursuit of higher social values?

 

Social Contribution as its Own Value

One community in the United Kingdom is exploring this concept through its ‘Social Value’ policies and practices. The city of Salford, 200 miles northwest of London, England, aims to maximize the power of its private and public financial investments by tying them securely to its Social Value principles. In its definition, there are two avenues of social values that can enhance the lives of the entire Sanford community, should all its residents decide to embrace them:

Its core social value encourages building socially and economically viable growth and development opportunities into each contract and agreement, both public and private. For example, construction businesses could sponsor and host apprenticeships through their contractors and subcontractors. These learning opportunities provide invaluable education for local students, learners, and adults and build a labor force infrastructure for the future.

Salford then expanded its roster of social values by encouraging the pursuit of best practices in all aspects of its economy, including environmental management, ethical purchasing, local employment, and other business activities that demonstrate respect for the community.

Launched in 2013, Salford directed its social value policies to engage its citizenry in building and sustaining non-financial, community-wide benefits that would augment positive outcomes, including happiness, well-being, inclusion, empowerment, and environmental care.

 

 

Articulating ‘Social Values’

Within that scope, Salford’s Civics planning commissions and public and private enterprises were then encouraged to consider a broader scope of values when investing their resources into individual Salford projects. The town developed a list of social value criteria that companies could use to assess their own social value parameters and then implement into existing or new projects. Civic leaders determined the town itself should be the role model and adopted the criteria as the foundation of its planning and practices strategies. These criteria explore both the challenges that the little city was facing as well as activities and initiatives to address those concerns.

 

As a ‘Growing’ City:

Salford would prioritize projects that pursued these goals and practices throughout its employment, hiring, and contracting processes: reducing worklessness, increasing workforce resilience by reducing sickness absences and keeping people employed, paying a living wage to its employees, promoting the use of local labor, improving education and skills, strengthening the local economy by buying Salford-based goods and services, developing strategies to attract new businesses and help them thrive, and facilitating good connections between the city and its local commercial community.

As an ‘Innovative’ City:

Salford will develop a better integration network across its existing and emerging systems, ensure that social services are available for all residents while addressing social concerns to reduce the need for social services, and reduce crime and disorder through advanced policy and practices. Salford will also enhance its environmental goals by using sustainable products, ensuring ethical purchasing of Fairtrade goods, improving public spaces, parks, and community areas, and reducing energy use.

As a ‘Cooperative’ City:

Salford will increase opportunities for volunteerism, improve the connections between volunteer sectors, social enterprises, and their mutual stakeholders, include the voices and presence of service consumers as contributors to the policies of their community, actively promote community cohesion and equality, encourage community resilience by facilitating ways for people to help each other, and increase the number of and celebrate Salford’s social values role models.

As a ‘Caring’ City:

Salford pledged to provide resources to improve family life, improve living standards for all while reducing local poverty levels, provide financial direction to reduce or eliminate economic inequality, provide health care direction to reduce inequalities and close the health gap within the town and between the city and the rest of the country, enhance public sector resources to ensure those who need social services can attain them, promote social mobility by informing residents of ways they can access educational, employment, living, and social opportunities, and increase the sense of community by actively pursuing a higher level of trust between leadership and the constituency and minding the mental well-being of its residents.

 

As a strategy, Salford’s Social Value charter provides direction and suggestions for businesses to engage in practices that give as much benefit to the community as they do to the company. By doing so, the work produced by each company and its labor force create value at all levels of the social strata for individuals, families, companies, neighborhoods, communities, and the town itself.

How do We Value Labor?

Pam Sornson, JD on January 2, 2023

The economic and workforce development sector constantly evolves as technology, social concerns, and an aging population disrupt a century of labor and economic traditions. While some occupations have remained steadily in demand, others have become obsolete, and still others have been newly generated. The state of constant flux in workforce modernization is now forcing changes in how society identifies the value of the labor necessary to keep it running. However, establishing new definitions for that (or those) value(s) is a challenge because there are so many variables involved in the activities described as ‘labor’ and an equal or greater number of outcomes that those activities produce.

 

Aspects of ‘Labor’

Defining the value of labor is an economic practice to establish how and why goods are exchanged for currency or other products. Some form of work or effort is needed to produce any product or service, and the laborers who make that effort expect some form of compensation from the consumers who receive it. The question is how to set a ‘reasonable’ compensation value for that effort.

Several notable theories attempt to explain appropriate methodologies for defining the value of labor, many of which center on the production of products or the value of the end product:

‘Labor Theory’ of Value

An early theory focused on the measurement of hours needed to produce a single instance of a commodity. This theory suggests that an item’s value should be determined by how many hours a worker invested in creating that product. This value is described as the “natural price” of the commodity but does not take into account the materials that were also invested in the production process. Subsequently, this labor theory was extended to include the value of those included materials, which was also valued based on their production cost. Those expenditures were added to the end product’s development cost. Economists set the value of the labor expense using a price/hour ratio and measured the value of the materials by the expense incurred creating or extracting them from their source.

Labor Supply and Demand Theory

The simple labor theory becomes skewed when third parties control the labor force, materials supply, and production facilities and can set arbitrary prices for those assets and the products they collectively generate. When any individual production asset – materials, workforce, or facility – is in short supply and limits the availability of the end product, the price of those products can go up. Businesses struggling to maintain their revenue streams due to a lack of staffing, for example, often increase the wage per hour value to attract that workforce asset, which may then also cause their product prices to rise. Further, emerging skill sets, such as technical expertise or complex problem solving, are also considered ‘valued’ elements of the product. They can add considerable proprietary values to the commodity and command a higher value per hour as more companies compete for that resource. The value of labor, in this case, is based on the type of labor offered and its volume as an available resource in the community.

‘Product Value’ Theory

Another way to define the value of labor is to attach it to the value of the product it produces, and in many cases, the value of that product is also relative based on its contribution to its consumer. Products designed and built to fulfill specific corporate or personal needs can fetch high prices in the marketplace when they successfully achieve those goals. Value-based product development practices focus on clarifying those specific consumer goals and then creating items that directly respond to those mandates. This process includes the selection of labor skills and abilities needed to create and produce the desired outcome, from its ideation to its ultimate creation. Producers whose products or services require precise skill sets will place a high value on that well-trained labor force and compensate those workers accordingly. Conversely, the labor needed for mundane or routine tasks is both more available and less taxing, so compensation for those activities is often much lower.

Other factors considered and establishing product value through a value-based development process include:

The size of the market for that product. Products that promise high popularity across populations will be valued more at that community level than those items designed for smaller, more distinct groups of consumers.

Demand for the product. Items that respond to the needs of many purchasers will be more popular than those developed again for more precise groups of consumers.

The value of the inputs to create that output. Companies with existing facilities and workforces can produce new products more quickly and at less cost than organizations that must first build out that infrastructure.

This economic theory sets the value of ‘labor’ based on end product value.

‘Service Value’ Theory

Valuing the labor involved in service performance is challenging, too. Services are transitory; they are the short-lived experiences of human engagement for specific purposes. Setting their price based on the time elapsed during their delivery doesn’t adequately capture the value they provide.

And services provide significant value to the community. In the third quarter of 2022, the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) value of services industries totaled over $14 trillion, up from just $9.7 trillion in 2005. Those industries span the full extent of the economy, including numerous health care services, food services and drinking places, data management and IT services, and legal services, to name just a few. In 2020, the “miscellaneous services industries” (professional, technical, and scientific services industries) added close to one trillion dollars to the American economy ($975 billion).

 

 

Each of these theories attempts to capture the economic benefits conferred by labor production on the community to the worker, the employer, and the consumer. In the following article, the Pulse will discuss the social value of labor and how “work” enhances the overall value of society.

 

SCAG’s Inclusive Economic Recovery Strategy

Pam Sornson, JD on December 17, 2022

Pam Sornson, JD

December 20, 2022

You can’t know which direction you’re going if you don’t know where you are. That was the context underlying the development of the Racial Equity Early Action Plan (REEAP) by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). In pursuit of the Plan, the agency developed its Inclusive Economic Recovery Strategy (IERS), which established a blueprint of recommendations to guide the acquisition of resources needed to alleviate the injustices that are so pervasive in its six SoCal counties.

 

REEAP Examined

In mid-July 2020, SCAG’s Regional Council affirmed its commitment to advancing DEI and justice initiatives throughout the six counties within its jurisdiction. At the time, the COVID-19 pandemic was exposing serious inequities embedded within numerous social systems. SCAG appointed a special Equity & Social Justice Committee to assess that current status and hypothesize how best to address those challenges. Populated by nonprofit and private sector representatives, elected officials, and university partners, the group represented the leadership and constituent interests of the SCAG’s six counties.

The tasks assigned to the Committee included reviewing and offering feedback on four fundamental agency elements. Their findings and conclusions would then help SCAG shape its understanding of the realities of the current situation and develop appropriate responses to those adverse and unfair situations:

Clarify an agency-wide definition of “equity” to ensure that all participants were working toward achieving the same community goal.

Assess existing DEI-related activities in the agencies and departments that populate the SCAG.

Create a preliminary framework for the action plan, including an overarching statement of its goals, activities to be undertaken in pursuit of those goals, and identifying the resources needed to achieve success.

Create an inclusive economic recovery strategy that encompasses both the DEI remediation initiatives and a plausible path to recovery after the economic chaos caused by the coronavirus.

In May 2021, the Committee issued its report, summarizing its factual findings on these issues and offering a preliminary schematic as a structure for the racial equity initiative. Of particular interest is the equity inventory undertaken by the Committee, which established a preliminary baseline assessment of inequities found within the geographical region. That assessment provided data on 26 “equity indicators” grouped into the goal sets of the “Connect SoCal” plan:

economy,

healthy and complete communities,

mobility, and

environment.

These indicators illuminate opportunities within the agencies to consult with their constituents and create partnerships designed to alleviate the racial disparities in their local communities.

The Framework suggested by the Committee advances four overarching goals, all of which are encompassed within three operational strategies:

Listen & Learn. To understand the shared history of discrimination, all stakeholders must be willing to hear and accept those uncomfortable realities.

Engage & Co-power. Every voice has value at this table. The Committee urged creating across the SCAG an environment that includes and respects the opinions and experiences of all its constituencies.

Integrate & Institutionalize. Change must happen at the system level, so all levels of agency effort must centralize racial equity as their primary focus. This strategy incorporates both internal and external systems.

Utilizing these strategies, each agency was encouraged to work toward achieving the Framework’s four goals:

Shift department and agency cultures to escalate awareness and embrace diversity, inclusion, and equity principles.

Put racial equity at the heart of regional policy and planning mandates. Policies and procedures designed to eradicate discrimination and empower success for all populations should be embedded into the fundamental practices of each regional governmental system and its public and private partners.

Regional leadership can promote equity initiatives to local governments and encourage their partnership in developing fair and just social systems on all levels of government.

Share the equity and justice intentions with the broader community while activating the practices and procedures designed to achieve those goals.

 

IERS Launched

The inclusive economic recovery strategy also included an assessment of resources that identified the current economic development and funding efforts designed to achieve equitable outcomes for all community members. The Committee organized these resources into four broad categories:

economic development initiatives,

state funding references,

federal funding references, and

a literature review of relevant sources of information and insight.

Further, each resource category was also parsed into four distinct subcategories, each of which focused on the resources available for expenditure toward a particular equity concern:

housing production and preservation,

transportation and infrastructure,

sector-based (industries and businesses), and

human capital (labor and workforce).

The IERP’s resources include both a brief summary of their content and a listing of the conclusions they offer. Entities, both private and public, can access these resources to discover new pathways to equitable success, best practices to engage in those processes, and possible optimal outcomes that can clarify local, county, and regional goals. For example, the literature review of “human capital” resources includes an analysis of projects written or presented by the American Jobs Project, the American “Build Back Better” plan, the Brookings Institute, and many more think tanks and economic and workforce development experts.

The resources provide invaluable information that encompasses, in broad strokes and with finite detail, the issues and challenges arising from each concern and offer conclusions and suggestions on possible ways to address them.

 

The REEAP and the IERP demonstrate the SCAG’s dedication to remediating unfair discrimination from the public and private systems supporting its six-county jurisdiction. Each initiative addresses unique and complex challenges by identifying those realities and offering suggestions and practices that can be applied to reduce them. The work of this agency is helping all of its individual counties and their local governments to uncover and eliminate the scourge of racial inequity so that all their residents can achieve personal success.

The Southern California Association of Governments – SCAG

Pam Sornson, JD on December 17, 2022

Pam Sornson, JD

December 20, 2022

Managing California’s vast network of public resources is the job of its 539 general-purpose governments. Within those governments, there are over 4400 local government units and almost 4000 special districts. Together, these politically determined entities manage billions of dollars worth of the State’s publicly owned assets. It makes sense, then, that by working together, they can reduce publicly funded expenses while enhancing publicly mandated benefits. This is the work of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).

 

The Powers of the SCAG

The SCAG’s authority derives from both state and federal law. In California, the agency is a Joint Powers Authority (JPA), a Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTP), and a Council of Governments (CoG). In federal jurisdiction, it is a designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO).

The premise of the JPA is to offer more efficient and effective government services to the general population while pooling insurance coverage and working together to reduce the public’s exposure to unnecessary risk. Sometimes, a new JPA is appointed to resolve a particular service delivery challenge.

An RTPO supports the efforts of local and regional governments in their non-metropolitan transportation planning and development activities.

The MPO oversees the planning and development of metropolitan transportation systems. As a single entity, the MPO represents localities in all urban areas with populations over 50,000.

The combined authority of these three agencies spans virtually all elements of society, including industries, education, transportation, and more. The SCAG region includes six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Imperial.

 

SCAG’s Work

As per its mandate, SCAG’s primary focus is regional transportation planning. Accordingly, its premier effort, “the 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy,” encompasses its long-range vision to facilitate future mobility and housing needs as well as to pursue economic and environmental goals. Its purpose is to gather information and insights from regional stakeholders to ensure that emerging transportation systems appropriately support the communities that they will serve.

Within the broad scope of the strategy is the “Connect SoCal 2024” (CS24) initiative. Currently in its development stage, CS24 is now collecting transport and economic data from local and county governments, transportation commissions, nonprofit organizations, and tribal governments within its six-county jurisdiction. The resulting analyses and conclusions drawn from that information will inform the next phase of the strategy. Built into the process are the regulations and standards set by other government mandates, including land use planning, greenhouse gas emission goals, Clean Air Act requirements, open space preservation, and public health and safety, to name just a few.

Additionally, CS24 will build on the economic and growth projections developed for its “Ready for 2024” project. That project has coalesced current information about employment, housing, populations, and education requirements at the regional, county, city, and town levels. Combined with trending and demographics data, the ‘Ready for 2024’ report will give decision-makers the information they will need to plan services for those projections far into the future.

SCAG maintains a series of ‘Atlas Jurisdictional’ reports that provide details and data relevant to each of the individual county members as well as to the regional group as a whole. It also manages a volume of resources and fact sheets that government entities can use to collect information from their residents to develop smaller, comparable, compatible development strategies for their communities. SCAG is also invested in ensuring that all Southern California residents are included and represented in its existing and emerging systems. Other programs and projects it runs are focused on housing, sustainability, transportation, the economy, and maintaining state and federal compliance.

 

SCAG in LA County

As the largest county in the country, Los Angeles County will receive significant benefits from these SCAG efforts as they roll out through 2045. The data suggests that:

The number of households in LA county will grow from 3.3 million in 2016 to over 4.1 million in 2045.

The population – the actual resident headcount – will grow as well, from its current 10.1 million residents to more than 11.6 million by 2045.

Population demographics are changing as well. The percentage of young people (under 15 years) will drop from 20% in 2016 to just 17.5% in 2045. The middle-aged population volume will drop, too, from 67% to 61.5%. However, the percentage of seniors living in the county will rise from 13.2% to 21%. This data point suggests that support and services directed to the senior citizen population will have to grow significantly to match that growing demand.

The type and number of benefits to LA county derived from the SCAG strategy will also be significant. The strategy aims at managing publicly owned resources to provide optimal service and support to the population.

The plan intends to reduce the volume of publicly held green spaces that are converted into industrial or residentially zoned areas. The goal is to reduce the consumption of green spaces per year by almost one-half (41%), so that future residents will be able to enjoy California’s undeveloped and natural environmental beauty.

Individual households will see monthly and annual cost reductions for their publicly provided resources, including water, transportation, and energy.

The plan also focuses on reducing the human and economic costs of transportation gridlocks. LA County is crisscrossed by several major highway systems, all of which experience significant delays due to overcrowding. The goal is to utilize better traffic patterns and controls to reduce the duration of each delay and also reduce the cost that those incur. Notable traffic improvement projects already on the books include a subway extension from Metro West Side to Century City to Westwood, a light rail extension from Azusa to the San Bernardino County line, and the addition of express lanes on Interstate 10 from Interstate 605 to the San Bernardino County line.

Not least significant is the projected growth in employment numbers. SCAG’s strategy for LA County anticipates that it will gain close to 200,000 new jobs each year between 2016 and 2045.

 

SCAG’s Executive Director, Kome Ajise, spoke with Pasadena City College Vice President of Economic and Workforce Development Salvatrice Cummo about the agency’s activities. The collaboration among these governments mirrors and enhances the cooperation emerging in the region’s EWD sectors. Together, this constellation of talent, intelligence, and initiative will drive the development of Southern California’s economic future.

 

Stephen Cheung’s Data Drives the County’s Economy Forward

Pam Sornson, JD on December 2, 2022

Understanding global financial and industry developments and how those impact the LA County region will help its industrial complex define and structure its short and long-term public and private investments. As the closing keynote speaker at the November 8th Future of Work Conference (FOW), hosted by Pasadena City College’s (PCC) Economic and Workforce Development division (EWD), Stephen Cheung offered his expert analysis of the possibilities suggested for LA County’s future economic opportunities. Mr. Cheung is the President of the LA Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) and the World Trade Center LA (WTCLA). In his opinion and based on extensive research and analysis, LA County can achieve exponential economic gains if it builds on its vision of where the global economy is going, not where it is right now.

Down a Little. Never Out.

LA County and all its residents suffered significant losses during the COVID-19 pandemic, just like the rest of the world. However, this region is well-known for its resilience and stamina, and its recovery efforts reflect its globally recognized dedication to overcoming adversity. Mr. Cheung’s evaluation underscores how this positive attitude will assist the County in achieving even greater economic excellence in the future than it did in the past.

Like everyone else in the workforce and economic development sector, considerations of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic color virtually all aspects of current and potential activities. Accordingly, Mr. Cheung analyzed data collected before and during the health crisis and up to the present to determine where the County’s economic realities lie in comparison to where it was two years ago:

In just two months, April and May 2020, the region lost more than 3/4 of a million jobs (784,800), which closed down thousands of businesses and created an immense demand for unemployment benefits.

Also, in May 2020, LA county experienced an unemployment rate of 19.2%. One in five workers was out of a job.

Those two data points reflect the worst economic moment in Los Angeles County since January 2000. The COVID-19 pandemic caused more employment havoc than either the bursting of the Dotcom Bubble of the early 2000s or the Great Recession of 2007 to 2009.

 

Always Optimistic

Cheung’s good news for 2022, however, is very heartening:

By September 2022, the County had recovered 91% of all the nonfarm jobs lost in 2020.

Also, as of September 2022, the County’s unemployment had fallen to a low of 4.5%.

This data confirms that LA County is definitely back in business, and its economy is slowly recovering from that dramatic and distressing downturn.

But it’s not returning to its “old normal,” Cheung says. Instead, while the pandemic eliminated hundreds of occupations completely, it also generated hundreds of new vocations that require workers to have different skill sets from before, as well as a more technology-savvy knowledge base. Consequently, former employees who are still out of work – and those who want to improve their ‘upward mobility’ – will most likely have to obtain new training and occupational skills to qualify for the work options that are emerging in the post-COVID economy.

Additionally, several industries that have already expanded beyond their pre-pandemic perimeters are now looking for a new labor force to fill these employment opportunities. The healthcare, business and professional services, transportation, construction, motion picture and sound recording, and information sectors are all building on COVID-driven insights and will need more workers as they grow into their “new” normal. As a result, the overall job posting volume is up, too, surpassing 110,000 in July 2022.

 

On a Firm Foundation

As assuring as the current labor data appears to be that LA County will enjoy a secure economic future, it is Cheung’s prognostications that the region’s emerging economic opportunities actually hold the most promise for a genuinely well-entrenched economic comeback. The County remains a commercial industry powerhouse across many significant industrial bases, including aerospace and defense, digital media and entertainment, trade and logistics, and manufacturing. All of those sectors will also be gaining ground moving forward as they adapt to emerging economic opportunities.

In addition:

LA County is the continent’s most significant transport and logistics hub. Despite the pandemic, the LA and Long Beach Ports handled over 10 million ‘TEUs’ (twenty-foot equivalent units) during FY 2021-2022, more than 3.5 million more than the previous FY. The port of Long Beach alone managed over 3,000,000 TEUs between January and August of 2022.

LAX, one of the world’s busiest airports, handled almost 19 million passengers between January and September 2022, which is a 107% year-over-year increase in passenger volume. In 2021, the aviation hub handled over 48,000,000 passengers.

LA County is also a startup epicenter, generating hundreds of new companies each year. Currently, 120 Venture Capitalist firms manage more than $9.1 billion in venture capital investments, and the County is home to 31 business accelerators, 49 incubators, and over 8,000 startup enterprises. Trader Joe’s, Hulu, Ring, and Fandango are just four of the thousands of internationally recognized brands that originated in an LA County storefront.

Home to global film, television, and multimedia industries, LA County also hosts millions of dollars worth of sporting events and entertainment at dozens of venues across its 88 cities. In addition to professional football, baseball, and hockey teams, the County will also be welcoming National Golf tournaments, horse racing, soccer, and Olympic sporting events in the coming years.

LA County’s still solid financial footing isn’t only American-based, either. Foreign-owned enterprises own thousands of businesses, employ almost two hundred thousand workers, and pay more than $17 million in annual salaries to their workers.

 

Cheung’s fact-based messaging underscored his message that LA County is and will remain a globally recognized economic powerhouse for years to come. California’s robust 2021 GDP of $815B (4th largest in the world) demonstrates its capacity to overcome even pandemic-driven catastrophes, while its cultural diversity (240+ languages) invites a constant stream of new ideas and dreamers. Moreover, as the State’s and nation’s largest county, LA County will remain at the economic center of the western hemisphere’s industrial universe. “All those businesses and industries will need well-trained workers,” says Cheung. “The community colleges should be the first place they go to find those resources.”

Dr. Su Jin Jez Connects Education to Employment

Pam Sornson, JD on December 2, 2022

Pam Sornson, JD

December 6, 2022

To quote Dr. Su Jin Jez, Los Angeles County should consider its economic future the same way Wayne Gretzky thought through his next move on the ice: “You follow where the puck is going,” he said, ”not where it is right now.” Where LA County is going economically is the big question facing its industrial, enterprise, and governmental organizations. That’s just one of the concerns addressed at the November 8th Future of Work Conference (FOW) hosted by Pasadena City College’s (PCC) Economic and Workforce Development division (EWD). Dr. Jez gave the opening keynote presentation and shared with attendees how her organization, California Competes, looks at the educational barriers facing so many of the State’s higher ed students.

Building stronger partnerships between educators and employers is the ultimate goal of California Competes. The organization’s fundamental premise is that a well-educated population builds a more robust economy, so all stakeholders in economic success initiatives are also stakeholders in successful higher education systems. Dr. Jez led made a compelling argument about how higher education and employment are the foundational pillars of today’s and tomorrow’s economy.

 

California Led the Nation in its Valuation of Advanced Education …

Research offered by Dr. Jez revealed that Californians place a high value on advanced and supplemental education. A 2016-2019 survey indicated that 57% of Californians at that time recognized that additional education contributed significant benefits to an improved economic status. That percentage compares to other states in the country, such as Wyoming and the Dakotas, where only 33% of those surveyed asserted such a high regard for advanced education opportunities. Additionally, the survey indicated that those populations that would most benefit from additional education resources were Californians of color and those without a high school diploma.

The motivations to pursue more education varies, but when asked:

more than half of survey respondents (57%) said they would pursue additional education if it came with a guaranteed employment outcome;

an almost equal percentage (56%) said they would attend if tuition were free, and

another significant percentage (54%) revealed they would attend if the college opportunity fit well with their schedule and other life obligations.

Equally interesting was the number of Californians that believed vocational programs, as compared to graduate degrees, were very much worth their cost. When comparing the five outcome options offered by advanced education beyond high school, attaining a graduate degree was deemed well worth the price by 59% of respondents, while 62% of respondents said the same about a vocational certification program.

Graduate degrees received the highest rank for ‘career value’ (66% listed these as offering the best long-term educational outcomes), which defines the correlation between added academic credentials and a higher standard of living over the course of one’s life. Vocational achievements were second, surprisingly, with 54% agreeing that they offered significant long-term benefits; bachelor’s degrees were third (7% behind vocational credentials, at 47%), and associate degrees were fourth on this list (at 42%).

This aggregated data indicates that Californians understand that they don’t need to achieve a four-year or more university degree to achieve a well-paying and satisfying life-long career.

 

… Until it Didn’t

Despite the value and benefits of pursuing additional education beyond high school, today’s statistics reveal a decided decline in enrollments in colleges across the state, especially at community colleges. The downturn continued even after COVID vaccines reduced the threat of the virus and allowed campuses to open again. In the fall of 2021, more students left their college campus than had done so in the fall of 2020. Since the beginning of the COVID pandemic, Community College registration numbers have fallen, down 7% from 2020 and 20% overall when compared to enrollment numbers of the fall term for 2019. A March 2022 memo from the CCCCO revealed that the cumulative loss of students over the course of the coronavirus concern includes more than 300,000 learners. This disturbing data suggests additional research is necessary to determine what will bring students back to school, especially since they know or could know of the benefits they would gain if they elected to pursue that course again.

 

California Competes Adds Data to the Conversation …

The California Competes research organization evaluated these statistics. It determined that several factors are keeping potential workers away from the employers who need them, now or in the future.

Cultural Barriers

Dr. Jez asserts that cultural challenges are some of the most significant barriers for many California residents who would benefit from but are not accessing higher education resources. Those populations having the most difficult time entering and persisting through any level of college program are the stereotypical populations: People of Color (POC), first-generation would-be college attendees, and those from society’s lower social and economic strata. In too many instances, according to jazz, existing policies and practices become insurmountable hurdles to learners from these communities.

Structural Barriers

Not only do they not have the social support systems that could sustain them through their academic term, but they also have challenges finding their way through the systems that currently exist in today’s college landscape. Each of these state-owned yet independently run organizations utilizes its own unique form of governance, rules, and protocols. Gaining access to one doesn’t equate to having access to all. Moreover, the processes required to qualify, enter, and pay for these resources are often beyond the financial capacity of many would-be college students.

‘Values’ Barriers

At least at the present time, there also appears to be a disconnect between the colleges and the employers that would hire their graduates. While the colleges prioritize graduation rates, persistence percentages, and incoming enrollment numbers, their employer and business-based community partners value high levels of skill, in-depth comprehension of industrial practices, and strong work skills that translate into profitable businesses. California competes suggests that schools should evaluate their programs in light of what their economic partners require. Both sides of these partnerships need to completely comprehend what needs to be taught and why that matters if they are each to achieve success in their shared economic development environment.

 

… And Suggests Solutions

Dr. Jez offered some of the conclusions she formed based on an analysis of the aggregate data. She has determined that one “best practice” would be to create multiple roles around college campuses that connect directly with local business entities. Faculty members, dedicated staff people, administrative agents, and others can engage directly with the business community throughout the school year to share information and seed the other’s perspective of industry and education evolutions. She also encourages all workforce development sector participants to develop and sustain shared spaces to gather the various elements and professions in one room for collaboration on solutions to these complex economic problems.

Jez notes that California Competes is already working on developing this second solution, as she introduced its regional pilot program, “LA Career Ready.” Launched in May of 2022, the pilot will develop processes to streamline and analyze workforce development programs to generate the capacity for cross-sector collaboration. Four Los Angeles County community colleges( Compton, El Camino, Los Angeles SW comma, and West Los Angeles) have committed to the program’s initial two-year term.

 

The contributions of California Competes and Dr. Su Jin Jez are significant for all stakeholders in LA County’s workforce development environment. Pasadena City College, its Economic and Workforce Development division, and conference attendees greatly appreciated her presentation.

The Future of Work Needs Higher College Enrollment Numbers

Pam Sornson, JD on November 14, 2022

Pam Sornson, JD

November 15, 2022

The Future of Work Conference (FOW) held at Pasadena City College (PCC) on November 8th, 2022, and hosted by its Economic and Workforce Development division (EWD), was a spectacular success when measured against its intended goal. Panelists and speakers from all sectors of the EWD environment presented clear and relevant insights in response to the challenges now faced by California’s Community College and Higher Education systems. The conference’s overarching message should be of value to anyone interested in pursuing an improved economy by building a well-trained, future-focused labor force.

 

Collaboration Will Be Key …

As noted by Dr. Erica Endrijonas in her welcoming comments, now is one of life’s “rubber meets the road” kind of moments. Empowered by statute, policy, and funding, the California Community College system (CCC) is uniquely positioned to rise in response to the imposing economic and social challenges emerging as the COVID pandemic recedes.

As PCC’s President and Superintendent of the PCC District, Dr. Endrijonas presides over a county-wide network of educational institutions and state and regionally based mandates. PCC is the designated coordinator of the Los Angeles Regional Consortium (LARC), a collaboration of the County’s 19 community colleges. In that role, the school – and especially its EWD division – is working to coordinate countywide efforts to streamline educational systems that meet the labor force demands of regional businesses and industries. Launched just in January 2022, the newly established LARC is now processing the immense volume of accumulated data related to those efforts as it sets itself as the “go-to data resource” for the County’s education, workforce, labor, and industry sectors.

PCC, the LARC, and their EWD colleagues across the County are now working at crafting several variations of workforce and occupational ‘rubber’ that will drive the region’s industrial engines forward on its economic recovery ‘road.’

 

… With Everyone at the Table …

The exceptional talent that populated the day’s roster of panelists indicates the value their agencies place on this discussion. Moderated by Jessica Ku Kim, the Chief Deputy of the Department of Economic Opportunity for the County of Los Angeles (who knows a thing or two about workforce development on a macro scale), the panel’s expertise spanned visionary endeavor to large government investment. A PCC alum and entrepreneur and representatives from Los Angeles County (LAC), the California Community Colleges Chancellors Office (CCCCO), PCC, and the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) each provided their unique perspectives on how these issues are impacting the work that they do. Their comments reflected how their agency or effort is or will be addressing these critical concerns.

 

… Talking About: Declining Enrollment

The declining enrollment numbers across California’s higher ed systems are of particular concern to all. For schools, fewer students also means fewer resources with which to build and sustain high-quality programming. For businesses and industries, fewer students mean a smaller and less qualified workforce with which to generate future growth. For the government, fewer students may mean reduced state revenues and a higher future demand for social services. Each of the five panelists offered their particular input on this topic:

Will Walls

The perspective of panelist Will Walls is particularly unique; he was a nontraditional student and is a PCC graduate and entrepreneur. His personal experience informed this response. As a new student, he was at a complete loss when he first entered the campus, not knowing where to go or how to start. In his words, “students don’t know what they don’t know. Schools need to do better at informing potential and returning students of all available options and opportunities.”

Dr. Micah Young

Dr. Micah Young, PCC’s Dean of Health Sciences, responded with his own question: how effective is the faculty in connecting its work to achieving student goals? Dr. Young believes that a close interface between teacher and student can enhance the student’s experience and encourage further attendance.

Sandra Sanchez

As interim vice chancellor of the CCCCO, Sandra Sanchez oversees the state-based Strong Workforce Program (SWP), the California Apprenticeship Initiative, and the California Adult Education Program, among many others. She revealed that the Chancellor’s office is changing regulations and developing new data-based policies to facilitate the introduction of promising new approaches that support student enrollment and retention across all of California’s 116 community colleges. She emphasized the Chancellor’s office’s attention to data and its growing reliance on that information to track and report on student and college success rates.

Martin Hernandez

Martin Hernandez is the internship coordinator for the LA County Department of Arts & Culture, the largest such program in the country. He recruits students for existing internships. In his experience, having on-campus personnel who are invested in championing the internship option among faculty is a critical step and opens the door to more work-based learning opportunities. He also noted that misaligned values separate the college’s focus from that of the student. If the college tracks retention and persistence numbers but not student graduation and job placement numbers, then it’s not focused on helping students achieve their goals. In his words, “the school and the student should be rowing in the same direction.”

Kelly Lobianco

As the Executive Director for the newly established Economic and Workforce Development Branch of the LA County Department of Economic Opportunity, Kelly Lobianco is well versed in growing workforce development and social enterprise programming. She agrees that a shared vision of success across the EWD environment is critical for each of its elements to achieve its individual goals. With several county agencies now clustered under the single, County-based EWD branch roof, she is confident that her agency will be able to provide support and resources for the countywide EWD effort. She sees that sector as being populated by many “customers,” each of which requires a different platform of services. She includes students in her definition of ‘customer,’ as well as businesses, industries, schools, think tanks, etc. Her office will engage with and leverage those community resources to enhance economic and social enterprise success at the macro level.

 

The compelling takeaway from this part of the conversation is that workforce training is and will remain a critical element of the community’s economic growth. It is in everyone’s best interest to ensure that all potential learners have access to the resources they individually need to find, be trained for, and secure a financially rewarding job.

The next article in this edition of the Pulse features the balance of the roundtable discussion on equally critical EWD initiatives. The next edition of the Pulse will feature the contributions of the conference’s two keynote speakers, Dr. Su Jin Jez, Executive Director of California Competes, and Stephen Cheung, President of the LA Economic Development Corporation and the World Trade Center LA.

Reducing Barriers Facilitates the Future of Work

Pam Sornson, JD on November 14, 2022

Declining enrollment numbers weren’t the only concern discussed at the recent Future of Work Conference hosted by the Economic and Workforce Development (EWD) division at Pasadena City College (PCC). The event’s five panelists, each bringing a unique perspective to the conversation, also addressed ancillary issues that are impacting today’s higher education, industrial, and workforce development sectors. All were aware that these topics also present significant barriers to student success and also, therefore, economic success.

 

Inequities

Data suggest that current policies and practices create adverse outcomes for a disproportionately large percentage of African and Latinx students. According to the Pell Institute, 62% of learners from high-income families graduate with a bachelor’s degree, compared to only 13% of learners from under-resourced communities. In many cases, lack of funding is the problem. However, students from these populations also struggle to find resources to sustain them through their education. They are more readily available to learners from more stable economic backgrounds. A lack of transportation, child care, and other family and social obligations frequently force these students to choose between an education and living their life. Panelists were asked to comment on how to reduce or remove these barriers.

Will Walls commented on the fact that out-of-state students face the additional barrier of higher tuition. Conventional college tuition strategies often provide in-state students with reduced rates compared to those of students coming from other locations, with no thought given to their suppressed economic situation. The practice inhibits some potential students from pursuing their education in California. Walls also suggested that many students in this economically depressed cohort group struggle to feel welcome on campus. He believes that a dedicated outreach to each student, offering the assistance they need to find the specific resources they want, would encourage many, if not most, to remain in or return to school.

Sandra Sanchez agreed with Walls. She asserted that students needed to know that they belonged on campus unconditionally, regardless of their social, economic, or ethnic status. She believes that the schools should shoulder the burden of facilitating access to resources so that when students declare they can’t find what they need, there is a school representative nearby to help them. Kelly Lobianco followed up by suggesting that colleges track student activities not only through the undergraduate process but also after graduation and into their careers. Additionally, Martin Hernandez believed that it is as important to understand the kinds of support each student needs as it is to understand what their ultimate educational goal might be. He noted that the definition of “student success” is as personal as each student’s identity. Schools should work to help their learners achieve their individual definitions of success.

Dr. Micah Young added that school personnel and students should actively engage in “value” conversations, asserting that the values offered by the institution may not match the values expected by the student. He sees two styles of “valuation” that can help both the institution and the learner clarify what they believe it is true:

The value of education as a standalone asset. Does the student benefit as much from the college experience as they do from the learning they’re achieving?

The value of a career. Is the student more interested and invested in attaining that future goal than they are in the means they pursue to achieve it?

Dr. Young suggests that learners attend higher education programs for different reasons; knowing what those are helps the learner and the college define their expectations of “educational success.”

 

 

Opportunities

Panelists were asked to comment on their experience of barriers within the workforce and economic development system as a whole. Happily, they chose to discuss new opportunities that have emerged because of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to Martin Hernandez and Sandra Sanchez, the unique circumstances of the coronavirus compelled positive evolutions in their organizations that might have taken years or decades to appear, if at all.

Hernandez was proud to report that his program grew substantially over the course of 2020 and 2021. Instead of remaining at a limiting four-month term, which was its norm, his internship opportunities were extended out to nine months, and added remote and hybrid (on-site/remote) internship formats as standard options, as well (dependent on the needs of the business, of course). He has received very positive feedback from his student interns and is tracking data to determine whether the programs for whom he recruits are reaping a similar benefit.

Sanchez is also proud of how the community colleges pivoted so quickly and comprehensively to an entirely online format. Those transitions reduced the perceived barriers to a more digital educational landscape and, instead, helped both instructors and the instructed gain new skills and deeper insights about their shared subject matter. Consequently, the CCCCO updated outdated regulations to allow more flexibility to teachers and faculty about how they offer their lessons. The new rules make it much easier for individual teachers to introduce work-based learning opportunities into their curricula as a fundamental element of their program.

 

 

Shared Visions of Success

Finally but not least, Kim asked the panel to share their thought on what the LA region could do at this moment as a unified system to support this educational and economic evolution. Collectively, three insights were advanced:

Kelly Lobianco commented that schools should bear the burden of moving learners through initial engagement and into their career opportunity. Existing systems encountered by new students are too often unwieldy and confusing and put off those potential learners who become overwhelmed.

As voiced by Will Walls: write a collective success story. Each agency is contributing resources and energy to these initiatives. Gather those individual histories to tell the full tale of what Los Angeles County has been doing, the successes it’s already had, the lessons it’s learned, and the directions it plans to go.

Martin Hernandez emphasized gathering a complete picture. The entities appearing in today’s conference are just a few of the hundreds of organizations across the county that are also contributing effort to these initiatives. What can we learn from them, he asks. And how can we use their experience to inform and enhance our own endeavors?

The conference’s timeline of a scant three hours was not expected to facilitate an in-depth conversation on any individual issue. Instead, the panelists and keynote speakers provided unique observations and information to improve the understanding of conference attendees of the issues facing Los Angeles County in its quest for economic development.

 

The next edition of the Pulse will share the information and insights offered by our two exceptional keynote speakers, Dr. Su Jin Jez, the Executive Director of California Competes, and Stephen Cheung, President of the LA Economic Development Corporation and the World Trade Canter LA.

Get the PULSE in your inbox!

Name(Required)