Pension Fund Evictions: Lessons for Housing and Labor

In this dissertation I analyze an institutional investor portfolio of over-leveraged multifamily rental housing in East Palo Alto, California to demonstrate how changing forms of landlordism produce both new and familiar targets for tenants organizing against displacement and for housing security. Venture capital investors in the first decade of the 2000s exploited the Silicon Valley regional conditions of racial exclusion, uneven development, and municipal rent control. I introduce the legacy of Black political organization in East Palo Alto as a way of contextualizing the tenants’ and the city leaders’ response to the monopoly investment purchase. The structure of this rental portfolio demonstrates the multiple actors involved in such large-scale residential investments, including institutional state pension funds, high-net worth individuals, local and international lenders, money managers, and the Security and Exchange Commission. The case study analysis considers how tenants, advocates, and a local union representing shareholders in the country’s largest pension, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), mobilized city and state officials to exert influence over these targets, focusing on the institutional investor in particular, albeit with limited success. This case finds that venture capital investors backed by public pension funds exacerbated the escalating renter crisis in East Palo Alto, and elsewhere. I suggest that the findings from this case study, particularly those detailing the points of leverage available to tenants to target public pension funds, as well as the power of cities, bear lessons for tenants organizing in other large-scale multifamily rental portfolios and bundled scattered site single-family real estate owned (REO) foreclosure-to-rental portfolios. The analysis concludes by drawing from principles of housing security and offering what a coalitional, labor/community, racial justice politics for “the right to the city” might entail when taking into account changing conditions of investor landlordism

Commentary: Culture of Poverty: Don\u27t Call it a Comeback!

Commentary on the culture of poverty argument

Motivators and barriers for dog and cat owners and veterinary surgeons in the United Kingdom to using preventative medicines

Routine use of preventative medicines is advocated as part of responsible dog and cat ownership. However, it has been suggested that the number of owners in the United Kingdom (UK) using preventative medicines to protect their pets is in decline. The aim of this novel study was to use a qualitative methodology to explore the attitudes of pet owners and veterinary surgeons in the UK to using preventative medicine products in dogs and cats. Preventative medicine was defined as “a drug or any other preparation used to prevent disease, illness or injury.” Semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone with owners and veterinary surgeons who had recently participated in a preventative healthcare consultation. Thematic analysis of transcribed recordings of these interviews identified four themes. This paper reports the theme related to motivators and barriers to using preventative medicines. Owners’ understanding varied widely about the importance of preventative medicines for pets, as did their confidence in the safety of prescription products. A good relationship with their veterinary surgeon or practice, seeing adverts on the television about specific diseases, advice from a breeder and having personally seen infected animals appeared to be motivators for owners to use preventative medicines. Concern about adverse events and uncertainty about the necessity of using preventative medicines were barriers. Owners who trusted their veterinary surgeons to advise them on preventative medicine products described little use of alternative information sources when making preventative medicine choices. However, owners who preferred to do their own research described reading online opinions, particular in relation to the safety of preventative medicines, which they found confusing. In contrast, veterinary surgeons described broad confidence in the safety and efficacy of prescription preventative medicines and described protection of pet health as a strong motivator for their use. Several expressed some concern about being seen to “sell” products, which may present a barrier to their advocacy. Veterinary surgeons were unsure about owners’ level of understanding of the necessity of preventative medicines, particularly in relation to vaccinations, and few recalled instigating conversations with owners about product safety. Owner uncertainties about preventative medicine products may not be adequately addressed in the consulting room. This first qualitative study to investigate dog and cat preventative medicines suggests strategies are needed to increase discussion between pet owners and veterinary surgeons in the UK about the necessity, safety, efficacy and cost of preventative medicines

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Dignity Strategies in a Neoliberal Workfare Kitchen Training Program

Welfare‐to‐work training (workfare) programs are designed to technically and affectively prepare marginalized people for jobs that are often routinized and dirty. They are expected to accept personal responsibility for their situation and demonstrate submission to bosses as means of “working off” their “debt” to society. Ethnographic observation at workfare training sites has tended to emphasize the indignities that trainees suffer, with less attention to how workers maintain dignity in the face of these experiences. Using ethnographic observation and interviews in a Chicago workfare kitchen training program, we show that neoliberal kitchen training work encompasses paradoxical expectations for trainee‐workers; they must demonstrate high levels of discretion and creativity required in professional kitchen work and demonstrate submission to charismatic authority as a means of getting kitchen work done and of affective compliance with the goals of the program. To combat the direct efforts of others to produce indignities, trainees developed two dignity strategies that are highly dependent on the structure of kitchen work: operating in a slipstream, and banking confidence that allows them to take liberties normally allowed for chef‐trainers. These findings contribute to sociological understandings of workplace dignity, a privilege that has been especially elusive for the poor under welfare‐to‐work programs