Bay Area garbage collection resumes after tentative agreement ends lengthy strike
'We're feeling great,' Local 439 President Rick Buzo said Saturday. 'We got our members exactly what they deserved.'
Republic Services, in an emailed statement, confirmed it had reached a tentative agreement with union officials for its Forward Landfill employees, who they said would be returning to work Saturday.
'We appreciate the community's patience throughout this situation, and we will work hard to catch up with needed recycling and waste collection as quickly as we can,' the statement read.
The strike originated in the Boston area, where more than 400 Republic Service workers represented by Teamsters Local 25 have been on strike since July 1. Since then, Republic Service workers across the country have joined the strike out of solidarity, with more than 2,000 Republic workers honoring picket lines, the Teamsters said this week, adding that picket lines had extended to Los Angeles and Youngstown, Ohio.
'Our members are everyday Americans performing essential services across our communities, but Republic is unwilling to offer workers good wages, decent benefits, or a fair contract,' Teamsters General President Sean M. O'Brien said in a statement Tuesday. 'The American public needs to understand that Republic Services and its overpaid, corrupt executives own this strike. Their greed is forcing trash collectors and waste haulers across the country out into the street. We don't want this garbage piling up. We want to return to work. But we refuse to be exploited.'
The company initially offered a 1.7% raise, which amounted to 30 cents per hour for employees making $20 an hour — and no relief on health care, which was costing some employees $1,200 per month.
'We don't do 30-cent raises,' Buzo said.
After waiting about a month to see whether Republic Services would provide a better deal, the landfill workers voted overwhelmingly to strike.
The union started the strike at the company's landfill in Manteca, then asked its commercial and residential waste haulers — whom it already represented and who already had negotiated contracts — to join the picket line.
Odorous bags of waste began piling up in residential areas across Northern California, causing officials in many cities to ask residents to take their garbage to specified drop-off sites.
The strike impacted areas across Northern California, as far south as Half Moon Bay, in communities such as San Jose, Richmond, Suisun City, and all the way to Stockton.
The pressure tactics led mayors in many local cities to call on Republic Services to come to an agreement and threaten to cut ties with the company if it did not.
Earlier this week, Stockton Mayor Christina Fugazi wrote on social media that the city was experiencing 'a health and safety crisis' because Republic Services was not fulfilling its contract, warning the company that if it did not come to an agreement with the union and provide a rate cut to customers 'you will no longer have a contract with the City of Stockton.'
On Friday, Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia touted the agreement on social media, telling residents that as of Monday, 'your garbage will be picked up on the regularly scheduled day.'
'The County is moving forward with demanding rate relief for residents,' he added.
Buzo said the tentative agreement — to be voted on Sunday morning — provides a five-year contract for members, with better wages and significantly lower health care costs.
'They work dangerous jobs,' he said. 'We're glad they can go to get medical treatment without hesitation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
29 minutes ago
- Politico
Exit polls show Japan's ruling coalition likely to lose key election
That is a big retreat from the 141 seats they had pre-election, but media surveys predict big setbacks for Ishiba. Exit poll results released seconds after the ballots closed Sunday night mostly showed a major setback for Ishiba's coalition. Japan's NHK television projected a range of 32-51 seats for the prime minister's coalition, while other networks projected it would win just over 40 seats. A poor performance in the election would not immediately trigger a change of government because the upper house lacks the power to file a no-confidence motion against a leader, but it would certainly deepen uncertainty over his fate and Japan's political stability. Ishiba would face calls from within the LDP party to step down or find another coalition partner. Soaring prices, lagging incomes and burdensome social security payments are the top issues for frustrated, cash-strapped voters. Stricter measures targeting foreign residents and visitors have also emerged as a key issue, with a surging right-wing populist party leading the campaign. Sunday's vote comes after Ishiba's coalition lost a majority in the October lower house election, stung by past corruption scandals, and his unpopular government has since been forced into making concessions to the opposition to get legislation through parliament. It has been unable to quickly deliver effective measures to mitigate rising prices, including Japan's traditional staple of rice, and dwindling wages. President Donald Trump has added to the pressure, complaining about a lack of progress in trade negotiations and the lack of sales of U.S. autos and American-grown rice to Japan despite a shortfall in domestic stocks of the grain. A 25% tariff due to take effect Aug. 1 has been another blow for Ishiba. Ishiba has resisted any compromise before the election, but the prospect for a breakthrough after the election is just as unclear because the minority government would have difficulty forming a consensus with the opposition. Frustrated voters are rapidly turning to emerging populist parties. The eight main opposition groups, however, are too fractured to forge a common platform as a united front and gain voter support as a viable alternative. The emerging populist party Sanseito stands out with the toughest anti-foreigner stance, with its 'Japanese First' platform that proposes a new agency to handle policies related to foreigners. The party's populist platform also includes anti-vaccine, anti-globalism and favors traditional gender roles.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Federal Reserve official gives green light to July rate cut
Is tariff inflation lagging, only to then burst and slip away? Or is it here to stay? Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Just ask Federal Reserve Governor Christopher J. Waller. Waller, a Trump appointee, surprised some Fed watchers late last month. He opined the Federal Open Markets Committee should cut the Federal Funds Rate at its July 29-30 meeting, citing slower-than-expected inflation data that wasn't going to be as hot as expected. Related: JPMorgan drops blunt forecast on future interest rate cuts Waller doubled down on that position July 17, saying the latest data, including the June CPI figure at 2.7% and other recent economic numbers, show it's definitely time for the Fed's first rate cut in 2025. But will the rest of Fed leadership vote for it? Image source: Bloomberg/Getty Images The tariffs, which President Donald Trump announced on "Liberation Day'' in April, now face an Aug. 1 deadline. They are the highest in nine decades, ranging from 10% to 50% on imported goods and services. An interest rate cut has been the mantra of President Trump for months, saying the current rates are holding back the American economy from robust growth. The Federal Reserve Board has one job: comply with the dual congressional mandate to maintain 2% inflation and keep unemployment rates stable with steady GDP growth. It uses interest rates as a tool to manage that balance. The Federal Open Meeting Committee (FOMC) is the Fed's 12-member policymaking panel headed by Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Related: Trump deflects reports on firing Fed Chair Powell 'soon' The FOMC has been holding the Federal Funds Rate steady at 4.25% to 4.50% in anticipation of inflation from President Trump's tariffs and trade wars. The Federal Funds Rate is the price the Fed charges U.S. banks to borrow money overnight. This, in turn, sets the pace for short-term costs of borrowing money, such as through credit cards and auto and student loans. The 10-year Treasury Bond yield is the benchmark for longer-term interest rates like the 30-year fixed mortgage, currently hovering around 6.8%. The market expectations for how the Fed will set rates in the future influence long-term rates. The president is calling for a hefty slash of 3%, saying it will benefit Americans looking to buy homes with lower mortgages and reduce interest on the trillions of dollars in the U.S. deficit. In addition, he believes it will kickstart the overall economy in tandem with the new tax reconciliation act once known as the One Big Beautiful Bill. He's also been calling Powell a rotating list of personal and professional nasty and vulgar names as well as threatening to fire him (which are likely illegal but still caused some wonky fireworks over D.C. this week.) The Trump administration and its allies say the tariffs impact will be transitory, meaning it will represent a one-time hit to prices but not multiply and ripple through permanently. And while past tariffs in modern U.S. history have proven to shock prices in the short term, they tend to settle back down over the long run, according to some economists. "I believe we should cut the policy rate at our meeting in two weeks," Waller said in a speech in New York June 17. He called for a Fed's policy rate of 3%, or 125-150 basis points lower than the current rate of 4.25%-4.5%. Waller advocated returning the Fed's policy settings to "neutral," meaning interest rates at a level that neither speeds up nor slows down business activity, The New York Times reported. "With inflation near target and the upside risks to inflation limited, we should not wait until the labor market deteriorates before we cut the policy rate," he said. More Federal Reserve: Fed interest rate cut decision resets forecasts for the rest of this yearFederal Reserve prepares strong message on long-term interest ratesFed official revamps interest-rate cut forecast for this year Waller has in the past defended his analysis as "not political." Earlier that day, former Fed governor Kevin Warsh said in a CNBC interview that the central bank was in need of a "regime change." Warsh was quick to say the independence of the Fed is essential, but just as quickly advocated for significant monetary policy adjustments. If Waller and Warsh sound vaguely familiar, their names have been circulating as President Trump's possible replacement for Powell when the chair's term expires in May 2026. The third name on that list appears to be Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Powell has said he will not resign before the end of his term and emphasizes he is focusing on maintaining the Fed's dual mandate. Given the warming inflation seen in this week's CPI numbers for June, the unimpressive jobs numbers, and the unknown impact of the tariffs, Fed watchers expect the current rates will maintain their "wait-and-see" hold at the September FOMC meeting. The widely watched CME Group FedWatch Tool forecasts a Federal Funds Rate cut at 4.7% later this month. Related: June inflation numbers reset Fed interest rate cut expectations The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
The U.S. is losing its biotech edge over China — and that's bad news for the Bay Area
From gene therapies to cancer breakthroughs, California has been the driving force behind America's biotechnology industry. But today, that edge is slipping. A National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology report to Congress in April stated that the U.S. is dangerously close to falling behind China in biotechnology innovation, and called for urgent investment and strategic coordination to maintain global leadership. Genentech's founding in 1976 in South San Francisco marked the start of the modern biotech era, and, ever since, California has been at the forefront of countless scientific discoveries and medical innovations. However, recent funding cuts and an overreliance on China for manufacturing pipelines leave our nation vulnerable. As the report urges, the U.S. must prioritize biotechnology at the national level or risk relying on China to use this strategic power for good. In 2011, the Chinese government declared biotechnology a ' strategic emerging industry ' and has since committed billions to secure dominance in areas like synthetic biology, gene editing and biomanufacturing. In 2024 alone, China conducted over 7,100 clinical drug trials, surpassing the United States and accounting for nearly 40% of global trial activity. Despite U.S. tariffs under the Trump administration designed to counter China's economic influence, China's gross domestic product has remained strong, fueling even greater investment in strategic sectors like biotechnology. By contrast, the U.S. continues to lose ground, constrained by outdated regulatory frameworks and a lack of coordinated federal strategy. While China is building a biotech empire with deliberate, state-backed coordination, the U.S. is stuck playing defense with shrinking budgets. U.S. federal support for biomedical research is slipping, with the budget for the National Institutes of Health facing a 40% cut in the coming year. For a region like the Bay Area, home to some of the world's most promising biotech startups and research institutions, these cuts have a direct toll, including the termination of $314 million in funding that was to be used to train the next generation of biomedical and health researchers. Major institutions like UCSF, Stanford and UC Berkeley are now bracing for delayed projects, staffing freezes and reductions in early-career fellowships that are vital to sustaining long-term innovation. On a national level, promising studies have been halted midstream, leaving research gaps in breakthrough treatments for cancer, Alzheimer's disease and other major infectious diseases that impact millions of Americans. When U.S. investment in domestic biotech falters, it slows innovation at home and creates an opening for global competitors to step in. China's government is strategically positioning its biotech sector to fill the gap left by stalled American research. Just last month, U.S. pharmaceutical firms signed 14 licensing deals with Chinese biotech companies worth up to $18.3 billion, underscoring our growing dependence on China's rapidly maturing R&D capabilities. This shift carries significant implications for California. It is home to over 16,500 life sciences companies and establishments, more than any other state, according to the California Biotechnology Foundation. The state directly employs more than 466,000 workers and generates more than $414 billion in annual economic output. In 2023, California led the nation in venture capital investment, raising over $34 billion for life science companies. Further, California accounted for 40% of all U.S. life sciences patents filed in 2023, and more bioscience patents are issued to California researchers than to those in any other state. Losing ground to China isn't just an economic risk; it's also a national security threat that could reshape who controls the future of health care. While the U.S. system is built on competition and patient outcomes, China's state-controlled model prioritizes strategic control and global influence. In America, ethical safeguards, transparency and regulatory review shape medical progress. In China, the government's control allows for faster approvals but also looser oversight, creating the risk of untested or misused science. The National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology warned that China's biotech advances could be weaponized — from battlefield-ready biologics to more nefarious applications. As a scientist working in biotechnology in the Bay Area, I understand that California plays a central role in this global race. From early-stage research in university labs to large-scale manufacturing by leading biotech firms, the state's infrastructure, talent and capital drive America's competitiveness. The Bay Area remains one of the most dense and productive biotech ecosystems in the world, thanks to its concentration of top-tier research institutions, world-class hospitals, a culture of entrepreneurship and the ability to attract the world's best and brightest to its academic and industrial ecosystem. But even here, the warning signs are hard to ignore. Federal NIH cuts have already disrupted major research projects at UC campuses, impacting our ability to attract talented students to our graduate and postdoctoral research programs, while venture capital is increasingly eyeing faster-moving regulatory environments abroad, preferring to license in late-stage assets from China instead of funding early-stage research at home. If Washington fails to prioritize a national biotech strategy, California's innovation engine could slow just as competitors abroad gain momentum. The state's economic future, public health leadership and ability to attract global talent are all at stake. China is no longer a distant biotech challenger and is actively reshaping the industry with its speed, regulatory agility and cost-efficiency, shifting the innovation center of gravity away from the U.S. The National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology has made clear that this is not just a matter of competition, but a strategic threat with long-term consequences for public health and national security. If America is to remain a global leader in biotechnology, we must urgently invest in our domestic research ecosystem and rebuild the infrastructure that has powered decades of discovery or be forced to surrender it to a rival that plays by different rules. Ash Jogalekar is a scientist and science writer based in the Bay Area. He is a scientist in residence at the Oppenheimer Project and works on emerging threats and technology risks in areas like biotechnology and AI.
