Robert V. Hess, the former director of New York City’s Department of Homeless Services, recently resigned after six years on the job. Mayor Bloomberg charged Mr. Hess with reducing homelessness by two thirds by the end of 2009. At the end of his tenure, there are actually more homeless people in the city than there were in 2004, due to a spike in family homelessness.

As we all know, the economy went south, the housing bubble went bust, and unemployment skyrocketed. No matter how well Mr. Hess did his job, it just wasn’t within his power to decrease the number of homeless people in New York City. As he and his staff did what they could to move people out of homelessness, new people were coming into homelessness at a faster rate.

Seeking Jobs

My good friend and fellow homeless advocate Steve Thomas recently found himself in a similar situation, trying to do the impossible. STREATS, a non-profit made up mainly of homeless and formerly homeless people striving to reach, educate, and transform society’s views on homelessness, have been working with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to employ the homeless community of Washington, DC.

STREATS and DOL understand that the homeless community faces more barriers to employment than others who are seeking employment and, therefore, have begun to craft a plan that will address the specific needs of this target community.

Steve and DOL began to discuss the types of jobs that the homeless would be trained for. But before that conversation could move forward, they had to decide on a definition for a “living wage”, that is, the amount of money that one would need to make in order to live in Washington, DC (preferably without needing to depend on public assistance).

A Living Wage

Steve asserted a living wage is twenty-four dollars an hour. DOL said that was too high and that they couldn’t guarantee that they’d be able to employ anyone at that level. The DOL disagreed, finally settling on twelve dollars an hour.

Though this is half of what it takes to live in DC, Steve said, “OK, let me see what jobs you have that pay at least twelve dollars an hour.” As it turns out, the DOL had only two jobs that it was prepared to train people for that paid at least twelve dollars an hour — auto mechanic or truck driver.

When Steve and i met again, he explained, “Here I am trying to get the homeless jobs that will make them self-sufficient; but, the jobs aren’t there!”

Self Sufficiency

I told Steve that I’d had a conversation about self-sufficiency and living wage with Laura Zeilinger of DC’s Department of Human Services. When I pointed out to her that most of the homeless people would never get jobs that would pay a living wage, she mentioned several programs that were in place to help them make ends meet — food stamps, rental assistance, HUD housing and the like.

It became apparent to me that her definition of self-sufficiency included perpetual dependence on public assistance. This presents a stark difference between her and STREATS. It also begs the question:

How exactly should we define self-sufficiency?

Should we consider someone self sufficient if they can only make ends meet with public assistance? Regardless of your personal opinion, one thing is for certain: The living age jobs aren’t there!

Many jobs are gone for good. They are not coming back. Many of the homeless are either unskilled or have skills that have become irrelevant due to modernization. Retraining them is not an immediate option. Their lives have been reduced to a daily struggle to just get by — to find adequate food and shelter. To make matters worse, the social safety net is quickly eroding.

The Abundance Ethic

The present economic realities present a need for a new paradigm — one that replaces the old, out-dated work ethic. People’s sustenance and benefits should no longer be tied solely to their work. There should instead be what I call an Abundance Ethic.

The Abundance Ethic is the understanding that, because our nation produces so many goods with so little labor and has so much merchandise that can’t be sold, those in need will just be allowed to receive from this abundance. If that were the case, we could simply place homeless persons into vacant housing.

While the jobs aren’t there, the human needs remain. With that being the case, we need to figure out how best to meet these needs. Giving from our abundance seems to be the most reasonable way to do that.

Photo credit: RXAphotos