Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Northwest labor press. (Portland , Ore.) 1987-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 20, 2009)
NWLP-2-20-09:NWLP 2/17/09 10:08 AM Page 7 Green jobs: Why labor must be at the table By BARBARA BYRD With the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency, global warming has gone from being a suspect theory to an accepted explanation for severe weather events, flooding and drought. Practically overnight, the call for “green jobs” to help clean up the envi- ronment has become a mantra for pol- icy makers around the country – not least because of the hope that public in- vestment in job creation can stimulate our damaged economy. Shortly before his election, Barack Obama promised to “… invest $15 bil- lion a year over the next decade in re- newable energy, creating five million new green jobs that pay well, can’t be outsourced and help end our depend- ence on foreign oil.” Governors Kulon- goski of Oregon, Gregoire of Washing- ton, and Schwarzenegger of California have all emphasized the potential of taking action on climate change actions to create green jobs. But we in organized labor know all too well that investing public dollars into a free market system does not au- tomatically guarantee the creation of good jobs. Our participation in these policy discussions, our ability to insert strong labor safeguards into public in- vestment proposals, and our careful monitoring of the results can assure that the economic development raises eco- nomic and job standards. Before exploring this issue, let’s consider the question of what, exactly, is a “green job.” “Green Jobs for Amer- ica’s Cities,” a 2008 publication of the Apollo Alliance, a coalition of labor, business, environmentalists and com- munity organizations, says that green collar jobs “... are well-paid, career track jobs that contribute directly to preserving or enhancing environmental quality. Like traditional blue-collar jobs, green-collar jobs range from low- skill, entry-level positions to high-skill, higher-paid jobs, and include opportu- nities for advancement in both skills and wages.” The report adds an important quali- fication. “... if a job improves the environ- ment, but doesn’t provide a family-sup- porting wage or a career ladder to move low-income workers into higher-skilled occupations, it is not a green-collar job. Such would be the case with workers installing solar panels without job se- curity or proper training, or young peo- ple pushing brooms at a green building site without opportunity for training or advancement.” For the labor movement, this is a crucial distinction. A green job is not an economically sustainable job, and thus not fully “green,” unless it pays a fam- ily wage, provides basic health benefits, has a clear career track, and includes worker protections (like the right to or- ganize and, ultimately, a union con- tract). Since the large-scale creation of green jobs will require large-scale pub- lic and private investment, organized la- FEBRUARY 20, 2009 bor needs to make certain that invest- ment is targeted to good job creation, and not squandered on projects that may “green” the environment but lower living standards for working families. Few green jobs are really new jobs. More often, they are traditional jobs that have been transformed or enhanced with new skills and knowledge: electri- cians working with solar photovoltaic energy; ironworkers erecting wind tur- bines; factory workers making energy- efficient appliances or equipment; or skilled construction workers putting up new “green” buildings and retrofitting existing buildings to reduce their car- bon emissions and upgrade their heat- ing and cooling systems. Green jobs in the forestry sector might focus on wa- tershed restoration or biomass energy generation. And green jobs aren’t just private sector blue-collar jobs, either. They also exist in government offices where environmental regulations are monitored and enforced and in com- munity organizations that serve as ad- vocates and watchdogs. A recent report concludes that Washington and Oregon, because of their early action and continuing com- mitment to clean energy and energy ef- ficiency, could create 41,000 to 63,000 new jobs across five energy sectors by 2025. Organized labor’s challenge is to assure that these new green jobs are good jobs. How can we do that? First, we need to protect our exist- ing union jobs in manufacturing, con- struction and forestry, and be proactive in making those jobs and industries more environmentally sound. We can build on our existing employer partner- ships, working in cooperation with em- ployers who are willing to invest in new technologies to control their green- house gas emissions. In return, we can demand from those employers access to occupational upgrade opportunities and a bigger piece of the economic pie. Second, we need to pay even more attention to training. Some union ap- prenticeship programs, for example, al- ready provide high quality training for workers that leads to higher wages and increased job security. Our apprentice- ship training committees and instruc- tors are looking for ways to train ap- prentices (and retrain journeymen) to work with new green technologies. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Work- ers, for example, has created an entirely new curriculum around solar PVC theory and applications, and is working with its signa- tory employers to secure solar, wind and geot- hermal projects. In manufactur- ing, where in- plant training has been on the decline, we should take ad- vantage of this window of opportunity to call attention to the superiority of registered apprenticeship and the long- term financial benefits not only to workers but also to employers who in- vest in these programs. Third, unions must work with com- munity allies, especially in rural com- munities that have been hard-hit by job loss, to attract and retain good green employers. Millions of dollars worth of public investment will be made in re- newable energy, energy efficiency and related activities. Without explicit stan- dards for good jobs (e.g., provision of family wages, health benefits, and full- time work) and community stability (“claw-back” provisions requiring the return of funds when an employer shuts down or lays off workers), the new green economy will undermine our quality of life rather than improving it. This is not a new approach. Demands for investment in high-wage, high-skill occupations have been made by labor for decades. The difference now is that organized labor has a unique opportu- nity to build the power to move this agenda. If we work in coalition with community organizations, and espe- cially the environmental community, on our mutual goals of cleaning up the environment while creating sustainable employment for working families, we can prevail. And speaking of community allies, let’s not forget that a proliferation of good green jobs can also be an oppor- tunity for the working poor in both towns and rural areas. We ought to be talking with low-income community advocates about how we can work to- gether to craft pathways out of poverty and into good union jobs. Such joint work can not only help rebuild our mid- dle class, but it can also remind non- union workers of the benefits of unions, and strengthen our image as advocates for the public good. In addition to these three areas of fo- cus, we must continue to fight against free trade agreements without strong la- bor standards – green jobs are not, after all, immune from outsourcing. And of course we must organize the new clean tech industry. Passing the Employee Free Choice Act will be the first step in that longer-term goal. In short, labor cannot afford to sit back and let elected officials, business leaders and environmentalists develop policy options that will eventually lead to green job creation. We must be at the table, advocating for our members and for working families as a whole, help- ing to shape an approach that leads to a healthy planet, a sustainable economy, and good family wage (union!) jobs for workers. (Editor’s Note: Barbara Byrd is sec- retary-treasurer of the Oregon AFL- CIO and a professor at the Labor Edu- cation and Research Center of the University of Oregon. This article first appeared in the Union Register, a pub- lication of the Carpenters Industrial Council.) Caterer says ‘thanks for support’ To The Editor: I wish to say “Thank You!” to the Northwest Labor Press and all of you who read the Labor Press for your sup- port of my growing business “Almost Heaven Catering.” It was a bit scary leaving my Bak- ers’ Union in-store bakery job last year, to devote my energies to my catering company. I did not want to leave the union, and Terry Lansing talked to me about making my business union and promoting union-made goods. It was a great idea. I am a continuing member of the Bakers Local 114, and it is my dream to grow into a thriving catering company that offers what no other catering company can do: Be union and promote union-made products. NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS The Northwest Labor Press helped tremendously in getting myself started with their great article in the Labor Press last year. Since then I have catered numerous functions for unions, union businesses, and the City of Port- land. I use union-made ingredients in my meals and at each event display a placard of the union-made items in the meal. So “thank you” again. Please con- sider my services when you have an event. You will be served a superior meal of superior made Union ingredi- ents. Misty Wright Bakers Local 114 Portland Open Forum Union members come through in holiday toy drive To The Editor: This comes with deepest thanks and appreciation for labor’s generous sup- port of the 2008 “Presents from Part- ners” toy drive. On Dec. 20, Labor’s Community Service Agency held its annual holiday toy distribution party at Genesis Com- munity Fellowship in Northeast Port- land. Donations from 38 local labor or- ganizations and labor leaders resulted in 801 toys provided for 277 under- privileged children from 104 families. Each of the children in attendance re- ceived two new toys, a visit with Santa, a stuffed animal, and a candy cane. The labor community’s generosity — abun- dant even in this difficult economy — made the event a resounding success, bringing smiles of delight and lifting the spirits of the children and their ap- preciative parents. On behalf of all the children and their families, a heartfelt thanks for your support. Glenn Shuck, Executive Director, LCSA Portland Union member suggests ways state can save money To The Editor: I have three suggestions for Gov. Ted Kulongoski and the Oregon Legis- lature. 1. The state is short of money. One way to put a dent in the shortfall would be to stop paying national guardsmen and women who work for the state double pay when they go on their two weeks of annual training. They now get their full state pay, plus military pay. They should get the greater of the two. 2. All politicians talk about more money for schools. Clackamas Com- munity College sends out its class schedule four times a year at a cost of over $1 million — and this is just the mailing cost. The money could be bet- ter spent on teachers and more classes. 3. Safety. Many states have laws stating that when you use your wind- shield wipers you must also turn on your lights. Also, when your registra- tion tags are renewed, a safety inspec- tion is required. Why not in Oregon? This would cut down on accidents and police would not have as many acci- dents to investigate. Glen Savage IAM Lodge 63 (Retired) Milwaukie PAGE 7
