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