Unions Call for Science-Based Reductions in Greenhouse
Gasses

http://www.labor4sustainability.org/post/unions-call-for-science-based-reductions-in-greenhouse-gases/

By Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith

Over the past couple of years, the American labor
movement has become an enthusiastic supporter of
expanding "green jobs" that fight global warming. But
policies to reduce carbon emissions scientists say are
safe have been a harder pill to swallow.  Now, in a
significant breakthrough, three significant unions have
come out for the science-based emissions targets called
for by the IPCC.

As 250 international union delegates arrived in
Copenhagen for the global climate summit, a statement
by the Transport Workers Union (TWU) and a joint
statement by the Service Employees International Union
(SEIU) and the Laborers International Union of North
America (LIUNA) called for a 25 to 40 percent reduction
on 1990 levels for developed countries by 2020.

Sean Sweeney, director of the the Cornell University
Global Labor Institute, who worked with the US labor
delegation to be fully engaged in the UN process at the
Copenhagen conference, said:

"The statements are a clear sign that U.S. unions want
to bring scientific necessity into alignment with job
creation and green economic development. Many other
unions are also moving in this direction. Engaging with
unions overseas has also helped U.S. unions to see
support for climate protection is also an act of
international solidarity."

Unions and targets

Both union statements gave support to the more limited
climate protection measures proposed by President
Barack Obama on the eve of the Copenhagen summit.  They
also endorsed the climate legislation introduced by
Senators Kerry and Boxer. But they argued that
reductions to address the climate emergency must go
substantially further.  They noted that President
Obama's commitment of 17 percent reduction on 2005
levels is only 4 percent below 1990 levels, which have
been widely used as a benchmark in international
scientific discussions.

The SEIU-LIUNA statement points out this means extreme,
perhaps impossible reductions will be necessary later
to meet the targets science says are necessary.

"To reach an 80% reduction by 2050, the scientific
consensus, with an only 4% reduction by 2020 means that
there must be a 76% reduction over the last three
decades or roughly 25% per decade.  We find it
difficult to justify backloading this obligation in a
way that shifts the burden of reducing carbon emissions
from ourselves to our children and grandchildren.
Accordingly, we would support more aggressive carbon
emission reduction policies."

It said that "an aggressive and science-based approach
to emissions reductions" is "absolutely necessary" for
"achieving a sustainable environment."

Until now few if any US unions and neither of the major
labor federations, the AFL-CIO and Change to Win, have
supported specific emission reduction targets or even
gone on record for the principle of making the
reductions called for by scientific consensus.   This
is largely because only a few unions with a direct
stake in the issue, notably in the energy and
manufacturing sectors, have opposed such measures.

Their stand brings these three unions in line with the
position of the International Trade Union Confederation
(ITUC), an organization that represents national union
federations with membership of 175 million workers in
155 countries.  It organized the international trade
union delegation to the Copenhagen conference and
strongly supported the IPCC targets.

An article published by the BNA reported that the AFL-
CIO had issued its own position paper at the Poznan
climate talks supporting ITUC concerns for "decent
work, green jobs, industrial regeneration, border
adjustment mechanisms and worker adjustment mechanisms"
but failing to indicate support for the targets and
timetables at the core of the ITUC position.  The BNA
reported that, "U.S. labor unions balked at backing
ITUC's position, given fears that deep cuts would
`devastate' heavy manufacturing in the United States as
well as the coal and steel industries."

Labor's traditional approach to climate policy was
largely shaped by industries in the manufacturing and
energy sectors.  That is likely to change, however, as
a result of the changing sectoral center of gravity
with organized labor.  According to a recent study by
the Center for Economic and Policy Research, barely one
union member in ten works in manufacturing.  An even
smaller proportion work in fossil fuel production.

Today the overwhelming majority of union members are in
services and the public sector.  But they have barely
begun to weight in significantly on climate policy.  If
the new statements by the transport, service, and
laborers unions are any indication, they are likely to
favor stronger climate protection with more stringent
emission reductions.  This reflects not only the
interest of their members in a livable world for their
children, but the fact that the great majority of
potential green jobs are in the building,
transporation, public, and service sectors.

Why targets matter for green jobs

Both statements emphasized that emissions reduction
targets were important to the green jobs agenda.
According to the SEIU/LIUNA statement, "A clear
science-based target will drive a massive increase in
the generation of green jobs, pubic mass transit,
renewable energy, green manufacturing, energy-efficient
construction and building retrofits, as well as in
other sectors."

The statement went on to describe strong targets as
critical to provide incentives for creating green jobs.
"The more ambitious the target, the stronger the
political signal to private investors and innovators
who wish to serve the green economy."

It also argued that absence of strong targets could
have the opposite effect.

"A weak target slows green job growth, serves as a drag
on the global effort, and will not serve climate
stability over the long term.  Jobs that conserve
energy, fight sprawl and congestion, and retool and re-
equip our industries according to green and sustainable
principles are the wave of the future for the US and
with world."

The TWU statement adds that a science-based approach to
emissions reductions will be good for our economy and
for working families.  "With the US suffering over 10
percent unemployment and falling living standards, we
need to fulfill the promise of green jobs sooner, not
later."

The statements called for a "just transition" to the
green economy to provide full protections for workers
negatively impacted by climate policies.  The TWU
statement notes that the transition to a low carbon
economy must be pursued in a way that is "fair to
workers and supportive of impacted communities."
According to the SEIU/LIUNA statement,  "Workers in
energy intensive industries should not be asked to
shoulder a disproportionate burden."

Why union positions matter

Union positions can make a big difference on climate
legislation.  Coal and manufacturing unions have played
a significant role in provisions in current legislation
that are favorable to their industries.  CQ says AFL-
CIO support is essential to passing any climate change
bill;  Jason Grumet, director of the National
Commission on Energy Policy, says, "If you don't have
organized labor, you can't get something through."
Strong union support for science-based target could
play a significant role in strengthening current
legislation.

The US will also face an enormous number of climate
related policy decisions in the near and more distant
future, ranging from what provisions should be in
international treaties to national policy on fuel
efficiency standards to sidewalks and bicycle lanes for
local streets.  Organized labor can be a significant
player in all of them.  It can also play a big role in
how those policies are actually implemented in
industries and workplaces.  And it can help educate its
sixteen-and-a-half million members about what climate
change means for them and their children and what has
to be done about it.

The SEIU/LIUNA statement concludes,

"Our nation stands at the threshold of a dramatic
transformation toward a clean, green and sustainable
economy.  Ambitious reduction targets for 2020 and
beyond can help drive this transformation."

The new union statements supporting science-based
targets could be the start of a significant trend that
could put organized labor in the forefront not only of
the green jobs movement but also of the broader
movement to protect the climate.  Support for targets
and strong policies to implement them will position
labor as a progressive social force and a leading
player in the emerging movement for sustainability.
According to Joe Uehlein, former director of the AFL-
CIO Center for Strategic Campaigns and a founder of the
Labor Network for Sustainability:

"This is an opportunity for all of labor to step up to
the plate for what science says is necessary to protect
the planet. That's what we have to do if we want our
society to be sustainable. That isn't only good for the
planet - it's good for labor."

_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to