March 10, 2008
This is the fifth in the GLS series on Labor and Global Warming.
While most of organized labor in the U.S. has stood aloof or even opposed efforts to address global warming, labor movements in the rest of the world have taken a far different approach.
Last November, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC — formerly ICFTU), representing most of the world’s labor movements, issued a statement on “Trade Union climate change strategies.” It declared: “Climate change is a global threat requiring urgent global action.”
Few days go by without some further troubling evidence of the accelerating rate of deterioration of the natural environment brought about by climate change: relentless drought across East Africa, continuing destruction of forests, grasslands and wetlands, rapid melting of the Greenland ice cap, accompanied in 2003 by a European heat wave that caused some 30,000 deaths and $13.5bn in direct costs — and the list goes on.
It called for “new and stronger commitments” going beyond Kyoto “to ensure serious and long-lasting reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
ITUC General Secretary Guy Rider told an international environmental conference in Nairobi, Kenya this February 6:
Trade unionists are firmly committed to sustainable development goals, in full knowledge that securing them will require very considerable churning of employment and disruption of labour markets; the disappearance of large numbers of jobs, which will need to be replaced by the creation of others. Trade unions are pointing to the need for “just transition” from current production and employment patterns to those we need — processes which will engage working people and their trade unions — make demands of them yes, but recognize too that decent work opportunities for all are also critical to sustainability.
While the AFL-CIO opposed U.S. signing of the Kyoto Protocol, The Canadian Labor Congress actively campaigned for Canada to join it. In 2005 it issued a statement called “10 reasons why Kyoto is good for workers and society.” It argued that “Climate change needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.” Global warming is already having an impact on Canadian (and global) weather, doubling the number of national disasters, and affecting major industries such as insurance, tourism, inland shipping and agricultural production. “We have to arrest and reverse this trend for the sake of future generations.”
It argued that “Kyoto is good for the Canadian economy.” Canada’s Kyoto target of a six percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from l990 levels would generate “a large amount of economic activity,” e.g., in the production of energy through alternative and renewable sources; greater use of natural gas; retrofitting and energy efficiency; energy conservation; mass transit; new regulations leading to the adoption of new technologies; waste reduction; and pollution control systems — thereby creating “more jobs and more secure jobs.” It would also cut down on pollution, creating “healthier workplaces and communities.”
It added that “What is really important is Just Transition.” It acknowledged that complying with the Kyoto targets for carbon reduction would mean some job losses. Therefore “a Just Transition program with alternative employment, changed work and retraining is essential for Kyoto implementation.” But “If done properly, the costs to the community will be minimal.”
Unions in industrialized countries other than the U.S. have been working closely with governments and employers to try to meet the Kyoto targets for greenhouse gas reductions while providing a “just transition” for workers and others affected by environmental policies.
“Trade Union climate change strategies” laid out key elements of their approach.
Public support for climate change measures requires “employment transition programs,” including green job creation, re-employment programs, training, education, and bridging compensation.
Targets for CO2 reduction should be placed in a “sustainable development framework” which “integrates national development and poverty reduction strategies” with environmental issues like biodiversity and desertification.
Responding to global warming must include mitigation and adaptation policies, particularly for vulnerable groups such as the poor, youth, the unemployed.
Industrial development must contribute to poverty eradication and sustainable natural resource management.
Policy on global warming must take into account the social dimensions of climate change and the distributive effects of mitigation and adaptation measures.
Participatory decision-making must be entrenched at the international, national, sectoral, and workplace levels to make sure that all affected groups, including workers, are involved in decision-making on climate change.
Participation requires the recognition of workersâ rights and a meaningful role in joint decision making with employers.
Workers need new statutory rights to allow such participation, such as formal recognition of environmental duties and paid relief and training for environmental representatives.
Union-based educational programs should provide worker awareness of climate change issues and build capacity for meaningful worker engagement in climate change initiatives.
More than 160 countries, including all industrial countries except the U.S. and Australia, have now signed the Kyoto Protocol. All are developing national policies to meet targets to reduce greenhouse gasses. Unions around the world are developing new roles to apply “trade union climate change strategies” within those frameworks.
In Spain, for example, the two major trade union federations, two leading business organizations, and the Spanish government agreed in 2005 to establish a “Framework to Institutionalize and Organize Social Dialogue, related to the Compliance with the Kyoto Protocol.” It establishes a tripartite “Dialogue Table” with responsibility for monitoring and assessing the country’s National Allocation Plan for Kyoto compliance. The agreement aims to “prevent, avoid or reduce the potentially adverse social effects that could result from compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in particular those related to competitiveness and employment.” The first round was held in 2006, with follow-on Dialogue Tables for seven industrial sectors, to review the mandatory greenhouse gas emissions reduction of the National Allocation Plan.
In Canada, the United Transportation Union, which represents railway workers, developed 18 hours of instruction modules on the Kyoto Protocol, climate change planning, government and union programs, and methods of union action on climate change, including a focus on transitional employment provisions. The plan is to train facilitators for each province who will then train union members in workplaces.
In Germany, the Alliance for Work and Environment joins representatives of unions, environmental organizations, employers, and government to renovate housing. It plans to renovate 300,000 apartments, create 200,000 jobs, and reduce CO2 emissions by 2 million tons a year. The project will also reduce heating bills for tenants, landlords, and government by $4 billion, as well as lowering unemployment costs and increasing tax revenues. The German government will provide $1.5 billion plus $8 billion in subsidized credit over a five year period.
Belgium, in order to meet the 7.5% cut in greenhouse gas emissions required by the Kyoto Protocol, plans to purchase emission quotas from other countries with its Kyoto Fund, supported by an electricity consumption tax. Consultation between unions, NGOs, employers and government has led to the inclusion of “social criteria” for its purchases. Any project will require a letter of social responsibility, which includes compliance with the OECD’s guidelines for multinationals, the eight ILO basic conventions, and its conventions on occupational health and safety and indigenous and tribal people. Project evaluation must include “social sustainability,” such as employment, equality, and access to essential services. Projects must include plans for monitoring, and the Belgian government can cancel contracts if performance does not comply with commitments. Projects that receive advance funding must provide monitoring by local unions, local environmental organizations, and local and indigenous communities.
The ITUC’s “Trade Union climate change strategies” also proposed a significant union role for fighting global warming in the workplace. “Since three-quarters of all greenhouse gases come from manufacturing, energy production or supply, transport and construction, workplace actions could be key to change in these sectors.” It listed these “preconditions” for worker participation in that process:
Right to participate: Workers have the right to participate in decision making related to environmental concerns in their workplace, exercised through the join health and safety committee or workplace safety and health representatives, or through new environmental committees.
Right-to-know: Workers have the right to be aware about the environmental hazards in the workplace, as they are identified and evaluated and information concerning these hazards is communicated to employers and employees through labeling, material safety data sheets and employee training. This standard currently applies to chemical manufacturers or importers of chemicals, but needs to be expanded to include climate change-related issues, i.e. the right to know about workplace emissions, technological choices, plans for energy saving, use and efficiency.
Whistleblower protection: A worker may not be held liable or be disciplined for reporting workplace practices that are honestly believed to pose an environmental risk.
Right to refuse dangerous work: A worker may not be held liable or be disciplined for refusing to perform work that he/she honestly believes may pose an immediate or serious threat to his or other workers’ health.
Right to refuse work which harms the environment: A worker may not be held liable or be disciplined for refusing to do work that he/she honestly believes may pose an immediate or serious threat to the environment.
The ITUC argued that the 2.3. million collective agreements in force around the world could serve as possible tools for workplace action — and a new workplace culture — for addressing climate change.
Some examples of union workplace initiatives are already under way. At the Scottish Agricultural College in Edinburgh, members of the local union branch who had attended an workshop on energy saving persuaded the college’s environmental committee to pursue a range of energy-saving strategies. First they focused on reducing lighting in public areas; switching off lights not in use; and switching off computers, photocopiers and other equipment at night. Electricity use was cut by 3 per cent. Next they promoted double glazing of windows and radiator thermostats. Then they promoted the recycling of waste paper, saving 57,200 liters of paper at just one campus.
While many U.S. unions still oppose the Kyoto Protocol, the ITUC is calling for developed countries “to commit to much higher emission reduction levels in absolute terms beyond 2012,” which in turn will lead less developed countries to introduce their own measures under the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities.” The E.U. has just agreed to such deep reductions. American workers now have the opportunity to join their brothers and sisters around the world in addressing the global warming threat to our common future.
The next piece in our Labor and Global Warming series will address some of the deeper questions of social change posed by the issue of global warming.