renewable energy workers

By staff - Nautilus International, April 28, 2023

Nautilus has warned offshore wind employers against seeking to continue to exploit migrant labour following the expected end of the Offshore Wind Workers Concession (OWWC) on 30 April.

Nautilus has consistently campaigned against the OWWC for disincentivising employers from hiring and training UK maritime professionals to work in the rapidly growing industrial sector of offshore wind in UK territorial waters.

Nautilus International general secretary Mark Dickinson said: ‘The end of the OWWC is a welcome move from government. Employers have had almost six years to develop UK maritime professionals in the skills needed for the growth of offshore wind. Instead, they have used this concession to utilise workers from abroad, often on much less pay and weaker conditions, undermining job opportunities and secure employment for UK resident seafarers.

‘Government must commit to a fair visa system ensuring that any seafarer recruited from abroad to work in the UK offshore wind sector is needed and that they receive wages and conditions reflective of UK standards.

‘If government are serious about their commitment to investing in the UK maritime workforce as highlighted in Maritime 2050, they must ensure a level playing field for seafarers across the offshore wind sector.’

The Home Office have said: ‘The OWWC is time limited and leave to enter under the terms of the concession will not be granted beyond 30 April 2023. The concession will not be renewed beyond this date.’

The concession was introduced as a temporary measure in 2017 and has been extended six times.
Nautilus has raised concerns that while this concession may end, employers may seek to find alternative ways to import and exploit workers from abroad, such as using the Migration Advisory Committee shortage occupation list.

By Barry Edwards - Nautilus International, April 28, 2023

Nautilus member Barry Edwards is speaking out after he and his fellow seafarers lost their jobs due to the Offshore Wind Workers Concession (OWWC). The visa concession is due to end on 30 April.

‘I got laid off twice last year because of this waiver. When you ask the company why, the answer you get is that they can get two people from abroad for the price of one of you,’ he said.

‘The first time it happened I was cheesed off, the second time I just thought “this is crazy, how can the British government allow this to happen?”’

On the second occasion, Mr Edwards was one month into a six-month contract when the waiver was renewed at the last minute, which caused the company to let its existing contractors go.

Mr Edwards describes the pay, terms and conditions offered to international crew as ‘horrendous’. ‘These guys are doing 12-hour shifts for £900 per month, which is just over UK National Minimum Wage rates for highly trained maritime professionals. The seafarers spend four to five months onboard at a time, without any shore leave, which saves employers money on travel costs. I don’t think that’s fair, especially if they’re working within the 12-mile limit.

‘The transport secretary and minister for shipping are saying there’s a shortfall in British seafarers – but this cheap employment is the real reason.’

Recently, Mr Edwards was offered another job in offshore wind by the same company that laid him off – though this time via an agency. He decided not to accept and has taken a different job outside the offshore wind industry.

‘When I got laid off for the second time, I thought about leaving the whole game – I thought, I can’t keep doing this, being offered a contract for six months and then being told to leave after a month,’ he said.

‘I don’t trust what’s going on. The government hasn’t said it will renew [the OWWC], but at the minute I’m not confident enough to accept a job in offshore wind and then be told the rules have been changed and I’m back to square one.

‘I’d like the government to put an end to all this completely and stop messing seafarers around.’

By staff - Blue Green Alliance, April 24, 2023

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act together provide billions of dollars to states, local governments, and private entities to support transportation decarbonization through the installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, or EV supply equipment (EVSE). States—even when not the direct grantees or program administrators—have the capability to shape what these historic EV charging infrastructure provisions mean for the workers and communities impacted by the infrastructure, manufacturing facilities, and new job opportunities that come with them.

This guide supports states seeking to maximize the employment and economic benefits that can accompany EV charging infrastructure provisions in the BIL and Inflation Reduction Act.

Download a copy of this publication here (link).

By Johanna Bozuwa, Arturo Massol-Deya, Patrick Robbins, Ted Glick, Seth Berry, and Gaby Sarri-Tobar - Center for Biolgical Diversity, April 24, 2023

By Andy O’Brien - Maine AFL-CIO, April 20, 2023

The Maine Lobstering Union (IAM 207) and the Maine AFL-CIO Executive Board have voted to support a proposal that would protect fishing grounds while also allowing offshore wind development in a way that creates good union jobs. The Maine Lobstering Union, IAM Local 207, the building trades, the Maine Labor Climate Council and others have worked tirelessly on the legislation, LR 741, -- with the support of bill sponsor Sen. Mark Lawrence and Senate President Troy Jackson -- to protect core fishing grounds and set high fisheries, environmental, equity, and labor standards on offshore wind development.

"We applaud the Maine Lobstering Union, Building Trades locals and others for doing the spade work to develop a solid plan for workers that protects Maine fisheries and guarantees good union jobs in the development of this new industry," said Matt Schlobohm, Maine AFL-CIO Executive Director. "When we work together to develop a worker led vision for climate action, we can create new union jobs, protect existing industries and tackle climate change head on."

By staff - Trade Unions for Energy Democracy, April 8, 2023

On Tuesday, the Mexican Government signed an agreement to purchase 13 power generation plants from the Spanish multinational Iberdrola. Purchase turns the State Company into a majority owner in electric energy generation in Mexico.

Three weeks after hundreds of thousands mobilised to mark 85 years since the expropriation of oil by former Mexican President Lazaro Cardenas, the federal government announced it is purchasing 13 electric energy generation plants owned by the Iberdrola for nearly USD $6 billion. The 13 plants represent 8,539 MW of installed capacity, with 8,436 MW corresponding to combined cycle gas and 103 MW to wind. Altogether, the purchase represents 77% of Iberdrola’s installed capacity in the country, although the Spain-based multinational would remain the main private generator of renewable energy in Mexico.

While many details are yet to be made public around the financing structure, according to the finance ministry, a new trust fund managed by Mexico Infrastructure Partners (MIP) will own the power plants, with a majority of its capital sourced primarily by Fonadin, the public infrastructure fund of Mexico. The federal power utility, Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE), will operate the plants.

"This means, without exaggerating (...), the rescue of the CFE and is a new nationalisation of the electricity industry. Most important of all, in this way, we guarantee that electricity prices will not increase for consumers, as has been the case in the last four years,” said President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO). “In other words, the CFE becomes the majority company. If we add to this that final plants are being built, hydroelectric plants are being rehabilitated with new turbines, all under the CFE, we can affirm that the Mexican state will maintain around 65 per cent of all energy generation at the end of the six-year term,” added AMLO in Tuesday’s televised announcement.

“The CFE is the only company with permission to commercialise electricity. The CFE had to buy electricity from these 13 Iberdrola plants in order to sell it. Today, we will no longer need this intermediation,” said Rocío Nahle, Secretary of the Energy Ministry (Sener). “The Mexican people are therefore favoured because we are able to sustain affordable electricity costs. In Mexico, we are the country with the lowest energy rates in the OECD because we have an energy policy that the President reviews daily, and with PEMEX, CFE, it allows us to have rates below inflation,” she said.

By staff - National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), April 5, 2023

OFFSHORE union RMT today demanded trade union rights and fair pay in the Offshore Wind industry following an independent report by the UK government’s Offshore Wind Champion Tim Pick.

RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said that it was disappointing that trade unions were not consulted as part of the report, especially as it acknowledges the importance of a just transition to the 50,000 jobs which are expected to be lost from the oil and gas industry by 2030.

“RMT is calling for mandatory collective bargaining in the offshore wind supply chain for fixed and floating projects, including in low tax low regulation Freeports where the government intend much of this accelerated offshore wind activity to take place.

“However, we welcome the recognition of the delay in skills passporting for our offshore members, the move away from voluntary local content targets and the linking of seabed leasing rights to supply chain development, which could be funded out of Crown Estates’ profits. 

“The recognition of the advantage gained in the US and EU by massive subsidy commitment to green energy is also significant but we need some reality to prevail over the damaging effects of government policy to date on increasing jobs, safety and skills across the offshore wind supply chain.

“For example, crew in the offshore wind supply chain can be paid below the national minimum wage to work at sea for months on end and that needs to change fast,” he said.

By Mary Church, Craig Dalzell, Roz Foyer, Sean Sweeney, Mika Minio-Paluello, et. al. - Just Transition Partnership, March 8, 2023

An online conference organised by the Just Transition Partnership to set out why public ownership of energy production and infrastructure is an essential part of any plans to hit climate change targets.

This event featured experts on how the privatised energy system is giving us fuel poverty, soaring energy prices and profits; and failing to deliver a Just Transition as well as reviewing the publicly-owned solutions in key sectors, from local to national levels.

Introduction: Mary Church - Reclaiming our Energy introduction

By Devin Keats and Don Hill - Iron and Earth, March 6, 2023

By Michael Levien - Historical Materialism, March 2023

Review of Matthew Huber, (2022) Climate Change as Class War: Building Socialism on a Warming Planet, London: Verso.

The year-long American saga that culminated in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) underscored the difference between two ways of mitigating climate change at the national level. The first is elite climate policy in which wonks and technocrats come up with the smartest policies to incentivise private capital to invest in the right technologies. This is, ultimately, what we got with the IRA, which has been accurately characterised as the triumph of ‘green industrial policy’.¹ The second is popular climate politics which seeks to build a broad political coalition for decarbonisation by tying it to social programmes that directly improve people’s lives. This is the idea behind the Green New Deal, which to a surprising extent made its way into the initial Build Back Better bill before Joe Manchin got his hands on it. Matthew Huber’s book Climate Change as Class War provides a powerful critique of the first while advancing a labour-centred version of the second.

Huber lands many good punches against what he calls professional-class climate politics. Building on the Ehrenreichs’ concept of the professional managerial class (PMC),² Huber argues that PMC climate politics characteristically over-emphasises that class’ stock-in-trade: education and credentials. In their hands, climate politics thus becomes a matter of knowledge (communicating the science) more than one of power (tackling the class power of the fossil-fuel industry). PMC policy technocrats further internalise neoliberal logic with their obsession with pricing carbon – a policy that ultimately balances the carbon budget on the backs of working-class consumers. In its more radical manifestations, PMC environmentalism – degrowth being the main target here – espouses an ascetic ‘politics of less’ that has no resonance with working-class people who already do not have enough. This type of environmental politics, Huber argues, explains why the right has been able to mobilise the working class against the environment.

By way of alternative, Huber advances a theory of working-class climate politics which he dubs ‘proletarian ecology’. The starting point, developed over Chapters 1 and 2, is to recognise that industrial fossil capital is responsible for the vast majority of emissions. As Huber sketches with discussions of the cement and fertiliser industries – for the latter, Huber draws on some interviews with managers of a fertiliser plant in Louisiana – their carbon intensity is not a matter of greed but of the structural imperative to produce surplus value, and therefore will not be halted (as opposed to greenwashed) by any amount of shaming. Thus, ‘Climate change requires an antagonistic approach towards owners of capital in the “hidden abode” of production’ (p. 106). The problem is that ‘the climate movement today – made up of professional class activists and the most marginalized victims of climate change – is too narrowly constructed to constitute a real threat to the power of industrial capital’ (p. 69).

This brings us to the bold and controversial claim of Climate Change as Class War: it is the working class (and organised labour in particular) that must be the main agent of radical climate politics, not the diverse coalitions of ‘marginalised groups’ – which includes Indigenous movements against pipelines and Black-led environmental justice organisations – who are currently the vanguard of the climate justice movement. What Huber calls ‘livelihood environmentalism’ only sees the working class as having environmental interests when their communities’ land, water or health are directly threatened (p. 195). Huber’s theory of proletarian ecology, by contrast, proceeds from the broader recognition that ‘a defining feature of working-class life under capitalism is profound alienation from the ecological conditions of life itself’ (p. 188). Thus ‘a working-class interest in ecology will emerge not from the experience of environmental threats, but from a profound separation from nature and the means of subsistence’ (pp. 181–2). Rather than defending bodies or landscapes, it will focus on the working class’s material interest in decommodifying the means of subsistence (p. 196).