Never let a (climate) crisis go to waste — so long as it benefits unions’ coffers and influence.
During last month’s 2024 International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) Grand Lodge Convention in New York City, John Harrity, retired president of the Connecticut State Council of Machinists, along with Zach Cunningham from Cornell University’s Climate Jobs Institute (CJI), presented a study co-authored by IAM and CJI, titled “Reclaiming Our Future: A Climate Jobs Agenda for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.”
While the report claims that addressing climate change will demand massive investments in new technologies and industries, the IAM, instead, focused on making sure every single climate project is a union job.
“You have heard some about the dangers of climate, and the opportunities it can also mean in terms of organizing workers in emerging green technologies,” Harrity said. “This fight on climate change is literally about our collective survival — but it is also about our growth and renewal as a union if we are smart enough to seize the opportunities before us.”
Additionally, Cunningham stated, “Leading on this issue [climate change], IAM has an opportunity to grow the union and secure a more secure future for members in generations to come.”
It is evident that for Harrity and the IAM, the so-called climate crisis is as an opportunity to recruit new members — and the unions’ bank accounts — through “green jobs.”
The IAM’s plan is laid out in four pillars: growing membership in clean energy industries; ensuring every new climate job is a union job; building a “climate resilient” IAM; and flexing their muscle at the bargaining table.
The study outlines several ways to expand union control over the clean energy sector. Among the suggestions are growing the zero-carbon energy sector and unionizing the manufacturing supply chain, offshore wind industry and clean vehicle market. Meanwhile, it also calls for pushing labor standards in the clean energy economy, which conveniently includes project labor agreements (PLAs) that effectively block nonunion contractors from even bidding on jobs.
So, what does that mean for taxpayers? Supposedly urgent projects like modernizing the electric grid or making buildings more energy-efficient will come with a much higher price tag. Take Connecticut, for example — between 2001 and 2019, PLAs on school construction projects alone cost taxpayers an extra $500 million. (Apparently, saving the planet can only be done through overpriced, union-controlled projects.)
Additionally, these construction projects will operate under “prevailing wage” laws, which require contractors to pay union-level wages and benefits, while also following union work rules. In other words, it’s not just about saving the environment — it’s about filling union coffers at the expense of taxpayers, all under the guise of “green” initiatives.
Harrity’s efforts to link the climate movement with union power become clearer when examining the numbers. According to UnionStats, an internet data resource that tracks labor union membership, coverage, and density, union membership in Connecticut’s private manufacturing sector has been steadily declining for the past three years. In 2021, 13% of the industry was unionized, but that number fell to 9.6% in 2022 and dropped again to 9.2% in 2023.
This steep decline is a far cry from earlier decades when union membership was much stronger. In 1993, 17.7% of manufacturing jobs in Connecticut were unionized, and back in 1983, it was a robust 31.1%. The steady erosion of union power in the private manufacturing sector is undeniable, and it’s not difficult to see why Harrity is so eager to exploit the climate movement.
Nationally, in 2023, only 7.9% of the 14.9 million manufacturing workers were unionized, a 0.1% increase from the previous year. But that’s a stark contrast to 1980, when 32.3% of just over 19 million manufacturing workers were union members.
By tying climate action to union jobs, Harrity and the IAM’s motivations seem clear: reverse the decline in membership and influence, and secure a foothold in the emerging clean energy industries. The lofty aspirations of preserving the planet appear as a guise or a Trojan horse for union resurgence. What better way to regain lost ground than to position themselves as gatekeepers of the green economy, demanding unionized labor and inflated costs for every climate project?
Lost in the climate change agenda, which is now the latest battleground for union influence, is determining the best and most cost-effective solutions to not only promote a cleaner environment while being mindful of taxpayers, who will be forced to foot the bill(s).
Ultimately, for all of the posturing, this is not about clean energy — it’s about labor power.
