The jobs of the future are not the same as the jobs of the past. The changes began with the inevitable development of technology plus the creation and expansion of the internet. These two factors, coupled with individuals and enterprises using these tools and infrastructure to connect to global markets, weakened the unionized labor force. These occurrences were NOT caused by any particular political party, but rather by the inherent effect of "connectivity" between markets and individuals. Having said this, from a Labor force perspective, there IS a significant difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. Which party has continually supported 1) improved working conditions, 2) Equal Pay for Equal Work, 3) Maternity Leave, 4) ant-Discrimination Laws, and 5) an increase in the Minimum Wage? The Democrats! The Republicans, as a whole, have NEVER supported these efforts.
I often wonder how much work the trades in all area's and millions of other people would have if the Republicans had not shot down every infrastructure and jobs bill Obama presented. Shame on them. Seems like we can build up Iraq every 10 or 15 years after we destroy it. We give billions to other countries for weapons and whatever but leave out our own country. Patriotism my foot.
4
Yes, someone needs to tell these union guys that renewable energy offers them far more of a future than clinging to the past ever will. But who is the person to tell them? Who do they trust, who will they listen to? It's the same thing with commercial fishermen who are so angry about the government regulations which impose catch limits. It would be huge if someone could spread the message that we need to look at the big picture, look to the future, and protect the planet's resources. Who is popular, respected, and nonpartisan enough to get this message across?
I'm thinking it's time for Michael Moore to make a film on this subject. OK, he's obviously not a nonpartisan figure, but he's influential, and he makes people think. And I can't think of anyone else right now.
Any other ideas?!
I'm thinking it's time for Michael Moore to make a film on this subject. OK, he's obviously not a nonpartisan figure, but he's influential, and he makes people think. And I can't think of anyone else right now.
Any other ideas?!
2
MM would do a good job, yes, but would the people who need to see such a film go to it?
The short-sightedness of both the hard-hat unions and the fisherman could be addressed at the national level by the candidates for national office. I wish they would do that. I'm sure there are think tanks that could come up with some great figures to bolster the value of long-term approaches.
It's a challenge, however, to try to counter all the pressures toward an increasingly short-attention-span world. I'm sure those effects ripple through everything.
The short-sightedness of both the hard-hat unions and the fisherman could be addressed at the national level by the candidates for national office. I wish they would do that. I'm sure there are think tanks that could come up with some great figures to bolster the value of long-term approaches.
It's a challenge, however, to try to counter all the pressures toward an increasingly short-attention-span world. I'm sure those effects ripple through everything.
The building trades unions have always been among the least democratic and progressive unions in the history of organized labor. They long practiced nepotism, excluding highly qualified workers from their ranks, and did not accept African Americans as union members. Now they apparently believe that clean energy policies will cost them infrastructure jobs, when quite the opposite is true. Representing only a small fraction of organized labor, their threatened boycott of get-out-the-vote efforts for Democratic Party candidates would have no significant impact. It would also isolate them further from organized labor. Still, it is a pity that some of their leaders are so misinformed. If the buolding trades union members think a president Trump would lift a finger to help raise their wages or improve their working conditions, they are sadly mistaken. He is only interested in helping the one percenters and has a long history of exploiting workers. His professed opposition to free trade would significantly raise the cost of living of all working families in the United States. His plan to deport millions of undocumented immigrants would have no impact on union members. And, of course, it would never happen. Our country should deport criminals, not hard working people, most of whom pay taxes, many of whom have lived in our country since they were infants or young children.
1
What about the construction jobs created by the ever-burgeoning wind- and solar-power industries? Do the heads of the construction unions think that Trump and his Republicans will continue the favorable climate for wind and solar that's existed under President Obama's administration?
Construction jobs are inevitably and unavoidably temporary; once a project is completed, workers must find themselves a new one to employ them. The heads of, and rank-and-file in these shortsighted unions must ask themselves which will be around longer: the natural gas-transmission industry, which will never be more than a stopgap, or the renewable ones. And which provides more jobs NOW? Pipelines are big projects, but few in number, whereas modest-sized renewable-energy technology construction is in many places already and will conceivably be almost everywhere within a few years.
The goose laying the golden eggs for construction workers isn't in the old burn-and-replace industries; choosing the wrong side threatens to kill that goose for a large part of the unions' membership.
Or do they expect that in exchange for supporting Trump he'll just hire them to build a new casino?
Construction jobs are inevitably and unavoidably temporary; once a project is completed, workers must find themselves a new one to employ them. The heads of, and rank-and-file in these shortsighted unions must ask themselves which will be around longer: the natural gas-transmission industry, which will never be more than a stopgap, or the renewable ones. And which provides more jobs NOW? Pipelines are big projects, but few in number, whereas modest-sized renewable-energy technology construction is in many places already and will conceivably be almost everywhere within a few years.
The goose laying the golden eggs for construction workers isn't in the old burn-and-replace industries; choosing the wrong side threatens to kill that goose for a large part of the unions' membership.
Or do they expect that in exchange for supporting Trump he'll just hire them to build a new casino?
3
Odd to think that the very same people may well be thanking the likes of Tom Steyer in the future for managing to help preserve some elements of their current self-indulgent lifestyles - if it's not to late.
Sent from an island off Thailand were construction has long since trashed the coastline and the coral is all but dead whilst divers fight to see the dwindling fish species. Mind you, on the plus side, the sunsets are spectacular due to the pollutants in the air.
Sent from an island off Thailand were construction has long since trashed the coastline and the coral is all but dead whilst divers fight to see the dwindling fish species. Mind you, on the plus side, the sunsets are spectacular due to the pollutants in the air.
2
Wind and solar increase the cost of electricity by 2x to 4x over fossil fuel based energy. Germany (chemicals) and Britain (steel) are losing their heavy manufacturing base due to uneconomic power cost increases (up to five times US rates). Renewable power is intermittent and can't be stored, which means consumers end up with rotating brownouts, or paying for a costly, redundant fossil fuel power system for standby power. China and India are building coal fired power plants to keep their cost profile the lowest, to dominate manufacturing. If we follow Germany and England into renewables we'll permanently foreclose high-paying production jobs in the US forever. Manufacturing could be restored here, under a balanced transition. Enviros don't want that to happen because their ""settled science" is getting dodgier and dodgier to sustain. This is more dangerous to working folk than any oppressive Republican regime. Read about the turmoil of plant closings in England and Germany in the Telegraph, Financial Times or Der Spiegel. It won't be printed in the US press.
5
The turmoil of plant-closing, lost jobs (all of which can be resolved with a safety net for those displaced workers) is nothing compared to the pollution (see China, or don't see China through the smog), health problems, coastal destruction and refugee displacement caused by burning coal.
That's the essence of the cost/benefit argument for switching to renewables.
That's the essence of the cost/benefit argument for switching to renewables.
3
What do you mean renewable power can't be stored? Of course it can -- look up the invention called "batteries," for example.
Wouldn't it be nice if some team of professional journalists could analyze this situation NOT from a horse-race perspective, NOR a demographic history perspective, but rather to break down the actual issues on which the building trade unions and Thomas Steyer disagree. Can we get some facts regarding any actual jobs or job opportunities Steyer has killed in his business operations? Or how many his policy proposals are likely to kill? And how many new jobs might be created by policies he lobbies for (especially if the union movement is involved in drafting such policies)?
I hate to see labor looking behind the curve on the greatest natural disaster since the dinosaurs. But I also hate to get caught cheerleading a guy who opposes one pipeline while investing in another (https://ballotpedia.org/Thomas_Steyer). I hope the NYT will put some resources into analyzing the merits of both sides' cases in this matter.
I hate to see labor looking behind the curve on the greatest natural disaster since the dinosaurs. But I also hate to get caught cheerleading a guy who opposes one pipeline while investing in another (https://ballotpedia.org/Thomas_Steyer). I hope the NYT will put some resources into analyzing the merits of both sides' cases in this matter.
6
As an environmentalist and a former union member, I'm not happy with the split. That said, I'm not going to support any union that wants to build environmentally destructive projects...like Keystone XL. And since many in the construction trade may want to support that con-man, Donald Trump...better to cut them off. There is plenty of infrastructure projects that don't promote the use of dirty fossil fuels. There has to be some give and take in any relationship. I can live with roads and bridges that promote the use of polluting vehicles. I don't want to see the dirtiest possible fuel source, the tar sands of Alberta, increased by building Keystone. If that means a break with some unions, so be it.
10
Let's stop calling this a "split" - unless we make it clear that it's one elite set of unions that's doing the "splitting" and "rifting". Let's stop giving any credibility to reporters who don't bother to go beyond the surface and exploit the easy story rather than doing any real analysis of what's really going on. Look at the banal language he relies on "muscling out unions" - which is patently false and contradicted by his own following paragraphs. Unfortunately you have read way down into the article to discover that the majority of union members in the country are in alliance with Mr. Steyer.
It's Sullivan and his crew who are dinosaurs making a lot of noise in their futile efforts to deny reality and protect their own turf. Their jobs aren't even in real jeopardy. They should be exposed for who and what they are, not given credibility by the Times. Don't you wonder who "leaked" the letters to the NYT and why the Times had no more important stories than this on which to spend column space?
There is no question that there are differences and tensions within the labor movement. There always will be. But their importance to their members is in direct proportion to the extent that those struggles are about power trips and egos, or the real issues facing workers: jobs, living wages in a healthy environment, worker health and safety, equality and dignity in the workplace, the right to organize and not being scapegoated for the poor decisions of their employers.
It's Sullivan and his crew who are dinosaurs making a lot of noise in their futile efforts to deny reality and protect their own turf. Their jobs aren't even in real jeopardy. They should be exposed for who and what they are, not given credibility by the Times. Don't you wonder who "leaked" the letters to the NYT and why the Times had no more important stories than this on which to spend column space?
There is no question that there are differences and tensions within the labor movement. There always will be. But their importance to their members is in direct proportion to the extent that those struggles are about power trips and egos, or the real issues facing workers: jobs, living wages in a healthy environment, worker health and safety, equality and dignity in the workplace, the right to organize and not being scapegoated for the poor decisions of their employers.
1
The teachers unions are pathetically seeking "partnerships" to help them cling to power and avoid ANY accountable for their rank and file members. Importantly the public has caught on and the teachers unions' votes for Democratic contract payola is now widely know to the taxpayer and will be coming to and end shortly. To the benefit of millions of struggling minority and poor students sacrificed at the altar of the teachers unions.
6
Yes, because teachers have such cushy salaries and live lives of luxury.
2
It doesn't matter what the leadership does. The rank and file are already gone to Trump. The AFL-CIO is terrified of this fact and ran an internal poll. They polled a statistically significant 1,000 members and Trump beats Hillary PLUS Bernie. The non- public sector union vote is gone. And of course every cop is going to vote for Trump.
4
The super PAC should add a few words to their goal. Preventing climate change and promoting prosperity outside the borders of the USA. To acknowledge climate change is a political term meaning that job loss in the USA is acceptable. Climate change in the political view is to raise the cost of living of virtually every citizen of the USA. These carbon taxes would be born by everybody who uses energy in any form such as electricity, gasoline, or even flying. The USA has been cleaning up its water and air long before the term global warming was coined. Diminishing returns will accompany any progress achieved by political means. Many countries like China and India could get a lot more bang for their buck by cleaning up their air and water. The USA should encourage other countries to clean up their environment and thereby cleaning up the world's environment by adding a tariff to any products that come from a country that does not meet our environmental standards.
5
As a career environmentalist it is apparent to me that this reporting unintentionally reveals why the environmental movement has been effectively killed (a number of articles by conservation professionals have been titled "The Death of Environmentalism") in recent decades, because of the treachery against any REAL environmental protection practiced by the allegedly environmental friendly democratic party as here is so ironically represented by the duplicitous Clintons. The democratic party with its mass immigration and sabotage of immigration law enforcement mania has always sold out to those few % business owners that need 30 million more land & resources consumers a decade to generate demand to bulldoze 1-2 million acres of forest, farm and range land per year for houses, malls, roads and other essentially temporary job infra structure jobs. But strangely not many factories that actually employ people full time. For the democrat party elites like the republican 1% seem mysteriously to feel a deep moral obligation to build factories in China and Mexico to raise millions of foreigners, who often hate us, out of poverty. The only thing that can possibly explain this kind of what seems to be insanity is an all consuming greed for yet ever more power that can be gained from out & insourced slave workers and the votes that can be bought by the democratic party from desperate immigrants they promise just enough social services crumbs to keep them alive to return to work and vote.
4
Environmentalism is a Crime Against Humanity. Limiting growth and abundant cheap energy will eliminate peace justice prosperity and any hope of reducing poverty.
1
Abundant cheap energy, maybe -- until those fossil sources are depleted. Meanwhile, our skies, rivers, oceans become ever more polluted. A well-planned transition to renewable clean energy would bring jobs galore -- it is puzzling that Big Energy hasn't jumped on this.
Andrew said it best: "Apparently the leaders of the building trade unions are unable to appreciate the vast scale of the labor force that will be employed to facilitate the transition to a clean energy economy." How short-sighted can these folks be?
1
Just remember, today's Democrats HATE the uneducated. Right Mr. Blow?
5
Obviously the congress as it is will not fund something intelligent, but the workers have to have fall-back training immediately available and solar industry work has to be set up for them along with other environmental work. Of course, the obstructionist and obscenely rich will love seeing that this strategy is bad for votes for the Democrats. We must fight and end gerrymandering that takes away votes in quite a few states, from progressive forces. Help.
2
The unions have my sympathy but they are willing to trade in their descendants' well-being for theirs. Understandable but not a stance I agree with. They should put some effort into figuring out how they can participate in a greener economy instead of relying on the same-old, same-old that is harming us all.
4
The corporate democrats took over in the 90s and have been selling out working people for yrs. Bob Shrum.
6
Construction trade union officialdom is hardly to be characterized as "left wing". The plumbers union, after all, gave the world the fanatically anticommunist Cold Warrior and all around neocon warmonger George Meany. It was New York constructions workers that infamously physically attacked anti-Vietnam War demonstrators.
And construction is a different branch of industry than manufacturing. Why does the journalist mix these up?
So right wing is the more accurate political and ideological designation for these particualr trade union "leaders". So too with their despicable advocacy of more oil patch jobs. This is unconscionable on two scores: On the obvious one of contributing to climate change, but also because the oil patch is the *least effective way* to create working class jobs; Employment in the oil patch constitutes a very small percentage to total employment. Check the BLS for verification.
It is even more despicable when one considers the vast backlog of infrastructure work that needs doing in the USA. Make that "green" infrastructure, and even more jobs - construction jobs! - can be created, far more than in the oil patch. But the construction trade union official greedheads can only see what is in front of their snouts. Shifting to advocacy of green infrastructure would require somewhat of a shift to the Left for them, too much for these greedy rightwingers. Working people will never make progress with this "leadership".
And construction is a different branch of industry than manufacturing. Why does the journalist mix these up?
So right wing is the more accurate political and ideological designation for these particualr trade union "leaders". So too with their despicable advocacy of more oil patch jobs. This is unconscionable on two scores: On the obvious one of contributing to climate change, but also because the oil patch is the *least effective way* to create working class jobs; Employment in the oil patch constitutes a very small percentage to total employment. Check the BLS for verification.
It is even more despicable when one considers the vast backlog of infrastructure work that needs doing in the USA. Make that "green" infrastructure, and even more jobs - construction jobs! - can be created, far more than in the oil patch. But the construction trade union official greedheads can only see what is in front of their snouts. Shifting to advocacy of green infrastructure would require somewhat of a shift to the Left for them, too much for these greedy rightwingers. Working people will never make progress with this "leadership".
3
Never understood why the labor unions continue to support the very people who invite illegals into the country to take their jobs. Especially true in the construction trades.
11
I am a member of the CNA nurse union.
I do not support our leaderships full commetment to the BS campain.
This slipt in the Dem. party will be a repeat of the 1968 pres. campain that allow the Pres. Nixion to become pres.
The leadership at CNA has become very militant and over reaching and over spending our union money to fund a socialist. While most of American is a socialist country e.g. Social Security, Medicaid, Medical and free pharmacy meds for over 65 and many more programs are and is very socialist ,but all of American is not ready to give up the profit insurance industry at all. The young nurses in CNA are miss lead by the leadership of CNA. Change needs to come in small steps not huge changes like Obama did. The Right wing GOP will see that the Dem. are split and they will win the house the senate the pres in this election mark my word if the dem s do not get behind one person now they will lose in NOV. 16
Welcome TRUMP/RYan/McConell/ScailiaRIP and 8 years of oil wars.
Welcome Welcome WELCOME.
remember well 1968????
no those young ones they were not there
nurse Dougie
I do not support our leaderships full commetment to the BS campain.
This slipt in the Dem. party will be a repeat of the 1968 pres. campain that allow the Pres. Nixion to become pres.
The leadership at CNA has become very militant and over reaching and over spending our union money to fund a socialist. While most of American is a socialist country e.g. Social Security, Medicaid, Medical and free pharmacy meds for over 65 and many more programs are and is very socialist ,but all of American is not ready to give up the profit insurance industry at all. The young nurses in CNA are miss lead by the leadership of CNA. Change needs to come in small steps not huge changes like Obama did. The Right wing GOP will see that the Dem. are split and they will win the house the senate the pres in this election mark my word if the dem s do not get behind one person now they will lose in NOV. 16
Welcome TRUMP/RYan/McConell/ScailiaRIP and 8 years of oil wars.
Welcome Welcome WELCOME.
remember well 1968????
no those young ones they were not there
nurse Dougie
1
If Mexico pays for the Trump Wall, they will surely be employing their own workers, not US union members.
1
I guess that would depend whether or not the wall was on US or Mexican territory.
1
Well, well, well... The Prol's are beginning to wake up and see the Greens are really anti-development communists who would be content to put them out of work. The Left only hates billionaires who dump hundreds of millions of dollars into political causes when they aren't dumping said dollars into their own pet projects.
8
Our solar installers will be putting up a whole house PVC solar system on our roof this week, another installation team of 6 or 7 skilled workers are just down the street putting up a system for a neighbor. Solar is booming in this part of Massachusetts, where our region has a special program with a specific provider. We plan on buying an electric car to go completely 'off the grid' in the coming months.
Massively building out these "green" industries will have a dramatic effect on this country's labor market. Having 1000s of skilled solar installers out in the labor market will vastly overwhelm those in the dying coal and oil industries. This, of course, is what the Koch brothers and his ilk are terrified about, and they will spend the millions to continue duping these old industry laborers that anything green is bad for them. Steyer and other enlightened Democrats have to do all they can to fight this, and to counter with convincing arguments.
Massively building out these "green" industries will have a dramatic effect on this country's labor market. Having 1000s of skilled solar installers out in the labor market will vastly overwhelm those in the dying coal and oil industries. This, of course, is what the Koch brothers and his ilk are terrified about, and they will spend the millions to continue duping these old industry laborers that anything green is bad for them. Steyer and other enlightened Democrats have to do all they can to fight this, and to counter with convincing arguments.
2
All subsizidized by the underclass that ''progressives'' so disdain.
4
Renaldo - "This, of course, is what the Koch brothers and his ilk are terrified about,"
Don't you think that if there was any money in "green," solar etc. the "Koch brothers and his ilk" would be buying up ":green" energy plants as fast as they can? They are billionaires who make fortunes keeping up with money making industries.
How many "green" solar companies have gone bankrupt, with millions in TAXPAYER money going to a few con artists? If there was money in "green" the smart money would be there, this has nothing to do with politics!
Don't you think that if there was any money in "green," solar etc. the "Koch brothers and his ilk" would be buying up ":green" energy plants as fast as they can? They are billionaires who make fortunes keeping up with money making industries.
How many "green" solar companies have gone bankrupt, with millions in TAXPAYER money going to a few con artists? If there was money in "green" the smart money would be there, this has nothing to do with politics!
4
There is already a party rift within the Democratic Party. It's called the donor class who utterly refused to even listen to average voters who want the government to serve for them not corporate America and the one percent, and the progressive movement that have been kicked to the curb for about eight years under Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the DNC machine. In either case, the party is heading down an ugly road with no turning back, especially when you have Queen Hillary at the helm.
12
Forget about the wealthy 1% for one day and let's talk about the greatest sham on the American Taxpayer: Public Sector Unions.
7
It's simple. Environmentalists don't want jobs because jobs take away from environmental resources. Furthermore environmentalists use "climate disaster" as an excuse to block jobs and projects (Keystone) when there exists no danger.
If you're a laborer, your choice is easy. You want welfare and no jobs? Vote for Hillary!
If you're a laborer, your choice is easy. You want welfare and no jobs? Vote for Hillary!
13
Don't you know that the Keystone project would have resulted in something like 35 permanent jobs? Do you really think we should have despoiled the environment for hundreds of miles (against the wishes of farmers, etc.) and enabled the risk of huge costly spills, while promoting the addition of more carbon/pollution to our atmosphere, for 35 jobs?
Of course environmentalists want jobs. But the Keystone project would not have delivered them.
Of course environmentalists want jobs. But the Keystone project would not have delivered them.
The Democrats have the general election almost clinched. Now I hope they don't go the Republican way and shoot themselves in the foot. Labor and Environmentalists may have a rift but both sides should understand if a Democrat is not on the saddle, both sides will lose.
3
Think of all the demolition and construction jobs that will be created as the oceans slowly rise, flooding everything along our coasts.
7
When it comes time to build all of those transmission lines for redistributing free solar and wind energy, let's see how quickly the environmental movement ties up the projects for decades because of some tiny insect in Nebraska. Luddites are Luddites, no matter what they call themselves these days.
10
One thing you can be sure of: ''Progressives'' couldn't care less about the environment if it gets in the way of their favorite projects. The same ''progressives'' who ruined the rivers of the West with dams want to ruin the landscapes with wind turbines.
They don't care how many eagles they kill, either. And when reliability goes to hell and electric rates triple, they won't care about that.
They don't care how many eagles they kill, either. And when reliability goes to hell and electric rates triple, they won't care about that.
9
Tens of millions of dollars to get the vote out?
That's not shady. It's high time for some changes anyway...
Maybe this election will see some real, long overdue change in our nation.
That's not shady. It's high time for some changes anyway...
Maybe this election will see some real, long overdue change in our nation.
1
The DNC should take a close look at what happened at the Nevada convention over the weekend. The claims that the deck was stacked in HRC's favor appear well founded. "Rigging" behavior like this by the Dems is going to turn people off and drive down turnout in November. And over what, 2 delegates for HRC?
14
Nice to see the Bernie Bros throwing it down like a bunch of thugs!!!
2
But Bernie was not promising to pay the legal bills. Nor encouraging his KKK, neo-Nazi, skinhead racist backers, who love him dearly, to beat opponents. Or quoting Mussolini. Or beating his wife, as he did with Ivana, ripping out her hair. Or harassing women. Or talking like a sewer rat. Or outsourcing jobs to China, as Trump did. Or doing all he could to let all other tax payers hold the bag for his legalistic cheating on taxes. Or his boasting of his serial infidelity. Or boasting about his venereal diseases he caught and spread. Yeah, it's just the same, in your little neo-fascist dreams.
4
"Enraged" construction unions should consider that it is because of Republicans who blocked and refused infrastructure rebuilding and maintenance that construction and the nation has suffered. Really? You want to elect a right wing Republican who will continue that ruin? Remember that from Reagan on, Republicans have done their best to crush all unions, from education to construction. Stand with the people who stood by you, Democrats. Vote Democratic.
9
It's clear that the DNC establishment has lost its compass just like the GOP establishment. The party establishments must survive regardless of the opinions of the members. Sanders is much more poised to be able to beat Trump in the election but the DNC can't rely on him being a cash cow for the party. If they continue on this path hopefully they will starve themselves out of relevance like the GOP establishment and the seeds of a real democracy will sprout in the US.
12
I don't think there will be many good union jobs left following a global environmental apocalypse, not even cleaning up after.
5
With the likes of this latest outbreak of civil war and the chair throwing melee in Nevada, the Dems are on the verge of repeating their 2004 fiasco - the election they couldn't possibly lose, but Kerry did - by allowing Trump to divide and conquer them just as he did the GOP primary field. It is amazing. Trump, despite the howls of protest from the Times and lefty intellectuals, may actually pull this off, chewing his way through a bewildered assortment of career politicians. Now he toys with Bernie and Hillary, playing on the Bernster's ego (stay in Bernie! stay in! you deserve to be our first socialist king!) By being the anti-politician and violating every political taboo (a GOP nominee defending Planned Parenthood and the right of trans people to use whatever bathrooms they want? huh?) he is running circles around all the politicians. It is something to behold.
12
It would be a tragedy that, as with Ralph Nader, a man allows his pride and misplaced stand in history to prevent Democrats from taking back the government of the US (House and Senate) from right-wing reactionaries and to stop their Party's leading demagogue (Trump) from going any further than his 3 ring circus.
7
It would be a tragedy if the DNC and Hillary don't realize that she can't beat Trump and get out of the way for the good of the country.
11
The more important thing about this story is that unions don't have enough money to do much of anything on their own, and thus have been compelled to partner with this patrician for financing. In other words, why is it that working people don't have enough money to support their own goals, and so now need to cozy up with some aristocrat to be able to pursue them. He might be a nice aristocrat, but what happens when people of his class simply decide to cut off working people altogether?
8
The Keystone pipeline will never provide as many jobs as will the building of a clean-energy infrastructure. Union workers are not well-served by a retrograde leadership.
7
Fact is union workers vote against their own best interests all the time. I'm ready to let those idiots fade into oblivion if it means creating a new labor block that will vote FOR themselves.
Jobs will become more secure as businesses accept the future and work towards it instead of against it. Like it or not, environmentally friendly practices are the future for our health and survival. Early adopters will be in the position to reap early benefits, and lead rather than follow. Senator Sanders is fighting hard for unions and workers. They are his top priority (I know mentioning Senator Sanders will probably lead to this comment being rejected by the NYT). Environmentalism and unions are in fact working towards the same goals, the long term well being of workers and families.
6
I wonder how many of these purported union supporters or members drive foreign cars? Hypocrites all!
4
We are just entering an era when automation will replace labor beyond the capacity of retraining. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to retrain, something neither party has funded since WW2. Climate change facts and fracking did not eliminate coal jobs, automation did. For a while, there is still plenty of work that needs doing (renewable energy, grids, bridges and roads) but the cost is high and existing business special interests (e.g. Investor-Owned Power companies) lobby to prevent it.
My generation pretended we had paid enough into pensions, infrastructure, and compensation for environmental resource depletion. Everybody over 50 whose family income exceeds 100K should be paying at least 30% of it in taxes, no deductions. Even then, it won't match what we took without paying our share. The cost will get enormous if we don't increase taxes now. On the positive side, all the knowledge needed to switch entirely to renewable energy exists, and economic growth will help with the cost more than most think.
My generation pretended we had paid enough into pensions, infrastructure, and compensation for environmental resource depletion. Everybody over 50 whose family income exceeds 100K should be paying at least 30% of it in taxes, no deductions. Even then, it won't match what we took without paying our share. The cost will get enormous if we don't increase taxes now. On the positive side, all the knowledge needed to switch entirely to renewable energy exists, and economic growth will help with the cost more than most think.
5
Yeah, let's soak the rich. Worked great in Venezuela, didn't it?
5
So how is it you determined people over 50 or who make $100K should be taxed at 30%. Probably the same way I think all public assistance should be taxed at 50%. Any non-profit, including churches that choose to feed the poor and run homeless shelters should loose their tax exempt status and be required to pay the state a hotel tax of 27% as do the private sector.
3
Maybe you should look into the facts some more. I pay way more than 30% all told, even after deductions. I'm not the problem.
Somehow, I am reminded of Monty Python´s Life of Brian.
BRIAN: We mustn't fight each other! Surely we should be united against the common enemy!
EVERYONE: The Judean People's Front?!
BRIAN: No, no! The Romans!
BRIAN: We mustn't fight each other! Surely we should be united against the common enemy!
EVERYONE: The Judean People's Front?!
BRIAN: No, no! The Romans!
1
Job creation is certainly an important aspect of economic growth, decreased inequity and improving the greater good, but not all jobs are of equal value. Climate change is going to have substantial impact around the world, and the U.S. is included in this, so it is foolish of some unions to pretend they have no role in supporting mitigation of climate change. One of the reasons unions have become a target in this country is their history of job protection regardless of circumstance, impact and long-term goals for the economy and environment. The Republican party is hostile to them already, so not supporting the Democratic party seems completely short-sighted and foolish.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
1
Environmentalists and labor unions should be locked in a warm embrace, and not be at each other's throats. The problem is on both sides, as illustrated by this "clash" among union members over Tom Steyer. While environmentalists have been instrumental in stopping projects like the KXL pipeline--and foreclosed opportunities for unions with sources of new jobs for their memberships when they do--the fact remains that energy efficiency and renewable energy represent a multi-trillion dollar market, and represents a far greater opportunity for union members than a continued build-out of fossil fuel infrastructure projects. But the first step must be taken by environmentalists, including business people like Tom Steyer, to better monetize energy efficiency and renewables, steer capital to sustainability, and create the basis for prosperity for union members. Solid coalitions have been built on far less.
2
As much as I'd like to see Big Oil get its comeuppance, I don't think the election cycle is the time for Democratic Party supporters to turn against one another and eat each other alive. Democrats can't afford to assume that "we've got this one in the bag" and start hashing out all our issues before November.
Look at the GOP: despite the stench from the Trump campaign, they're holding their noses and uniting: he might win. And if you thought G. Dubya Bush was bad in 2000, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Priority number one HAS to be making sure we don't elect a half-witted, violent, narcissistic dictator to the Presidency. Our schools, our environment, our democracy and our planet cannot afford to have the Democrats blow this one.
Look at the GOP: despite the stench from the Trump campaign, they're holding their noses and uniting: he might win. And if you thought G. Dubya Bush was bad in 2000, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Priority number one HAS to be making sure we don't elect a half-witted, violent, narcissistic dictator to the Presidency. Our schools, our environment, our democracy and our planet cannot afford to have the Democrats blow this one.
4
Stopping Keystone was irrational. It was politics at its worst. It was what this administration has been about. Arrogance in reckless support of micro-minority desires at the expense of the majority.
9
Come on, that project had no longterm value. Only a handful of permanent jobs would have been created, in the service of extremely dirty fossil fuel that would add to the glut.
The environment and job creation cannot fight. If environmentalists don't understand that, the planet is doomed! It is simply not reasonable to expect people to go unemployed and risk poverty for long-term gains. We must think in terms of a short human lifespan. We must also think of biggest bang for the buck environmentally speaking. Something like a national campaign to eat less meat. The resources required for cattle raising on the scale it is currently done is staggering! It is the single best thing we can do for the planet and in many ways, it is the easiest and the economic impact to all but a few, is minimal.
As a consequence, the case for GMO crops weakens. Farmers could focus on quality and greater diversity in what they grow. Organic farming would be more profitable. A great deal of the food currently grown is for feeding cattle.
As a consequence, the case for GMO crops weakens. Farmers could focus on quality and greater diversity in what they grow. Organic farming would be more profitable. A great deal of the food currently grown is for feeding cattle.
1
How about a campaign to save water by not cultivating marijuana? Oh no, couldn't have that, now could we?
2
"...it appears that the answer is to sell out to a billionaire who not only has little or no stake in our movement, our members or their work but who has actively fought against our members’ interest,” Mr. O’Sullivan wrote.
Wait, are we talking about the GOP/Trump or Unions/Environmentalists?
Kind of funny: the symmetry of it all.
Wait, are we talking about the GOP/Trump or Unions/Environmentalists?
Kind of funny: the symmetry of it all.
5
The Will Rodgers quote was "I don't belong to an organized political party, I' a Democrat" seem apt for today.
The young will eat the old, the old the young, and we will have a President Trump. And Supreme court Justice Palin.
The young will eat the old, the old the young, and we will have a President Trump. And Supreme court Justice Palin.
1
Looks like the Union members have finally figured out that the leadership has been using them to get rich. If you are in a Union-you want jobs. If you want jobs-you want Trump. Period. Clinton is 8 more years of Obama.
9
Republicans have been dividing working men and women from their allies who care about the middle class living conditions for many years now by claiming it is one or the other that must be sacrificed. The environment for jobs, unions for freedom, and health for the economy. The truth is that the Republicans are just incompetent, short sighted managers who cannot see how chew gum and walk at the same time to make progress on all fronts or worse, simply want to keep "those people" from succeeding. Either way, democratic allies should keep their eyes on the future prize that awaits us if we stay united and not do the Republican's dirty work for them.
What a thoughtful, disturbing yet compelling article!!! Kudos to the Times (again) for leading the charge of compelling front-page political journalism. Food and ideas for thought, here.
If the Democrats fail to #ComeTogether then Donald Trump could become President. The wouldn't bode well for Environmentalists or Union workers. Not all choices are perfect but #EyeonthePrize.
1
OMG...we deserve to lose our democracy when these kind of kindergarten antics are being played out in the political arena. "I don't like your friend, so I am not going to play with you any more!" So now construction is only concerned about their own short-term pocketbook and don't want to do anything about climate change? Think of all the construction that will be available when we finally get sane enough to do building to prepare for the climate changes that are beyond our control! Maybe we should have the US divided into two countries...one who wants to maintain our democracy (led by rationally elected leaders), and one that wants to preserve the oligarchy and cater to the dark side of human instincts - led by Donald Trump. Egads, this election season is bringing out all the snakes from under the rocks, and we the people are the ones who are going to get the poison.
2
I am a big supporter of unions... Just not short sighted unions. I'm afraid their myopic behavior will speed their demise. Too bad, because they are vital to maintaining a middle class. In Oregon, unions are fighting to maintain an unsustainable PERS, IP28 and more. Please union leaders, think bigger and longer term for the sake of your members.
7
A simple point that Steyer and the labor leaders might want to pay attention to?
Wind turbines and their access roads and power connections don't build themselves. Rooftops don't sprout solar panels after a rainstorm.
And we have roads, bridges and aging energy infrastructure that all needs repair or replacement. Buildings around the country can be better insulated and more efficient, also requiring the trades.
So stop the bickering and go with it. They know that even if Trump built a wall between us and Mexico, he'd hire foreign workers to build it.
Wind turbines and their access roads and power connections don't build themselves. Rooftops don't sprout solar panels after a rainstorm.
And we have roads, bridges and aging energy infrastructure that all needs repair or replacement. Buildings around the country can be better insulated and more efficient, also requiring the trades.
So stop the bickering and go with it. They know that even if Trump built a wall between us and Mexico, he'd hire foreign workers to build it.
We need a huge infrastructure jobs program, as Bernie Sanders continually points out, which would include the switch to clean energy. There is no need for labor unions and environmentalists to fight.
1
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Thank you Pogo
2
These unions that oppose climate crisis activists attempting to prevent the end of everything, need an education in how to save their children with CLEAN GREEN ENERGY JOBS: pipes and components for geo-thermal, wind and solar need building NOW & create jobs for a future that is SUSTAINABLE for all. Scientific gnorance is driving the reaction to Steyer’s good work. Understandably workers are worried, and need an education at www.GreenWorldRising.org to see how new green jobs & extant technology for them can save life on Earth for their families & be safer for them. Only the political will to create such jobs is lacking, because of right wing greed corporate greed from Koch Bros, Exxon Mobil, BP etc. FDR retrofitted industries in less than 2 yrs to defeat Nazi powers. We can retrofit industry to save our children's lives on this planet. Mr. Steyer is doing a good thing to help save civilization for all, including laborers. GOP maniacs who deny the truths of scientists are keeping too many workers ignorant. Watch www.GreenWorldRising.org Carbon & methane emissions are choking the thin veil of air we breathe with carbon & methane emissions, trapping the sun's heat on Earth. A sixth extinction is is upon us as we reach over 400 parts per million of pollution in our atmosphere & glaciers melt away!
KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE And your Enemies Closer, goes an Arabic saying. Polarization among groups of Democratic voters needs to be minimized. In order to get things done, you must accept the reality of things you'd like to have others change. Convincing Trumka to refocus his building projects on sustainable energy would be for more constructive than attacking him as an enemy. Talk with him about the fact that Germany's energy mix is about 80% solar and wind, headed toward 100%. Convince him that sustainable is the future and will bring him profits along with benefits to entire planet. Scorched earth politics will put the Earth at greater risk than working together toward protecting our planet. We're all in the same lifeboat. We need to be wary about who we push overboard to feed to the sharks. Next time someone is chosen to be pushed overboard, it could be your turn.
1
It was estimated that the Keystone Pipeline would create about 50 permanent jobs. Compromising Earth's environmental health as a trade off for short term economic gain and employment is disappointing and is going to cost the unions support from many people who otherwise do support them.
1
It sounds like the Times is looking around for a Tea Party doppelganger within the Democrats. Most of the reporting within it is pop cultural exploration of the natural differences between labor and Tom Steyers. Not much is said about the Keystone pipeline's irrelevance now that the source of oil and gase in Canada that would have fed into the pipeline is now burning up, and the fields have been shut down. And labor will easily be appeased by a serious promise to reconstruct an aging, broken infrastucture in the cities of this country. Finally, if Trumka of the AFL-CIO said anything about this major conflict between labor and The Bad Environmentalists it isn't reported in this story
1
Don't be silly.
There will be plenty of construction jobs building dikes and pump stations from Massachusetts to Texas as global warming already in play takes hold.
Get over the infighting.
Invest in Caterpillar and cement.
There will be plenty of construction jobs building dikes and pump stations from Massachusetts to Texas as global warming already in play takes hold.
Get over the infighting.
Invest in Caterpillar and cement.
1
Did you see the mass revolt at the Democrat conference in Utah? Barbara Boxer was booed off the stage by various Democrat constituencies, including those backing Bernie Sanders. She taunted them and declared that Hillary was already the nominee of the party. Democrats are always talking about the splinter groups of the Republican party. They need to look at their own party. It is coming apart at the seams.
4
That makes sense? Side with Scott Walker, the Koch Bros, etc?
There will be more long-term great jobs in developing clean energy than in scraping the bottom of the coal mines and the oil barrels.
There will be more long-term great jobs in developing clean energy than in scraping the bottom of the coal mines and the oil barrels.
2
What will hurt turnout is a significant percent of the Democratic base rejects Hillary as the candidate for the party. This will not change or be remedied by Hillary as she pivots to the right, her natural position, in the general election.
3
Anyone not willing to support the democratic nominee is a hypocrite to the values of the party, and both of these constituenties. The republicans, with a Trump presidency, will destroy all effort to include science in the discussion of the environment and energy sources. They will undo the Paris agreement, "tear up" the Iran nuclear agreement, destroy Social Security and as many social programs as possible. Medicare will see reduced funding, the VA will be privatized, more Citizens United jurists will be appointed to the SCOTUS, infrastructure, jobs and education will be unfunded, and the upper percent will receive more tax cuts and the middle class ignored. Uniting behind the ISSUES, not personalities is critical.
2
Keep it up, and you just might convince me -- to vote for Trump!
As a Union member and former Labor official I can Understand the concerns of the building trade Unions. Unions should be calling for the building of our infrastructure. I understand about the enviorment and agree we need to save our enviroment. This country needs roads, bridges, tunnels, airports this creates building trade jobs for some years. I believe Organized Labor needs to find common ground and work together. Fighing among ourselves will hurt in the long run.
3
The Unions (A.F.L. - C.I.O. in particular) need to think short term for once. They need to work to keep the republicans out of the White House in 2017.
They can go back to bickering after November 8th.
Not that I'm all that wild about who the democrats are offering up.
They can go back to bickering after November 8th.
Not that I'm all that wild about who the democrats are offering up.
1
The building trade unions might want to look at a calendar. It's the 21st century. Renewable energy and infrastructure are where most of their jobs will be coming from for the foreseeable future.
Rather than sulk, they should be looking for assurances to get the additional training needed to perform them and keep them as union jobs.
Their leaders have to know that coal mining, steel production and large scale manufacturing are not coming back and that's primarily because of economic factors, not politics. They are not doing their membership any favors by pandering to their ignorance. Playing footsy with Trump is even worse, look at his record on unions and wages in general.
Get in the game, instead of standing on the sidelines and waiting for it to be 1955 again.
Rather than sulk, they should be looking for assurances to get the additional training needed to perform them and keep them as union jobs.
Their leaders have to know that coal mining, steel production and large scale manufacturing are not coming back and that's primarily because of economic factors, not politics. They are not doing their membership any favors by pandering to their ignorance. Playing footsy with Trump is even worse, look at his record on unions and wages in general.
Get in the game, instead of standing on the sidelines and waiting for it to be 1955 again.
6
It's high time manufacturing laborers joined us in the 21st century. Mindless manufacturing work can be done easily and cheaply by machines. It's not new and it's not sudden but insisting on staying uneducated and hiding behind their corrupt union bosses, they've managed to keep their zombie jobs alive for decades longer than they deserved.
If they're completely unable or unwilling to build knew skills, there's always emigration as an option. Pack your bags and leave as European laborers have done for over a century. That's how I ended up in the US to begin with. I emigrated for similar reasons.
In the meantime, I prefer to do everything possible to maintain clean water, clean air, unadulterated food and a thrive no natural ecosystem for my children and the generations after them.
If they're completely unable or unwilling to build knew skills, there's always emigration as an option. Pack your bags and leave as European laborers have done for over a century. That's how I ended up in the US to begin with. I emigrated for similar reasons.
In the meantime, I prefer to do everything possible to maintain clean water, clean air, unadulterated food and a thrive no natural ecosystem for my children and the generations after them.
1
Liberals, typically, castigate anyone who doesn't believe as they do. A reaction which they abhor on the right. Let's think about people who are currently 45-55 years old and in the situation the article refers to.
What they see are manufacturing jobs going away either to other countries with cheaper labor or due to advances in technology. The latter could mean jobs for some, but require education well beyond what the workers currently have. So these folks hear about the future explosion of jobs in new fields that they are unprepared for and wonder how they pay their bills when their current jobs go away.
A classic example of what they fear is Hillary Clinton's comment regarding the coal workers, "At a CNN town-hall event Sunday night, the Democratic front runner made clear that a Clinton administration would “put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”" (National Review)
So, before you take sides, try to listen from the other person's perspective so you truly understand what they are saying.
What they see are manufacturing jobs going away either to other countries with cheaper labor or due to advances in technology. The latter could mean jobs for some, but require education well beyond what the workers currently have. So these folks hear about the future explosion of jobs in new fields that they are unprepared for and wonder how they pay their bills when their current jobs go away.
A classic example of what they fear is Hillary Clinton's comment regarding the coal workers, "At a CNN town-hall event Sunday night, the Democratic front runner made clear that a Clinton administration would “put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”" (National Review)
So, before you take sides, try to listen from the other person's perspective so you truly understand what they are saying.
8
I guess union leadership thinks building a huge wall will provide jobs that will make Amerika great again. Teamsters tossed in with Nixon, traffic controllers joined them on Reagan, Bush41/Clinton cleaned their clocks with NAFTA and now 2 of their elected leaders, who have led the membership to 3rd class lives, are whining about who is on the Get Out The Vote Team. I guess the construction unions would prefer a Get Out The WHITE Vote program instead, considering their long history of keeping non whites out of the trades.
The union workers opposed to this initiative have to look to the future. Climate change is here.
9
Labor has bigger problems, namely Richard Trumka.
Trumka was Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO in the 1990s. He was a key cog in a money-laundering scheme between the unions and the DNC in order to rig the Teamsters election for Carey over rival Hoffa. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/26/us/ex-president-of-teamsters-is-charge....
Trumka pleaded the Fifth under congressional inquiry and for some reason, the AFL-CIO ignored its own rule barring people who plead the Fifth from holding leadership positions in the union.
Now, Trumka is selling the AFL-CIO, just as he did the United Mine Workers. Is it any wonder why their is a rift in Labor ... and it's not just because of the greens.
Trumka was Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO in the 1990s. He was a key cog in a money-laundering scheme between the unions and the DNC in order to rig the Teamsters election for Carey over rival Hoffa. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/26/us/ex-president-of-teamsters-is-charge....
Trumka pleaded the Fifth under congressional inquiry and for some reason, the AFL-CIO ignored its own rule barring people who plead the Fifth from holding leadership positions in the union.
Now, Trumka is selling the AFL-CIO, just as he did the United Mine Workers. Is it any wonder why their is a rift in Labor ... and it's not just because of the greens.
6
As a lifelong Democrat I am disgusted at the majority of comments lambasting the unions. It was union labor that built our highways, bridges, tunnels, water systems, and cities as well as the companies that supply our nation with energy. Likening the people criticizing the hedge fund manager who believes in climate change with horse and buggy drivers is wrong.
The very technologies that these workers labor so hard on every single day are the ones that are still driving our country today. The best selling cars in America are not hybrid and the overwhelming majority of Americans do not have solar panels installed in their homes. Cllmate change is real but the reason the labor unions do not want to see their jobs gone is real. Without fracking, and without Saudi Arabia's fear of American energy independence we would be paying $4.00 instead of $2.00 for a gallon of gas and would be beholden to a country that is funding jihadists around the world.
It's very easy to call people dinosaurs who work hard every day to put a roof over their family's heads, and food on the table and clothes on their backs.
If our government wants to shut down certain industries then it has an obligation to pay 100% for retraining people in these "old" industries for jobs in the new era. It also has a responsibility to provide them with an income until they have a new job so they can support themselves and their families, and to help place them in a new job.
The very technologies that these workers labor so hard on every single day are the ones that are still driving our country today. The best selling cars in America are not hybrid and the overwhelming majority of Americans do not have solar panels installed in their homes. Cllmate change is real but the reason the labor unions do not want to see their jobs gone is real. Without fracking, and without Saudi Arabia's fear of American energy independence we would be paying $4.00 instead of $2.00 for a gallon of gas and would be beholden to a country that is funding jihadists around the world.
It's very easy to call people dinosaurs who work hard every day to put a roof over their family's heads, and food on the table and clothes on their backs.
If our government wants to shut down certain industries then it has an obligation to pay 100% for retraining people in these "old" industries for jobs in the new era. It also has a responsibility to provide them with an income until they have a new job so they can support themselves and their families, and to help place them in a new job.
25
What's clear is that climate change is proceeding at a much faster pace than scientists had predicted. Union leadership must be part of the all out battle to secure the safety of the planet for future generations rather than focusing solely on short term concerns. All of our lives will be disrupted by this effort, but it is better than the alternative.
1
Industrial unions have won their battle for wages, benefits, and working conditions. In right to work states in the south, workers routinely reject unionization. This is not the behavior of exploited masses. The result is that unions are looking to public employees to swell their coffers and retain political clout. When people bash unions today it is because they are impacted by public employee work stoppages.
1
The faster we transition to a fully sustainable energy system deriving the bulk of our energy needs from renewable sources like solar, wind, geothermal, and hydro, the quicker we will be free of our dependence on oil from all sources.
"Government" already funds a great deal of the social, vocational, educational and housing programs that aid displaced workers. Maybe it's time for some unions to take a hard look at what is truly best for their members -- not just today but in five, ten, 20 years -- and helped them make some of the difficult decisions to transition to a healthier, more robust, and sustainable economy that's coming into fore in that time period. We don't live in China, and government cannot dictate unilaterally what happens in the economy from the top down. Our only option is to work together, and if we can do that, then we're all environmentalists and labor unionists, together.
"Government" already funds a great deal of the social, vocational, educational and housing programs that aid displaced workers. Maybe it's time for some unions to take a hard look at what is truly best for their members -- not just today but in five, ten, 20 years -- and helped them make some of the difficult decisions to transition to a healthier, more robust, and sustainable economy that's coming into fore in that time period. We don't live in China, and government cannot dictate unilaterally what happens in the economy from the top down. Our only option is to work together, and if we can do that, then we're all environmentalists and labor unionists, together.
Construction workers have always been ideologically conservative. The rank and file are the polar opposite of their union bosses. Blue collar workers have been aligned with the conservative culture wars for years. The Republican Party appeals to them because they, like business, in general don't want government telling them what to do. So they keep putting their heads deeper into the sand with the promise that things won't change. They don't like change. Their kids will follow them in their job choices. A lot of those jobs are slowly dying. They are clinging to false hope. Donald Trump gives them false hope. The quick fix. Tells them what they want to hear. Their jobs are coming back. They are gone forever. Technology, robotics, and the search for cheaper wages are making a lot of blue collar work obsolete. They need to tell their kids to get into the future. The past is past and it ain't ever coming back, regardless of what Trump says and the whole of the Republican Party. The future is here, embrace it.
6
“Years of financial distress have left the A.F.L.-C.I.O. desperate for cash, and it appears that the answer is to sell out to a billionaire who not only has little or no stake in our movement, our members or their work but who has actively fought against our members’ interest,” -
True enough. If the Democrats want to thrive, they need to look towards the future
True enough. If the Democrats want to thrive, they need to look towards the future
2
Ah, the irony is rich. "Two of the Democratic Party's most loyal constituencies, labor and environmentalists," are fighting over who's in charge of getting out the vote for Hillary Clinton, the poster-girl for job-killing trade agreements and environmentally destructive fossil fuel extraction and pipelines. You just couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.
11
How charming to receive moral lectures from the comfortable with stable jobs and stable lives, who advise workers battling to survive to just suck it up. Labor in this country has borne the brunt of a double whammy. Corporations were greenlighted to move manufacturing to low-wage countries by policiies like NAFTA. Then enforcement looked the other way as remaining businesses hired illegal immigrants willing to work for wages that can't sustain a middle-class American lifestyle.Of course we need to work toward clean energy, but it can't just be on the backs of some of us. Ask the people of Puerto Rico about the wisdom of trusting hedge fund managers to steer us in the right direction.
12
And unions show once again why unions are so detested, when they ought to be beloved... sigh.
4
This is absolutely HILLARY-ous! The Conservative Democrats squaring off against the true Progressives. Will money win? Stay tuned.
5
As Bob Dylan wrote, and to which several commenters have alluded, "the times they are a-changing."
I grew up in the labor union's time of glory. My father, Guy Nunn, was the "Voice of the United Auto Workers," broadcasting labor news and views out of Detroit in the early 60s when the Big Three automakers were prime - and working on the assembly line was not only made safer and better compensated by unionization but the UAW also provided workers an opportunity for career elevation and civic awareness through continuing education. Much of that is gone now, swallowed up by competition from the global economy, but the original purpose of labor unions lives on: Essentially, to protect workers from exploitation.
The tendency of corporations - especially in today's relatively unregulated, unaccountable economic environment - is to consider the human factor as the most expendable. This is true regardless of whether any particular industry is eco-sustainable or not. It is not the type of work - but corporatism itself - that unions should be concerned with. Whether building oil pipelines or photovoltaic cells there will continue to be a need for unions, as global industry tries to turn the corner towards climate-sensitive means of production.
Now the question is, and will continue to be, Which party, and which candidates, best represent the kind of awareness of these issues that the nation's labor unions can throw their support behind?
I grew up in the labor union's time of glory. My father, Guy Nunn, was the "Voice of the United Auto Workers," broadcasting labor news and views out of Detroit in the early 60s when the Big Three automakers were prime - and working on the assembly line was not only made safer and better compensated by unionization but the UAW also provided workers an opportunity for career elevation and civic awareness through continuing education. Much of that is gone now, swallowed up by competition from the global economy, but the original purpose of labor unions lives on: Essentially, to protect workers from exploitation.
The tendency of corporations - especially in today's relatively unregulated, unaccountable economic environment - is to consider the human factor as the most expendable. This is true regardless of whether any particular industry is eco-sustainable or not. It is not the type of work - but corporatism itself - that unions should be concerned with. Whether building oil pipelines or photovoltaic cells there will continue to be a need for unions, as global industry tries to turn the corner towards climate-sensitive means of production.
Now the question is, and will continue to be, Which party, and which candidates, best represent the kind of awareness of these issues that the nation's labor unions can throw their support behind?
10
This friend speaks my mind.
I agree with Andrew in Alaska. As usual, labor is far behind the times and uninformed. There is far, far more to infrastructure than natural gas pipelines, and they ought to endorse the candidate who cares about infrastructure, and that would be Mrs. Clinton.
3
They are being asked to support a man who says no to certain jobs today in favor of possible jobs in the future. Sounds like 'Jam yesterday and jam tomorrow, but never jam today".
4
Does the divide of both major political parties surprise anyone?
The two most unpopular candidates ever, cannot hold together their individual political caucuses and core constituents. This comes as a shock to anyone?
320 million people in this Country and we have a choice of smallpox or hemlock as the Republic's cause of death.
O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command. - Laveliee, Roulthier & Weir - (1880/1908)
The two most unpopular candidates ever, cannot hold together their individual political caucuses and core constituents. This comes as a shock to anyone?
320 million people in this Country and we have a choice of smallpox or hemlock as the Republic's cause of death.
O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command. - Laveliee, Roulthier & Weir - (1880/1908)
2
American unionism is a long-dead corpse, its killing a necessary precedent to the sinking of the middle class and the institution of full plutocracy so that rule of the wealthy, by the wealthy and for the wealthy shall not perish.
The problem with American serfs is they haven't fully learned their place and need the lash and a whiff of grapeshot to drop and grovel to their owners and masters.
The problem with American serfs is they haven't fully learned their place and need the lash and a whiff of grapeshot to drop and grovel to their owners and masters.
3
It's the 21st century. The middle class is white collar.
Humans have to evolve, not the environment. Environment first, jobs second. We should never, ever kick the environment to the curb to save jobs. The AFL-CIO needs to grow up; learn how to properly represent their unions in ways that are smarter. The keystone pipeline is simply unnecessary. Anyone who says otherwise is making money from its construction or operation.
4
We don't have to make a choice between jobs and the environment. The only chance we have to avoid catastrophic climate change is a new infrastructure. That means massive investments in wind, solar, transmission lines and storage. If the unions are smart they'll work to position their people to do those jobs and pressure the manufacturers in these new industries to use union labor. We can't stop the coming change and it's in labor's best interests to get ahead of it.
The Dems have been divided for quite some time between the old stalwarts in the Labor movement versus environmentalists. One wants jobs at almost any cost environmentally while the well upwardly mobile Dems concerned about the environment want to curtail too much growth. One could see this chasm forming decades ago. It has grown deeper, and unless the two can get together many white working class males who care more about having a job then the effects of climate change are going to go over to the dark side, read: Trump. They already think he's their savior. Wait till they find out Trump's pulling the wool over their eyes. Where will they go next?
DD
Manhattan
DD
Manhattan
I hope the strategy works, but it will be a tough road. It's an issue fueled by college education ( environmentalists) vs high school or not (labor) and labor has a limited viewpoint due to traditional roles for it's workers. Environmentalists want to protect our environment = not selfish while labor just wants jobs at ANY costs = only care about their lives and be damned as to the impact on society or the earth.
Wake up labor!
Wake up labor!
2
"Rift Between Labor and Environmentalists...
"...Both letters were provided to The New York Times by a labor official who insisted on anonymity.
"The schism comes as Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, is running a populist campaign..."
Call me paranoid, but I smell a rat.
As November approaches, many powerful issues are at stake--the future of our two political parties included. The "Dirty Tricks" pioneered by Nixon and Atwater, and perfected by Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove, are very likely to put in an appearance...and this article, referencing "bitter" anonymous letters, and predicting a schism on the Left, smells of such tactics.
"Wedge issues," design to divide and manipulate the electorate, and the whole "voter fraud" non-issue, designed to curtail voter turnout, are examples of this ilk.
As are the efforts of the formerly prestigious NYTimes to bury, dismiss, or prematurely predict the death of Bernie Sanders' campaign, and force the Nomination of Hillary Clinton, the least trusted and most disliked candidate since Nixon.
Clearly, the NYT is no friend of the Left, and has been so determined to foil the only truly Progressive candidate in this election, that it was willing to risk whatever was left of its reputation for journalistic integrity!
So before you call me paranoid, remember Lilly Tomlin's droll comment, "These days, no matter how cynical I get it's never enough to keep up!"
"...Both letters were provided to The New York Times by a labor official who insisted on anonymity.
"The schism comes as Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, is running a populist campaign..."
Call me paranoid, but I smell a rat.
As November approaches, many powerful issues are at stake--the future of our two political parties included. The "Dirty Tricks" pioneered by Nixon and Atwater, and perfected by Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove, are very likely to put in an appearance...and this article, referencing "bitter" anonymous letters, and predicting a schism on the Left, smells of such tactics.
"Wedge issues," design to divide and manipulate the electorate, and the whole "voter fraud" non-issue, designed to curtail voter turnout, are examples of this ilk.
As are the efforts of the formerly prestigious NYTimes to bury, dismiss, or prematurely predict the death of Bernie Sanders' campaign, and force the Nomination of Hillary Clinton, the least trusted and most disliked candidate since Nixon.
Clearly, the NYT is no friend of the Left, and has been so determined to foil the only truly Progressive candidate in this election, that it was willing to risk whatever was left of its reputation for journalistic integrity!
So before you call me paranoid, remember Lilly Tomlin's droll comment, "These days, no matter how cynical I get it's never enough to keep up!"
9
To Say Hillary Clinton came down on the side opposing the Keystone XL pipeline is just plain foolish. Read Clinton Cash to check out the shenanigans Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and the State Department engaged in to try to get the pipeline approved before Obama finally shut it down. She opposed the pipeline only under extreme duress and if you believe she wouldn't revive the project when the money is right then you're silly.
8
Exactly. Well said.
1
What is disturbing is that for all the 'liberal' bias against the union leaders representing the working class and the "look to the future" slogans, there are no answers, no plan, only hypothetical ideas and renewable energy jobs in factories yet to be built. You can't ask frightened workers to feed their children on empty promises. Solar companies are going out of business. Oil will be cheap for decades. If a Republican becomes president you may well see a resurgence in coal. And for many families of many generations that means income and a way of life. Yes things are changing but what we have has been built on the backs of people like coal miners and now you want to throw them under the bus for promises you cannot keep.
10
There was the time of farm laborers, which gave way to the time of factory laborers and now it's the time of office workers. Things change. Societies change. Better for some, worse for others. No transition is seamless and painless. But it takes willingness to adapt to minimize the pain. Digging your heels in will only turn you into a loser.
No jobs on a dead planet.
3
If the planet is dead then there are no people who need jobs -- there aren't any. But, if there is death then morticians, cemetary workers, and resurrectionists are needed.
The union folks seem to like Trump a lot.
2
Keep it in the ground, or else...
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/keep-it-in-the-ground/
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/keep-it-in-the-ground/
This particular division--between labor unions and environmentalists--is typical in each election cycle because the Democratic platform supports labor and the environment. However, environmentalists, in the past, tended to not give very much money in campaign contributions, given that they were passionate, but poor. Their cause has been slow to take root.
Unions gave generously for decades, until union busting diminished their ranks. If unions should be angry at anyone, it should be at the companies who refuse to hire union workers, not an environmentalists. Now, with the environmental sector taking off, there will be many green construction jobs.
Increasingly, the world acknowledges the need for clean energy, and the necessity of dialing back those deadly, extra 2° of global temperature change.
More importantly, companies have discovered that money can be made from this transition. To the labor unions--plasterers, painters, welders, plumbers, and the rest--there will be plenty of work to be had on green projects. Keystone fostered petroleum energy, and it was blocked. But think of solar farms, building with green materials, infrastructure repairs. The unions will still be needed.
I do not see that a get-out-the-vote effort, supported by a rich environmentalist, contradicts Democratic loyalties to unions. Work is work, and that will be available.
Unions gave generously for decades, until union busting diminished their ranks. If unions should be angry at anyone, it should be at the companies who refuse to hire union workers, not an environmentalists. Now, with the environmental sector taking off, there will be many green construction jobs.
Increasingly, the world acknowledges the need for clean energy, and the necessity of dialing back those deadly, extra 2° of global temperature change.
More importantly, companies have discovered that money can be made from this transition. To the labor unions--plasterers, painters, welders, plumbers, and the rest--there will be plenty of work to be had on green projects. Keystone fostered petroleum energy, and it was blocked. But think of solar farms, building with green materials, infrastructure repairs. The unions will still be needed.
I do not see that a get-out-the-vote effort, supported by a rich environmentalist, contradicts Democratic loyalties to unions. Work is work, and that will be available.
6
Are we fishing for false equivalency between the parties here? Because the prospect of a Trump POTUS seems like MORE THAN ENOUGH to bring out a DEM DELUGE.
#twocents
#twocents
7
Yes. And, apparently a fair number will vote Trump.
Climate change and pollution impact low-income and poor people far more than they do the wealthy, so the partnership between the working class and environmentalists seems a perfect fit. The trend to clean energy is inevitable. A republican president may slow it down for a little bit but if you look at what's happening internationally, it's clear that fossil fuels are not the future. Any rational person can see that the sooner businesses, unions, and workers embrace the change towards sustainability, the better it will be for them.
3
The Teamsters, along with the Air Traffic Controllers, endorsed Reagan. How'd that work out for them?
7
All elections are important, but the idea of Trump as president should be scary enough for all Democratic constituencies to put their differences aside and work to defeat him. After all, once one parses through Trump's bluster, his misogyny, his xenophobia, and his outright lying, he's like an onion pealed away to reveal nothing.
5
Classic job-killing wealthy "environmentalist" Democrats. After all, they won't lose their jobs. No wonder Trump is doing so well.
7
Trump is a union buster. And thinks the current minimum wage is "OK." And Republicans pack the NLRB, which judges union cases, with anti-union members. How anyone can think he cares about anyone except himself is unimaginable.
3
I agree with you. I don't know how anyone can think that Trump cares about anyone except himself. But, I'm hard pressed to feel any differently about Clinton. Beyond being the first woman POTUS, I don't see what compelling vision she has for America, or what her presidency is really about. It seems all about her becoming president, and then.....what? Incrementalism for the rest of us?
4
If the unions continue to support the Democrats the jobs on which the union members depend will continue to dwindle. Perversely the democrat policies are more likely to destroy unions than republicans. No jobs=no unions.
Well, they better kiss and make up, or they will find that that throwing a hissy fit now - when the Republican disaster is unfolding before us - will cost THEM support on every level, including financial and activist.
FOCUS, folks. You have a once-in-a-lifetime chance here. Remember Ralph Nader and Florida - would we really have had a President Bush without the split in Democratic support?
And I am sure that President Trump will heavily support the efforts of these fine environmentalists and union leader if they cause his election.
FOCUS, folks. You have a once-in-a-lifetime chance here. Remember Ralph Nader and Florida - would we really have had a President Bush without the split in Democratic support?
And I am sure that President Trump will heavily support the efforts of these fine environmentalists and union leader if they cause his election.
1
This is another reason why Bernie may have to become the VP choice. Like when Johnson joined Kennedy, this may be a marriage of necessity.
Hillary needs a united Democratic Party to beat Trump.
His Senate seat would be easier to win than Sherod Brown's in Ohio.
Hillary needs a united Democratic Party to beat Trump.
His Senate seat would be easier to win than Sherod Brown's in Ohio.
1
Well well, a schism in the Democratic Party. I liken climate change (i.e. global warming) to our national debt. Both are extremely troubling, both are intangible to the common man, but our debt is more important to fix. Why; because if it isn't fix who will care about the environment when our economy completely collapses. We currently have enough resources to be energy independent, yet all the environmentalists want to do is rack up more debt with expensive unreliable renewable energy - mind boggling!!
4
On the other hand, who will care about the economy when Florida is a shallows in the Atlantic Ocean? (Yes, I know that is an exaggeration -- as is your "when our economy completely collapses".)
Yesterday on NPR I was shocked to hear a reporter state a coal miner's salary was $80,000 per year. The loss of that job and the ability to provide for oneself and one's family, I realized, was far greater than I had imagined.
I suspect the same disconnect is driving the gap between liberal environmentalists and these labor union members, who recognize that the new jobs in the green economy will go, not to middle aged workers who will be put out to pasture, but to younger applicants. What they fear is the loss of a good paying job, long term unemployment and the prospect of minimum wage work.
Does raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour matter to a 55 year old who has lost a job paying $80,000?
I suspect the same disconnect is driving the gap between liberal environmentalists and these labor union members, who recognize that the new jobs in the green economy will go, not to middle aged workers who will be put out to pasture, but to younger applicants. What they fear is the loss of a good paying job, long term unemployment and the prospect of minimum wage work.
Does raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour matter to a 55 year old who has lost a job paying $80,000?
8
This is when liberals say "thank God that demographic (white working class males) is dying out and will be increasingly electorally irrelevant."
OK fine an exaggeration -- but that is their response to why pandering to the interests of illegal immigrants is politically expedient.
OK fine an exaggeration -- but that is their response to why pandering to the interests of illegal immigrants is politically expedient.
1
These unions and their members are like concentration camp prisoners fighting over the crumbs thrown out by the guards. The real future for these workers is not in the short term and diminishing work doled out by the oligarchy but in a fairer economy which supports the millions of jobs that a transition to a low carbon economy will create. These are the same people that helped elect the great union buster in 1980.
3
As uncomfortable as it may seem to many folks, especially to those who depend on the coal and petroleum industires for their livelihood certain facts must be faced. These industires (just like cigarettes) are detrimental to one's health and the sooner they go the way of the dinosaurs the better.
In addition to completing the complete control of the planet's energy sources by the new, clean energy sources such as solar power, etc. steps must be taken immediately to ease the transfer of the current workers in the coal and petroleum industires into other more suitable and desireable types of employment. This, of course, will require expenditures on education and training as well as livinig expenses for those families no longer supported by the coal and petroleum industries. The remaining "wealth" of the now-defunct industires should be used to help undue the damage done to the environment by these industries.
As for those workers who are angry at Hillary Clinton and the Democrats - what do they expect the Republican plutocrats to do for them? (What has the Republican Party ever done for them?) Perhaps some of the coal magnates will give out free oxygen masks to help their peones breathe better.
In addition to completing the complete control of the planet's energy sources by the new, clean energy sources such as solar power, etc. steps must be taken immediately to ease the transfer of the current workers in the coal and petroleum industires into other more suitable and desireable types of employment. This, of course, will require expenditures on education and training as well as livinig expenses for those families no longer supported by the coal and petroleum industries. The remaining "wealth" of the now-defunct industires should be used to help undue the damage done to the environment by these industries.
As for those workers who are angry at Hillary Clinton and the Democrats - what do they expect the Republican plutocrats to do for them? (What has the Republican Party ever done for them?) Perhaps some of the coal magnates will give out free oxygen masks to help their peones breathe better.
1
The prospect of a President Trump is increasing by the days.
6
What will they build, and who will they build it for, if there's no clean air to breathe, no fresh water to drink, no decent soil to grow food, and no intact ecosystems to sustain Life?
4
Loved seeing the fist fights at the Nevada Democratic Convention between Clinton and Sanders supporters!
6
The summary lead-in to this story doesn't make sense. Who's the wealthy opponent of climate change?
1
The Democratic Party's platform is awful. They have no chance of winning with it. All the money in the world won't buy this election.
6
Tens of millions won't make any difference in an election that is as expensive as this one.
1
Please connect the dots -
Union members care about and recognize what is at stake environmentally. The reason the Dem’s position isn’t resonating better is because of the contradictory environmental positions being taken by Dem's.
It is meaningless to seek to reduce the effects of climate change without addressing world population increases and US population increases – that touches on immigration. While the world’s population was a little over 1 billion at the start of the 20th century, it now is over 7 billion. US population went from 150 million circa 1950, to over 300 million today.
150 vs 300 million people has a bigger environmental impact than a pipeline. If one is going to curtail jobs because of the environmental impact one is ethically obligated to speak up about that.
But Dem’s can’t because its not PC and touches on legal and illegal immigration.
The order should be 1st reduce population growth (including immigration), then worry about pipelines etc. Donald has the sequence right. Though he may not recognize the need for the follow up.
Adding insult to injury is the financiers who profit from the transition to clean energy without acknowledging the large impact which falls heavily on individuals and their families.
Dems, should take a hard stand on immigration and use the money saved educating the children of illegal immigrants to support displaced workers as they transition. That’s a consistent policy that is fair and would resonate.
Union members care about and recognize what is at stake environmentally. The reason the Dem’s position isn’t resonating better is because of the contradictory environmental positions being taken by Dem's.
It is meaningless to seek to reduce the effects of climate change without addressing world population increases and US population increases – that touches on immigration. While the world’s population was a little over 1 billion at the start of the 20th century, it now is over 7 billion. US population went from 150 million circa 1950, to over 300 million today.
150 vs 300 million people has a bigger environmental impact than a pipeline. If one is going to curtail jobs because of the environmental impact one is ethically obligated to speak up about that.
But Dem’s can’t because its not PC and touches on legal and illegal immigration.
The order should be 1st reduce population growth (including immigration), then worry about pipelines etc. Donald has the sequence right. Though he may not recognize the need for the follow up.
Adding insult to injury is the financiers who profit from the transition to clean energy without acknowledging the large impact which falls heavily on individuals and their families.
Dems, should take a hard stand on immigration and use the money saved educating the children of illegal immigrants to support displaced workers as they transition. That’s a consistent policy that is fair and would resonate.
3
Sorry, but how does immigration have anything to do with population growth?
If they were immigrating from another planet, that would perhaps be a valid argument, but the environment is collapsing because of global population growth, and immigration into the US won't affect that in any way.
If they were immigrating from another planet, that would perhaps be a valid argument, but the environment is collapsing because of global population growth, and immigration into the US won't affect that in any way.
2
Nils,
Does the word sophistry mean anything to you?
You state the 'The environment is collapsing because of global population growth'. You imply that the US population does not contribute to global population which is a basic flaw in your logic' per se because US population is a part of global population.
Secondly your inference is wrong- that the US acceptance of immigration does not impact how many people are born globally. If the US had stopped accepting the 20+ million immigrants from Mexico, they would have begun practicing birth control a long time ago. Same goes for other countries with over population, including India for whom I have much respect.
Look Democrats cry about environment but won’t do what needs to be done because they want Latino votes, etc. Meantime their fat cats will finance the technological revolution and make oodles of cash.
The average working person will not see any gain in environmental quality because population numbers overwhelm technological advances. Unless there is cash available for them to be retrained, which there ain’t , new hiring won’t in reality help them.
The cash needed will go to hire cheap illegal immigrants and pay for the education of their many children.
The Dem’s are offering a double whammy, baked in a pie.
At least we agree on the real reson the environment is collapsing
Does the word sophistry mean anything to you?
You state the 'The environment is collapsing because of global population growth'. You imply that the US population does not contribute to global population which is a basic flaw in your logic' per se because US population is a part of global population.
Secondly your inference is wrong- that the US acceptance of immigration does not impact how many people are born globally. If the US had stopped accepting the 20+ million immigrants from Mexico, they would have begun practicing birth control a long time ago. Same goes for other countries with over population, including India for whom I have much respect.
Look Democrats cry about environment but won’t do what needs to be done because they want Latino votes, etc. Meantime their fat cats will finance the technological revolution and make oodles of cash.
The average working person will not see any gain in environmental quality because population numbers overwhelm technological advances. Unless there is cash available for them to be retrained, which there ain’t , new hiring won’t in reality help them.
The cash needed will go to hire cheap illegal immigrants and pay for the education of their many children.
The Dem’s are offering a double whammy, baked in a pie.
At least we agree on the real reson the environment is collapsing
3
Isn't the best solution simply to have a plan and a slogan to require that environmentally friendly programs be required to employ union labor?
Unions United for a Better Environment!
A slogan like that!
Unions United for a Better Environment!
A slogan like that!
2
The number of jobs from the XL pipeline et al is minimal. The lack of expenditures on infrastructure, has cost way more jobs of the type these construction unions are calling for. Jobs that are on going sustainable. The total public need for infrastructure is trillions. The pipeline is a few billion. If these Unions fail to join us, the loss of the right of representation will result in far greater losses of income and benefits. In addition, green jobs will quickly outstrip the grey ones. Please, as a former Union President, lets work together, if we do we will all win. If we don't, I guarantee we will die separately.
2
I don't know about the rest of the country but Michigan Republicans are not labor's friend. The republican governor & legislature passed a right-to-work law, pushed a "prevailing wage" law and squabbled over funding road repair. The roads bill uses Earned Income Tax Credit from low income families and job training money for road repair. Prevailing wage means that workers doing the same job can be paid less in low income counties than in affluent counties. And right-to-work means the union pays for attorneys, health plan administrators and retirement fund managers for All employees regardless of whether the employee pays for these services or not. Meanwhile, Michigan infrastructure rots away (Flint water pipes, Detroit school buildings) and the legislature overrides a voter referendum banning state-appointed emergency managers.
Seriously?! The AFL CIO thinks these republicans are better for labor than environmentally friendly democrats. Most rank-and-file people I know don't see it this way. So I have to wonder what's happened to the union leadership.
Seriously?! The AFL CIO thinks these republicans are better for labor than environmentally friendly democrats. Most rank-and-file people I know don't see it this way. So I have to wonder what's happened to the union leadership.
2
So the unions are wising up. The "progressive" democrats have all but destroyed one industry and the associated jobs and looks like oil and gas industries will be next. The abject idiocy of this is that it is not physically possible to replace those energy sources with gas and wind. What is surprising is how long it has taken the unions to recognize the danger these radical "progressives" pose to their ways of life.
8
United we stand...Divided we fall. Talk about not seeing the forest from the trees. Do these fools not realize what electing Donald Trump would do to both these camps? I am almost to the point where the U.S. is going down a deep dark hole that defies logic. When they wake up to Donald Trump as President they can explain to their grandchildren 50 years from now how they could have been such idiots. P.T. Barnum had it right 100 years ago; there really is a sucker born every minute. Goodbye America; it was great while it lasted!
As a member in good standing with LIUNA, aka Laborers Union, my heart was broken with the Executive Board (E.B.) endorsed Hillary Clinton, a politician whose anti-union record is 100; anything that splits labor from the Clinton Party is welcome news
9
Hopefully the Democrats will realize that there is no place in their party for those unwilling to accept that climate change MUST be tackled.
1
“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” A. Lincoln
3
Why do Lincoln quotes always make him sound so darned wise and thoughtful? The contrast with today is absolutely staggering. What would he think to hear that his political descendant is Donald Trump?
1
The fact that these labor leaders are specifically highlighting the Keystone pipeline is PROOF they have been hijacked by special interests. The Keystone pipeline is almost meaningless as a jobs creator. Many of the business interests strongly supporting Keystone OPPOSE the type of large infrastructure spending Democrats support but Republicans oppose. There is no doubt where organized labors real interests lie with Democrats.
3
Steyer and Trumka should offer themselves as examples to the entire party, through something they may remember from the old days: COMPROMISE! Knock off the in-fighting and join together to put a Democrat in the White House, and more in Congress and the Supreme Court. Those things are FAR more important than your foolish, petty differences. Seems like neither of you is fit to serve. How do you like the sound of "President Trump?"
1
All of this discordance among st both parties , I fear the Democrats have the most to lose. Trump is an entity unto himself...no one knows what his next blunder will be. But the general public is sick and tired of all the old rhetoric,,,,we are desperate to reach out and try the unknown.
2
The unions need to work with Democrats to make sure the jobs of the future, which include many infrastructure projects in clean energy manufacturing and infrastructure and upgrades to existing infrastructure that have the full support of environmentalists, remain union jobs or become union jobs. There is zero chance that this will happen where Republicans hold sway.
Whether or not the XL Pipeline ever gets built, hundreds of solar energy projects of various types will get manufactured and installed, many thousands of miles of power lines will get manufactured and installed and tens of thousands of windmills will get manufactured and installed.
The mood in many parts of the country is swinging to the idea of decent wages for working people through an increased minimum wage. The unions can benefit from that wave if it spreads, which it definitiely will not do if Donald Trump and other regressive candidates are elected. Union leaders need to show some leadership and start looking forward, not backwards, as they plan to increase their membership instead of seeing it continue to decline as it has done under years of attacks by Republicans.
Whether or not the XL Pipeline ever gets built, hundreds of solar energy projects of various types will get manufactured and installed, many thousands of miles of power lines will get manufactured and installed and tens of thousands of windmills will get manufactured and installed.
The mood in many parts of the country is swinging to the idea of decent wages for working people through an increased minimum wage. The unions can benefit from that wave if it spreads, which it definitiely will not do if Donald Trump and other regressive candidates are elected. Union leaders need to show some leadership and start looking forward, not backwards, as they plan to increase their membership instead of seeing it continue to decline as it has done under years of attacks by Republicans.
8
What's telling for me here isn't whether labor is right or environmentalists are right or whether they can work together. It's the fact that one of the country's major political parties depends so much on expensive, planned efforts to drag people out to the polls.
I'm not a Democrat, and every Election Day I find my own interest in the future of the country is all the motivation I need to get up, get out, and cast my vote.
I wonder how the electoral map would change if the only people to vote were the ones who gave enough of a damn to do it without an "ambitious voter turnout operation." Instead it's "here's your wake-up, here's your bus to the polls, here's your index card telling you who the 'good guys' are, now step this way and pull that lever. Good job, here's a cookie."
[The index card thing? I've seen it in person, so save your indignation.]
To all the reply posters who will rail about voter suppression: I'm against that too, same as you. But isn't "voter inflation" a wrong of its own?
I'm not a Democrat, and every Election Day I find my own interest in the future of the country is all the motivation I need to get up, get out, and cast my vote.
I wonder how the electoral map would change if the only people to vote were the ones who gave enough of a damn to do it without an "ambitious voter turnout operation." Instead it's "here's your wake-up, here's your bus to the polls, here's your index card telling you who the 'good guys' are, now step this way and pull that lever. Good job, here's a cookie."
[The index card thing? I've seen it in person, so save your indignation.]
To all the reply posters who will rail about voter suppression: I'm against that too, same as you. But isn't "voter inflation" a wrong of its own?
5
There’s an assumption among the elites of the Democratic Party that by simply creating new regulations mandating clean energy there will be a boom in retrofitting the country that will benefit labor.
Obsessive regulation to try and manipulate private companies to take on the roll is likely to constrain development. Labor is right to fear this approach. The budget is where the rubber hits the road. Everything else is simply lip service. Raising taxes doesn’t create money for these projects unless it’s budgeted to go there. It’s not. Labor gets it.
Obsessive regulation to try and manipulate private companies to take on the roll is likely to constrain development. Labor is right to fear this approach. The budget is where the rubber hits the road. Everything else is simply lip service. Raising taxes doesn’t create money for these projects unless it’s budgeted to go there. It’s not. Labor gets it.
7
If the New York Times did not choose the comments which it liked best, often concealing thereby its readers' real opinions about issues, I'm sure we would see that many people now see the Democratic Party as the party of government employees and billionaires. President Obama promised workers new jobs in "clean industries" when he ran for President in 2008. But where are those jobs? What are workers in less clean industry to do in the meantime? Visit government run family counseling and drug rehabilitation facilities, the consolation prize for unemployment that Hillary Clinton just offered the fearful coal miners of West Virginia? The smug disapproval of industrial workers for their concern about their livelihoods in this Comment section reveals a lot about the new Democratic outlook.
13
They are only now discovering climate-change? Gimme a break!
This member of TWO unions will continue to teach the realities and dangers of climate change along with inspiring and training students for a career that helps to preserve habitat, biodiversity AND the future of humanity.
3
In the south labor votes T party and have voted Republican for years. Emotion has won on election day for years.
1
Some isolated observers might have surmised that the Socialist-Statist-Democrats might have simply disposed of all their capitalists, but that is not the case.
The people who still admit that capitalism is the greatest answer for the poor worker refuse to join the bookburners of progressivism.
The people who still admit that capitalism is the greatest answer for the poor worker refuse to join the bookburners of progressivism.
5
Looks like the Dems arent so stupid after all they must have been listening to Trump expose the corruption among the Reps and luring the delegates. No matter what side your on people are bought and paid for, but if you are on the losing side thats when the people start to belly ache, I see Hillary starting to fade for sure on this one.
2
It's short sightedness on the part of these construction unions. If Trump is elected, then the GOP undoubtedly would hold on to control of both houses of Congress. The next President will likely make multiple appointments to SCOTUS. Trump promised to nominate conservative think tank approved candidates. With that much control over the levers of power, Republicans will legislate to hobble labor unions, as has been done in Scott walker's Wisconsin.
They should mobilize to support Hillary as if their life depended on it ...because it does.
They should mobilize to support Hillary as if their life depended on it ...because it does.
2
Since when did the construction trade unions - historically the least representative sector of the labor movement and the most short-sighted and narrow-minded - come to represent ALL labor as the NYT misleading headline and worse article would have us believe? If there were a "rift" as the Times suggests, one would expect the letter Sullivan sent to have gone to the Sierra Club et al rather than Mr. Trumpka and the AFL-CIO. If anything, this so-called "rift" is between reactionary unionists and those facing reality.
Sullivan and his crew of high-wage members give unions a bad name. They've been outliers in the labor movement for a very long time, fighting all efforts to mitigate climate change, rather than to joining in to figure out - as Mr. Trumpka did when he was president of the Teamsters - how we can work together to everyone's benefit to preserve jobs and create new ones in a changing economy.
This old labor vs environment nonsense is long over for those in both the labor and environmental movements who understand that there's no time for it anymore and that there was never any credible evidence that good environmental policy does anything other than CREATE jobs.
Only in this reporter's imagination do these letters signify anything as momentous as a "clash!" More like a little ripple. But I guess that's the Times' new tag line - "elevating nonsense to news" - regardless of the damage it does. The facts have long ago left the house.
Sullivan and his crew of high-wage members give unions a bad name. They've been outliers in the labor movement for a very long time, fighting all efforts to mitigate climate change, rather than to joining in to figure out - as Mr. Trumpka did when he was president of the Teamsters - how we can work together to everyone's benefit to preserve jobs and create new ones in a changing economy.
This old labor vs environment nonsense is long over for those in both the labor and environmental movements who understand that there's no time for it anymore and that there was never any credible evidence that good environmental policy does anything other than CREATE jobs.
Only in this reporter's imagination do these letters signify anything as momentous as a "clash!" More like a little ripple. But I guess that's the Times' new tag line - "elevating nonsense to news" - regardless of the damage it does. The facts have long ago left the house.
1
It is high time for the American middle class to realize that "environmentalism" and "climate change" are being employed by the political left as stalking horses for other issues from the leftists' Wish List, including especially its war on capitalism and its "redistribution" goals.
6
I really hope that the powers that be in the labor unions take serious note of what Republicans like Scott Walker do to labor unions. They need to work with environmentalists so that we don't end up as the Chinese have, with air that is unbreathable and water that is undrinkable. American labor unions will have a great opportunity in the coming years to help cleanup our environment and show the rest of the world what American ingenuity can do. Or they can fall in with the Republicans and be put out of business.
2
Why do union members think that they won't be needed even more in a proactive effort to rebuild our infrastructure? Good grief! I organized a union back in the early nineties. We need to stick together to prevent exploitation of workers by people like Donald Trump, not block efforts to rebuild our economy and infrastructure -- efforts that will bring jobs, if we as a country will only commit to funding the massive retooling. To get the funding, we need progressive politicians who are willing to work and pass legislation, not sit around and block anything the president suggests!
2
When Bernie Sanders introduced in Congress his Rebuild America Act of 2015, he said:
“There’s a reason that investing in our infrastructure has traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support in Congress. It’s a good idea. It creates jobs, income, profits and tax revenues. It lays a foundation for the efficient operation of our economy in the future.”
This legislative proposal for massive infrastructure projects (roads, bridges, dams, electrical grids, railways, airports, waterways, and phone and internet lines) all across the country is estimated to create 13 million new construction jobs for the 5-year $1 trillion investiment in America.
Independent studies show that, in the short-term, non-residential construction generates nearly twice as much economic activity as money spent ($1.92 per $1 spent). The long-term impact is even more ($3.21 per $1 spent).
This proposal benefits the American economy, American workers on a grand scale, and the world's climate.
“There’s a reason that investing in our infrastructure has traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support in Congress. It’s a good idea. It creates jobs, income, profits and tax revenues. It lays a foundation for the efficient operation of our economy in the future.”
This legislative proposal for massive infrastructure projects (roads, bridges, dams, electrical grids, railways, airports, waterways, and phone and internet lines) all across the country is estimated to create 13 million new construction jobs for the 5-year $1 trillion investiment in America.
Independent studies show that, in the short-term, non-residential construction generates nearly twice as much economic activity as money spent ($1.92 per $1 spent). The long-term impact is even more ($3.21 per $1 spent).
This proposal benefits the American economy, American workers on a grand scale, and the world's climate.
7
I find it disconcerting that the focus of these comments is primarily on energy. Yes, our energy mix is evolving over time; however, it will not occur overnight.
The real story behind the rift is the manufacturing angle, which is largely missing from this conversation. Over $165 billion dollars have been targeted for private investment in the manufacturing sector because of shale development. That kind of investment is independent of political parties.
The stuff coming out of the ground isn't just for fuel; it is also used as a fundamental feedstock to make chemicals and plastics. The construction unions are concerned that folks like Steyer, who doesn't have a clue about manufacturing or how it works, will try to disrupt shale development in a naïve attempt to save the planet.
It's a fairly straightforward picture: the main concern of unions is membership and, the surest way to increase membership in a union is through jobs for its members. While some of those jobs will come from renewable energy infrastructure, most will come from the manufacturing sector. The unions are not as dumb as some of these commenters think. They know where the jobs are and will support policies to ensure those jobs are realized.
The real story behind the rift is the manufacturing angle, which is largely missing from this conversation. Over $165 billion dollars have been targeted for private investment in the manufacturing sector because of shale development. That kind of investment is independent of political parties.
The stuff coming out of the ground isn't just for fuel; it is also used as a fundamental feedstock to make chemicals and plastics. The construction unions are concerned that folks like Steyer, who doesn't have a clue about manufacturing or how it works, will try to disrupt shale development in a naïve attempt to save the planet.
It's a fairly straightforward picture: the main concern of unions is membership and, the surest way to increase membership in a union is through jobs for its members. While some of those jobs will come from renewable energy infrastructure, most will come from the manufacturing sector. The unions are not as dumb as some of these commenters think. They know where the jobs are and will support policies to ensure those jobs are realized.
2
I have been a Union building trades person (pipefitter) since 1970, and an industrial construction manager since the late 90's. For all of that period, I have probably been out of work for a quarter to a third of that time. Despite that, I support any transition to green technologies as part of the future, and I regard coal as 19th Century technology and oil as 20th. Their time is past.
The trouble is that the Unions allied with this hedge fund manager (really?) are part of the "professional class" of Democrats that Thomas Frank describes in his recent book ("Listen, Liberal") so well. These professionals have no idea what my life is like, or how complex and unpredictable our work can be.
The key words in this article describe our "...working class votes, and political foot soldiers." That is all we are to these people--foot soldiers. They have little respect for our intellects, and do not want to value our ideas and our dreams at the "big table" which is increasingly populated by hedge fund managers and bankers who couldn't care less about workers.
The Democratic Party has to commit to infrastructure so we can use our skills to rebuild our country. This is part of our common dream. Until the "professional Dems" commit to a sane and long term industrial policy, and start really respecting our skills, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever they nominate, because I am a Bobby Kennedy Democrat and always will be. But my days of being a foot soldier are over.
The trouble is that the Unions allied with this hedge fund manager (really?) are part of the "professional class" of Democrats that Thomas Frank describes in his recent book ("Listen, Liberal") so well. These professionals have no idea what my life is like, or how complex and unpredictable our work can be.
The key words in this article describe our "...working class votes, and political foot soldiers." That is all we are to these people--foot soldiers. They have little respect for our intellects, and do not want to value our ideas and our dreams at the "big table" which is increasingly populated by hedge fund managers and bankers who couldn't care less about workers.
The Democratic Party has to commit to infrastructure so we can use our skills to rebuild our country. This is part of our common dream. Until the "professional Dems" commit to a sane and long term industrial policy, and start really respecting our skills, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever they nominate, because I am a Bobby Kennedy Democrat and always will be. But my days of being a foot soldier are over.
3
The party is made up of every repugnant piece of flora and fauna that can feed and flourish on a sewage pile. Sooner or later they are going to get into a contentious competition for the food source.
4
Coal is doomed. Get over it and start planning for the future instead of resisting it.
2
For the unions it is not about jobs, it is about union jobs.
2
Wow, bravo to the construction and trade labor unions for recognizing that their support was taken for granted by the progressive left. The only mystery is why it took so long. It was obvious that something was wrong when the left started disparaging Keystone because the jobs weren't "sustainable," and therefore apparently of no real benefit. That pretty much devalued every construction job that there ever was and could be, and created an excuse for the left to oppose future infrastructure projects that failed the green energy (or any progressive) litmus test.
4
Did these union members not understand that the planned Keystone XL pipeline only create 35 permanent jobs, and the thousands that would have built it would be jobless after is was completed? In addition, that dirty tar sand was to be refined in Koch owned refineries only to be exported to other nations.
Our bridges, highways, airports and other infrastructure resemble the ones of a third world country.
If the government - the one that Republicans want to drown in a bathtub - would invest more in the infrastructure across this land, there would be millions of jobs created for the building industry.
In order to finance large projects, the US should follow other nations by imposing a much higher tax on gasoline.
That tax was used by European nations to build a net of high speed trains - the ones that American tourists marvel about - , and considerably helps the environment.
Our bridges, highways, airports and other infrastructure resemble the ones of a third world country.
If the government - the one that Republicans want to drown in a bathtub - would invest more in the infrastructure across this land, there would be millions of jobs created for the building industry.
In order to finance large projects, the US should follow other nations by imposing a much higher tax on gasoline.
That tax was used by European nations to build a net of high speed trains - the ones that American tourists marvel about - , and considerably helps the environment.
1
Blue-collar white voters who vote for the Republican Party are among the most sadly misinformed and gullible folks imaginable. Good luck if the Republicans finally succeed in rolling back your Social Security and Medicare benefits, Believe it or not, it's very high on their agenda. Much higher, in fact, than building that wall across the U.S. and Mexico border.
1
US workers remember all too well the reassuring promises that NAFTA's prosperity would bring to *them* in the early 90s with Clinton #1 at the helm – hundreds of thousands of new jobs created, rapid US export growth, incentives to move jobs to Mexico eliminated, reduced immigration from Mexico because of projected standard-of-living increases for our new trading partner to the south.
None of that happened of course. Indeed, the exact opposite took place and continues to this day. So it’s a bit amusing to read comments here claiming the short sightedness of trade unions. And better yet, the promise of a glorious "clean energy economy" that awaits US workers – now that's a howler!
Why under any reasonable expectation would US workers trust a "job-killing hedge fund manager with a bag of cash" and his activist coterie? As my father who was a Teamster his entire life used to say – I may be dumb, but I ain't stupid.
Here's a more complete rundown of the establishment's bait-and-switch that gave us NAFTA: https://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTAs-Broken-Promises.pdf
None of that happened of course. Indeed, the exact opposite took place and continues to this day. So it’s a bit amusing to read comments here claiming the short sightedness of trade unions. And better yet, the promise of a glorious "clean energy economy" that awaits US workers – now that's a howler!
Why under any reasonable expectation would US workers trust a "job-killing hedge fund manager with a bag of cash" and his activist coterie? As my father who was a Teamster his entire life used to say – I may be dumb, but I ain't stupid.
Here's a more complete rundown of the establishment's bait-and-switch that gave us NAFTA: https://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTAs-Broken-Promises.pdf
12
As a Michigander, I appreciate your perspective, and I appreciate that you are bringing the misguided policies of Clinton I and their terrible outcomes to the fore. Still, there is more at stake here than the fortunes of individual union members (FYI, I was AFL/CIO back in the 70's, and now in the teacher's union). An uninhabitable planet provides jobs for no one.
1
And I appreciate your concerns for having an inhabitable planet in which to work and live – I obviously share them.
But I'm waiting for the climate change proposal that guarantees without condition the same standard of living to all displaced workers for the sake of saving the planet from immanent destruction. I mean if all of the dire predictions are true, and I believe most of them are, such a proposal seems like an extremely small price to pay for saving a doomed planet. Don't you?
Trust – it's a terrible thing to squander.
But I'm waiting for the climate change proposal that guarantees without condition the same standard of living to all displaced workers for the sake of saving the planet from immanent destruction. I mean if all of the dire predictions are true, and I believe most of them are, such a proposal seems like an extremely small price to pay for saving a doomed planet. Don't you?
Trust – it's a terrible thing to squander.
1
If rank and file union members and the general public allow ourselves to be led by dinosaurs, we will share their fate. It's time for these union "leaders" to get their heads out of the sand and deal with the world we are going to be soon living in instead of just spouting the same-old same-old rhetoric that they assume will help them get re-elected to their positions.
Unions in Iowa supported the theft of land from Iowa property owners for an oil pipleline, apparently that whole brotherhood thing is a brotherhood of thieves
1
This isn't just a failure of old-economy unions and union members to understand the future economy. It's a failure of the Democratic Party and its leaders to talk to those constituencies in a way that resonates.
Too many liberals have the attitude that anybody not already with them is worthy of contempt and condescension. Sadly, Hillary is not great at communicating a vision for the future. It's time we honed our message to be less about ideals and more about people's every day lives.
Too many liberals have the attitude that anybody not already with them is worthy of contempt and condescension. Sadly, Hillary is not great at communicating a vision for the future. It's time we honed our message to be less about ideals and more about people's every day lives.
2
Oh no! Not another shoot-yourself in the foot move. Just like the over-my-dead- body Bernie loyalists who will boycott the election rather than vote for Hillary, unionist are totally deluded it they think their lives won't be much worse if Trump is elected and if the Republicans retain control of the House and Senate. We'd be in danger of a Supreme Court which decided that unions are unconstitutional.
2
I just returned from a 12 day road trip and can tell you with certainty that there are hard-hat jobs to be had if the country would just address the infrastructure. Roads across all states that I traveled have poor to terrible roads. If it's okay for the country to assume $3 trillion in debt for the Iraq war, we certainly can assume some debt to fix the roads (and other infrastructure projects). Besides, if you but all those hard-hat workers to work, there would be an increase in tax revenue and decrease in paid out benefits. It's time to get on with it!
2
Note to Mr. Trumka: we have moved off of whale oil, we are now moving off of coal, and eventually gas and oil will go the way of the dinosaur as well. Welcome to the 21st century. The AFL-CIO seems locked into a 20th century mindset of manufacturing and building. Even trades like plumbing and electrical have become far more technical education based than in the past. The failure of Mr. Trumka and others to see just how important manufacturing and construction will be in a 21st century "smart based" technology driven world is disappointing.
Hey you know what? Sell your pickup truck you drive for appearance, stop throwing your cans in the garbage etc etc. Carbon is an existential problem which is already causing massive disruption. Its not just an idea; we actually need to stop producing as much. Californians lowered their water consumption 25%. It can be done. The 20th century is over and its not coming back.
The Republican Party heartily, gladly welcomes the votes of the laboring class, but there is no tit for that tat.
1
Interesting that the construction industry unions whose jobs depend on a healthy economy are objecting to the alliance.
Whereas the jobs of the unions who've signed on depend on the social welfare tax base provided by the former.
Seems somewhat indicative of the philosophical split between the presumptive nominees and their political parties. Work first versus handouts first. Has anyone figured out that without work, ther will nothing left to handout?
Whereas the jobs of the unions who've signed on depend on the social welfare tax base provided by the former.
Seems somewhat indicative of the philosophical split between the presumptive nominees and their political parties. Work first versus handouts first. Has anyone figured out that without work, ther will nothing left to handout?
3
Wow, I have to just get out and vote for the candidate I choose, without being told/persuaded who to vote for?
P.S.--Dear Unions, be sure to tell your grandchildren why you don't believe in climate change.
P.S.--Dear Unions, be sure to tell your grandchildren why you don't believe in climate change.
Take it from me----most of the members of the labor union are going to vote for Donald Trump anyway.
2
Good old Democrats -- always up for shooting themselves in the foot at election time.
1
Let us dispense with all of the parlous prose and sloganeering. Unions are on the wane, be they "hard hat" or, in the case of public entities, being forced out by Republican led governments. So if you want a continuation of this trend, fine, continue your bickering. If you want a resurgence, and by the way flexibility in the union movement is the key, then get together to defeat a common enemy.
And,as an aside, it is this very form of ideological nonsense that has given the union movement a bad name among those they wish to organize.
And,as an aside, it is this very form of ideological nonsense that has given the union movement a bad name among those they wish to organize.
It’s always surprised me that the unions stuck with the democrats especially after Clinton approved NAFTA and American jobs flowed out of the US to workers making slave wages. The majority of those who voted for NAFTA both in the Congress and Senate were Republicans. According to Wikipedia: Clinton, while signing the NAFTA bill, stated that "NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement.” If Hillary runs, I think the unionists will vote for Trump as they did in 1980 for Ronald Reagan.
2
Traditional BT unions have one foot in the past and one foot in the present. As such it is not too difficult to see why the BT's union movement is losing ground to open shop tradesman. The BTs need one foot in the future.
The view of all its members, as in this case, unfortunately is often represented by the Neanderthal mindset of just one or two individuals in leadership positions - those with the loudest mouth. As self defeating for the union movement, as this seems to an outsider, it represents, at best, the selfish viewpoint of just one union across and array of unions. It is the selfish viewpoint of the particular trade with the most at stake. The trade with the most motivation and the microphone in hand.
This from a retired BT official.
The view of all its members, as in this case, unfortunately is often represented by the Neanderthal mindset of just one or two individuals in leadership positions - those with the loudest mouth. As self defeating for the union movement, as this seems to an outsider, it represents, at best, the selfish viewpoint of just one union across and array of unions. It is the selfish viewpoint of the particular trade with the most at stake. The trade with the most motivation and the microphone in hand.
This from a retired BT official.
2
There go the unions again, screwing over their members. When is an organization going to come along to protect the workers from them?
1
Tom Steyer's bio tells the story - From the Buckley School, to Philips Exeter Academy, on to Yale University and then to Morgan Stanley. Throw in some Hollywood moguls and millionaire entertainers and you have new Democratic party.
7
The comments here from (presumably) Democrats bashing their own traditional blue-collar base are really alarming. Is it short-sighted for the construction trades and the teamsters to resist a stronger pro-climate agenda? Absolutely, but it's also perfectly understandable, and insulting or writing off the people who actually build the country's infrastructure is a sure-fire way to lose votes and become the elitist, out-of-touch party that the Republicans insist we already are. Liberal, white--collar Democrats need to work together and find common ground with more conservative, blue-collar Democrats, not condescend to them.
3
Sadly for the writer, the Times may not have realized that its ability to report on any aspect of the Democratic nomination has been severely impaired by the shameless partisanship it has displayed thus far. Any reader with critical intelligence - of which the Times has many - can not read even something like this as a shadow version of drum-beating-for-Hillary. Which is a real shame, as there is much to discuss. Your loss, newspaper-of-record, and it will be hard to regain trust.
5
Effective union leadership has been absent for some time now. They've been unable to ease the flow of off-shored labor for years. They've failed in foresight by not preparing their membership for this reality...manufacturers who chased cheaper labor in India, China, e.g., Apple, are not bringing those jobs back to the U.S. They've failed in responsible leadership to protect their own interest and now they want to fight an industry with a huge upside, environmental redevelopment and construction. Their recalcitrant position seems very conservative and self-defeating to me. How does not getting out the vote for a candidate who advocates on their behalf help their plight?
How depressing. I am a union worker and an environmentalist. This reminds me of that monty python sketch about the People's front of Judea, and the Judean People's Front.
Same scenario played out in BC Canada. The New Democratic Party was poised to win the election handily when the party leader went into the working class heartland and said no pipelines in order to appease the environmentalists in the Vacouver area. The pro labor heartland turned against the party, and the election was lost. Not saying one better than other.....but make sure everyone understands implications of electing Trump if the same scenario plays out.
15
Ah, it seems that the dearth of qualified and intelligent leadership that pervades the ranks of the Congress, the Military, the Judiciary, and the Administration, is also problematic in business leadership as well. But, we get the leadership we deserve, and we are heading from the first rank of nations economically, politically, and socially to the second or third rank. If Union leadership is too STUPID to realize that a victory for the Conservatives will completely destroy them, they don't deserve to survive. The ace in the hole for the Democrats is that with Trump leading the charge for the Republicans, the Unions won't be necessary to get out the vote.
1
Labor Unions in support of fossil fuel will eventually see their wages in a downward spiral as Republicans continue their quest to eliminate unions. The rift between environmentalist and Unions will be exploited by Donald Trump. Large numbers will be voting against their own interests in November as Trump make empty promises about well paying jobs and ending trade with rouge nations.
1
The construction unions are not "labor." The construction uniions, since the late 1940s, has consisted supported conservative Democrats and even Republicans. Remember Richard Nixon? They have not and do not speak for the great mass of union members.
this article underscores the horns of our dilemma very nicely. We the actual people are stuck between the lunatic right and the lunatic left. The lunatic right is beginning to culminate in Donald Trump, though it would be very naive to think that it can't get any worse than him. The lunatic right is pursuing policies that lead to economic deterioration meanwhile deflecting blame through racist propaganda, an approach that rarely leads to good outcomes. The lunatic left is pursuing bizarre socialism by perverting science through state sponsored climate change theories. The actual economy deteriorates no matter who is in power. Politically, no apparent light in the tunnel while the actual social pressure is building up relentlessly. May we live in interesting times.
2
If the planet's trashed, there won't be anything to build or anyone to build it for.
As other commenters have mentioned, someone -- HRC, the Democrats, a visionary -- needs to articulate a plan for transitioning to renewable energy and sustainable building practices. And by "articulate," I mean talk loudly and clearly across the country for several months in major policy speeches and in town halls, not issue an inside-the-Beltway white paper and then wonder why the country isn't behind the plan.
A renewable energy plan is like any other idea: It needs to be "sold" to stakeholders who will be affected: Business people, union members and tradespeople, school teachers, pastors and rabbis and priests, my next door neighbors -- everybody.
Since the American people are buying just about anything these days, it'd be nice to see something worth paying for.
As other commenters have mentioned, someone -- HRC, the Democrats, a visionary -- needs to articulate a plan for transitioning to renewable energy and sustainable building practices. And by "articulate," I mean talk loudly and clearly across the country for several months in major policy speeches and in town halls, not issue an inside-the-Beltway white paper and then wonder why the country isn't behind the plan.
A renewable energy plan is like any other idea: It needs to be "sold" to stakeholders who will be affected: Business people, union members and tradespeople, school teachers, pastors and rabbis and priests, my next door neighbors -- everybody.
Since the American people are buying just about anything these days, it'd be nice to see something worth paying for.
1
There are already more jobs in renewable energy that fossil fuels and the number if growing. The buggy-whip economy is dead and unions that don't get on board with the new economy will be dead as well. Rather then trying to figure out how to hold back the tides of history, perhaps unions should figure out how to get ahead of it for a change. Regardless of what donald trump says, there simply is no future for unions building tax-payer financed fossil-fuel boondoggles!
1
The tides of history seems to include fracking, which is an exciting alternative to coal and half as polluting. It also is creating all kinds of new jobs.
Yet do not look for practicality from today's Left on embracing this.
Yet do not look for practicality from today's Left on embracing this.
How ironic, unions moving to the right. Blows me away.
"“We object to the political agenda of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. being sold to a job-killing hedge fund manager with a bag of cash,” he wrote. But it's ok to vote for Trump who could care less about anyone's future but his own and won't produce one job, and is funded by a billionaire gangster from Las Vegas. Trump will make the rich richer, and destroy the environment and nobody wins. A "job-killing hedge fund manager" who cares about the future or a blowhard idiot who cares only about himself. Your choice.
1
Labor unions, stop acting like a bunch of petulant children and get behind Hilary. You need to strengthen the Democratic party who supports Labor or you will wind up with a Republican president who, with a Republican Congress, will continue to work to dismantle the unions. The clean energy plan is a win-win for all.
1
No clean energy hurts the people most unable to afford it. There's a reason India, China, and Africa reject the rich-world obsession with banning coal.
2
Workers in the pipeline industry will find jobs in a massive redeployment of pipeline infrastructure to carry water. California particularly will find itself relying on desalination more than ever. Does anyone thing this kind of vision is in the wheelhouse of the Republican party?
Labor unions never disappoint ---always a decade behind in forming an agenda.
What, union members don't live on planet earth either? They will not be affected by rising seas, crop failure and the loss of oxygen that will ensue when the phytoplankton in the oceans die and our forests burn up?
There is no rift between environmentalists and labor, here. The rift is between Union chiefs and Union rank and file.
Unions haven't put workers' needs, and politics ahead of their own since Taft-Hartley. Since then, the primary function of all that dues money is to enable the Union elite...and they are entitled and elite...to have self-serving, financially enriching, political clout.
The rank and file have no power whatsoever in the grand scheme of the Unions they created those many decades ago. None. But the merry-go-round is spinning too fast for them to get off. And if they want to get off, it's risky...even virtually forbidden, as it is for most public sector, union employees.
Ironic that the greedy, power-hungry, union bosses don't understand that fossil fuels are moribund and that there is gold to be mined in green construction.
Unions haven't put workers' needs, and politics ahead of their own since Taft-Hartley. Since then, the primary function of all that dues money is to enable the Union elite...and they are entitled and elite...to have self-serving, financially enriching, political clout.
The rank and file have no power whatsoever in the grand scheme of the Unions they created those many decades ago. None. But the merry-go-round is spinning too fast for them to get off. And if they want to get off, it's risky...even virtually forbidden, as it is for most public sector, union employees.
Ironic that the greedy, power-hungry, union bosses don't understand that fossil fuels are moribund and that there is gold to be mined in green construction.
6
Let's be honest....global warming is a reality....the way to stop it scares union leadership because it mean jobs for their rank and file....union leadership need to be part of the solution and not part of the problem...however, they see things in black and white and never grey...this is what is going on in CT right now unfortunately....unions hold the state legislature and are urging more taxes to higher income people...many are leaving the state while many houses stand idle.
1
Can't we all just get along ?
Democrats once again ripping defeat out of the jaws of victory!
2
I agree with Andrew,mwaxo1, and tomreel, labor union leaders have poured cement over their policies and find it hard to flex for a coming new age.
So now Trumpka is hiring out his unions, in the fashion of SEIU purple shirts, to serve the interests of leftwing rich people politics?
Sounds like some unions need a pretext for supporting Trump over Clinton or at least freeing their members to vote their conscience. That's assuming of course their members' vote wasn't fractured in the first place. The unions might just need an excuse because they've lost control of their membership.
Michigan, Indiana, and others suggest the problem doesn't really lie with environmentalists per say. You redo the roof and install solar panels at the same time. Bingo. Synergy. I think it's more a latent but growing hostility towards Democrats for failing to provide adequate relief during the housing crash.
Clinton has big, big problems...
Michigan, Indiana, and others suggest the problem doesn't really lie with environmentalists per say. You redo the roof and install solar panels at the same time. Bingo. Synergy. I think it's more a latent but growing hostility towards Democrats for failing to provide adequate relief during the housing crash.
Clinton has big, big problems...
5
The Democratic Party needs to respond and insist on addressing the issues around job security ... for all of us but in particular for those affected by climate crisis and trade agreements. Demand progress for us all!
2
Much easier to focus on problems in public school bathrooms that affect 0.03% of the population. Or how much ice Starbucks puts in their drinks. Now that's real progress for all.
1
The real threat to the Democrats' "turnout plan" is the candidate they are apparently going to nominate.
Hillary Clinton is the most flawed, weakest candidate the Democrats have fielded since McGovern. On the other hand, Bernie Sanders' sparkling honesty makes him one of the most popular candidates ever with the general public. Polls consistently show Bernie blowing out Trump, while Clinton struggles--and this is before the Republicans turn their guns fully on her.
We have to pray for an FBI recommendation for indictment, and soon. Otherwise, Democratic fecklessness will very possibly put Donald Trump in the White House.
BERNIE OR BUST
Hillary Clinton is the most flawed, weakest candidate the Democrats have fielded since McGovern. On the other hand, Bernie Sanders' sparkling honesty makes him one of the most popular candidates ever with the general public. Polls consistently show Bernie blowing out Trump, while Clinton struggles--and this is before the Republicans turn their guns fully on her.
We have to pray for an FBI recommendation for indictment, and soon. Otherwise, Democratic fecklessness will very possibly put Donald Trump in the White House.
BERNIE OR BUST
3
Those who pit the economy against ecological stewardship promote a false dichotomy and fail to comprehend that if we do not preserve a viable ecosystem on this planet, NO OTHER ISSUE will matter.
4
A union member who does not vote or one who votes for Republicans, overlooks history at his/her peril. First and foremost, Republicans are the enemies of unions. Republicans have done everything that they can to destroy unions, to prevent unionization, to prevent unions from collecting dues. Workplace safety, Workers Compensation, workers rights, and productivity sharing are all targeted by Republicans for termination because Republicans only care about profits. Second, The changing workplace will not be what is was. Building the Keystone pipeline is not economical. Protecting jobs in the fossil fuel industry is losing jobs to renewable energy projects. Abandoning the Democratic Party to save jobs in dying industries is stupid. Abandoning one's own self interest to keep a job in the coal industry is too stupid.
It is the place of union leadership to educate their members and assist their transition to other industries. Help elect Trump and you will have helped build the gallows from which your future and your rights will be hung.
It is the place of union leadership to educate their members and assist their transition to other industries. Help elect Trump and you will have helped build the gallows from which your future and your rights will be hung.
5
Democratic turnout has to do with the candidates. Hillary brings Dem turnout down. Sanders brings it up. It's no more complicated than that.
8
The Dem's will always support unions. The GOP? Forget about it, they are so anti-union as you well know! There will be so much work if the clean energy economy is fully endorsed and developed. It is a win-win. What are the building unions thinking? Steyer is not against unions, he was only against business as usual with the polluting oil industries. Unions! Get on the bus, its leaving, either you join us or you will be left behind grubbing for the old economy jobs that are fast disappearing. We need you and want you to join us! Your skills will be needed for the next cycle in our development.
4
These union workers would find jobs in the clean energy sector. And the environment would be cleaner too. Win-win.
5
The AFL-CIO is shooting itself in its feet with nuclear bombs.
The organization should be proactively embracing the future and advocating for construction projects that build alternative energy systems, retrofit old buildings to be more energy efficient, shore up our failing roads and bridges, and bring us a modern transportation the world would envy.
If Richard Trumka is that shortsighted and cannot accept the inevitable decline of the destructive and nefarious carbon-based economy, he should resign or be removed as AFL-CIO President.
The organization should be proactively embracing the future and advocating for construction projects that build alternative energy systems, retrofit old buildings to be more energy efficient, shore up our failing roads and bridges, and bring us a modern transportation the world would envy.
If Richard Trumka is that shortsighted and cannot accept the inevitable decline of the destructive and nefarious carbon-based economy, he should resign or be removed as AFL-CIO President.
9
It is our friends the Republicans, bolstered by Exxon, who propagated the myth that fighting climate change meant a loss of jobs.
Even, President Obama drank that Kool Aid.
That is why he accomplished next to nothing against climate change, as he left his bully-pulpit rot in the basement.
The truth is that boldly retooling our nation would create jobs and technological advances that could be exported.
When we owned GM & Chrysler, it would have been a good time to delelope the fastest and most efficient high-speed trains in the word.
Sadly, we had no such vision. We have let China and Europe dominate the green energy market.
This weekend, Hillary touted "clean-coal". Just how depressing can it get?
Even, President Obama drank that Kool Aid.
That is why he accomplished next to nothing against climate change, as he left his bully-pulpit rot in the basement.
The truth is that boldly retooling our nation would create jobs and technological advances that could be exported.
When we owned GM & Chrysler, it would have been a good time to delelope the fastest and most efficient high-speed trains in the word.
Sadly, we had no such vision. We have let China and Europe dominate the green energy market.
This weekend, Hillary touted "clean-coal". Just how depressing can it get?
5
I think Obama also touted "clean coal" in his first campaign.
1
Pretty stupid on the part of some labor groups. The Republican party has been willing to let our infrastructure rot. Investing in infrastructure, something Democrats support, will create many many more jobs than Keystone.
6
Sorry, the biggest reduction to Dem turnout will be nomination of Hillary.
9
It is nice to see on the front page of the NY Times, no less, that people at large are waking up to the fact that the pretend climate science is a massive attack on their livelihoods.
Perpetrated by billionaire profiteers, using corrupt pseudoscientists.
In the last elections, the climate profiteer Steyer showed a reverse Midas touch.
Anyone whom Steyer supported lost if they were projected to win handily, and barely made it if they were projected to sail through. The political kiss of death of the climate obsession is not easily forgotten.
It is mind boggling why anyone who cares about true science or who has to make a living by honest work would go for a pseudoscience con which threatens to trash the economy.
The answer is simple. They don't. Not any more.
People wake up. By the millions. And don't come back again.
The most important thing is to make sure that ASAP not one penny of public money goes to the fraudsters. That is the only thing which would take care of everything.
***
Modern science is based on data. Medieval religion on "consensus."
How is it POSSIBLE that in two decades the NYT never showed the measurements of the sea gauge at The Battery, NYC, in the middle of the city
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=...
Sea levels ARE rising. But at THE SAME rate as in Lincoln's time. A rise of emissions by a factor of 100 had no effects whatsoever.
Yet profiteers like Steyer take advantage of this data hiding.
Perpetrated by billionaire profiteers, using corrupt pseudoscientists.
In the last elections, the climate profiteer Steyer showed a reverse Midas touch.
Anyone whom Steyer supported lost if they were projected to win handily, and barely made it if they were projected to sail through. The political kiss of death of the climate obsession is not easily forgotten.
It is mind boggling why anyone who cares about true science or who has to make a living by honest work would go for a pseudoscience con which threatens to trash the economy.
The answer is simple. They don't. Not any more.
People wake up. By the millions. And don't come back again.
The most important thing is to make sure that ASAP not one penny of public money goes to the fraudsters. That is the only thing which would take care of everything.
***
Modern science is based on data. Medieval religion on "consensus."
How is it POSSIBLE that in two decades the NYT never showed the measurements of the sea gauge at The Battery, NYC, in the middle of the city
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=...
Sea levels ARE rising. But at THE SAME rate as in Lincoln's time. A rise of emissions by a factor of 100 had no effects whatsoever.
Yet profiteers like Steyer take advantage of this data hiding.
5
It is truly frightening, Adrian, I agree, the level of scientific illiteracy perpetrated by the alarmist movement and the NYT. (A more histrionic example of this cannot be found than Elizabeth Kolbert's fortnightly police sirens on Armageddon.)
I now know how the early evolutionists felt against the creationists: The computer models have all largely failed, there's been no warming for 18 years, the CO2 sensitivity is being massively overstated, people are being lied to endlessly, and -- what I most fear -- the reputation of science will be severely damaged when all this Orwellian group-think becomes no longer plausible.
Another 2-3 years with no warming, and this house of cards collapses, taking a good deal of science's sheen down with it. Because people have forgotten the scientific method and respect for evidence and now worship appeal to majority and authority.
I now know how the early evolutionists felt against the creationists: The computer models have all largely failed, there's been no warming for 18 years, the CO2 sensitivity is being massively overstated, people are being lied to endlessly, and -- what I most fear -- the reputation of science will be severely damaged when all this Orwellian group-think becomes no longer plausible.
Another 2-3 years with no warming, and this house of cards collapses, taking a good deal of science's sheen down with it. Because people have forgotten the scientific method and respect for evidence and now worship appeal to majority and authority.
4
It is amazing how many people here just 'know' what is better for union workers. They 'know' how those dolts who just don't or can't 'get it'.
It is precisely that patronizing attitude that make people vote Trump.
And that is the part that the NYT and most of its readers just don't 'get'.
It is precisely that patronizing attitude that make people vote Trump.
And that is the part that the NYT and most of its readers just don't 'get'.
15
They clearly don't live anywhere on the east coast, where billions are being spent to mitigate against future Superstorm Sandy like events. Big construction jobs that employ thousands of workers.
7
Both Labor and the Environmentalists should stay focused on the overall goal--keep Donald Trump out of the White House. Labor needs to realize that, without combatting Climate Change, a good bit of new construction would be in jeopardy of submerging (into the sea) or burning-up, and rising seas and wildfires can also deny the long-term existence of some communities.
The Environmentalists, likewise, need to realize that their considerations often need to be scaled in, in a scheduled manner, as to be rational, and the incremental value acceptable. Any environmental implementation of concerns would be more acceptable if they are not forced down people's throats.
Donald Trump is well-known for having his name on things--but, oftentimes not his money. Much of those products are made in offshore sweatshops. Likewise, many of his workers are brought-in from overseas, on special Visas. And for construction, they're short-term residents, and the cost-cutting ignores environmental concerns. He's a Union-Buster!
So, the two factions should recognize who their true enemy is, and join together to deny him the ability to be The Worst President Ever!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
The Environmentalists, likewise, need to realize that their considerations often need to be scaled in, in a scheduled manner, as to be rational, and the incremental value acceptable. Any environmental implementation of concerns would be more acceptable if they are not forced down people's throats.
Donald Trump is well-known for having his name on things--but, oftentimes not his money. Much of those products are made in offshore sweatshops. Likewise, many of his workers are brought-in from overseas, on special Visas. And for construction, they're short-term residents, and the cost-cutting ignores environmental concerns. He's a Union-Buster!
So, the two factions should recognize who their true enemy is, and join together to deny him the ability to be The Worst President Ever!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
7
This is a genuine mess, and it's apparently been approaching the boiling point for some time now (as evidenced in the building-trades letter to Mr. Trumka). The AFL-CIO is in a difficult, perhaps impossible position. The D party leadership is telling the AFL-CIO that future jobs are going to reside in a "new" energy sector. At the same time, these union members are telling the AFL-CIO to preserve, and support the creation of existing jobs, in the fossil fuel based energy sector.
This rift really reflects a division within the Democratic party itself.
This rift really reflects a division within the Democratic party itself.
3
It's unfathomable that unions would throw their support behind the GOP which espouses "Right to Work" legislation designed to destroy organized labor.
7
I can only figure that union leadership is just as corrupt as the politicians.
Unions have been supporting their own demise for decades. They're just not very bright.
The future of the union movement has been tied to public employees for a generation. This is not a good thing since the public never runs out of money. When politicians sit down to bargain with public sector unions, the people who pay are not represented and can never go out of business. Industrial union members and public sector union members have nothing in common. The latter are elitists who have no idea how hard it is to make a go of it in what is left of industrial America, so a split between the two is inevitable.
9
Been voting since Richard Nixon's reelection and was just starting to get to know the answers...then someone came along and changed all the questions.
2
I'm all for the move to renewable energy, which is inevitable in my opinion. Unions need to adapt and think about ways they can benefit from the sea change.
But as we move toward a greener economy, I can understand labor angst. As jobs in coal mines, pipelines and other areas fade away, where will the new green energy jobs be created? Will they be created in regions like appalachia, which will suffer huge job losses due to the decline of coal mining? Or, will they be created elsewhere, perhaps overseas?
I saw how once thriving manufacturing towns were turned into eyesores by another sea change: globalization. And very little has been done to revive them. I'm concerned that the benefits of a new green economy will not be shared with the people who lose their brown economy jobs.
But as we move toward a greener economy, I can understand labor angst. As jobs in coal mines, pipelines and other areas fade away, where will the new green energy jobs be created? Will they be created in regions like appalachia, which will suffer huge job losses due to the decline of coal mining? Or, will they be created elsewhere, perhaps overseas?
I saw how once thriving manufacturing towns were turned into eyesores by another sea change: globalization. And very little has been done to revive them. I'm concerned that the benefits of a new green economy will not be shared with the people who lose their brown economy jobs.
5
Look to Buffalo, NY which, for decades, has floundered after massive industrial closures in the 1970s and 80s. Why the 2008 recession was not even noticed here. But, fortunately, the area is rebounding having the wisdom to invest in industries involved in green technologies and advances in medicine. The change is, frankly, sometimes annoying (tongue-in-cheek) with so many streets half-closed due to construction and refurbishing of buildings to address the growing investment in the region. The local communities who face job losses to a changing economic model have the power to rebuild themselves, just as Buffalo is doing. It just take leadership and vision to get it done.
Good point. I spend time in New York State and have seen the startup New York ads touting the success in Buffalo. Albany looks like it is finally starting to "get it," in spite of the corruption (two of the three amigos in jail now). Vision is needed, but also money. If a state like West Virginia comes up with the vision and learns from places like Buffalo, will it also have the money?
Labor made a bad bargain when it bought into the consumption model and abandoned its role of participation management. Labor traded what could have been real moral force, for ever-increasing benefits, some of which fueled the rise in health costs and others which priced disadvantaged people out of the job market.
Tolerating over-exploitation of natural resources, degradation of the environment and erosion of workers' rights for the sake of nebulous "jobs" set unions up for their own downfall. Letting yourself be defined as "middle class" based solely on the amount of money you spend (or realistically, borrow) played right into the process of exploitation.
Marx had one thing right: "commodity fetishism" by means of an ostensible sharing of profits with the worker, only to be spent on manufactured goods, had the potential to completely undermine the revolution. Management figured that out really fast. A pity labor still hasn't.
Tolerating over-exploitation of natural resources, degradation of the environment and erosion of workers' rights for the sake of nebulous "jobs" set unions up for their own downfall. Letting yourself be defined as "middle class" based solely on the amount of money you spend (or realistically, borrow) played right into the process of exploitation.
Marx had one thing right: "commodity fetishism" by means of an ostensible sharing of profits with the worker, only to be spent on manufactured goods, had the potential to completely undermine the revolution. Management figured that out really fast. A pity labor still hasn't.
5
Those workers figured out what is still a mystery to Nancy, that the people cannot afford ever-rising benefits/payoffs/giveaways.
Those workers actually cared enough for their children not to stick them with a crumbling economy caused by cash-addicted government taking tax money to buy votes with. Is Nancy ready to vote yet? Not until she has her grandparents' understanding of government and money.
Those workers actually cared enough for their children not to stick them with a crumbling economy caused by cash-addicted government taking tax money to buy votes with. Is Nancy ready to vote yet? Not until she has her grandparents' understanding of government and money.
3
Did you just not READ what I wrote?
It is business that seduced workers with "ever-rising benefits." Unions simply bought in.
It's business that still wants to persuade us that unlimited growth is necessary and desirable and that unlimited consumption will drive it. Unions want their piece of that pie. What I am saying is that it can't last: that resources are finite and that working people should have values other than snout garages for their SUV's and televisions in every room in the house.
Are you so caught up in your conservative "free stuff" rant that you can't recognize a completely different economic model when it is proposed?
It is business that seduced workers with "ever-rising benefits." Unions simply bought in.
It's business that still wants to persuade us that unlimited growth is necessary and desirable and that unlimited consumption will drive it. Unions want their piece of that pie. What I am saying is that it can't last: that resources are finite and that working people should have values other than snout garages for their SUV's and televisions in every room in the house.
Are you so caught up in your conservative "free stuff" rant that you can't recognize a completely different economic model when it is proposed?
This is what happens when there's no party leadership. Democrats are not uniting around Hillary they're going with their factions instead of the well visioned direction that a good leader brings. Hillary isn't it.
7
Natural gas is not an answer to climate change. It is the cheapest source. Under the deception that is the answer, fracking is destroying our water sources and pipelines our lands.
Those in the cities who have not lived in the Appalachian coal country, should be aware that the Democrats have promised to diversify the coal economy. Nothing happened, except more exploitation. Some reading: Night Comes to the Cumberlands" by Harry Caudill. We have had the War on Poverty, and politician after politician, and no solution.
Now Mrs. Clinton, and as report in the NYT times explains her plan is a tax credit plan that is so unhelpful you will have to read the story to see what I mean.
Dominion Resources in VA is protected as a power company but is a vertical monopoly that produces natural gas. They would construct a spur disguised as a pipeline, putting the pipeline through karst, through pristine mountains to send gas to Newport News for export at ten times the price of production.
There is nothing wrong with coal in versus natural gas except mountain top removal and strip mining. These mining practices have to be ended, and the lands and waters restored as best we can. That would be employment and a worthy use of miners. Dominion Resources put a huge coal fired plant in Wise County where it is fed by mountain top removal mining.
it is not going to be simple to fix climate change. I agree and I support the goals.
Those in the cities who have not lived in the Appalachian coal country, should be aware that the Democrats have promised to diversify the coal economy. Nothing happened, except more exploitation. Some reading: Night Comes to the Cumberlands" by Harry Caudill. We have had the War on Poverty, and politician after politician, and no solution.
Now Mrs. Clinton, and as report in the NYT times explains her plan is a tax credit plan that is so unhelpful you will have to read the story to see what I mean.
Dominion Resources in VA is protected as a power company but is a vertical monopoly that produces natural gas. They would construct a spur disguised as a pipeline, putting the pipeline through karst, through pristine mountains to send gas to Newport News for export at ten times the price of production.
There is nothing wrong with coal in versus natural gas except mountain top removal and strip mining. These mining practices have to be ended, and the lands and waters restored as best we can. That would be employment and a worthy use of miners. Dominion Resources put a huge coal fired plant in Wise County where it is fed by mountain top removal mining.
it is not going to be simple to fix climate change. I agree and I support the goals.
2
Nothing reflects the poor state of this nation's infrastructure more than this story. If we were investing properly in the repair of roads, bridges, and water systems, construction unions would not have to pin their hopes on Keystone.
3
I manage construction for a living and am appalled by the short sighted attitude of the organized labor and capital alike. The carbon energy industry is ending. This means an end to the utilization of coal, oil and natural gas. Not only are these sources running out but climate change is making utilizing of what remains untenable.
Skilled labor, the construction industry and ultimately Wall Street bankers must let go of mining and burning fossil carbon, building pipelines and refineries and start rebuilding our nation infrastructure around renewable energy and high speed municipal fiberoptic telecommunications.
Skilled labor, the construction industry and ultimately Wall Street bankers must let go of mining and burning fossil carbon, building pipelines and refineries and start rebuilding our nation infrastructure around renewable energy and high speed municipal fiberoptic telecommunications.
6
This is a false dichotomy. The only real environmental solutions must also be real labor solutions. Democrats need to review the energy ideas Obama outlined in his first campaign (and pretty much abandoned after getting elected). Global warming, underemployment, a lack of good jobs and little social moment for America's workers are all elements (equally bad) of a failure of imagination. We need partnerships between labor, capitol, environmentalists and government to invent a sustainable economy in which all of us feel invested. These partnerships can happen; we just have resist distractions (like Trump), keep reviewing in our minds and discussions what we are doing and why, and get on with it. We need the presidency but I am not sure anymore that we need Republicans and congress for that matter -- it seems now that America, for a while at least, will survive that body's increasing irrelevancy. One thing is clear: we cannot wait any longer!
6
I am guessing there is more to this story than is reported here.
The real takeaway for me:
The union doesn't trust the beneficent billionaire: Agree.
Many people don't trust union leadership when they do stuff like this: Agree.
Hardly anyone trusts the Democratic leadership, especially Clinton: Agree.
I don't think turnout is going to be low because of some arcane battle between some unions and a billionaire climate change activist; it's because Hillary Clinton is incredibly unpopular. She's unpopular with many Dems because she stands for the pay-to-play corrupt status quo and because she is compromised by the millions she has taken from Wall Street and corporations. If we have to crawl to Wall Street or supposedly liberal billionaires to get what we need, we are doomed.
It's enough to make you want to throw up your hands and cry. If it weren't for Bernie Sanders, I would have completely given up on the political process. It is depressing to see how the establishment kept Sanders from getting the exposure he needed in order to have a chance. It's almost a miracle that he has done as well as he has.
Whether this particular billionaire should be accommodated or not, whether he is truly going to use all those $ for good, whether the union is being selfish -- these are not the true scandal. This is just a symptom of how messed up things are. This brilliant newspaper is maddeningly part of the problem.
The real takeaway for me:
The union doesn't trust the beneficent billionaire: Agree.
Many people don't trust union leadership when they do stuff like this: Agree.
Hardly anyone trusts the Democratic leadership, especially Clinton: Agree.
I don't think turnout is going to be low because of some arcane battle between some unions and a billionaire climate change activist; it's because Hillary Clinton is incredibly unpopular. She's unpopular with many Dems because she stands for the pay-to-play corrupt status quo and because she is compromised by the millions she has taken from Wall Street and corporations. If we have to crawl to Wall Street or supposedly liberal billionaires to get what we need, we are doomed.
It's enough to make you want to throw up your hands and cry. If it weren't for Bernie Sanders, I would have completely given up on the political process. It is depressing to see how the establishment kept Sanders from getting the exposure he needed in order to have a chance. It's almost a miracle that he has done as well as he has.
Whether this particular billionaire should be accommodated or not, whether he is truly going to use all those $ for good, whether the union is being selfish -- these are not the true scandal. This is just a symptom of how messed up things are. This brilliant newspaper is maddeningly part of the problem.
8
I blame this situation on Republicans AND Bernie Sanders. Republicans have been promoting two messages that led us here. 1. The idea that climate change is fake science and/or akin to a communist plot. 2. That the Clintons, and in particular Hillary, are evil incarnate.
Bernie Sanders rejected his ethics and perpetuated the Republican plot to discredit Hillary. To hear him speak about her one would think he had been caucusing with Republicans for the last 2 decades!
I do not rule out direct involvement from Republicans in this riff among labor unions. It just does not make any sense! The union workers who would be affected by the failure of the pipeline's approval has to be relatively small in comparison to all union members.
Why would these workers/unions be so fixated on a single project, even though it would take many years to complete? When the job is done, it's DONE.
With a democrat in the White House and a potential to take back the Senate there would be greater possibility for a myriad of more construction, not less. I also find it hard to believe that this union's rank and file are all climate change deniers. How does this benefit anyone beyond a limited number of years to collect a paycheck for a limited number of workers? Something else is afoot here! And it smells strongly of Republican!
Bernie Sanders rejected his ethics and perpetuated the Republican plot to discredit Hillary. To hear him speak about her one would think he had been caucusing with Republicans for the last 2 decades!
I do not rule out direct involvement from Republicans in this riff among labor unions. It just does not make any sense! The union workers who would be affected by the failure of the pipeline's approval has to be relatively small in comparison to all union members.
Why would these workers/unions be so fixated on a single project, even though it would take many years to complete? When the job is done, it's DONE.
With a democrat in the White House and a potential to take back the Senate there would be greater possibility for a myriad of more construction, not less. I also find it hard to believe that this union's rank and file are all climate change deniers. How does this benefit anyone beyond a limited number of years to collect a paycheck for a limited number of workers? Something else is afoot here! And it smells strongly of Republican!
3
And Hillary thinks she is going to win? Not a chance.
Rift between labor and environmentalists. Rift between Hillary and Bernie.
Bye Bye Hillary and none to soon. The lady has and always had high negative ratings, is dishonest and not trustworthy.
And this is from an elderly female voter who is fed up with establishment Democrats choosing our "leaders".
Those establishment people need to listen to the people.
Rift between labor and environmentalists. Rift between Hillary and Bernie.
Bye Bye Hillary and none to soon. The lady has and always had high negative ratings, is dishonest and not trustworthy.
And this is from an elderly female voter who is fed up with establishment Democrats choosing our "leaders".
Those establishment people need to listen to the people.
9
I am also an elderly female. Most of my elderly female friends have had it -- and will be sitting out this sham of an election.
3
She will clean Trumps clock. Fortunately, this this still the country which elected the profoundly decent, thoughtful and effective Barack Obama.
Matt, She is NOT Barack. I supported him. You are correct he is profoundly decent, thoughtful and effective. Hillary is the opposite.
2
"But Mr. Steyer has opposed oil and gas projects like the Keystone pipeline, and the construction unions assailed the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s willingness to make common cause with him as an abandonment of their members and the federation’s principles."
should read "Republican operatives within the construction unions assailed...."
Terry O'Sullivan is doing the work of the GOP for them - if he cannot turn off his Fox news feed view of the world perhaps his membership should remove him from office before he creates more damage.
O'Sullivan has some gall discussing "politically bankrupt betrayal".
should read "Republican operatives within the construction unions assailed...."
Terry O'Sullivan is doing the work of the GOP for them - if he cannot turn off his Fox news feed view of the world perhaps his membership should remove him from office before he creates more damage.
O'Sullivan has some gall discussing "politically bankrupt betrayal".
1
Unions had a place in our society, but when they became a political entity unto themselves they became more focused on retaining power then actually representing the worker. I grew up in a union house, my father being a factory worker. I chose the college pate via the GI bill. I've worked both in unionized companies and non-union companies and unfortunately for the unions the non-union companies were much more efficient,
Unions do not like change, but history has shown that technology is not stagnant. Natural gas and oil replaced coal in the factories and solar/wind power may replace fossil fuel. If fission energy ever becomes practical it will most likely replace all energy producing sources we are now using.
There is still a place for unions in our society, but they must be flexible and be able to change with the times. Jobs are definitely important, but so is the condition of the environment. Unions working together with environmentalists is the best answer to creating jobs while keeping the world habitable.
Unions do not like change, but history has shown that technology is not stagnant. Natural gas and oil replaced coal in the factories and solar/wind power may replace fossil fuel. If fission energy ever becomes practical it will most likely replace all energy producing sources we are now using.
There is still a place for unions in our society, but they must be flexible and be able to change with the times. Jobs are definitely important, but so is the condition of the environment. Unions working together with environmentalists is the best answer to creating jobs while keeping the world habitable.
5
folks just don't labor under the delusion that if you elect a democrat in the fall that they won't be coming after your job (I'm talking to you coal miners and construction laborers) unless that job is a clean energy job. Oh you'll hear democrat platitudes about job retraining and so forth that won't come to fruition, but unless you toe the "death to climate deniers" line you are not welcome in the modern left. Trump is the only candidate dedicated to bringing jobs like the Carrier fiasco back to the US by punishing companies like Carrier and scrapping the disastrous trade deals democrats have been complaining about for decades, don't believe Hillary, who was for the TPP before she was against it.
9
If you don't think countries won't retaliate when Trump tries to do whatever his incoherent and disjointed policies claim at the moment I've got a bridge to sell you. Oh, and a 45% tariff on items we need and don't make here? Get ready to pay more. About 45% more.
Maybe the labor unions that want to help their members can be proactive in terms of promoting training for a world rapidly changing as a result of technological advances and climate change.
4
We have so many other and better things to build and repair than the Keystone Pipeline and similar projects which at this point of low oil prices is financially unfeasible anyway. A NEW technology with an eye towards climate will be the jobs going into the future as opposed to jobs that will be diminishing as obsolete.
10
Considering the state of our infrastructure and the massive shortage of affordable housing In most areas of the country, the unions don't have a leg to stand on in this dispute. All other industries are having to look forward and adapt their business to unavoidable environmental constraints. This NOT about labor, this is about big money in construction using labor as a wedge. This is as offensive as conservatives using women's bodies to wage their wars for power.
The AFL-CIO could dodge this one by calling it like it is, Not likely and That is precisely why unions are losing ground. In so many ways, they are not about or for labor at all but big boss politics.
This rift shows up in high profile that we need to rework what unions do and how they work for the interests of labor.
There's more construction work out there than we can even contemplate. Doing it in an environmentally sound way sounds like a win win for everybody.
The AFL-CIO could dodge this one by calling it like it is, Not likely and That is precisely why unions are losing ground. In so many ways, they are not about or for labor at all but big boss politics.
This rift shows up in high profile that we need to rework what unions do and how they work for the interests of labor.
There's more construction work out there than we can even contemplate. Doing it in an environmentally sound way sounds like a win win for everybody.
19
This is just more evidence that the American political landscape is changing dramatically. This is going to be a very interesting general election, and it would probably not be wise to put too much reliance on the polls or the political pundits as they do not seem to understand what is happening.
4
"...it appears that the answer is to sell out to a billionaire who not only has little or no stake in our movement, our members or their work but who has actively fought against our members’ interest..."
Mr. O'Sullivan's words here could easily be applied to Unions or their members who support Trump. The strategy is clear: Divide and conquer. We need to look to the long game; environmentally friendly infrastructure still needs to be built by someone. Pipelines are not the only game in town.
Solidarity is the one tool that Unions have that should not be undermined by the mischief of faction.
Mr. O'Sullivan's words here could easily be applied to Unions or their members who support Trump. The strategy is clear: Divide and conquer. We need to look to the long game; environmentally friendly infrastructure still needs to be built by someone. Pipelines are not the only game in town.
Solidarity is the one tool that Unions have that should not be undermined by the mischief of faction.
3
“ 'It saddens us that the very labor movement we have fought for and supported for over a century seems to have lost sight of its core mission and has moved away from us and our membership in the interest of headline-grabbing political expediency,” wrote the leaders of the operating engineers, plumbers, elevator constructors, roofers, laborers, plasterers, and heat and frost insulators."
It saddens ME that concern for the welfare of our environment is seen as an elitist interest, especially when average Joe/Josephine is going to be hit a lot harder in the pocket down the road by the practical effects of climate change than people like Tom Steyer. And I don't understand the general mistrust of climate scientists bearing bad, but increasingly incontrovertible (no matter what shortsighted business interests would have you believe) news about where we are headed.
It saddens ME that concern for the welfare of our environment is seen as an elitist interest, especially when average Joe/Josephine is going to be hit a lot harder in the pocket down the road by the practical effects of climate change than people like Tom Steyer. And I don't understand the general mistrust of climate scientists bearing bad, but increasingly incontrovertible (no matter what shortsighted business interests would have you believe) news about where we are headed.
2
Typical union maneuver to try to extort their way into derailing a process if not leveraging full control. Since no one is entitled to a job, they likewise are not entitled to a say in their wages and working conditions. Giving labor any voice is a headlong leap toward the market equality favored by Karl Marx. This is exactly why Ford and Carrier have moved manufacturing to Mexico. How on earth do you justify $23 an hour for jobs that do not require a $250k education? Those Carrier workers should have known they'd priced themselves out of their jobs. The hourly costs needed to fall below $5.35 but they thought they could bully and embarrass their way to continued employment.
Maybe they should just vote for Trump. He seems to appeal to those supporting the "drill, drill, drill" mentality. I guess they are too short-sighted or ignorant to see that climate change is a reality and it will dramatically impact the way their children's children live their lives 50 years from now, that is if there is a habitable planet st that time.
4
The unions actually do not support Hillary 100%. In 2008 they half-heartedly agreed to have a phone bank for her in my town, and then didn't staff it. Same for other women candidates in the state.
1
For years the Democrats have been dismantling and ignoring the coalitions that give the Democrats their greatest strength. They have done this in order to accommodate a business community that no longer sees the insanity of the republican party as business friendly. The result has been exactly what the Democrats should have expected. NAFTA was a death knell for American unionism. While unions cannot move to other countries in order to fight runaway companies, companies can operate anywhere in the world where wages are almost nonexistent. Those who brought us that treaty saw exactly what would happen (and what did happen) when they refused to put strong labor and environmental protections in that law. After decades of failing to support the major institutions that make up their coalition we are only seeing the results of this because Bernie Sanders chose to run.
Unfortunately workers think they can get a better deal from Trump than they can from the Democrats. This would be tragic as there is no love for the working people of this country within the republican party either - they need look no further than the likes of Christie and Walker and every right to work state governor who chose to run this year. Good luck everybody whatever the out come it the rich will win and workers will once again pay the price.
Unfortunately workers think they can get a better deal from Trump than they can from the Democrats. This would be tragic as there is no love for the working people of this country within the republican party either - they need look no further than the likes of Christie and Walker and every right to work state governor who chose to run this year. Good luck everybody whatever the out come it the rich will win and workers will once again pay the price.
4
“Years of financial distress have left the A.F.L.-C.I.O. desperate for cash, and it appears that the answer is to sell out to a billionaire who not only has little or no stake in our movement, our members or their work but who has actively fought against our members’ interest,” Mr. O’Sullivan wrote.
He blames a billionaire when his own members routinely vote against their own best interests. That's rich.
He blames a billionaire when his own members routinely vote against their own best interests. That's rich.
5
Wow the NY Times actually publishes an article indicating that other groups other than the GOP have reasons to oppose the political climate change agenda.
How will Hillary walk this tight rope to gain the A.F.L.-C.I.O's vote?
How will Hillary walk this tight rope to gain the A.F.L.-C.I.O's vote?
2
Both of my parents belonged to unions when they were quite different than they are today: totally greedy with members who refuse to pay for their healthcare and other benefits which the rest of us pay for. Unions have decimated the Northeast and I am thrilled unions are not down South where most companies are moving due to the high taxes and monetary mess the unions have created. Trump has done a tremendous amount for NYC and the building trades whereas Clinton promises jobs she cannot and will not produce. Her answer is her husband will create jobs; well Bill is not running for the position.
4
Perhaps addressing environmental concerns would be more relevant (to those unions who work the "dirty jobs") if people weren't losing their jobs (re: coal, oil, shale), AND all of the industries/businesses that rely upon the coal, oil, shale industry weren't stagnant or declining (I work for a fortune 500 that is one such business, and our earnings report hasn't been good in quite some time - flat most of the time). Many comments infer or flat out state that these union members who complain need to "get with the times", "there are lots of clean energy jobs", "retrofitting jobs", etc. Well, that all sounds nice, but in order to do any of that, first you put the existing tradespeople out of work because they don't have the skills to perform these new jobs (assuming those jobs exist in large numbers), you make entire industries fizzle, such as coal; which has far reaching economic implications (i.e. where U.S. businesses buy steel to build stuff, how much electricity costs, etc.), and last, but certainly not least, the private sector's ability to invest in all of that retrofitting, employing new "green jobs", and training for "green jobs."
When I read articles/comments like the ones here, I'm reminded that environmentalists are largely comprised of two kinds of people: 1) people with more money than they know what to do with and 2) people that have no idea how inter-connected the various industries they hate are with other businesses/industries/facets of our economy.
When I read articles/comments like the ones here, I'm reminded that environmentalists are largely comprised of two kinds of people: 1) people with more money than they know what to do with and 2) people that have no idea how inter-connected the various industries they hate are with other businesses/industries/facets of our economy.
7
Wait a minute. There are a lot of other infrastructure projects this country desperately needs. For this SNAFU over a pipeline - seriously guys, grow up.
14
Better to not have a gas pipe line that won't really create an longer term job projects and have regular work with the everyday infrastructure work. The whole country needs road repairs, just one item on a long list of infrastructure work..
12
Labor Unions need to broaden their views and prepare their members for new jobs in their industry rather than agreeing with industry wit no change. Unions should work more golbal working with more countries.
2
The unions are smart on this one. Climate change is NOT settled science in so many ways that I won't get into here. However, the environmentalists - especially the wealthy ones like Steyer - will not stop at this. They want everyone to live at a much lower standard of living. It's really about control of the population and not the environment.
18
It's "settled science" to the vast majority of...scientists. Upward of 95% of them, in fact. You have a right to your opinion, but not to your own sense of facts.
3
Oh please do...90%+ of scientists are confirming global warming....Miami and other coastal cities are already having problems with ocean level...this is one of the reasons we are falling into the abyss...lack of education and "ignorance is bliss" attitudes....non-scientists who question scientific evidence who don't have any credibility...please enlighten us on why you think this is not settled science?
2
Not true and never was.
1
This is being badly managed. Environmentalism and construction are not at odds, they should be allies. Becoming more environmental means building a new infrastructure that leverages alternative energy and promotes resource management. For example, better water management would include new pipelines, reservoirs and treatment plants. That's a full employment agenda. The issue is the candidates' proposed environmental strategies. What are they? Doing more of the same old same old is not an option but it seems it is the message the members are getting.
3
I once belonged to the Mighty Mighty Bricklayers Union. I belonged to a local union in NYC doing high-rise construction. After several years it became very apparent that this mighty mighty union was really just a company union, as one large private union construction company employed over 60% of the local members. Where that company's interests were, so were our interests. I think they should look and dig deeper into the major wealthy companies that employ a majority of the members of the disgruntled unions. You might find the members (or maybe just the leadership?) are just being good little lobbyists for their bosses and funders.
My old local continues to have a membership that is less than 1% women. When the old local president retired, his son became a Business Agent. When a different Business Agent retired, his brother took over as Business Agent and that guy's son joined the union without formal application to the union or initial probation as was the case for me. Dinosaurs all.
My old local continues to have a membership that is less than 1% women. When the old local president retired, his son became a Business Agent. When a different Business Agent retired, his brother took over as Business Agent and that guy's son joined the union without formal application to the union or initial probation as was the case for me. Dinosaurs all.
Union leaders continue to value power over practicality. The two teachers' unions, for example, threw their support behind Ms. Clinton who takes lots of campaign dollars from the hedge funders who underwrite the Democrats For Education Reform (DFER). DFER's definition of reform is captured in Arne Duncan's Race To The Top: adopt "national standards"; give "high stakes" tests based on those "standards" to identify "failing schools"; close those "failing schools" and turn them over to privatizers who employ non-union workers; repeat this process annually until the majority of public schools are owned by investors. As a result of this process, unions are demonized, teachers' wages, benefits, and working conditions are compromised, and students-- especially those raised in poverty-- are hurt. If teachers' unions can support a candidate who takes hedge fund money that leads to their demise why should construction unions behave any differently? Oh, that's right, the other party is no better, is it? So which candidate IS on the side of working Americans? The answer: that pesky social democrat Senator from Vermont!
2
Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. Union members voting for Republicans is beyond nuts.
2
Time for the Democratic Party to break with the Unions. The Unions in this country cut off their nose to spite their face time and time again.
1
This is the precise 12th century mentality that is getting unqualified inappropriate candidates like Trump a shot at presidency. Trump is a egomaniac a person who cares a damn about America and is only tapping such backward mentality individuals. Democratic Party is better off without these unions. The future belongs to organizing around clean energy in any sector including construction. This is pure political and ego driven discussions. Folks who don't want to come out of comfort zone ad adapt to new era. USA needs to lead in clean energy.
2
While the New York Times was dismissing the candidacy of Senator Sanders, a long time and sincere advocate for Unions, as well as the environment, and someone who is is actively working to provide massive investments in infrastructure including renewable energy, and has a bill aimed at just that in the Senate, this. Senator Sanders has attracted votes from the very working class cited in this article. You endorsed Mrs. Clinton. Every county in West Virginia went for Senator Sanders.
7
Once again, the Democrats seem determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
3
This is a seriously misleading headline. AFSCME and some other unions allied with Steyer and some of the construction unions got ticked off. This is not about a rift between labor and environmentalists. (And it is hardly news that the Teamsters sometimes back Republicans -- anyone heard of Richard Nixon?)
1
Needed now more than anytime in the past century, unions continue to do so much to alienate themselves from the public. It's very frustrating.
2
"Rift Between Labor and Environmentalists Threatens...", Hillary's looking for a new role for Bill (Wall Street's best friend), Hillary's looking for a way to sway Republicans vote. Articles in today's paper alone. Says it all. And, yet again, we are being told that we have no choice. Hold our noses, swallow a bottle of Tums, swig back a shot of something. But vote for the lesser of two evils. Good luck, Clinton. You ain't got mine. The Democrats can call me when the Clinton Dynasty has truly ended.
4
I am pro-union, but first I'm pro-Earth.
The unions opposing this are dinosaurs who need to realize that
fossil fuels jobs are not worth killing the planet.
The unions opposing this are dinosaurs who need to realize that
fossil fuels jobs are not worth killing the planet.
7
I was born and raised union, but I am sad to think that Democrat-leaning unions can be like hard-core Republicans and foolishly shoot themselves in the foot. Not voting for Clinton will be the same as voting for Trump, and he will ruin whatever is left of unions and union members. Wake up and pay attention to the bigger picture, or you will be immeasurably worse off.
56
There is an even bigger fracture between the conservative and affluent Clinton backers and real progressives. Clinton has split the party into three factions, and will lose in November as progressives stay home.
5
Salivating at the thought of building dikes to protect cities all along the US coastlines. Talk about investment in infrastructure!
United they stand and divided they fall. The chips are big in this one, as the polls indicate that Donald Trump could easily be your next president unless the turnout of Democratic voters were truly high. Get smart; get together and defeat this menace.
2
At some point at the appropriate time, a Party must stand up for what is in the best interest of its nation's future, even its survival. In doing so, it must offer creative solutions for workers displaced from enterprises made obsolete by technological and environmental change.
Some interests will still be upset. The Party must respect such concerns and be prepared to deal constructively with them, but not be browbeaten. In the upcoming general election, voters will do well to recall which candidate has turned browbeating into an art form.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Some interests will still be upset. The Party must respect such concerns and be prepared to deal constructively with them, but not be browbeaten. In the upcoming general election, voters will do well to recall which candidate has turned browbeating into an art form.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
1
this is a real problem that the Democratic party must address. It cannot desert the concerns of the working class. that doesn't mean ignore the environment, what it means is addressing their loss of jobs and income.
1
Clean energy represents a second industrial revolution. It will stimulate business in the same way the first one did. Union workers will be building solar farms, wind farms, and probably nuclear plants designed without the flaws that made the old ones unsafe. On the reverse side, dealing with the long predicted, and ongoing, cost to society of runaway climate change will displace funds from every area, both private and public. What will be the cost of evacuating large swaths of low-lying cities inundated by rising water? How will food costs be affected by increasing draught and unreliable changing weather patterns. Ironically, these costs will devolve to government, leading to higher taxes, and lower spending on everything from education to roads to healthcare to public transportation.
1
Coal, oil and natural gas are all finite resources. Even if burning fossil fuels didn't cause climate change, they were going to run out eventually. If that had been the case, having postponed the inevitable well into the future, the pain associated with that void would have been unimaginable.
The problem is, and always was going to be, unavoidable. There are no easy solutions. It's made worse because so many will suffer during the transition. But it would be a cake-walk compared to the looming disaster that awaits the entire globe. Look out, because it is probably coming, no matter how many join the ranks of environmentalists. The push back is the easier path to take, hence only a small percentage of people, or just one or two defiant countries, will upset the apple cart.
If you don't need to fool all of the people all of the time, only a few of the people some of the time, then planet earth is doomed.
The problem is, and always was going to be, unavoidable. There are no easy solutions. It's made worse because so many will suffer during the transition. But it would be a cake-walk compared to the looming disaster that awaits the entire globe. Look out, because it is probably coming, no matter how many join the ranks of environmentalists. The push back is the easier path to take, hence only a small percentage of people, or just one or two defiant countries, will upset the apple cart.
If you don't need to fool all of the people all of the time, only a few of the people some of the time, then planet earth is doomed.
Have the Times "geniuses" finally figured out the Democrats are in as much or more disarray as the Republicans?Hillary cannot "put away" a socialist like Sanders for her party's nomination.Subtract Hillary's super delegates and her lead shrinks to a competitive race with Bernie.Will the Democratic power brokers finally wake up and deny Hillary the nomination in favor of Warren or will we watch Hillary be defeated by Trump in November?
2
The energy infrastructure jobs of the future won't be in gas pipelines, but in solar and wind farms, and the power storage and transmission apparatus they will need. Those jobs are not imaginary, they are already here, and growing in number daily.
While the unions opposed to the environmentally-inspired turnout push should realize this already, Steyer and others familiar with the economics of renewables should be proposing specific projects that would make the point, and put these union workers on the job. Why aren't renewable energy projects as much a part of the debate as the Keystone pipeline? Pushing for any incentives necessary to make these projects reality could unite the labor movement on the side of renewables, and unify Democratic strength around good jobs that protect the planet.
As is so often the case, where is the overall strategy among Democrats? In this case, it appears to be simply on electing HRC, regardless of how, regardless of why.
While the unions opposed to the environmentally-inspired turnout push should realize this already, Steyer and others familiar with the economics of renewables should be proposing specific projects that would make the point, and put these union workers on the job. Why aren't renewable energy projects as much a part of the debate as the Keystone pipeline? Pushing for any incentives necessary to make these projects reality could unite the labor movement on the side of renewables, and unify Democratic strength around good jobs that protect the planet.
As is so often the case, where is the overall strategy among Democrats? In this case, it appears to be simply on electing HRC, regardless of how, regardless of why.
1
Environmentalists are essentially bratty children who fully enjoy all the perks & products produced by unions. And as jobs were shipped over seas, they continued to use products produced countries with a determined disregard for anything environmental.
3
I read in January that solar energy jobs exceed the number of jobs in the oil and gas industry. It was very easy to find the article again, CNN Money Jan12 2016.
Also, solar jobs are growing quickly while gas and oil jobs are shrinking. Why didn't the NYT article mention this? Why aren't labor leaders aware of this.
Also, solar jobs are growing quickly while gas and oil jobs are shrinking. Why didn't the NYT article mention this? Why aren't labor leaders aware of this.
1
This comparison is misleading.
Solar plants do not create sustainable jobs. Yes during the construction phase a large project may employ a few hundred assemblers and pylon drivers; but after startup, the only jobs remaining are for typically about 25-50 minimum wage mirror washers and a handful of operators.
Solar plants do not create sustainable jobs. Yes during the construction phase a large project may employ a few hundred assemblers and pylon drivers; but after startup, the only jobs remaining are for typically about 25-50 minimum wage mirror washers and a handful of operators.
The strength of the American economy is based on creativity, invention and risk-taking. The changing climate presents an opportunity to create new industries and jobs. Union leadership needs to think strategically about how to protect and support the work force. In the past, unions have sometimes actually hurt their own members by resistance to change and an insistence on mantras from the past. We all need to evolve in the face of climate change otherwise we will share the fate of the dinosaurs.
And on a final note, please don't even try to make the case that Donald Trump is a friend of the unions!
And on a final note, please don't even try to make the case that Donald Trump is a friend of the unions!
Finally, we see people in labor really waking up to the zero-sum stakes of endless climate fear-mongering and the damage it will do to blue-collar jobs.
When Hillary was confronted by the out-of-work coal miner, I half expected her to say, "Hey, I have jobs for all you unemployed coal miners! You can go to work making solar panels at Solyndra!"
The frightening thing about today's energy debate is it's completely unmoored from reality and the cost-benefit of jumping off of coal, fracking, etc. Liberals act like choosing an energy source is picking a flavor of ice cream you like at the corner parlor. It's scary they're now attacking fracking, which can be done safely, and which is one of the few economic success stories at creating jobs in this economy. Great, let's kill that.
Meanwhile, the Warmist movement is in increasing crisis as the computer models have failed to predict the hiatus in warming the past 18 years, and NOAA has started to post-adjust buoy temperature data to recapture that hockey-stick umph. Spain and Germany are retreating from Big Green, and skepticism is on the rise, as it scientifically should be.
When Hillary was confronted by the out-of-work coal miner, I half expected her to say, "Hey, I have jobs for all you unemployed coal miners! You can go to work making solar panels at Solyndra!"
The frightening thing about today's energy debate is it's completely unmoored from reality and the cost-benefit of jumping off of coal, fracking, etc. Liberals act like choosing an energy source is picking a flavor of ice cream you like at the corner parlor. It's scary they're now attacking fracking, which can be done safely, and which is one of the few economic success stories at creating jobs in this economy. Great, let's kill that.
Meanwhile, the Warmist movement is in increasing crisis as the computer models have failed to predict the hiatus in warming the past 18 years, and NOAA has started to post-adjust buoy temperature data to recapture that hockey-stick umph. Spain and Germany are retreating from Big Green, and skepticism is on the rise, as it scientifically should be.
2
Coal mining jobs are disappearing due to mountaintop removal and cheap natural gas. Clean energy jobs are already more plentiful than coal mining jobs and offer more growth potential.
Hiatus? Each of the last 2 years set records for the highest average global tempertures ever recorded since they began measuring them. The overwhelming majority of climate scientists disagree with you.
Hiatus? Each of the last 2 years set records for the highest average global tempertures ever recorded since they began measuring them. The overwhelming majority of climate scientists disagree with you.
I'm with you if by "clean energy jobs" you mean jobs in the natural gas/fracking industry: But it should be averred, it is the Left demonizing that now.
The last 2 years were within the margin of error. It's not at all surprising that if the current temperature graph has plateaued near a local maximum that this could be possible, but we don't know enough to say it is.
"The overwhelming majority of climate scientists" do not at all agree on the time rate for getting off carbon: There is a constant elision between: a) humanity plays a role in warming the planet; and b) hence we must get off carbon because the costs of not doing so outweigh the costs of adaptation/mitigation.
The last 2 years were within the margin of error. It's not at all surprising that if the current temperature graph has plateaued near a local maximum that this could be possible, but we don't know enough to say it is.
"The overwhelming majority of climate scientists" do not at all agree on the time rate for getting off carbon: There is a constant elision between: a) humanity plays a role in warming the planet; and b) hence we must get off carbon because the costs of not doing so outweigh the costs of adaptation/mitigation.
1
What a shame that these union members, just like so many on the "Right," are unable -- or unwilling -- to embrace evidence-based reality and look to the future, rather than cling to the past.
While carbonaceous fuels have served humanity since the discovery of fire, we are now facing the greatest environmental and ecological catastrophes in the history of our species; the past twelve months have each been the hottest in recorded history, and that trend is expected to continue. If we are to have any hope of mitigating this impending cataclysm, then we have no choice but to migrate away from carbon-based energy as quickly as possible.
We now have the technology to harness energy that is abundant, widely distributed, inexhaustible and which source cost is identically zero -- and which would guarantee U.S. energy security forever.
In less than an hour, the Earth receives (at its surface) more energy from the Sun than the entire human race consumes in a year.
In addition, we the capacity to generate far more energy than total U.S. consumption from wind alone; indeed, wind farms placed miles off our two coasts could more than fully power the lower forty-eight states.
If the outraged unions were to embrace a sustainable future that would benefit us, our nation, the world and themselves, then they would be demanding projects that would move us past carbon into the twenty-first century and well beyond -- and provide good jobs for a very long time to come.
While carbonaceous fuels have served humanity since the discovery of fire, we are now facing the greatest environmental and ecological catastrophes in the history of our species; the past twelve months have each been the hottest in recorded history, and that trend is expected to continue. If we are to have any hope of mitigating this impending cataclysm, then we have no choice but to migrate away from carbon-based energy as quickly as possible.
We now have the technology to harness energy that is abundant, widely distributed, inexhaustible and which source cost is identically zero -- and which would guarantee U.S. energy security forever.
In less than an hour, the Earth receives (at its surface) more energy from the Sun than the entire human race consumes in a year.
In addition, we the capacity to generate far more energy than total U.S. consumption from wind alone; indeed, wind farms placed miles off our two coasts could more than fully power the lower forty-eight states.
If the outraged unions were to embrace a sustainable future that would benefit us, our nation, the world and themselves, then they would be demanding projects that would move us past carbon into the twenty-first century and well beyond -- and provide good jobs for a very long time to come.
48
"What a shame that these union members, just like so many on the "Right," are unable -- or unwilling -- to embrace evidence-based reality and look to the future, rather than cling to the past."
What evidence?
All the "evidence" is computer generated hypotheses based on whatever data the scientists have deigned to enter into the calculations. That we can know what the weather was like more than 150 years ago is fantasy since no data was collected before then. Now they're upset because the last 15 years haven't seen the warming they say is happening.
Garbage in, garbage out. That's why the majority remain unconvinced.
What evidence?
All the "evidence" is computer generated hypotheses based on whatever data the scientists have deigned to enter into the calculations. That we can know what the weather was like more than 150 years ago is fantasy since no data was collected before then. Now they're upset because the last 15 years haven't seen the warming they say is happening.
Garbage in, garbage out. That's why the majority remain unconvinced.
You don't mention the miles of solar panels or farms that fry birds that need to be build and maintained. The gardens of wind generators, each taller than the Statue of Liberty, that crowd hilltops and fields and mulch birds. Power lines cutting through forests. Mining of radioactive and toxic rare earth minerals for magnets in turbines. Standby generators to keep the power flow consent when there are clouds and no winds.
2
Not to mention all of the battery waste and defective inverter components using selenium and other polluting minerals.
I maintained a small back up system when I was in the Navy. 1200 Ni-Cad batteries filled with 600 gallons of Potassium Hydrochloride (KOH).
The non-techies pushing this power generation scheme think this stuff is composed of cotton candy and filled with Unicorn poo.
GOOGLE opened a site here and had said it was going to use solar and wind power for the server farm.
They're using commercial power. Why? They said it was because the solar and wind were undependable.
I maintained a small back up system when I was in the Navy. 1200 Ni-Cad batteries filled with 600 gallons of Potassium Hydrochloride (KOH).
The non-techies pushing this power generation scheme think this stuff is composed of cotton candy and filled with Unicorn poo.
GOOGLE opened a site here and had said it was going to use solar and wind power for the server farm.
They're using commercial power. Why? They said it was because the solar and wind were undependable.
Democrats and liberals consider billionaires and hedge fund managers just swell as long as they fund the Democratic Party. Workers on the other hand..pfft!
And people wonder why the working class has abandoned the Democratic Party. It's because the Democratic Party abandoned them.
And people wonder why the working class has abandoned the Democratic Party. It's because the Democratic Party abandoned them.
24
It seems to me that most "people wonder why the working class has abandoned the Democratic Party" for the Republican Party, specifically, which doesn't even try and disguise the fact that they only really care about "billionaires and hedge fund managers." .... Cut off our noses to spite our faces, shall we?
Noses were already excised--by both parties.
Until a clear policy of how a candidate will deliver jobs for the working class appears, who can blame the labor unions for being angry and scared? Infrastructure stimulus would be a good start. Or a clear plan to build the transition to renewable energy. Good jobs at good wages for the working class have to come from somewhere. Mr. Hedge Fund spends his life pushing around paper. It's a long leap to ask laborers to see him as an ally. Something concrete has to be put on the table.
30
Where has ANY republican job plan been for the last 11 years? Or medical plan? The republican actions are non existent in caring for these issues.
Actually, Mr. Hedge fund made his fortune on carbon energy. Now that the windfalls are in "renewables," he has taken his profits and redirected most of his portfolio. It's more self-dealing dressed up as concern for the environment.
1
The Democratic party seems to have a knack for shooting itself in the foot through infighting and divisive counterproductive squabbles among traditionally Democratic constituencies.
It's going to be a disaster if Democrats squander a chance to defeat Trump. The country stands poised to elect a total unknown, a celebrity with an oversized ego and a totally unknown agenda (everything is a "suggestion').
It's going to be a disaster if Democrats squander a chance to defeat Trump. The country stands poised to elect a total unknown, a celebrity with an oversized ego and a totally unknown agenda (everything is a "suggestion').
1
Uh, sometimes the unknown is preferable to what those of us who were old enough to be aware of what was going on back in the 1990s foresee happening again. No thanks. You could not convince me that any random person on the street would not be a better candidatee than Billary 2.0, including a homeless guy. And I won't be staying home; I'll be voting for whoever has the best chance of sending her and her sorry excuse for a spouse packing.
One would hope that construction unions would support Dems who are interested in supporting infrastructure spending as opposed to R's who would rather spend the federal money on tax breaks for their donors.
Sigh. Yes it's true a lot of coal mining jobs are going to be lost, ultimately all of them. A lot of new jobs, in the renewable energy sector, will be created. Cold comfort for coal miners, especially ones in their forties & above. We can't keep burning coal to save some jobs. The only non-nutso way to call for that is to make the nutso claim that climate change is a vast hoax.
All we can offer the coal miners is generous support to transition out of coal mining and for the older coal miners that's gonna be tough. They will have to find another way to make a living and for most the new way will pay less. Perhaps for those above a certain age we should guarantee them a comparable income. Not quite just welfare -- we should insist that they find some sort of job and then top up their wages. How hard will it be for them to find any job at all, even Walmart greeter? Maybe pretty hard but we should assist them in that effort.
Maybe government make work a la the WPA. There are two WPA projects which I routinely use: an outdoor theater and a summer camp in the redwoods. They're still providing value some 80 years after being built. I assume the workers who built them took pride in doing so since they did such a good job.
All we can offer the coal miners is generous support to transition out of coal mining and for the older coal miners that's gonna be tough. They will have to find another way to make a living and for most the new way will pay less. Perhaps for those above a certain age we should guarantee them a comparable income. Not quite just welfare -- we should insist that they find some sort of job and then top up their wages. How hard will it be for them to find any job at all, even Walmart greeter? Maybe pretty hard but we should assist them in that effort.
Maybe government make work a la the WPA. There are two WPA projects which I routinely use: an outdoor theater and a summer camp in the redwoods. They're still providing value some 80 years after being built. I assume the workers who built them took pride in doing so since they did such a good job.
1
How many of the commenters here work at jobs that get their hands dirty or have been aboard a nuclear powered vessel? Seems to me that many of the commenters here see a bright green future through rose colored glasses. The fossil fuel economy will end when we run out of cheap, available, fossil fuel. Nuclear and yet to be perfected batteries will replace it. Wind farms and solar panels will be quaint curiosities.
3
Isn't it somewhat anachronistic at this point for the Times to refer to the private building-trades unions as the American constituency called "labor"?
Yes, it's evocative of class-struggle, implies (for the nostalgic reader) that there still is a "labor movement" in the U.S., and neatly creates the type of boxing match-style rivalry publications favor, but the term has its roots in the mid-20th century, at a time when American manufacturing and production were the dominant forces in our economy.
It seems especially odd to adopt the term in this story in particular, since it reports that the AFL-CIO (in the past, a near-synonym of "labor") is supporting Mr. Steyer's leadership of the Democrats' get-out-the-vote super-PAC.
In fact, using the term "labor" in this piece, and in its title in particular, obscures the article's point: the "rift" reported is not, as the headline proclaims, between "labor and environmentalists," it's between the building trade unions and the AFL-CIO over the AFL-CIO's support of Mr. Steyer's contribution and leadership in the Democratic get-out-the-vote effort.
That's not at all the same conflict, level of conflict or even "threat" the title of this article ominously foretells.
Personally, I would prefer a few more facts and stats to the "Clash of the Titans" approach on this one.
Yes, it's evocative of class-struggle, implies (for the nostalgic reader) that there still is a "labor movement" in the U.S., and neatly creates the type of boxing match-style rivalry publications favor, but the term has its roots in the mid-20th century, at a time when American manufacturing and production were the dominant forces in our economy.
It seems especially odd to adopt the term in this story in particular, since it reports that the AFL-CIO (in the past, a near-synonym of "labor") is supporting Mr. Steyer's leadership of the Democrats' get-out-the-vote super-PAC.
In fact, using the term "labor" in this piece, and in its title in particular, obscures the article's point: the "rift" reported is not, as the headline proclaims, between "labor and environmentalists," it's between the building trade unions and the AFL-CIO over the AFL-CIO's support of Mr. Steyer's contribution and leadership in the Democratic get-out-the-vote effort.
That's not at all the same conflict, level of conflict or even "threat" the title of this article ominously foretells.
Personally, I would prefer a few more facts and stats to the "Clash of the Titans" approach on this one.
1
Not only is there a rift between labor and environmentalists there is a division between the Sanders supporters and Clinton supporters. The Clinton supporters will stick to Clinton if she wins the nomination but the Sanders supporters will become Trump democrats or they will urge Sanders to make an independent run which could give him an edge over both Clinton and Trump.
1
I can't speak for all Sanders supporters, but I guarantee you that this one will behave exactly as you predict in your last sentence.
Jobs and protecting the environment are not mutually exclusive. Democrats should advocate a jobs program focused on the environment and the decaying infrastructure, retraining workers as needed, instead of abandoning them to the cause of "free trade". It could be paid for by a small trading tax on Wall Street - an industry with little benefit to society other than to fatten the wallets of Wall Street gamblers.
1
Sure Unions, you stay at home in the next election. Your gripe is not with environmentalists wanting to save the planet; infrastructure jobs encompass more than energy. How about improving transportation, bridges, communication, etc. But you stay at home, and lets see how more years of Republican obstructionism, stiffeling of wages and benefits work out for ya.
1
Unfortunately, those unions were sold a bill of goods on the keystone pipeline. It would only provide jobs termporarily, would wreak enormous environmental damage across the US, would only benefit the Alberta oil companies, and had no real fail-safe in the case of ruptured single-wall pipeline. Once completed, the jobs promised were a lie, creating in actuality just a few hundred.
But Donald Trump is as anti-union as any 19th century robber baron, fighting unions in hotels and casinos where all the others have come to agreement with them.
So these unions are stuck between a rock and a really, really hard place: Environmentalists like Clinton and Sanders who oppose projects incredibly dangerous to the environment, or Trump, who hates unions with a passion that makes Ronald Reagan look like a union-lover.
Besides, infrastructure projects opposed by Republicans but supported by Democrats are ALL construction jobs....where's your bread&butter for real, folks?
But Donald Trump is as anti-union as any 19th century robber baron, fighting unions in hotels and casinos where all the others have come to agreement with them.
So these unions are stuck between a rock and a really, really hard place: Environmentalists like Clinton and Sanders who oppose projects incredibly dangerous to the environment, or Trump, who hates unions with a passion that makes Ronald Reagan look like a union-lover.
Besides, infrastructure projects opposed by Republicans but supported by Democrats are ALL construction jobs....where's your bread&butter for real, folks?
2
This rich environmentalist could start a business manufactuiing solar panels or windmills but what does he do, he spends his money in politics which will not generate blue collar jobs. His political philandering does genderte white collar jobs in Washington. Instead of fighting people in a no win polit all hate game use your wealth to build the type of infrastructure that you claim to want. Then the unions would support you.
So a voting bloc acts in what it perceives as its own self interests - exactly like rich people, poor people, veterans, college students, middle-class parents, business people, on and on.
That is what people do, for the most part. If you think your ability to earn a living is threatened you will act accordingly. That is also what people do.
If you are a Democratic official or candidate who must choose between enviro-liberals who will turn out and vote for you and hard-hat unions whose members will almost certainly support the Republican, who would you worry about offending?
The idea that all of labor should be part of some "progressive" movement is silly. The construction trade members are the guys who beat up anti-war protesters in the 1960s. They are voting for themselves. There is no crime in that and it isn't surprising.
That is what people do, for the most part. If you think your ability to earn a living is threatened you will act accordingly. That is also what people do.
If you are a Democratic official or candidate who must choose between enviro-liberals who will turn out and vote for you and hard-hat unions whose members will almost certainly support the Republican, who would you worry about offending?
The idea that all of labor should be part of some "progressive" movement is silly. The construction trade members are the guys who beat up anti-war protesters in the 1960s. They are voting for themselves. There is no crime in that and it isn't surprising.
3
This is a real problem, just like the coal-miners' problem in West Virginia. These are good, hardworking people whose livelihoods are being threatened by environmental policies. We (and probably they) realise that these policies are necessary, but that knowledge doesn't feed their families. And it's not realistic to expect them all to move to the (probably very different) locations where the new climate-friendly work will take place, or to expect them to be able to perform the new roles that will be created.
Basically, we need a safety-net for people who will suffer (in the short term) for policies that will help everyone (in the long term). It is the only responsible way to act, and it is also the only way to get the buy-in of these people.
Basically, we need a safety-net for people who will suffer (in the short term) for policies that will help everyone (in the long term). It is the only responsible way to act, and it is also the only way to get the buy-in of these people.
1
Being a member of Steamfitters Local 638 for 40 years, I say it is about time the Building Trades stood up to the politicians that gladly take our money, take our votes, take our time as volunteers, and take us for granted! Regardless of my personal feeling's regarding the Keystone Project, Obama and Clinton strung the Building Trades along for 6 years with lies and deceit.
Nationwide, Building and Construction Trades have a totally different agenda than most of the rest of the AFL-CIO. If we are to survive as a collective of aligned unions, it is time to sever the ties with the AFL-CIO.
Tom Franzson. Brevard NC
Nationwide, Building and Construction Trades have a totally different agenda than most of the rest of the AFL-CIO. If we are to survive as a collective of aligned unions, it is time to sever the ties with the AFL-CIO.
Tom Franzson. Brevard NC
1
Anybody who believes in unions and is considering a Republican in any election anywhere is grossly misinformed.
2
The Republicans think of workers and their unions as enemies. The Democrats think of workers and their unions as patsies who are ripe for being conned, plucked and consumed. So long as workers allow the Democrats to get away with this, so long as they receive the money and votes of workers, the workers will remain conned, docile, and under their thumbs. The two party system is a convenience for those who already control the body politic and economic. Let's not get fooled again. We are commodities for the movers and shakers. Let's not be bought and sold voluntarily.
2
We have so much infrastructure to build and upgrade. Roads, bridges, rail lines, schools, hundreds of billions worth of needed project before we even get to the industrial scale renewables and electric transmission infrastructure. It's an obvious win win for everyone, for construction workers, for technology workers, for the entire county. The republicans in congress have blocked this investment for years. It's time for full speed ahead.
1
It's so sad to see some of the unions, all of whom I have always supported, just look at part of the picture of climate change, and see efforts about adapting ways to ameliorate it as simple job killing. This is like all other times of a large transition from one phase of work life to another, not the end of all decent jobs because what the jobs consist of is changing. As other posters here say, the next economy will also have good jobs, just different ones, if we all work together to demand them as it happens, and support solutions that include change to keep our earth from having many difficulties that none of us would want. Tom Steyer wants to use his money for positive change for the environment we all share; I hope the unions that don't support that now can come to see it benefits us all.
47
They worry about local job losses. How puerile.
What they should worry about -- dread, actually -- is Planet Earth's diminishing carrying capacity. By their lights, it's better to destroy the natural world -- the basis for life itself, found here and nowhere else -- than to change our stupid, cruel, wicked, wasteful ways.
Earth's future -- and our species' place in it -- is not assured. To the extent that we as a species still have a future at all will be decided in just a few years' time. And the actual long-term biodiversity situation already is much worse than most people allow themselves to believe. They ignore the proposition that civilization might not survive our depredations despite abundant, overwhelming evidence to the contrary (the economic, social and political crises destroying Venezuela, Brazil and much of the Muslim World make good examples). The question is why.
I suspect it's because, deep down, they know it to be so -- instinctively. But because that knowledge is intuitive, it generates such overwhelming primal fear within themselves that they strain to deny it and lash out at those who dare to contradict them by pointing out the obvious.
What they should worry about -- dread, actually -- is Planet Earth's diminishing carrying capacity. By their lights, it's better to destroy the natural world -- the basis for life itself, found here and nowhere else -- than to change our stupid, cruel, wicked, wasteful ways.
Earth's future -- and our species' place in it -- is not assured. To the extent that we as a species still have a future at all will be decided in just a few years' time. And the actual long-term biodiversity situation already is much worse than most people allow themselves to believe. They ignore the proposition that civilization might not survive our depredations despite abundant, overwhelming evidence to the contrary (the economic, social and political crises destroying Venezuela, Brazil and much of the Muslim World make good examples). The question is why.
I suspect it's because, deep down, they know it to be so -- instinctively. But because that knowledge is intuitive, it generates such overwhelming primal fear within themselves that they strain to deny it and lash out at those who dare to contradict them by pointing out the obvious.
Yes I agree with your comment. And to add to your comment, now more than ever people who do physical labor with their skills and knowledge are getting harder to find. Those that use their physical skills should be paid much more than those with brains only. They sacrifice their flesh and blood to build, repair, and maintain. And to me it is essentially the same as slave labor if they don't have good health care and a livable income the rest of their lives. This part of the story doesn't get told very often which might be because of the other non-labor union members (like teachers- and I say that with respect for what teachers do, just not with their bodies). A great carpenter is in a class way above everyone else. A great mechanic can be a life saver. Concrete workers make all the rest happen.
When you read articles like "Clinton to find a role for her husband", and that article indicates he will be responsible for improving the economy; it helps to contribute to this "rift". It was Bill Clinton who repealed Glass-Steagall and set into motion the economic woes people are still feeling and was the start of the "rift". The rift goes beyond unionists and environmentalists. The Clinton type Democrats are more right of center and follow more GOP values; especially related to jobs, trade and economic issues.
It is no small wonder that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have burst on the scene and is resonating with independent and centrist voters. In a way, they both are resonating across the political spectrum; anyone who is not part of the establishment, oligarchy, 1%.
The bottom line, like the GOP with ]]he far right, the Democrats, with the far left, are splintering; they are divided. The Ayn Rand agenda, of both parties, is failing.
If you really like the status quo, including poverty rising under a Democratic president; then vote for Hillary Clinton; else voter fro Mr. Sanders or Mr. Trump. Right now what stands between the 1% and the voters have a real say; are Sanders and Trump.
It is no small wonder that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have burst on the scene and is resonating with independent and centrist voters. In a way, they both are resonating across the political spectrum; anyone who is not part of the establishment, oligarchy, 1%.
The bottom line, like the GOP with ]]he far right, the Democrats, with the far left, are splintering; they are divided. The Ayn Rand agenda, of both parties, is failing.
If you really like the status quo, including poverty rising under a Democratic president; then vote for Hillary Clinton; else voter fro Mr. Sanders or Mr. Trump. Right now what stands between the 1% and the voters have a real say; are Sanders and Trump.
4
Yes, the articles you mention are linked. Don't we have term limits in this country? How can she be planning an official role for Bill Clinton with a straight face. They are an embarrassment to our country and the Constitution which never envisioned such a situation. We desperately need new leadership. Sanders has proven his ability, his fortitude, and vision. Even if you disagree with particulars in his agenda, he would help move us toward improving our country. He would not be plagued by scandal, either, which is a
godsend given the magnitude of the issues we face.
godsend given the magnitude of the issues we face.
1
Clueless unions. Clean energy jobs are the fastest growing segment of the workforce other than health care and show no signs of slowing down. In my region, 570,000 jobs are now in the clean energy sector, a majority of them in construction and the trades like electricians and metal workers far outstripping any manufacturing jobs. As to the trades, there is a lack of and increasing local demand for electricians, plumbers and the like, while union support of apprenticeships that would satisfy that demand are dwindling. Another example of unions shooting themselves in the foot. As to union members, they have to understand which party is pushing right to work laws and failing to increase penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens.
69
Boy, such a strange new political order when college-educated upper middle class folks are now Democrats and high school diploma card-carrying union member factory workers are about to become Republicans!
2
Respect:http://youtu.be/IkeLYDZdPSc
View this ASAP
View this ASAP
Oh brother. This is beyond short-sighted. It is suicidal.
The unions must be aware that climate change threatens us all - but also - transitioning to green energy and updating infrastructure will create a great many jobs!
The idea that environmentalism is "job-killing" is reactionary and incompatible with the modern world.
Workers need unions and we all need good jobs. But killing the planet isn't an option. We live here!
The unions must be aware that climate change threatens us all - but also - transitioning to green energy and updating infrastructure will create a great many jobs!
The idea that environmentalism is "job-killing" is reactionary and incompatible with the modern world.
Workers need unions and we all need good jobs. But killing the planet isn't an option. We live here!
15
The Democratic Party might just as well invite all its trade union members to vote for Trump. The Democratic Party stands for the issues of the liberal gentry (environmentalism and identity grievances) and for the economic security of public employees, but not for the economic interests of other blue collar workers. Too bad.
6
Simply, those who dissent from this opinion can no longer abide the destruction these industries yield. The livelihood of its workers is not more important than the lives of those already lost or imperiled as a result.
The union leaders are idiots. Of course Steyer cares for union members. He cares about the air they breathe, the water they drink and the health and quality of life of their kids...things far more important than a stupid pipeline or more urban sprawl. Unions should lobby for sustainable infrastructure projects. There are plenty of jobs to be had building solar installations, green buildings and public transportation infrastructure. Democrats will fund those projects, narrow-minded Republicans certainly won't.
Democratic demographics are such that the middle class folks are getting squeezed by liberal elites, who pet issues do nothing to help their economic situation.
Job in clean energy are just as rewarding as fossil fuels.
Job in clean energy are just as rewarding as fossil fuels.
1
I am at a loss to understand the "certainty" of most of the comments. How is it possible to have a mass democratic socialist mass movement with out the existing trade unions, let alone the larger working class? And how will Clinton (the likely nominee) beat Trump while losing the upper mid west?
This is the time for everyone to breath hard and find creative ways to combine labor and environmental concerns. To look how not to do it, just visit my city, Portland or my state, Oregon and see the head bashing that continues the great reduction of the middle class (actually the former better paid working class).
Both Sanders and Clinton have been thin on details of a possible middle ground and Trump will say anything to get elected. We need some common sense or we will soon have just 2 classes, rich and poor and fascism knocking at our doors!
This is the time for everyone to breath hard and find creative ways to combine labor and environmental concerns. To look how not to do it, just visit my city, Portland or my state, Oregon and see the head bashing that continues the great reduction of the middle class (actually the former better paid working class).
Both Sanders and Clinton have been thin on details of a possible middle ground and Trump will say anything to get elected. We need some common sense or we will soon have just 2 classes, rich and poor and fascism knocking at our doors!
1
Would it have been that hard to ask Mr Steyer what he thinks? It seems pretty obvious to me that building and maintaining better roads, transit systems, power grids, clean power facilities and 'green' buildings will produce vastly more construction jobs than Keystone XL and I seriously doubt Steyer is opposed to that. One has to wonder where the union leadership got their bizzarre notions.
Its hard to believe but the Democratic party is shifting from working class blue collar workers to "high income voters and liberal donors" (your words). Translated as leave the middle class for monetary payoff. Isnt this EXACTLY EXACTLY EXACTLY what Bernie Sanders has been saying and complaining about? Is there any wonder that the party is splitting along these lines? That "big tent" democratic party is turning into a country club of the one tenth of one percent with the money the influence and the power. Talk about being inclusive and politically correct while sticking the finger in the eyes of the workers. Hypocrisy at its finest. Who is left on the left with the moral and ethical standing to actually take on Donald Trump with an honest message and no indictments pending? Bernie is looking better and better.
3
Another reason to be depressed. It's a good thing that the Democratic establishment is coming down on the side of preserving the environment. It's a sad thing that the Democratic Party has become the party of the wealthy, to the exclusion of everyone who doesn't earn at least 150k a year & isn't a sucker.
1
What do you call people who refuse to support efforts to maximize voter turnout?
REPUBLICANS!
REPUBLICANS!
3
Well this pretty much raps it up. With the twenty and thirty yearolds and the unions not voting for Hillary, it is going to be President Trump.
3
So many commenters assert, without any data evidence whatsoever, that we as a nation could easily transition "dirty" industry workers to the clean energy space.
This assertion patently absurd. It will cost billions of dollars, not the mere tens of millions HRC is willing to commit, to retrain the millions of blue collar fossil fuel workers and relocate them to areas of the nation where clean energy jobs are available. Further, even after all this training, fossil fuel workers would nevertheless see their salaries decline: blue collar jobs in fossil fuel extraction, transportation and refinement pay substantially more than those in the clean energy sector. Consider that coal miners make ~$85K and fracking workers make ~$100K while solar panel installers make around $50K, and the solar panel salespeople make a mere $40K.
I have solar panels and drive a Prius; I care about the environment. But every regulation we impose upon our fellow citizens necessarily has a tradeoff. Environmental regulations in particular hurt blue collar Americans in the heartland and benefit wealthy coastal Americans (e.g. protecting them from coastal flooding as a result of climate change). In all, it seems that many readers of this article are unwilling to acknowledge this unfortunate reality.
This assertion patently absurd. It will cost billions of dollars, not the mere tens of millions HRC is willing to commit, to retrain the millions of blue collar fossil fuel workers and relocate them to areas of the nation where clean energy jobs are available. Further, even after all this training, fossil fuel workers would nevertheless see their salaries decline: blue collar jobs in fossil fuel extraction, transportation and refinement pay substantially more than those in the clean energy sector. Consider that coal miners make ~$85K and fracking workers make ~$100K while solar panel installers make around $50K, and the solar panel salespeople make a mere $40K.
I have solar panels and drive a Prius; I care about the environment. But every regulation we impose upon our fellow citizens necessarily has a tradeoff. Environmental regulations in particular hurt blue collar Americans in the heartland and benefit wealthy coastal Americans (e.g. protecting them from coastal flooding as a result of climate change). In all, it seems that many readers of this article are unwilling to acknowledge this unfortunate reality.
5
It's true that the next generation of blue collar workers, because of globalization, immigration and automation are going to find unionization beyond their reach.
Dissenters to this opinion, myself included, argue that we can no longer hold the fate of our children hostage to the inability of our fathers to navigate their way out of an industry which was always short-sighted in its pillory of finite resources, and that, with each extraction, moved our planet toward an inhabitable end.
The Democrats should nominate Bernie Sanders, and then the unions would be happy. Tom Steyer has a huge investment in coal, which is much dirtier than natural gas or oil. His opposition to hydrocarbons promotes his stake in coal.
4
Coal is a hydrocarbon. Natural gas will cause climate change just like coal. But at present coal is much dirtier in particulates and other gases. I read in the WSJ that Exxon is spending a lot to develop a carbon capture method that would help solve the problems for both coal and natural gas.
Huge investment. Reference needed.
I am a proud union member. I will take up any fight with any politician or right wing nut job when it comes to solidarity and the union struggle. But, when cretins hold the country hostage for short term jobs that ultimately ruin many lives and then hide behind the cloak of their union, it is sad. The unions have served a great service to this country with some deserved black eyes, but when it comes to this earth, pro union people need to back off.
11
if you live in a house and the roof is falling in, you don't build an addition on the back. you fix the roof!
you're telling me these guys want to build a pipeline, but don't want to rebuild bridges and tunnels and water mains and electrical grids, etc?
I understand that it's harder to get infrastructure funding, but let's change that! if you think building a pipeline will fix everything, you're believing a pipe dream...
you're telling me these guys want to build a pipeline, but don't want to rebuild bridges and tunnels and water mains and electrical grids, etc?
I understand that it's harder to get infrastructure funding, but let's change that! if you think building a pipeline will fix everything, you're believing a pipe dream...
7
there's is total agreement....keep burning fossil fuels...and we will run out of fresh air and water; stop burning fossil fues and we might lose some jobs
1
It's Hillary Clinton's turn to be president of the USA, which she loves deeply, except for most of the people in it.
Steyer has every reason to support Clinton, the rest of you should reconsider. Her foreign policy masterpiece is Libya and she admires Kissinger. Clintonism transformed the Democratic Party, the party of workers and small business, into a corporatist party. Democrats let the GOP trash their great allies, the unions. Democrats are passively watching the middle class still going down - there's no middle class jobs program on offer. Banks and Wall St were made whole but thousands and thousands of homeowners went down. Gigs are replacing jobs. Corporate arbitration is replacing the right to your day in court and stands to overturn environmental regulations all over the world that could conceivably reduce profit if the "Gold Standard" of trade agreements passes with a few minor changes (bet on it).
The unions aren't the idiots who don't get it.
Steyer has every reason to support Clinton, the rest of you should reconsider. Her foreign policy masterpiece is Libya and she admires Kissinger. Clintonism transformed the Democratic Party, the party of workers and small business, into a corporatist party. Democrats let the GOP trash their great allies, the unions. Democrats are passively watching the middle class still going down - there's no middle class jobs program on offer. Banks and Wall St were made whole but thousands and thousands of homeowners went down. Gigs are replacing jobs. Corporate arbitration is replacing the right to your day in court and stands to overturn environmental regulations all over the world that could conceivably reduce profit if the "Gold Standard" of trade agreements passes with a few minor changes (bet on it).
The unions aren't the idiots who don't get it.
1
Oh Christ, "Death Threats" , I do believe that this reporting represents more of the NYTimes', corporate policy to elect Clinton and to demonize Sanders supporters. From the beginning, and throughout the campaign, the Times has functioned as Clinton's press apparatus, always proclaiming the inevitability of her coronation. Now you've moved deeply into attempting to completely de-legitimatize the Sanders candidacy.
I'm sure some naive and frightened old people will believe your propaganda. You know your readership. But it is a sorry thing to compare the current NYTimes with the paper that 20 and 30 years and more ago stood for progressive values and honest reporting. The NYTimes is now just another part, another tool, of the oligarchic corporate brainwashing system. You make yourself irrelevant.
I'm sure some naive and frightened old people will believe your propaganda. You know your readership. But it is a sorry thing to compare the current NYTimes with the paper that 20 and 30 years and more ago stood for progressive values and honest reporting. The NYTimes is now just another part, another tool, of the oligarchic corporate brainwashing system. You make yourself irrelevant.
The ego of the self-aggrandizing Mr. Steyer is only exceeded by the overblown hype used to market his snake oil. His worldview allows ideology to trump people, when the entirety of his background and training informs him that he is a huckster and a fraud.
Market forces and the pricing mechanism dictate the future of energy supplies; this Steyer character fully understands this but yet continues on his crusade against fossil fuels. Sure, go ahead and lead the world, like Spain, and spend tens of billions on "renewable" energy sources(solar and wind), and wind up with an uncompetitive economy.
For the next few decades, the world will rely on fossil fuels, regardless of the opinion of the fool Steyer.
Market forces and the pricing mechanism dictate the future of energy supplies; this Steyer character fully understands this but yet continues on his crusade against fossil fuels. Sure, go ahead and lead the world, like Spain, and spend tens of billions on "renewable" energy sources(solar and wind), and wind up with an uncompetitive economy.
For the next few decades, the world will rely on fossil fuels, regardless of the opinion of the fool Steyer.
1
It took some time but private sector unions have finally realized that today's Democratic Party is not the friend it was a generation ago. That Democratic Party was responsive to the needs of private sector unions whose members, predominately male, were engaged in the transportation, manufacturing and extractive industries. The Democratic Party of Obama, Clinton and Sanders has declared war on the industries that hired these workers ("We're going to put a lot of coal companies and coal miners out of business") in order to keep the Green and Hollywood money flowing.
Public sector unions, the backbone of 'labor' support for Democrats today, don't suffer the consequences of progressive policies. Others are not so lucky.
Public sector unions, the backbone of 'labor' support for Democrats today, don't suffer the consequences of progressive policies. Others are not so lucky.
1
The headline of the story is inconsistent with facts reported.
A better headline would be:
Labor-Environmentalist Alliance to Boost Democratic Turnout Denounced by a Few Conservative Unions.
The building trades craft unions have long been conservative, and usually lean Republican. They are out of step with the mainstream of the AFL-CIO, which has been allied with the environmental movement in opposition to pro- corporate so called "free trade" deals, and which appreciates the great opportunity for good new domestic jobs in the clean energy economy.
A better headline would be:
Labor-Environmentalist Alliance to Boost Democratic Turnout Denounced by a Few Conservative Unions.
The building trades craft unions have long been conservative, and usually lean Republican. They are out of step with the mainstream of the AFL-CIO, which has been allied with the environmental movement in opposition to pro- corporate so called "free trade" deals, and which appreciates the great opportunity for good new domestic jobs in the clean energy economy.
2
As much as it is evident that the GOP has become the know-nothing party, Democrats are in great danger of becoming the do-nothing party if they allow themselves to be overrun by the extremist anti-energy, anti-mining, anti-infrastructure, anti-construction, anti-corporate, anti-business wing of their party.
I know too many left-leaning Democrats who are living off mommy and daddy's money, contribute almost nothing to society, pay zero income taxes, and are then resentful about others who have worked hard for a living. Democrats are in GREAT danger of losing people who 'get it' that the middle class needs jobs.
I know become I've been a lifelong Democrat and businessman, and while I just about zero respect for the GOP, I am alarmed at how many Democrats think that the economy sprouts from trust funds and inheritance (e.g. Elizabeth Warren being a great example).
I know too many left-leaning Democrats who are living off mommy and daddy's money, contribute almost nothing to society, pay zero income taxes, and are then resentful about others who have worked hard for a living. Democrats are in GREAT danger of losing people who 'get it' that the middle class needs jobs.
I know become I've been a lifelong Democrat and businessman, and while I just about zero respect for the GOP, I am alarmed at how many Democrats think that the economy sprouts from trust funds and inheritance (e.g. Elizabeth Warren being a great example).
3
The conflict unions face is the conflict the country faces.
We have not invested in major infrastructure since the 50’s, when construction of the interstate highway system began. This spanned administrations and generated not just highway construction but the automobile and residential construction industries. Federal money created industries which interacted and multiplied their assets, creating employment for decades. We’ve squandered this benefit; politicians are not capable of anything which doesn't bear fruit quickly, so they can be re elected.
We need to build an alternative energy industry. High speed rail. A water supply system. These items employ huge amounts of people. But we need the will to finance the future; the time to begin is now.
The recent conflict over the tar sands pipeline illustrates our problem. An oil state senator claimed it would create ‘real jobs’ not just help a few ‘solar scientists’. He was referring to the Solyndra scandal, obviously a bad situation. The oil / gas industry has received all sorts of assistance since the 19th century. And when we calculate the cost of existing energy, do we include the cost of pollution? These ‘independent’ industries would never depend on a subsidy, but like the tobacco industry, they have cost the country plenty.
If unions want to build a pipeline and don’t care about alternative energy systems they are stuck in the past. This choice exists in all sectors of industry.
We have not invested in major infrastructure since the 50’s, when construction of the interstate highway system began. This spanned administrations and generated not just highway construction but the automobile and residential construction industries. Federal money created industries which interacted and multiplied their assets, creating employment for decades. We’ve squandered this benefit; politicians are not capable of anything which doesn't bear fruit quickly, so they can be re elected.
We need to build an alternative energy industry. High speed rail. A water supply system. These items employ huge amounts of people. But we need the will to finance the future; the time to begin is now.
The recent conflict over the tar sands pipeline illustrates our problem. An oil state senator claimed it would create ‘real jobs’ not just help a few ‘solar scientists’. He was referring to the Solyndra scandal, obviously a bad situation. The oil / gas industry has received all sorts of assistance since the 19th century. And when we calculate the cost of existing energy, do we include the cost of pollution? These ‘independent’ industries would never depend on a subsidy, but like the tobacco industry, they have cost the country plenty.
If unions want to build a pipeline and don’t care about alternative energy systems they are stuck in the past. This choice exists in all sectors of industry.
1
They might have a chance to survive unless Trump gets to appoint Supreme Court justices.
1
Can we just stop this silliness now? I, and I believe, most adults are just plain tired this "if I can't get my way, I'm going home and taking my bat and ball with me." The issue of the day is the future of the Republic; the details of these ongoing differences can be worked out after we save ourselves and our children from the lunacy standing just around the corner. Take a breath, guys. First save the world then sweat the details.
4
The unions have no clout. They also operate on the age old idea that inefficiency is job security. This article is baseless.
We need unions, but unions need to be smart.
Are you hoping to have the best jobs and working conditions for your members ringside to our planet's destruction?
Are you hoping to have the best jobs and working conditions for your members ringside to our planet's destruction?
2
yeah the Dems are sold out, no better than the GOP, everyone talking about the end of the GOP, but they have it backwards, this election will be the end of the Democrat party
1
Silliness and nonsense. The difference between Labor and Environmentalist with respect to the Democratic turnout is like the difference between a person who orders a Bacon Cheeseburger with everything on it and one who orders a Bacon Burger - everything on it - plus Cheese.
US Labor Unions should see how climate policy has killed jobs in the EU and raised electricity costs by 42 percent. One consequence is 40,000 deaths in 2014 due to "climate poverty/electricity poverty."
1
Could, but won't.
This country will not tolerate a Trump president.
No way, no how, not in this country.
You don't have to be a Cassandra to see that the repugnance of Donald Trump is what will defeat Donald Trump.
The sky is falling - not to worry, its only falling on the Republicans and deservedly so.
This country will not tolerate a Trump president.
No way, no how, not in this country.
You don't have to be a Cassandra to see that the repugnance of Donald Trump is what will defeat Donald Trump.
The sky is falling - not to worry, its only falling on the Republicans and deservedly so.
Who cares about what the building trades unions think, anyway? We all know that -- as usual -- they're going to endorse the GOP candidate
Well, when we have Democrats making abusive calls and threatening violence to the families of Democratic party officials in Nevada, Wyoming, and other states, maybe we Democrats need to do everything we can to get our decent voters out on Election Day and just give up on the ones who would prefer Donald Trump or use threats of violence on us. At least the union leaders are upset about an issue, and unlike the supporters of at least one candidate, they are not being abusive and uncivil.
Republicans have always been shortsighted when voting against their own interests. Where jobs are concerned it appears that Democrats are not immune from this. but Democrats should understand this fear and react positively to it by strengthening our safety net and breaking the log jam in Congress that prevents the new environmental economy from flourishing. Without this advancement workers will not see a positive direction for the future and look back to the past. Its not enough to lecture construction workers about their fears. Democrats need to address those fears with positive action.
35
So, they would rather elect a nominee of the party whose policies have been union busting for years rather than a party which has supported unions and cared about union members? Interesting.
There is change in the air. Some jobs are disappearing; workers need to be retrained. That is always the case as progress happens. At one time lots of folks worked as elevator operators, too, then automation came along. Clean energy provides different kinds of jobs. Apparently the unions 1) are leading their members in the myth that their jobs can stay the same forever; 2) willing to sell out future generations for the sake of short term jobs.
There is change in the air. Some jobs are disappearing; workers need to be retrained. That is always the case as progress happens. At one time lots of folks worked as elevator operators, too, then automation came along. Clean energy provides different kinds of jobs. Apparently the unions 1) are leading their members in the myth that their jobs can stay the same forever; 2) willing to sell out future generations for the sake of short term jobs.
24
A-MH
Yup, the GOP has always been in favor of cutting down a forest and building a parking lot. Many union members do not see the loss of the forest--they see job creation.
The fact that the GOP are union=-busters and want blue collar workers to be cheap available labor and part of a working class (not middle class) is lost on workers who see that parking lot as a way to work and pay this years bills.
It is regrettable, but understandable. The Dems cannot simply take the high road without also creating jobs. proclaiming that coal mining jobs will be eliminated without creating replacement jobs. That is a good way to lose union support very quickly.
Yup, the GOP has always been in favor of cutting down a forest and building a parking lot. Many union members do not see the loss of the forest--they see job creation.
The fact that the GOP are union=-busters and want blue collar workers to be cheap available labor and part of a working class (not middle class) is lost on workers who see that parking lot as a way to work and pay this years bills.
It is regrettable, but understandable. The Dems cannot simply take the high road without also creating jobs. proclaiming that coal mining jobs will be eliminated without creating replacement jobs. That is a good way to lose union support very quickly.
Let the construction unions lose the opportunity to unite with their brethren, and defeat the Koch dark money which backs the big biz Republicans. Then, watch their unions die when big biz busts them after throwing the election away for eight years...and passing the TPP and the TTIP in the lame-duck Congress, which will kill the rest of our business here like they've already done to our steel workers.
Maybe they've forgotten what has been happening over these last few years. Big biz has already been moving its manufacturing from Ford to Carrier, from the US to Mexico every few months. They'll just bring cheaper, foreign construction workers here, like Disney did, to build their construction projects here. Don't let the big boys with the big bucks beat us again.
Maybe they've forgotten what has been happening over these last few years. Big biz has already been moving its manufacturing from Ford to Carrier, from the US to Mexico every few months. They'll just bring cheaper, foreign construction workers here, like Disney did, to build their construction projects here. Don't let the big boys with the big bucks beat us again.
14
Construction unions are thinking like the coal industry does and the tobacco industry used to, concerned with jobs and profits instead of with where society has to go to keep the earth habitable and people healthy.
77
Working men are concerned about feeding their families, putting a roof over their heads, and hopefully getting better lives for their kids. And the "creative classes" sneer at them. Any wonder why there is a rift?
1
We give little help to people who find themselves in dwindling industries or jobs, giving them the primary responsibility for resettling or retraining themselves. So people in established jobs and career paths try to preserve these jobs and paths by any means, even if they and their children are sickened or their environment is destroyed.
They do this not because they are greedy or stupid but rather because they are stunk, playing the bad hand they have been dealt as best they can. They are stuck because their employers make sure they are stuck so that their only option is to support their employers in preserving jobs that harm them and everyone in the long run.
Coal miners do not worry about the environment because the powers that be have arranged things so that it does them no good to do so. Taking the views of people who are stuck as views of people who have chosen freely is a classic conservative tactic that has confused many.
They do this not because they are greedy or stupid but rather because they are stunk, playing the bad hand they have been dealt as best they can. They are stuck because their employers make sure they are stuck so that their only option is to support their employers in preserving jobs that harm them and everyone in the long run.
Coal miners do not worry about the environment because the powers that be have arranged things so that it does them no good to do so. Taking the views of people who are stuck as views of people who have chosen freely is a classic conservative tactic that has confused many.
This trade union protest is suspicious. I have 60 years of commitment to the labor movement and this makes no sense. I assume the leaders of the unions who wrote these letters to Mr. Trumpka are misinformed on the history of the labor movement and the economic history of the US. Rebuilding this country to create a new world and US economy not based on fossil fuels will be the greatest job creator since WWII.
We are in a global emergency and it will require an entirely evolutionary approach to adapt the World to a non-fossil fuel economy. It must be given high priority so that we can get started.
Necessity is the mother of invention and I can promise you that we will build a 300 mph, all-weather, all-electric transport network along our Interstate Highways to haul trucks in roll-on, roll-off superconducting Maglev carriers & because this system is so efficient we will be able to pay truckers 5 cents per ton mile and the same system can carry passengers for 5 cents per passenger mile. See www.magneticglide for the concept. We also plan to launch solar satellites to geosynchronous orbit to beam very cheap electricity to Earth for 2 cents per kwhr. This power authority in space will be the new source of energy to replace fossil fuels. Saving the best to last, with the unlimited cheap electricity we will make synthetic gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel from the carbon dioxide in air and hydrogen in water. This is greatest job opportunity yet to come to the trades.
We are in a global emergency and it will require an entirely evolutionary approach to adapt the World to a non-fossil fuel economy. It must be given high priority so that we can get started.
Necessity is the mother of invention and I can promise you that we will build a 300 mph, all-weather, all-electric transport network along our Interstate Highways to haul trucks in roll-on, roll-off superconducting Maglev carriers & because this system is so efficient we will be able to pay truckers 5 cents per ton mile and the same system can carry passengers for 5 cents per passenger mile. See www.magneticglide for the concept. We also plan to launch solar satellites to geosynchronous orbit to beam very cheap electricity to Earth for 2 cents per kwhr. This power authority in space will be the new source of energy to replace fossil fuels. Saving the best to last, with the unlimited cheap electricity we will make synthetic gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel from the carbon dioxide in air and hydrogen in water. This is greatest job opportunity yet to come to the trades.
24
Shall we also come to the aid of the millions of cocaine and heroine workers who will lose their jobs if we make these drugs illegal? It's unfortunate that these good people need to lose their jobs, but that doesn't mean we should continue producing something that is hazardous for the environment and our health. Let's see if we can give them alternative jobs, but the coal and Keystone project must end.
13
How about you giving up your job in a show of solidarity?
1
Um, yes we should. To not aid significant numbers of people does no good. In the example you cite, I would suppose you would support incarceration or letting them continue a life of crime. That's costly.
Of course we should support the displaced construction workers. The jobs lost through Keystone are minimal. You can't tell me we can't create an equal or greater number of jobs through meaningful public works employing green technology. We should be doing that anyway.
Of course we should support the displaced construction workers. The jobs lost through Keystone are minimal. You can't tell me we can't create an equal or greater number of jobs through meaningful public works employing green technology. We should be doing that anyway.
How short-sighted and self-interested!
In addition to oil-industry work they're banking on, the unions can also be confident that increasingly frequent and devastating floods, fires, tornadoes, and hurricanes will give them even more work.
In addition to oil-industry work they're banking on, the unions can also be confident that increasingly frequent and devastating floods, fires, tornadoes, and hurricanes will give them even more work.
15
The way I see it, I'd much rather enter the convention with policy disagreements like this, as opposed to the increasingly fanatical devotion to and/or hatred for individual candidates. You can redirect a platform with rational compromise, but good luck swaying consequence-blind fanatics from their cause.
12
I have been a Democratic voter for decades. My demo, white middle aged feminist female, is supposed to support Clinton. Yet her policies and judgement through the years turned a girlhood crush into active dislike, I admit. But I am not fanatical about Bernie Sanders, whom I support and who has flaws -- although not ones of honesty and judgement. I am fanatical about the ideas and policies for which he advocates. And I love that he has been for decades for Unions while in the face of climate change, balancing that with understanding the economic realities and opportunities for good union and non-union jobs. And I appreciate that he will do all in how power as President or as Senator to stop fracking, something Clinton simply will not. So, pardon me, this is not about hatred per se, this is about caring so much for what is right -- which coincides with what will make good jobs for the people including Union jobs -- that makes me a supporter of Sanders 2016.
2
Exactly. This is actually a true issue that needs addressing. Do we think that only construction jobs need to modernize to become green? Or that white collar jobs can't be replaced with overseas workers or robots? And America doesn't have effective solutions for its citizens for these issues.
Much better to talk of this than Hillary versus Bernie.
Much better to talk of this than Hillary versus Bernie.
Not sure why this is coming out now. All along Bernie's supporters have maintained that they would not support Hillary. Not a surprise, been like that for months.
4
Which is relevant to this story how? Oh, all the union guys are feeling the Bern? And I thought it was all college kids & old time lefties who regard all union leaders as sell-outs.
1
Some hing tells me that Sanders is also pro-environment: so not sure that this makes sense: would they also not object to any candidate who is against keystone or other moves towards sustainable energy?
And let them watch as a Republican president with a Republican House and Senate block all that they, the Bernies, seek, and destroy all that President Obama has achieved.
BAR
USA
BAR
USA
Unions are accusing their only remaining allies of betrayal? Who exactly is the strategic genius that developed this brilliant line of political thinking for you, Scott Walker?
36
Maybe the problem is with Hillary and her actual and/or perceived disdain for re-training workers for the new challenges of a cleaner environment.
Bernie for President in 2016!
Bernie for President in 2016!
25
Your use of "actual and/or perceived" to propose support for your thesis is discouraging in precisely the way that the Bernie Brigade is discouraging.
2
Uh, she has called for spending serious money on re-training, just a bit less than Sanders. Clever how you admit it may only be a perception, a perception which you're doing your best to spread, like with a loaded word like disdain.
I was gonna get down on you for being anonymous but seeing's how you're from Texas I'll refrain.
I was gonna get down on you for being anonymous but seeing's how you're from Texas I'll refrain.
2
If this means Bernie or bust, all workers lose.
1
In making their political decisions, unions and their members should remember that Republicans have in the past openly opposed any and all unions. So, any Union or union member voting for a Republican is in fact voting to dismantle their union--period. Thus, irrespective of some disagreement with any democratic group, the future survival of unions rest with the Democrats and their ultimate destruction is the goal of the Republicans. Not a difficult choice to make!
46
You're forgetting one thing. Donald Trump. All bets are off.
This is unfortunate and unnecessary -- since a shift to a clean energy and increased energy efficiency and new infrastructure can create many new skilled jobs in the construction trades, jobs that can't be outsourced. In fact, many more jobs than in the old fossil-fuel economy, with boom and bust cycles and increased mechanization (as in the coal industry.) If we can unite around such a future instead of being divided by it, it can usher in a prosperous and sustainable future for millions in the trades -- as well as protecting our climate.
10
If the Unions side with Republicans, they are responsible for signing their own death warrant.
21
As a union member I am deeply saddened that my labor brothers and sisters are taking such a backwards position with respect to the sustainability movement. As a mother, my son's future is my single most important concern, and that future depends on phasing out fossil fuels as rapidly as humanly possible. I imagine that the building trades' members also have children. The labor movement needs to abandon the economy that threatens our families and embrace sustainable development that can provide more than enough good jobs. If forced to choose between my son and and my support for labor, there is no contest. I really hope that I am never required to make that choice.
11
Is Tom Steyer concerned enough about the environment that he's living in a 1,800 square foot 3 bed/2 bath home that uses less energy to heat/cool/maintain? I doubt it.
And if he's not, he's all talk.
He should use his wealth to promote eco-friendly infrastructure projects that will employ legal citizens and benefit everyone living in this country.
Instead, the Steyers of the world have no problem building luxury homes, yachts, and planes for themselves. They are NOT environmentalists. They are wolves in sheep's clothing.
And if he's not, he's all talk.
He should use his wealth to promote eco-friendly infrastructure projects that will employ legal citizens and benefit everyone living in this country.
Instead, the Steyers of the world have no problem building luxury homes, yachts, and planes for themselves. They are NOT environmentalists. They are wolves in sheep's clothing.
11
Too bad the republicans spent the last 30 years denying that climate change was real and fighting policies to promote wind and solar. If they hadn't, we might have some of the many thousands of good wind turbine manufacturing that are now all in Europe and Asia.
18
Here is yet another problem for the Democratic Party, whose mantra seems to be divide and conquer. If it were truly a party that stood for the working class, and a fair economy for all, this rift would not be happening. Bernie Sanders speaks of the urgency of climate change at the same time as he speaks of jobs - infrastructure jobs, in particular. And he is trustworthy, standing by his word. Meanwhile, his opponent talks about having her husband be a job czar if she wins the White House - with no irony at all. No wonder many in the working class have given up on this party, in despair. And yes, some will turn to Donald Trump. At this point, it's hard to blame them. People need to eat, and it is the economy, stupid or not.
13
I too am a union member and supporter. I grew up listening to Pete Seeger records.
Which Side Are You On?
They say in Harlan County
There are no neutrals there
You'll either be a union man
Or a thug for J.H. Blair
The Republican saint- Ronald Reagan- made his bones destroying the air traffic controllers union. Unions have since become the permanent target of the GOP. Any union members voting for Trump need to know a little history.
Which Side Are You On?
They say in Harlan County
There are no neutrals there
You'll either be a union man
Or a thug for J.H. Blair
The Republican saint- Ronald Reagan- made his bones destroying the air traffic controllers union. Unions have since become the permanent target of the GOP. Any union members voting for Trump need to know a little history.
32
I'm a life-long union man. The unions may howl to get their voices heard. But at the end of the day, they would be spiting themselves if they fall for Trump and his bombast.
12
Labor and anyone who has any real work experience in infrastructure know that the climate change activists despise blue collar people. These are the people who drive pick ups with V8s, oh, how horrible. They dig up the earth and build real stuff so that real people can get real food and real energy delivered to the stores they shop and the real homes they live in. Real people know that real animals emit gas and think that is part of the world, not that we all need to eat tofu and kale so that we reduce the methane gas emissions of animals. Real people know that many climate change activists are elitists who are pushing agendas that make the "green" energy business people rich. That hard core environmentalists don't believe that real blue collar people should have children, because those children will emit, gosh, methane gas.
The labor movement is a lot smarter than the climate change people give them credit for.
The labor movement is a lot smarter than the climate change people give them credit for.
5
If you believe "climate change people" are so awful I feel sorry for you, your children and generations of children to come. These terrible "climate people" want a planet to live on that is clean, sustainable and around in centuries to come. If members of unions vote for any republican they are fools voting against their own future. Show me a republican candidate who isn't on the side of bashing unions, holding wages stagnant and anti-negotiation for salary and benefits. The Koch brothers et all have and will spend millions of dollars defeating Democrats. All union members should think long and hard about which party is their best representative.
I am always suspicious of commenters who rely on sweeping generalizations: do ALL blue collar workers despise environmentalists? Are not environmentalists not "real people" as well?
Also, yes animals do eat and then produce methane. However, much less methane is produced if one limits ingestion to plant based product, as then the food source itself is also not producing methane, and we we then only sending nutrients through one gastro-intestinal system (ours) instead of two (ours plus the cow).
This de-humanization of people who disagree with you is, I believe, at the root of much of our political gridlock.
Also, yes animals do eat and then produce methane. However, much less methane is produced if one limits ingestion to plant based product, as then the food source itself is also not producing methane, and we we then only sending nutrients through one gastro-intestinal system (ours) instead of two (ours plus the cow).
This de-humanization of people who disagree with you is, I believe, at the root of much of our political gridlock.
Real people need to breathe clean air and drink clean water.
We need a new infrastructure for the 21st century, and we need to repair our existing infrastructure.
According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, we need $3.6 TRILLION in repairs in existing infrastructure:
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org
Why don't our labor unions get smart and fight to repair our existing bridges, roads, airports, water pipes, etc. They can also focus on moving forward with renewable energy jobs.
Seriously, $3.6 trillion is more than enough to create some great middle class jobs and job-creating projects.
According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, we need $3.6 TRILLION in repairs in existing infrastructure:
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org
Why don't our labor unions get smart and fight to repair our existing bridges, roads, airports, water pipes, etc. They can also focus on moving forward with renewable energy jobs.
Seriously, $3.6 trillion is more than enough to create some great middle class jobs and job-creating projects.
25
Are you serious? We can't afford those construction costs because of unions and their larcenous wages and outrageous benefits coupled with prevailing wage laws.
That's right "Leave Capitalism Alone." It's much better to spend $2 Trillion on invading Iraq and rebuilding their infrastructure (I'm being sarcastic, btw).
I am serious. It would be much better to raise the gas tax, which hasn't been raised in over 25 years, and end the special carried interest tax rate for the rich, and start rebuilding our infrastructure, especially since interest rates are so low.
WIth your thinking we would never have built the Hoover Damn or built the railroads or our interstate highway system.
I am serious. It would be much better to raise the gas tax, which hasn't been raised in over 25 years, and end the special carried interest tax rate for the rich, and start rebuilding our infrastructure, especially since interest rates are so low.
WIth your thinking we would never have built the Hoover Damn or built the railroads or our interstate highway system.
This rift is sad to see.
My own take is that energy efficiency and alternative energy (solar, wind, geothermal, hydro), especially when building-integrated, creates substantial numbers of construction jobs-- many of them unionized.
There is an urgent need to employ more Americans in infrastructure repair and replacement, as well as in energy efficiency and alternative energy. I hope that the unions focus their efforts in this direction.
Keystone XL is a short-term solution for jobs and energy with limited significance.
My own take is that energy efficiency and alternative energy (solar, wind, geothermal, hydro), especially when building-integrated, creates substantial numbers of construction jobs-- many of them unionized.
There is an urgent need to employ more Americans in infrastructure repair and replacement, as well as in energy efficiency and alternative energy. I hope that the unions focus their efforts in this direction.
Keystone XL is a short-term solution for jobs and energy with limited significance.
32
This rift in the union movement is symptomatic of burgeoning income inequality in the U.S. As the Times points out, the AFL-CIO's cash flow has declined. Thus, the union-Steyer PAC, in which Steyer, a hedge fund billionaire, matches union funds. In decades past, of course, the AFL-CIO would not have needed such an alliance.
I appreciate Steyer's pro-environmental stance and liberal activism, but the economic clout of a small handful of individuals is a big part of the economic problem confronting the U.S. Bernie Sanders is one of the few who has dared to grapple with this problem,
I appreciate Steyer's pro-environmental stance and liberal activism, but the economic clout of a small handful of individuals is a big part of the economic problem confronting the U.S. Bernie Sanders is one of the few who has dared to grapple with this problem,
13
The "labor force that will be employed to facilitate the transition to a clean energy economy... operating engineers, plumbers, elevator constructors, roofers, laborers, plasterers, and heat and frost insulators" - all and more will be needed to build solar projects throughout the US, to develop new massive wind catchers and a new and more efficient energy grill. The leaders of the trade unions need dream catchers - singers and artists- to assist their workers to look beyond the folly of the toxic pipelines, which will provide few jobs and destroy the planet which their children`s children need.
11
Here's a thought. Ban donations from corporations and unions, ban SuperPacs, and limit individual donations to about $1500. Anyone who thinks that Mr Steyer has any seniors interest in income inequality or, perhaps more importantly, social immobility, is a fool.
11
I'd be far more impressed with the various "hard hat" unions if, instead of Keystone type pipelines, the unions would use their "muscle" & "influence" with Republicans to support and FUND just basic maintenance of the country's infrastructure, ie, highways, freeways, bridges, etc. That work could keep a lot of "hard hats" busy for a long time.
But, then again, the last Republican who was interested in the nation's infrastructure has been dead for 47years...
But, then again, the last Republican who was interested in the nation's infrastructure has been dead for 47years...
26
A tempest in a tea pot.
The construction trade union leaders are seeing an opportunity to take a stand they believe members support and using voter turnout as a wedge. Before condemning the unions, the building trades have always been the conservative sector of the labor movement and the lest related to any social implications of Labors’ potential power from Gompers on. Here they are holding to form – the world as they see it.
The memberships are comprised of working people who made their own decisions, in this case and others, as to what has been happening to them over the last decade or so and that is not a bright story. They will vote as they see fit or stay home as many do if they do not see prospects in what is offered up by the political establishment. Voter turnout, with a few exceptions, is a transparent veil of little weight. Want their votes offer them something real for a change as at least one candidate is doing, if heard.
The construction trade union leaders are seeing an opportunity to take a stand they believe members support and using voter turnout as a wedge. Before condemning the unions, the building trades have always been the conservative sector of the labor movement and the lest related to any social implications of Labors’ potential power from Gompers on. Here they are holding to form – the world as they see it.
The memberships are comprised of working people who made their own decisions, in this case and others, as to what has been happening to them over the last decade or so and that is not a bright story. They will vote as they see fit or stay home as many do if they do not see prospects in what is offered up by the political establishment. Voter turnout, with a few exceptions, is a transparent veil of little weight. Want their votes offer them something real for a change as at least one candidate is doing, if heard.
3
The way I see it, jobs created from the construction of an oil pipeline is limited in numbers and finite in timespan (how long does it take to build a pipeline anyways?!), but climate change is long term into the future, impact is far reaching, and the shift to clean energy has the potential to generate a lot more jobs.
If I were King Solomon, the choice is easy.
If I were King Solomon, the choice is easy.
27
Fascinating to see how Big Labor and the right wing have common, short-sighted goals in shutting down responses to climate change, driven by their own myopic self-interest. Next thing you know, the construction unions -- full mainly of white men -- will align with Trump, who will promise to "build baby, build." Not hard to imagine.
12
Want a winning coalition? Find partners. Whether a decision or an election, all those on the winning side probably won't agree on everything. It's OK to agree to work together on common goals even if you won't be together on others. Efficiently deploying resources avoids duplication and increases effectiveness. Why not take advantage of other resources to make sure your common goals are met? Maybe you'll have more to devote to the topics you don't agree on. America is indebted to both groups for their work for the common good -- keep your eyes on the prize and what we really need in the decades to come.
3
Funny that the Democrats are now the party of the wealthy elite. The New Democrats cater to wealthy hedge fund managers and their spoiled kids in college.
17
Oh good between the Bernie bros and construction unions it should be a...oh let's call it... "remarkable" 4-8 years of President Trump. I'm sure it'll be a yuge success. The size of the yuge? Large.
9
LOL at all the 'renewable energy job' commenters. Sure there will be some jobs with renewable energy, there already are and the number will continue to grow with or without rich people donating to the democratic party.
In fact, if rich people weren't supporting Clinton, Bernie Sanders would probably be winning, which is what these complaints are really about. The wealthy are buying influence. Sure they say the money is to fight climate change, but it's all fungible. What the hedge fund guys really want is to make sure nothing happens to 'carried interest' and that the outsourcing and H1B gravy trains continue to run on schedule.
In fact, if rich people weren't supporting Clinton, Bernie Sanders would probably be winning, which is what these complaints are really about. The wealthy are buying influence. Sure they say the money is to fight climate change, but it's all fungible. What the hedge fund guys really want is to make sure nothing happens to 'carried interest' and that the outsourcing and H1B gravy trains continue to run on schedule.
25
Exactly.
Show me the house Steyer lives in and I will tell you if he's really an environmentalist worried about climate change.
Show me the house Steyer lives in and I will tell you if he's really an environmentalist worried about climate change.
6
President Obama opposes the Keystone pipeline. So far, 74 months straight of job growth and over 14 million new private sector jobs created. Compare that to Bush Jr's 8 years- negative jobs & the Great recession. Let's focus- we need Tom Steyer so we can retake Congress and keep the White House.
20
The new is the enemy of the old and nostalgia and inertia are the enemies of progress. If we give every union member his old polluting job back, then his children won't have a world to pollute. The black or white thinking of many of these union members is appalling. They have to be willing to transition to a green economy or to a mixed, green and fossil fuel economy, at the very least they have to admit an adamant attitude that focuses purely on having their jobs back is a short term solution and won't bring them safety in a world of boiling seas. "It's always been that way," or "these are just natural cycles of climate alteration that have come and gone since well before man" don't cut it. Humans violate the Earth in awful ways and to insist they don't have an iota of impact on the atmosphere, the various species or on vegetation or ocean currents or the seasons or the temperatures experienced across continents is to be bereft of common sense. Of course Trump the opportunist will swoop on the disaffected union members for his booty and they may cozy up to him, but their jobs are not returning. Trump is not Atlas. He can't hold up the sky for union members who think their sky has fallen and as for Hillary Clinton lying that she will return lost coal mining jobs to West Virginia, her double speak is a travesty of justice.
5
So let the union zealots (I'm generally pro union) vote for Trump and see how well that goes for them. Truly stupid.
6
Is Donald Trump someone your children can look up to?
2
Some of the unions have always been extremely pro-war and reactionary in the name of jobs. Some of them also discriminated against non-whites and women.
There will always be more jobs, but there will not always be an environment. Furthermore, there may end up being more and better jobs in an economy where the environment is taken care of than there will be if it is abused.
The unions need to remember this. Union members need to remember this.
There will always be more jobs, but there will not always be an environment. Furthermore, there may end up being more and better jobs in an economy where the environment is taken care of than there will be if it is abused.
The unions need to remember this. Union members need to remember this.
4
This has more to do with the leaders of these unions wanting to maintain credibility with their rank-and-file members who rightfully cannot stand or trust Hillary Clinton. Steyer just gives them their excuse to back away from her. And besides, the Times readers might not like it much, but Trump is an economic populist who's agenda is better for blue-collar union members than any Republican in 40 years.
4
Deporting "illegals" has nothing to do with a job-creating agenda and everything to do with scapegoating. The undocumented did not outsource US manufacturing jobs or destroy unions, nor did they "take away jobs" from blue-collar workers. The "job creators" did that. Some unions have seen the writing on the wall and are now actively trying to unionize workers in certain industries were there are large numbers of people of color and the undocumented. Trying desperately to maintain the world white blue collar workers once knew by going against other groups of workers is selfish and counterproductive. Any person guaranteeing a return to "the good old days" is not a true ally, and shame on workers who believe that fantasy.
The Democrats are now solely the party of effete urban liberals and grievance groups. The GOP has long been the "get off my lawn" (i.e. angry old guy) party. We are in desperate need of another option.
11
Will these groups get in synch, there are lots of jobs to be created by environmental retrofitting, infrastructure to build mass transit, clean energy power sources and grids, etc.? Look at Los Angeles, where labor and environmentalists (and communities of color) get together to support transit projects, that help all their interests. Labor and environmental leaders, like politicians, need to get out of Washington with its polarized non-cooperative atmosphere and learn from successes around the country.
12
It is too bad that the construction industry does not try and get ahead of the curve and go all out for the clean energy and the building opportunities that the clean companies will offer. There is new energy saving construction and energy from wind, sun and water that will require workers.
13
To Steyer and the rich Hollywood phonies who are obsessed with climate change, it doesn't matter if gasoline costs $7.00/gallon or if electric rates triple. To the hard-pressed workers in the construction trade, it matters a lot. And these two visions are irreconciable.
9
The price of gasoline and electric rates will be irrelevant if the planet is uninhabitable..
4
I can't believe these Unions are willing to leave the Democrats who are pushing for new tech and infrastructure repairs which will create lots of new good paying union jobs for republicans who want keystone and coal. The keystone will create very few jobs and coal is leaving the way of the dinosaur. This is crazy. Who wrote this article? Was it a right wing "think of how they can create nonexistent problems tank"?
3
I thought it was a BIG mistake for the Ds when they didn't pass card-check first thing, even before Obamacare, when they had the majority in both Houses of Congress in 2009. Did they never hear "Dance with the one that brung ya'"? Or maybe they WERE too beholden to Wall Street.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost, and although labor is no longer the power it once was, it is still good at turning out the vote AND among white men, if the unions are happy.
On the other hand, who they gonna vote for? Republicans? Who absolutely HATE unions? Who enact "right to work" (for peanuts) laws in every state they run?
Maybe the unions should look a little farther than "pipeline" projects to "solar cell projects" or "windmill projects." Or maybe they should just realize how all those road and bridge construction projects were held down by the Rs.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost, and although labor is no longer the power it once was, it is still good at turning out the vote AND among white men, if the unions are happy.
On the other hand, who they gonna vote for? Republicans? Who absolutely HATE unions? Who enact "right to work" (for peanuts) laws in every state they run?
Maybe the unions should look a little farther than "pipeline" projects to "solar cell projects" or "windmill projects." Or maybe they should just realize how all those road and bridge construction projects were held down by the Rs.
4
I understand that the hard-hat unions want climate change to proceed. Their workers are looking forward to re-building all the coastal cities on higher ground. Jobs, jobs, jobs.
3
The real reason there are fewer coal mining jobs is that new coal requires fewer workers. Big machines on open pit mines substitute for 100s of workers iin underground mines.
An even bigger explanation is the greater availability and lower cost of natural gas. Gas generation plants employ fewer workers as they pollute less in some ways. When the gas infrastructure is required to reduce methane emissions (as the Obama administration is trying to get them to do) they will have to invest in their infrastructure meaning more union jobs.
However, clean renewable energy (CRE) industries are far more labor intensive than the fossil fuel industry. Labor needs to focus on CRE industries.
Energy efficiency is poised to create many jobs for insulators and to replace old inefficient systems (HVACR, elevators, escalators, lighting,, etc.) and many of those jobs will be union jobs.
There is a need for a reinvigorated blue-green alliance, so that we and our children can look forward to a clean sustainable future brought about by men and women working in safe and clean conditions where worker receive a good living wage.
An even bigger explanation is the greater availability and lower cost of natural gas. Gas generation plants employ fewer workers as they pollute less in some ways. When the gas infrastructure is required to reduce methane emissions (as the Obama administration is trying to get them to do) they will have to invest in their infrastructure meaning more union jobs.
However, clean renewable energy (CRE) industries are far more labor intensive than the fossil fuel industry. Labor needs to focus on CRE industries.
Energy efficiency is poised to create many jobs for insulators and to replace old inefficient systems (HVACR, elevators, escalators, lighting,, etc.) and many of those jobs will be union jobs.
There is a need for a reinvigorated blue-green alliance, so that we and our children can look forward to a clean sustainable future brought about by men and women working in safe and clean conditions where worker receive a good living wage.
10
that some of the so-called hard-hat unions fervently wanted."
even if the jobs were a few thousand in the beginning and just a handful when the pipeline was completed. It wasn't a very good battle to choose. There are actually more bridges that need replacing or repairing that would held union workers. Are those union workers who want the bennies but don't want to pay the dues?
It is stupid to not support the environment because without a climate in which we can all survive, the gas pipelines won't make any difference when we are all dead. It is the equivalent of "the surgery was a success but the PATIENT DIED".
even if the jobs were a few thousand in the beginning and just a handful when the pipeline was completed. It wasn't a very good battle to choose. There are actually more bridges that need replacing or repairing that would held union workers. Are those union workers who want the bennies but don't want to pay the dues?
It is stupid to not support the environment because without a climate in which we can all survive, the gas pipelines won't make any difference when we are all dead. It is the equivalent of "the surgery was a success but the PATIENT DIED".
2
I'm a union supporter from a union family, but it's time for the workers' unions to think about the welfare of their children and their grandchildren. Climate change is real. Neglecting it will result in far more costly repairs and much greater job losses in the future. One of the marks of human civilization is the ability to put off immediate gratification for the better good in the future, and working people have to recognize these job-related issues as part of that calculation.
Many of the jobs that these unions want to save or create are not real and certainly not lasting. Keystone pipeline will supply jobs for two to four years, and then employ almost nobody, but the effects on our coastal cities will last for centuries. Coal mining is a dying occupation. Those jobs are never coming back, and it's time for Democrats to say so in strong language.
Many of the jobs that these unions want to save or create are not real and certainly not lasting. Keystone pipeline will supply jobs for two to four years, and then employ almost nobody, but the effects on our coastal cities will last for centuries. Coal mining is a dying occupation. Those jobs are never coming back, and it's time for Democrats to say so in strong language.
4
This country has an immense deficit in infrastructure spending, including that on mass transit, bridges, ports, water distribution, and the electric grid, among many others. Moreover, there is much needs for labor building our clear energy infrastructure. Given that, it is shameful that labor unions would fight for coal plants given what scientists tell us about the environment impact of burning coal.
5
One thing that differentiates construction unions from other unions is that they have no qualms about building anything, no matter how counterproductive, polluting or disruptive as long as provides some transitory work. They just wreck, build and then move on, without regard to consequence. In NYC they push for every mega-development, boondoggle and castle for the 1% while forgetting that they have participated in pricing themselves out of this very city and now commute from Nassau county and NJ - all in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs. Perhaps they should use their considerable clout to promote infrastructure rebuilding, sustainable energy and affordable housing instead of being the eager tools of people like Trump.
6
Why don't these same labor unions that want to build the Keystone XL pipeline, in order to transport the dirtiest oil in the world and thereby greatly exacerbate the potentially catastrophic problem of global climate change, get behind the Bernie Sanders campaign instead.
Bernie Sanders has made a legislative proposal for massive infrastructure projects (roads, bridges, dams, electrical grids, railways, airports, waterways, and phone and internet lines) all across the country.
Nearly a quarter of the nation’s 600,000 bridges have been designated as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. In 2010 alone, it was estimated that deficiencies in surface infrastructure from potholes and outdated rail lines to collapsing bridges cost $130 billion between property damage and lost time.
According to a report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), federal spending on transportation and water infrastructure since 2003 has decreased by 19 percent. According to this report, forty-two percent of major urban highways are congested, costing us $101 billion annually and increasing carbon emissions.
Independent studies show that, in the short-term, non-residential construction generates nearly twice as much economic activity as money spent ($1.92 per $1 spent). The long-term impact is even more ($3.21 per $1 spent).
Bernie Sanders has made a legislative proposal for massive infrastructure projects (roads, bridges, dams, electrical grids, railways, airports, waterways, and phone and internet lines) all across the country.
Nearly a quarter of the nation’s 600,000 bridges have been designated as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. In 2010 alone, it was estimated that deficiencies in surface infrastructure from potholes and outdated rail lines to collapsing bridges cost $130 billion between property damage and lost time.
According to a report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), federal spending on transportation and water infrastructure since 2003 has decreased by 19 percent. According to this report, forty-two percent of major urban highways are congested, costing us $101 billion annually and increasing carbon emissions.
Independent studies show that, in the short-term, non-residential construction generates nearly twice as much economic activity as money spent ($1.92 per $1 spent). The long-term impact is even more ($3.21 per $1 spent).
5
Welcome to reality.
The 2 actual political parties are the Investor Class and the Workers.
Democrat and Republican are has-been labels.
The Investors want cheap labor, prohibitively expensive energy they can hog while the riff-raff workers go without, and miles of private US beaches to enjoy.
Guess whose money Hillary will take and guess who she will serve.
The 2 actual political parties are the Investor Class and the Workers.
Democrat and Republican are has-been labels.
The Investors want cheap labor, prohibitively expensive energy they can hog while the riff-raff workers go without, and miles of private US beaches to enjoy.
Guess whose money Hillary will take and guess who she will serve.
13
This may mean the loss of some money from those unions, but with the exception of the steelworkers, the building trades unions have traditionally been fairly conservative. Most of their members would probably have been voting for Trump, anyway.
That said, the truth is that there should be little cause for discord between the unions and the environmental movement. Far from being "job-killers," the greening of America is an opportunity for job creation, especially in the building trades. Buildings need to be retrofitted or, in some cases, torn down and rebuilt.
The real problem is with union leadership that is short-sighted and unimaginative. There are more jobs to be had in rooftop solar installation and weatherization than in building pipelines. Maybe if these union leaders didn't have such cozy relationships with industry they'd be able to think a little more creatively.
That said, the truth is that there should be little cause for discord between the unions and the environmental movement. Far from being "job-killers," the greening of America is an opportunity for job creation, especially in the building trades. Buildings need to be retrofitted or, in some cases, torn down and rebuilt.
The real problem is with union leadership that is short-sighted and unimaginative. There are more jobs to be had in rooftop solar installation and weatherization than in building pipelines. Maybe if these union leaders didn't have such cozy relationships with industry they'd be able to think a little more creatively.
6
Is there anyone who can make it clear to the unions (and their members) that there is nothing Donald Trump--or anyone else--can do to bring back jobs in the fossil-fuel sector, especially coal? The bankrupt coal producers are not going to rise, Phoenix-like, from their own ash heaps. What we do need is a national policy of providing support to workers in carbon-emitting industries who have lost their jobs. Fat chance unless the Dems take the presidency and in the process sweep the Congress.
3
NYT fails to mention the rift caused by the DNC itself this year by supporting the establishment queen and her rigging of the system through arbitrary rules applied/and changed at whim to her advantage by her cronies. Welcome to the Nevada DNC meeting over the past weekend.
No one else needs to cause irreparable rifts that ensure a Trump victory.
The DNC is doing a might job of losing this November by ignoring how much people detest all things establishment and establishment related this year.
No one else needs to cause irreparable rifts that ensure a Trump victory.
The DNC is doing a might job of losing this November by ignoring how much people detest all things establishment and establishment related this year.
7
The demcrats, and especially clinton have taken union money and given nothing in return. Union leadership in the building trades are missing the boat and should have backed sanders.
my grandfather was a founding member of the long beach butchers local, but voting for clinton is not happening for me, it is sanders or stein this time.
my grandfather was a founding member of the long beach butchers local, but voting for clinton is not happening for me, it is sanders or stein this time.
5
My father, a union plumber, taught me to support the labor movement. But I think he would be shaking his fists at the short sighted thinking of a labor leadership that doesn't look at the big picture. The last time labor sided with reactionaries, we had Richard Nixon and that other crook Spiro Agnew. I say Yes to jobs but not at any price.
3
If you're doing something professionally which has proven detrimental to the health of others or to the planet in general, it's on you to change jobs. If that's impossible, it's on our government to assist you, financially and with retraining. That would be tax dollars very well spent it seems to me.
What other option do we have? Mass suicide?
What other option do we have? Mass suicide?
1
Well, that's sad. Do they think there will be no jobs created by sustainable energy projects?
3
No, there won't be that many jobs. Some -- but not enough for all the displaced older workers. And the jobs won't be in Appalachia.
Think: Solyndra
Think: Solyndra
2
Interesting. I support workers rights and viewed myself as a supporter of unions in an effort to support workers against the relentless efforts of many corporations to squeeze as much blood from the American worker as they can get away with. However, my support stops if the union's sole concern is to keep their members working regardless of what it is they are working on. In fact my support for the AFL-CIO evaporates entirely if the AFL-CIO advocates for coal fired power or Keystone XL.
2
The coal jobs are going and the coal companies are going bankrupt, get used to it.
1
If Hillary through the unions is going to have to pander to Big Energy, she might as well start taking donations from the Koch brothers. Or is she?
1
No. She's not.
1
I'm pro-union but this time the union's wrong. There's a future in green energy --- embrace it. Don't get stuck in the old economy.
4
Sad to see the unions propping up jobs that poison both workers and the atmosphere - that we all need. Better to get retraining for the fast-growing clean energy sector. There are now more jobs in solar energy than in coal. That's where the future is. But it's harder to organize the new tech businesses and most I know of are already paying decent wages and benefits. Green construction is also happening and is the way of the future that we all need.
1
In dealing with climate change, the election, and most other issues, especially controversial ones, it helps to at least get one's facts straight. Only then can we have intelligent discussions among people with differing views; only then might we develope solutions instead of standing around marking "our" turf on hydrants.
The Most Recommended comment by Lew says, "I'm a huge labor advocate, but Trumka and Co. are being ridicuous. The next wave in real jobs is in renewables, not fossil. Sometimes, doing the right thing is hard, but essential.
Try not to act like Republicans, dammit!"
Lew, read the article, dammit! Get your facts straight.
Ditto for all those who have made his comment the most recommended.
Trumka and Co. are not opposing policies to ameliorate climate change. They were the ones the letter from the recalcitrant unions was addressed to.
The Most Recommended comment by Lew says, "I'm a huge labor advocate, but Trumka and Co. are being ridicuous. The next wave in real jobs is in renewables, not fossil. Sometimes, doing the right thing is hard, but essential.
Try not to act like Republicans, dammit!"
Lew, read the article, dammit! Get your facts straight.
Ditto for all those who have made his comment the most recommended.
Trumka and Co. are not opposing policies to ameliorate climate change. They were the ones the letter from the recalcitrant unions was addressed to.
6
"...a job-killing hedge fund manager with a bag of cash”
Ouch.
Ouch.
9
Sounds just like one of your Republican donors, doesn't it?
I hope they work out their differences.
I hope they work out their differences.
If we destroy our environment, there will be no jobs, union or not. As someone who supports both unions AND combating climate change, I am very frustrated by this development. We need industries to evolve over time to put less of a strain on our environment. If the jobs we have now are ruining the planet, they are simply not the right jobs for the coming century. We should pay 100% unemployment and retraining wages for anyone who loses their coal job.
I'm hoping Bernie Sanders will step in and say something here...
I'm hoping Bernie Sanders will step in and say something here...
2
The willful ignorance of these unions, saying that dirty coal and dirty oil sands, somehow represent the future prospects of union workers is astounding. There is far more potential work in the new economy of renewables than in the twilight of carbon.
4
The climate is burning up and these bozos want to make it worse? (I'm the Donald's twin Ronald) What's wrong with green jobs? They've worked very well in California.
2
Proud these unions are standing up. Hedge fund managers are not our allies. If bourgeois environmentalists want union support for their causes they need to show solidarity back.
6
So you'll vote for a billionaire who promises to bring back coal mining jobs? Good luck.
2
The solar industry is one of the fastest-growing job creating sectors in California now. Maybe the unions should get busy and unionize it.
1
I totally agree with the sensible argument that climate change is the more important challenge, and that some unions/union members are short-sighted in that regard. But there's a tone of high-handedness here that is simply anathema to resolving this issue, and particularly so to some in the blue collar camp. The better approach would be to prominently support a program to directly address the economic displacement that a new and necessary social direction requires. Surely we've been through this enough to know that it's not free money to blame the working class. Both Democratic candidates, but especially the one most likely to be nominated, need to more prominently promote programs that will help workers avoid being left behind. This will cost something, but addressing climate change starting right now will save inestimably more. Some small slice of those savings should be used to help those no long asked to build pipelines or mine coal -- without giving in to the blame-throwing impulse of a left-leaning Calvinism.
4
Without going into every particular of the construction unions' objection to Mr, Steyer, I notice that they are still on the Keystone XL bandwagon. Too bad, because that train has left the station and there likely won't be another one.
In case they hadn't noticed, the price of oil is a fraction of what it was when the pipeline was first proposed, undercutting the economics of mining the Alberta oil sands, an expensive process in money, energy and environmental costs. KXL if built now would be a white elephant. There are far worthier infrastructures to spend money on, not least renewable energy and retrofitting existing structures to conserve energy.
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/05/13/Fort-McMurray-Slow-Burn/
In case they hadn't noticed, the price of oil is a fraction of what it was when the pipeline was first proposed, undercutting the economics of mining the Alberta oil sands, an expensive process in money, energy and environmental costs. KXL if built now would be a white elephant. There are far worthier infrastructures to spend money on, not least renewable energy and retrofitting existing structures to conserve energy.
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/05/13/Fort-McMurray-Slow-Burn/
3
The price of oil won't stay down for much longer.
I was paying $1.39 for gas a few months ago. Yesterday, I had to pay $2.39.
After the elections, I predict prices will go right back to $3-$4 a gallon pronto.
I was paying $1.39 for gas a few months ago. Yesterday, I had to pay $2.39.
After the elections, I predict prices will go right back to $3-$4 a gallon pronto.
1
We need a public/private sector commitment to becoming the world leader in alternative energy...not unlike our efforts to put a man on the moon.
This would benefit business, labor, and the environment.
These union folks are being very short-sighted, and I have a hard time believing that many of them are not already in the bag for Trump.
This would benefit business, labor, and the environment.
These union folks are being very short-sighted, and I have a hard time believing that many of them are not already in the bag for Trump.
1
These are the same people who worked for General Motors, had subsidies for GM cars, and yet bought Toyotas. The parking lot was filled with them. So when Labor is looking at jobs and wants to hang their hats on the jobs of the past instead of embracing the jobs of the future remedying Climate Change!
1
No wonder the Unions are in decline! They, every member, have to realize that 65% of the future work force in college, high schools, and elementary schools now, has to be trained for jobs that we do not even know about yet; not coal mine jobs, oil pipe line jobs, and the like! We need to encourage/take the unions into the next century and help them demand union shops for those next centery jobs in battery factories, windmill factorties, electric car factories, and cell phone factories.
3
Arguing against the Dems because of the failure to TPP to be approved is a poor argument. I want union jobs, too - but clean ones; not jobs for a die-nosaur industry like the fossil fuel gang. Building the TPP is like building a pipeline to nowhere. There's plenty of jobs if we, as a country, come up with an alt-energy program that fully supports solar, wind, thermal, tidal and nuclear. We can do it - and put lots of folks to work.
1
Give Tom a chance. For every 10 high paying oil industry or heavy construction jobs he would kill, he could create four if you want to work on a roof installing solar panels alongside illegal immigrants, or are comfortable with wind tower heights.
Democrats are coming face to face with the real issue involved with climate change: No one has made a convincing case that the path forward can happen without shrinking employment.
Democrats are coming face to face with the real issue involved with climate change: No one has made a convincing case that the path forward can happen without shrinking employment.
6
That makes no sense. How many pipeline jobs can there be?
2
This argument is a common -- and ignorant one. Most construction projects create only jobs during the construction phase, not afterward. Think bridges, roads, cell towers, houses, you name it. Pipeline construction creates pipeline construction jobs. Yes, they are temporary. So are all construction jobs.
Environmentalists are now after any and all pipeline projects. Keystone XL is just one that has been shut down. Anyone in the business of engineering and constructing pipelines will understandably be upset with people like Steyer.
Environmentalists are now after any and all pipeline projects. Keystone XL is just one that has been shut down. Anyone in the business of engineering and constructing pipelines will understandably be upset with people like Steyer.
They believe they should have a right to continue building coal plants, even though they are less cost efficient and emit more pollution over the eastern states than any other form of fuel. The Unions, and the US, should be assisting these members with education which will provide them with the experience and training they need to find work in the construction of more modern, energy efficient energy plants. As far as construction projects, I don't that any environmentalists object to the construction or repair of roads and bridges. Their is plenty of work that needs to be done. Forget about the Keystone Pipeline.
2
I'm surprised only that it took so long. A rift is inevitable between unions and climate change activists. For all the hype, the heralded green economy is bound to destroy good paying jobs tied to fossil fuel. Coal mining is just the beginning. The switch isn't going to be easy and it isn't going to be pretty.
7
those unions know they have a friend in the gop, definitely.
2
Just as the Republican Party seemed to be falling apart, now the Democratic Party seems to want to follow suit. Maybe it is time for both Parties to be rent asunder and we can have 4 parties -- a party for the left behind consisting of labor and the Trumpistas; a party for the social reactionaries, a party for the left of center, and a party for the right of center
2
This may be anecdotal but I know many union members (outside of teachers) who are at heart Republicans. Look at Staten Island, many police officers, firefighters and other city workers live there. And the borough is consistently Republican leaning. Seems to me the only reason why they would ever vote Democratic is because it affects their wallet since Republicans would want to do away with collective bargaining. Beyond that, they tend to have very Republican views. But their self interest trumps all.
2
My father was a union organizer all his life. I belonged to a union all my working years. But my father told me that there are some issues more important than labor issues. It's too bad that these so called labor leaders are so myopic. I guess they are not that smart.
Why not push for construction work that helps the environment?
2
I consider myself pro-union, have had a union job and been proud of it, but If Mr. Trumka and Mr. Sullivan draw a line in the sand between being pro union or being for smart climate policy, the choice is a no-brainer. They will lose my support (and inspire passionate resistance). The right to a job today does not "trump" the imperative to do something about the economic mayhem we will leave to our children if climate change is not seriously adressed.
4
The problem with people like Mr. Steyer is that he believes the jobs lost as the economy transitions to a cleaner base will be magically replaced by those in the new economy. It is not that simple: coal miners do not magically turn into to wind energy specialists. Thus some programs are need to ease the transition and in some cases take care of those who are permanently displaced. Also the companies that suffer losses from their stranded capital investments need some attention. Mr. Steyer was warned about this issue in a public meeting in SF last year and he ignored the issue. I know, because I raised it. Hilary had better up her game and realize there are real options to address this issue with public policy. The answer it not to say how many jobs are in the solar or wind energy area. They are not the same voters!
8
Billionaires like Tom Steyer do not see the little people they trample on.
A 55 year old coal miner, who dropped out of high school in 8th grade, is not going to retrain as a "wind energy specialist" or a "computer programmer" -- putting him into college will take up 4-6 years of his life, and put him heavily into debt -- just as he is approaching RETIREMENT.
And frankly, there are not enough of those "green energy jobs" to go around -- lots of other, college-degreed professionals want them too! Mostly they are a mirage. Solar and wind power are ineffective and costly and won't replace fossil fuels.
A 55 year old coal miner, who dropped out of high school in 8th grade, is not going to retrain as a "wind energy specialist" or a "computer programmer" -- putting him into college will take up 4-6 years of his life, and put him heavily into debt -- just as he is approaching RETIREMENT.
And frankly, there are not enough of those "green energy jobs" to go around -- lots of other, college-degreed professionals want them too! Mostly they are a mirage. Solar and wind power are ineffective and costly and won't replace fossil fuels.
5
Since jobs in all forms of the renewable energy sector grew, while jobs in the coal, oil and gas sector did not, puts the demands of those unions wishing a break with environmentalists into an indefensible position. Those union leaders are not working in their members' best interests, so what is their agenda, really?
2
Both of the Dem candidates have an opportunity to support the election of a non-Trump in November while proving their negotiating/compromise-brokering skills (perhaps behind the scene) to keep this split from becoming highly destructive. Infighting, boycotts - great ways to self-defeat the Party of Reason's chances in November, no matter who is nominated..
44
Go get'em hard hats! I am sick to death of the radical tree huggers blocking every construction project----big or small. They are extreme in their views and actions. The trades are getting hurt--and badly by the environmentalists. Who put more union tradesmen to work, Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton? Any thinking business person knows it has been Mr. Trump.
30
Listen to yourself: "blocking every construction project"??? No--blocking polluting projects that harm us all, but opening up huge opportunities to construct sustainable new infrastructure. Hysterical reaction won't stop the future from arriving, but intelligent adaptation will make it livable.
2
Peter said, "I am sick to death of the radical tree huggers blocking every construction project----big or small." I don't know about Albany, but I just traveled through a significant part of the eastern United States, and it is clear that there is a lot of construction taking place. So to say that every construction project is being blocked does not ring true with me. Other commentators on this article have indicated in their areas that the construction trades are at or near full employment, so that would also bring into question the assertion that "every construction project----big or small" is being blocked. So, Peter, what is the real reason why your construction project was not approved?
2
If every construction project has been blocked how come I see so many cranes out there? Course I haven't been to Albany NY in decades but out here all kinds of stuff is getting built.
As far as the wonderful hard hats go, I still remember them backing Nixon & being gung ho for the Vietnam War. Of course all those anti-war folks were extreme in their views & actions.
Needless to say all the unions' problems have been caused by environmentalists and the wonderful Republicans have been 100% pro-union.
As far as the wonderful hard hats go, I still remember them backing Nixon & being gung ho for the Vietnam War. Of course all those anti-war folks were extreme in their views & actions.
Needless to say all the unions' problems have been caused by environmentalists and the wonderful Republicans have been 100% pro-union.
2
If the Democrats won't fight global warming, then we might as well have two Republican parties.
3
Why haven't any of these climate change fighters denounced such polluting, gassing, wasteful, filthy activities as ocean cruises, motor sports, down hill snowskiing/snowsledding, atv's, sports cars, outdoor festivals, andl a host of other things that you can all quickly come up with?
Really, we kinda wanta know why? Maybe, this is all just a big political ploy that plays on our visceral emotions like abortion and homosexuality, patriotism, so-called traditional values, etc., and so on do, perhaps?
Maybe, some of the workers these unions represent have figured something out that many of us have yet to do, hmnnn!
Really, we kinda wanta know why? Maybe, this is all just a big political ploy that plays on our visceral emotions like abortion and homosexuality, patriotism, so-called traditional values, etc., and so on do, perhaps?
Maybe, some of the workers these unions represent have figured something out that many of us have yet to do, hmnnn!
6
Mostly because none of the things listed above produces a significant share of greenhouse gasses.
Duh.
Duh.
"That's different".
Anything lefty liberals ENJOY is sacrosanct. So it's OK to ride snowmobiles or jet skis on vacation -- OK to fly all over the world for fancy vacations - OK to buy a new smartphone every year (made in China, by slave labor at Foxconn) -- but god forbid you mine coal, because that benefits "low class, low information redecks in a red state".
Lefties are total hypocrites.
Anything lefty liberals ENJOY is sacrosanct. So it's OK to ride snowmobiles or jet skis on vacation -- OK to fly all over the world for fancy vacations - OK to buy a new smartphone every year (made in China, by slave labor at Foxconn) -- but god forbid you mine coal, because that benefits "low class, low information redecks in a red state".
Lefties are total hypocrites.
3
What? "Outdoor festivals" are major sources of filthy air pollution? Good lord, man, listen to yourself!
This schism perfectly illustrates the current political climate, which sees popular candidates drawing support from across traditional party lines. Contrary to the belief of many who would blithely dismiss the current candidates with one word labels, the issues facing us in the election are multilayered and complex. People are angry. It may seem in the self-interest of some unions to want to break with the Democratic party on a certain issue, but so what? That fact doesn't make the unions' issue less worthy than some other issue. As Tip O'Neil said, "all politics is local."
Union leaders read the newspapers and watch television. They know their members share the insecurities that drive Trump supporters. So they take positions that will put money in their members' pockets now.
I may agree with the commentators who look to renewable energy projects as sources of future employment. But the Democrats can lose the election by being tone- deaf to the anxieties of the middle class as it faces a post- industrial economy. Infrastructure spending may help, but disdain will never be part of the solution.
I may agree with the commentators who look to renewable energy projects as sources of future employment. But the Democrats can lose the election by being tone- deaf to the anxieties of the middle class as it faces a post- industrial economy. Infrastructure spending may help, but disdain will never be part of the solution.
2
If climate change is not more seriously dealt with the union workers will be busy building walls between lower lying areas and the ocean. Continually spending money on fossil fuels and we'll soon be fossils ourselves. Ignoring change of any sort is highly detrimental. The unions in question will further weaken if they do not bite the bullet and embrace facts over bluster.
2
I can not believe anyone who would otherwise be for Hillary would vote for Trump for this reason.
Most of the people who are telling you this are either lying or do not believe that what is happening to the environment can harm us.
Most of these people are conservative and would not vote for Hillary even if this was not a issue with them.
Most people know there are very few jobs that will be lost because of her concern for the environment and more jobs will be created in the future.
This is not a endorsement of her candidacy as there are many more issues than the environment that have to be considered and I have not decided who I will vote for if I vote and it looks like I will not vote and since I live in New York my vote will not count anyway so why waist my time on taking a position.
Most of the people who are telling you this are either lying or do not believe that what is happening to the environment can harm us.
Most of these people are conservative and would not vote for Hillary even if this was not a issue with them.
Most people know there are very few jobs that will be lost because of her concern for the environment and more jobs will be created in the future.
This is not a endorsement of her candidacy as there are many more issues than the environment that have to be considered and I have not decided who I will vote for if I vote and it looks like I will not vote and since I live in New York my vote will not count anyway so why waist my time on taking a position.
2
Get real. The old-line rank-and-file worker will ignore the union bosses and vote for Trump. Clinton (or Sanders) will get those SEIU workers who bother to turn out.
5
wait a sec., the unions are so irate at not getting the Keystone pipeline (a few thousand jobs at best) that they want to support Republicans, the same party that has blocked or delayed or twisted every effort to rebuild the infrastructure of this country for the past, how many decades now?
We have roads, bridges, and buildings crumbling before our eyes.
We have roads, bridges, and buildings crumbling before our eyes.
6
Arborguy... That is the point!!! Bullseye!!
1
Unions have a proud tradition of fighting for workers' protections, which I hope will continue. But every citizen deserves a world with environmental protections. With death and destruction due to climate change, all else, jobs included, are secondary. A healthy planet is needed for any economy to work.
8
A healthy planet...while you and your family starve to death, on your subsistence tenant farm....in the cold....in the dark...no electricity ("too polluting") and no medical care (killed off by Obamacare).
Please tell your constituents that very realistic scenario. They should be so thrilled to vote for Hillary when they see the future CLEARLY.
Please tell your constituents that very realistic scenario. They should be so thrilled to vote for Hillary when they see the future CLEARLY.
1
How utterly sad (and predictable) that the unions would come out blasting Steyer. If the unions could see the future and their place in it to embrace new building technologies, and avoid environmental ruin, they would be onboard with Steyer and co. Reminds me of Hillary's remarks about replacing coal with green technologies, then getting blasted by the miners and their braindead "leadership." The future is upon us, get serious.
9
As a former AFL CIO member, I am deeply disappointed to read this. Repairing the countries infrastructure and the transition to clean energy promise good jobs for hard hat workers but only in a country and in states where unions are recognized and supported. The people I worked with were smart enough to know that right to work was meant to undercut our financial security and hard won rights -- they knew that working men and women had no business for voting for Republicans. As well, most were parents and grandparents who loved their children and grand-babies who are going to inherit the horrific consequences of ignoring climate change. This could be a win win situation. If hard hat unions want to abandon the Democrats for a loud mouth fraud and the Republican party, they will lose, that much is certain.
10
"Repairing the countries infrastructure and the transition to clean energy promise good jobs for hard hat workers "
Perhaps if the democrats would drop their demands that all infrastructure work be done only by "prevailing wage" union members who would then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats the GOP might be willing to fund such repairs.
As a compromise, why not allow states with Right to Work laws to use non-union workers for infrastructure repairs and restrict union workers to those states without such laws. Then at the end of the day we could compare the cost and quality of union vs non-union work.
Perhaps if the democrats would drop their demands that all infrastructure work be done only by "prevailing wage" union members who would then kickback most of their union dues to the democrats the GOP might be willing to fund such repairs.
As a compromise, why not allow states with Right to Work laws to use non-union workers for infrastructure repairs and restrict union workers to those states without such laws. Then at the end of the day we could compare the cost and quality of union vs non-union work.
2
LBS-thank you for your words! Please help communicate this to AFL CIO members!
Silicon Valley has the highest "green tech" in the nation and there are plenty of jobs for AFL CIO members here too given all the *extensive* (and almost obnoxious building) growth in the valley! this is from 2009 during the recession.
http://www.siliconvalleycf.org/press-release-february-17-2009
This can be a "win-win" as you state!
Silicon Valley has the highest "green tech" in the nation and there are plenty of jobs for AFL CIO members here too given all the *extensive* (and almost obnoxious building) growth in the valley! this is from 2009 during the recession.
http://www.siliconvalleycf.org/press-release-february-17-2009
This can be a "win-win" as you state!
2
I'm very pro-union. I'm a union member, from a union extended family. Yet the unions opposing Steyer's donation and efforts to combat climate change are damaging their own credibility and fighting a losing battle.
What Hillary Clinton said in W.VA -- the entire statement, not the sound bite -- is true. To save the environment -- surely our priority, and the unions' concern too, since their members live on the same planet as the rest of us -- we will have to switch to cleaner forms of energy. Inevitably, this means that old energy jobs -- coal, oil -- will be gone. Our objective should be to subsidize retraining and find new jobs for the old energy workers in new energy industries. Clinton proposes legislation that would devote tens of millions of dollars to do just that.
Blacksmiths lost their jobs when the automobile took over the roads. Should those championing the rights of labor advocated for more stables? Should newspaper workers, now losing jobs, advocate against the internet? The answer is not to block change, but to insist at a seat at the table so that your interests are served. In the case of the energy industry, that means retraining, new jobs, and government-subsidized project (recall the TVA) that repurpose displaced workers.
Splitting the party and electing a Republican would be counter-productive. Yes, you might save a coal mine- but at what price to the labor movement?
Sanders now; Clinton, if she's the candidate, in Nov. GOP, never!
What Hillary Clinton said in W.VA -- the entire statement, not the sound bite -- is true. To save the environment -- surely our priority, and the unions' concern too, since their members live on the same planet as the rest of us -- we will have to switch to cleaner forms of energy. Inevitably, this means that old energy jobs -- coal, oil -- will be gone. Our objective should be to subsidize retraining and find new jobs for the old energy workers in new energy industries. Clinton proposes legislation that would devote tens of millions of dollars to do just that.
Blacksmiths lost their jobs when the automobile took over the roads. Should those championing the rights of labor advocated for more stables? Should newspaper workers, now losing jobs, advocate against the internet? The answer is not to block change, but to insist at a seat at the table so that your interests are served. In the case of the energy industry, that means retraining, new jobs, and government-subsidized project (recall the TVA) that repurpose displaced workers.
Splitting the party and electing a Republican would be counter-productive. Yes, you might save a coal mine- but at what price to the labor movement?
Sanders now; Clinton, if she's the candidate, in Nov. GOP, never!
316
The issue here is that the Wall St. democrat-types exemplified here by Steyer have absolutely zero interest in creating high-wage jobs in America. They are hedge fund predators who are cynically using the environment as a wedge issue to keep the left from focusing too hard on the fact that so many of the evils that beset the country are due entirely to their greed. To blame the unions for essentially standing up to the anti-labor, faux-environmentalist Wall St. wing of the democratic party is foolishness. "Trying to get a seat at the table" is exactly what they're trying to do.
"...it appears that the answer is to sell out to a billionaire who not only has little or no stake in our movement, our members or their work but who has actively fought against our members’ interest,”
I think labor unions are essential to a necessary balance of power. If THEY think curbing global warming is "against (their) members' interest", they are mistaken.
At some point, advocates for either side of any debate just go too far and zealotry gets the better of reason. That's what's happening here.
I think labor unions are essential to a necessary balance of power. If THEY think curbing global warming is "against (their) members' interest", they are mistaken.
At some point, advocates for either side of any debate just go too far and zealotry gets the better of reason. That's what's happening here.
4
these union leaders are being fools - believing the lies created by republicans that fighting climate change will kill jobs. Yes some jobs will be lost because various projects will not be launched.
But when will they wake up and realize that many other projects will be launched in the effort to fight climate change?
And of course, consider how many jobs will be lost if we lose the battle to stem the tide of climate change. (yes, pun intended!)
These fools are no better than the CEOs that make strategic decisions based on maximizing the company's share price THIS quarter instead of doing what will best position the company for the longer term. They do this because they will personally earn more, since much of their compensation is stock options. They don't care what's best for the company or the employees ... or anybody else.
But when will they wake up and realize that many other projects will be launched in the effort to fight climate change?
And of course, consider how many jobs will be lost if we lose the battle to stem the tide of climate change. (yes, pun intended!)
These fools are no better than the CEOs that make strategic decisions based on maximizing the company's share price THIS quarter instead of doing what will best position the company for the longer term. They do this because they will personally earn more, since much of their compensation is stock options. They don't care what's best for the company or the employees ... or anybody else.
5
And you wonder why so many people in this country distrust unions when they refuse to change with the times.
The sad part is that in Europe unions have adapted for out changing times and are still a powerful influence.
But, here in this country we have idiots who lead unions, willing to toss away what is left of their shrinking influence for a handful of jobs in dying industries like coal and a couple of temporary jobs to build a pipeline that no one wants.
You also have to ask yourself, does working class Americans even possess a brain to think when they choose union leaders that look backwards and make no effort whatsoever to organize in emerging industries like solar, wind and high technology.
To me, this lack of thinking among working class Americans is why many people in this country, especially in the Democratic Party, do not see any issue in tossing working class Americans under the bus, because clearly they are doing a fine job of tossing themselves under the bus.
The sad part is that in Europe unions have adapted for out changing times and are still a powerful influence.
But, here in this country we have idiots who lead unions, willing to toss away what is left of their shrinking influence for a handful of jobs in dying industries like coal and a couple of temporary jobs to build a pipeline that no one wants.
You also have to ask yourself, does working class Americans even possess a brain to think when they choose union leaders that look backwards and make no effort whatsoever to organize in emerging industries like solar, wind and high technology.
To me, this lack of thinking among working class Americans is why many people in this country, especially in the Democratic Party, do not see any issue in tossing working class Americans under the bus, because clearly they are doing a fine job of tossing themselves under the bus.
1
Frankly, Mr. Trumka is a fool.
The tasks necessary to simply mitigate the effects of a changing climate will keep his members busy long after all of them are dead.
And that's just to mitigate. To reverse (not likely) or to adapt to the changing climate is will require a herculean effort of not only muscle but brains and money.
The tasks necessary to simply mitigate the effects of a changing climate will keep his members busy long after all of them are dead.
And that's just to mitigate. To reverse (not likely) or to adapt to the changing climate is will require a herculean effort of not only muscle but brains and money.
4
American infrastructure is falling apart. The real problem here and the source of this rift is that public infrastructure repair -- roads, bridges, sewage and water treatment plants, water distribution systems, levees, airports, parks, anything else you can think of -- requires Congressional action for funding.
The fossil fuel industry is rolling in liquidity and will pay top dollar to workers otherwise informed about global warming to work for the devil building the extractive industry's infrastructure on their dime and help wipe out the human race.
Believe me. I talk to kids from all over Canada all the time who fly in and out of Alberta to work in the tar sands because the money is great and agonize about what they are doing to the planet.
The fossil fuel industry is rolling in liquidity and will pay top dollar to workers otherwise informed about global warming to work for the devil building the extractive industry's infrastructure on their dime and help wipe out the human race.
Believe me. I talk to kids from all over Canada all the time who fly in and out of Alberta to work in the tar sands because the money is great and agonize about what they are doing to the planet.
8
Short term thinking by some unions, but at the same time, the Democrats have used them to win elections, and then kicked them to the curb with destructive trade deals, NAFTA, TPP, TTIP etc., just as they have misused Progressives. Running Clinton is another mistake, because she represents exploitive big money, where Sanders stands for unions and working people, the 99%. THe Dems are a mess. I hope they go on to self destruct, as the Republicans are. Time for alternatives for the rest of us.
77
Nice speech. Now practice the following phrase: "President Trump..President Trump.." That's what we'll get if we follow your thinking and support Bernie Sanders - a dead end candidate.
Sanders may "stand for the working people 100 percent," but he's also pro-evironmentalism, which means that he, too, would be advocating for new types of union jobs in new industries focused on rebuilding the environment and infrastructure. Just as Hillary is. She's aware of the unintended consequences of NAFTA and is working to figure out how to help people transition into a future-oriented economy. It's not easy, because there are all kinds of realities to deal with, including the reality that a lot of families need jobs now, and not in ten years.
An example of union leadership at its absolute worst. It's exactly this kind of short sighted self sabotage (along with pockets of corruption) that has turned so many people against the unions and has cost them the influence they need to be a counterweight to corporate interests. I sure hope that they have a change of heart.
1
Maybe the unions should be fighting harder for other infrastructure projects that provide jobs and are not so bad for the environment - wind and solar power, efficient transportation; clean water and sanitation projects; and to upgrade aging infrastructure like highways, bridges, airports, the electricity grid, telecommunications grid, etc.
7
I suggest you check out the programs of the construction trades unions for the last ten years. You will find that they have been calling for infrastructure improvements that would put their members to work and also improve energy efficiency. It's a shame so many commenters to this article don't know what they're talking about.
4
When are we going to come together and start putting our differences aside and start uniting and working together to make our nation better and our future generations futures. We all need to look at them really closely and start to look to leave them a better nation than what we had it who is with me on this one. I am sick of the right and left stuff it is not accomplishing anything at all.
2
Short-sighted unions are again standing in the way of a progressive agenda that addresses problems like climate change that are likely to have a long-lasting impact on our society, including a negative impact on jobs.
1
About time these unions realize that the extreme environmentalists are their worst enemy.
7
I have been a union member and worked for unions for years - always a proud member. That being said, how stunningly short sighted of AFL-CIO to take this stance. I assume all their members like to breathe clean air and drink clean water - so we are all on the same side of trying to stop devastating our environment. This election has been filled with candidates on both sides who have pandered to a bygone era - coal, sewing clothes and other low skilled manufacturing jobs are gone - forever. Hillary Clinton has been the only candidate to state this honestly and discuss what to do now - which is retraining our workforce with the skills needed for the new era. So let's reunite here - and work together to build that better, cleaner future.
9
The future is stuff like self-driving cars and automated checkouts in stores.
The future has fewer and fewer jobs for fewer people....more people displaced, useless, on the "dole".
Europe copes by allowing 20% of the population to live on welfare forever, with no hope of any job.
But you can't do that infinitely, or you end up with more people on the dole than are actually working and the whole thing collapses like a Ponzi scheme.
Hillary has no more clue than Obama about how to create "green jobs". It's mostly a fantasy. You can't make a coal miner's salary, by selling people solar panels at Home Depot for $10 an hour.
The future has fewer and fewer jobs for fewer people....more people displaced, useless, on the "dole".
Europe copes by allowing 20% of the population to live on welfare forever, with no hope of any job.
But you can't do that infinitely, or you end up with more people on the dole than are actually working and the whole thing collapses like a Ponzi scheme.
Hillary has no more clue than Obama about how to create "green jobs". It's mostly a fantasy. You can't make a coal miner's salary, by selling people solar panels at Home Depot for $10 an hour.
4
The Green Vision espoused in many of these comments ignores reality as much as they claim the Republicans are doing. Let us use a little science and logic here to really address climate change and prevent liberals from creating a new religion based on feeling and ideology.
1. The climate is changing, and consensus says that human emissions are likely to be at least be contributing to this (read the wording in the IPCC report...it is vague). How much and how fast it is changing is a guessing game based on a number of assumption and flawed models that require constant tinkering. Saying that that majority of climate scientists support evidence for global warming is a far cry from saying the majority supports a specific policy action. The truth is, we don't know. We have some catastrophic risk models and that is about it. Evidence for extreme weather events is also not clear cut. It is often cited, but there are not many studies that can link GW with hurricanes of increased frequency.
2. Green energy "renewables" will not solve this crisis. All of them require back up generation from coal and gas power plants. This is why Germany's emissions increased despite an increase in renewable power generation. US emissions fell again, thanks mostly to natural gas (fracking?). That opens another can of worms: What is the goal of climate change? Emissions? Or protection of water? These are mutual exclusive.
Natural gas and nuclear are cleaner, yet they are opposed. Where is the science?
1. The climate is changing, and consensus says that human emissions are likely to be at least be contributing to this (read the wording in the IPCC report...it is vague). How much and how fast it is changing is a guessing game based on a number of assumption and flawed models that require constant tinkering. Saying that that majority of climate scientists support evidence for global warming is a far cry from saying the majority supports a specific policy action. The truth is, we don't know. We have some catastrophic risk models and that is about it. Evidence for extreme weather events is also not clear cut. It is often cited, but there are not many studies that can link GW with hurricanes of increased frequency.
2. Green energy "renewables" will not solve this crisis. All of them require back up generation from coal and gas power plants. This is why Germany's emissions increased despite an increase in renewable power generation. US emissions fell again, thanks mostly to natural gas (fracking?). That opens another can of worms: What is the goal of climate change? Emissions? Or protection of water? These are mutual exclusive.
Natural gas and nuclear are cleaner, yet they are opposed. Where is the science?
6
This is asinine. The coal mining jobs are unsafe and represent a dying industry. Both Bernie and Hillary have spoken about the need to retrain the miners and provide alternative jobs in Appalachia. As for the hard hats, plenty of jobs will open up, once we begin addressing the serious infrastructure needs that have been neglected by McConnell's do-nothing filibuster team. The Keystone XL jobs are not long-term. On the other hand, retrofitting solar panels and energy efficient appliances have a future filled with jobs.
10
You mean like....the way OBAMA has helped rebuild Detroit...trained displaced auto and steel industry workers in high tech....created new industries and new jobs?
You do realize that he has utterly failed and Detroit looks like a bombed out city after a war? with very high unemployment?
We can't even provide jobs to ordinary workers! We can't even employ people with college degrees! How on earth would we get an "alternative job market" in APPALACHIA? which is a sprawling, low-density rural area?
Hint: if you had the slightest inclination to do this -- you do the retraining and create the new jobs FIRST....you don't first tell people "we're destroying your industry and putting you on welfare, and someday maybe, we'll retrain you and find some new jobs for you to do".
You do realize that he has utterly failed and Detroit looks like a bombed out city after a war? with very high unemployment?
We can't even provide jobs to ordinary workers! We can't even employ people with college degrees! How on earth would we get an "alternative job market" in APPALACHIA? which is a sprawling, low-density rural area?
Hint: if you had the slightest inclination to do this -- you do the retraining and create the new jobs FIRST....you don't first tell people "we're destroying your industry and putting you on welfare, and someday maybe, we'll retrain you and find some new jobs for you to do".
5
Stan, I'm with you, coal is a dying industry. But here's the problem: retraining is too little, too late and ineffective. America should flat out guarantee that displaced workers will get alternative employment, and hold corporations that go out of business, default on their pensions, or ship jobs overseas, responsible. The law should go after any assets that remain after bankruptcy to fund pensions and re-employ displaced workers; slap import duties on companies that offshore jobs to re-employ; require 1-year notifications of any layoffs so the government can put alternative employment in place. A job is essential for most of our citizens, and they should have an inalienable right to make a living. Anything short of this full commitment is unacceptable.
1
Maybe these unions are dinosaurs and need to go.
2
If union members want good jobs that will last into the future shape of our economy, they should be lining up for green energy jobs and the infrastructure improvements that will be necessary to keep our climate livable over the next few generations.
10
I just checked the help wanted ads in the Seattle Times and some online sites and didn't see green energy jobs to line up for.
3
I for one realized a while back that my Union no longer represents the needs of its members. The goal of protecting and enhancing my job opportunities, providing for a secure future my employment are long forgotten goals.
Now the Union fights for the latest PC agenda item, job killing fiasco.
Support agendas that put the entire industry that provides the food at the table is wrong.....
If the Union said we are working with Companies to grow and be better stewards for long term stability and jobs, that's one thing, but support someone who wants to destroy coal, power and other good jobs and tell me that in 20 years things will be great.
Who's going to feed my kids, pay my rent and so on for the next 20 years until the wonder green agenda hopefully works out?
Now the Union fights for the latest PC agenda item, job killing fiasco.
Support agendas that put the entire industry that provides the food at the table is wrong.....
If the Union said we are working with Companies to grow and be better stewards for long term stability and jobs, that's one thing, but support someone who wants to destroy coal, power and other good jobs and tell me that in 20 years things will be great.
Who's going to feed my kids, pay my rent and so on for the next 20 years until the wonder green agenda hopefully works out?
6
The times they are a'changing and it's time for all working people to find ways to ensure that future generations have a livable world and people today can make a living without destroying what we have . . .
5
What I, a retired union member, had hoped for is a Democratic Party that would be very pro-labor as one important way to combat income inequality. However, the Donald Trump regressive approach to "open the mines" to lure miners to vote for him when hydraulic fracking has killed Old King Coal is not the way to promote the formation of new unions with members getting good-paying 21st century jobs. Unions should promote work for the common good not just their immediate welfare. The federal government needs to lend its considerable muscle that would allow a union at Volkswagen (VW) auto plants in "right-to-work" Tennessee as VW has requested. It should help fast food workers unionize as well as Walmart, Target , Best Buy and other big box companies that provide low wages, low benefit jobs that often rely on federal government programs like Food Stamps and Medicaid to supplement their poverty-level wages. We need to make unions part of all our international trade agreements as a way of ensuring that domestic jobs here are not lost to low wage, non-union jobs abroad. The best program for restoring economic equality in America is not simply by breaking up big banks and reining in Wall Street excess, but by restoring Big Labor that will collectively bargain on behalf of its workers so that they partake of their increased productivity and end wage stagnation that corporate America has imposed.
218
I don't think I'll hold my breath for Sec. Clinton, many years a Board Member of Walmart, to push that agenda...
3
"The federal government needs to lend its considerable muscle that would allow a union at Volkswagen (VW) auto plants in "right-to-work" Tennessee as VW has requested."
The UAW twice has lost elections at the VW plant. The lost even with the advantages VW allowed by having the union wear their UAW T shirts and solicit the workers on the floor during working hours.
Now Unions are demanding that the NLRB force employers to give them the home addresses, cell phone numbers and email addresses of employees as if harassing them will make them more open to union membership.
The workers have spoken. It is a statement of how morally bankrupt the unions are if they need federal force to make people join.
isn't bad enough that employers now only have 10 days to mount a campaign against a union which has had months to prepare? Or that they must tell the union what labor relations firm they used to advise them while the unions don't?
With the exception of civil service workers unions are dying and these are all signs of their coming mortality.
The UAW twice has lost elections at the VW plant. The lost even with the advantages VW allowed by having the union wear their UAW T shirts and solicit the workers on the floor during working hours.
Now Unions are demanding that the NLRB force employers to give them the home addresses, cell phone numbers and email addresses of employees as if harassing them will make them more open to union membership.
The workers have spoken. It is a statement of how morally bankrupt the unions are if they need federal force to make people join.
isn't bad enough that employers now only have 10 days to mount a campaign against a union which has had months to prepare? Or that they must tell the union what labor relations firm they used to advise them while the unions don't?
With the exception of civil service workers unions are dying and these are all signs of their coming mortality.
1
Right. And then the people who rely on Walmart's low prices to exist will have nowhere to buy their food and goods. Made In The USA bankrupted steel, auto and other heavily-unionized manufacturing so now you want to extend that destructive influence to big box stores? It's a shell game designed to line the pockets of unions and to hell with anyone else.
1
An observation, apart from the main point of the article: Mr. Steyer is a hedge fund manager spending lots of money to combat climate change and to get out the vote, two important, positive dimensions of the Democrat's platform. To all the Bernie Sanders supporters who refuse to vote Democrat if Hillary Clinton is the nominee: are you paying attention? Big money can be used for good purposes; and a hedge fund manager just might believe in good causes and not be looking for personal or industry favors.
7
Today we learned that April set another record for the hottest April ever recorded and 2016 already looks to set a record as the hottest year ever recorded. Meanwhile unions are arguing about oil and energy jobs. Talk about rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.
'It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the line most responsive to change.' - Charles Darwin
'It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the line most responsive to change.' - Charles Darwin
2
Sorry, I don't share the hyperbole this article is trying to portray. The construction industry is nearly back to full strength employment. Here in Philly there are construction cranes everywhere you look. The construction trade unions are strong and are trying to flex some muscle.
But most of those Union tradespeople rarely vote against their best interests. They know the economy is humming under Obama and would continue to do so under Clinton. With Trump, who knows where we would be going, he doesn't even know.
Oh, and the cancelled pipeline project out there in the middle of no where? Just ask a locally employed construction worker how they feel about that, unless they are an unemployed pipe fitter, they probably don't think about it too much. To say it steers them towards who they vote for as president is, well, hyperbole. It's like the NYT wants us to think there's a huge split on this issue, when there really isn't.
But most of those Union tradespeople rarely vote against their best interests. They know the economy is humming under Obama and would continue to do so under Clinton. With Trump, who knows where we would be going, he doesn't even know.
Oh, and the cancelled pipeline project out there in the middle of no where? Just ask a locally employed construction worker how they feel about that, unless they are an unemployed pipe fitter, they probably don't think about it too much. To say it steers them towards who they vote for as president is, well, hyperbole. It's like the NYT wants us to think there's a huge split on this issue, when there really isn't.
161
Oh yes, blame the messenger. Are you saying these letters are hoaxes? That they were so obviously silly that the Times should have made the editorial judgement to ignore them?
You make some good points but are a bit too optimistic. There are and will be tensions from the transition to carbon-free economy. Doesn't mean we shouldn't do it -- we have to. But no good will come out of ignoring the pain it will certainly cause at least some.
A good friend of mine in academia who's looked closely into the role of energy in our economy is convinced we will all have to pay a price. It's more politically expedient in the short term to deny this and insist the transition will be painless but if that turns out to be wrong the political blow back might be quite severe indeed. I don't assume my friend is right, he's always been a bit of a contrarian, but I have to assume he might be right.
You make some good points but are a bit too optimistic. There are and will be tensions from the transition to carbon-free economy. Doesn't mean we shouldn't do it -- we have to. But no good will come out of ignoring the pain it will certainly cause at least some.
A good friend of mine in academia who's looked closely into the role of energy in our economy is convinced we will all have to pay a price. It's more politically expedient in the short term to deny this and insist the transition will be painless but if that turns out to be wrong the political blow back might be quite severe indeed. I don't assume my friend is right, he's always been a bit of a contrarian, but I have to assume he might be right.
1
Union trade people rarely vote against their interests?? Right, they always vote the way they are told to by their union leadership.
Agree. A perceived "split" creates drama and sells ads. And oil unions? There are none--not in the drilling (exploration) end of it. The hourly wage is far from union scale--just a lot of hours.
This is an obvious ploy for labor unions to publicly pull out of the Democratic party, and run over and hitch themselves to the Republican populist, Donald Trump, in a great spectacle. They have always wanted an excuse to pull out of the progressive movement, and Trump is there excuse. He will make America great again, and Labor has bought this con. The labor movement is finally over.
4
Mrs. Clinton is not a progressive. We need more and stronger unions, and we need to manufacture here, and not be completely sold out to globalism and the Clintons.
2
It is time for the democratic party to learn from what the republicans are going through, and re-invent itself. It needs to work for positive changes, and not appease those on the wrong side of the future like the coal industry.
6
I see little difference between the current Dems and Republicans. Until we get money out of politics and address income inequality I just don't care about anything else.
2
I thought the "political agenda" of all unions was to protect the right to organize workers and collectively bargain for wages, benefits, working conditions, job security etc. When Republicans are constantly legislating against workers' rights, I would think unionists of all trades and industries would have their hands full keeping Republicans at bay. Since when did "creating jobs" by supporting specific projects, like the Keystone pipline, or opposing laws that they deem "kill jobs," become their mission? But if it is, why aren't they all endorsing Bernie Sanders whose commitment to two huge job creating initiatives, green energy and infrastructure, is far stronger than Clinton's and the Republicans don't even go there? Makes no sense.
3
It is really shortsighted of >>the operating engineers, plumbers, elevator constructors, roofers, laborers, plasterers and heat and frost insulators<< unions to pin their fortunes to projects like Keystone XL rather than Wind Solar and self-driving automobile infrastructure. Shameful AND stupid.
3
Maybe if you had their bills to pay you might have some compassion for them
6
LOL -- it's kind of hilarious you do not realize that "self driving car technology" means making obsolete TENS OF MILLIONS OF JOBS for truck drivers, bus drivers, cab drivers, etc. -- it would make the loss of coal jobs look like a walk in the park.
Count on lefties to continually shoot themselves in the foot.
Count on lefties to continually shoot themselves in the foot.
3
Sorry, most people care more about their grandchildren's future than that of a contractor. Good riddance. Go vote for Trump just like you voted for Reagan and see where you are in four years.
5
It's not a good riddance, unless you want to see Trump elected. It's not see where you are in four years, but where we are.
2
To the heads of those unions, fare thee well. Let me know how your life looks under a republican president who treats unions and their members like trash. You and your members need to recognize you are part of a MUCH larger picture here call The Planet Earth. If you think it is in the planet's best interest to keep building coal-fired power plants so your members can keeps a few jobs while 150 million people around the planet are driven from their homes you perspective on reality is WAY to cramped. Get you members into new training programs so they can work on solar farm installation and other sustainable energy projects.
6
So who are these union members gonna vote for if they don't vote Democratic??Trump?? If that's the case, unions might as well plan on disbanding permanently before 2017....it's not like TruMP will ever support unions and it is very likely HRC and Democrats in will.
3
The overwhelming majority of public sector unions support the uber wealthy environmentalists who stand to profit from the government increasing its control of energy, along with their proposals for a carbon tax, some of which will be diverted to pay for their wages and underfunded pension funds. Mo money.
The private sector unions, the craftsmen, the pipe layers, the manufacturing and construction workers are far better off supporting Trump. Hillary's objective is to put coal miners out of work. A few of them may be tricked into supporting Hillary with the prospect of some of that carbon tax going to fund infrastructure, but they were tricked by Obama's statement that the $800 billion in stimulus was going to infrastructure and haven't forgotten that Obama and Hillary refused to approve the Keystone XL that would have provided jobs without a dime of taxpayer money. Fool me once...
The private sector unions, the craftsmen, the pipe layers, the manufacturing and construction workers are far better off supporting Trump. Hillary's objective is to put coal miners out of work. A few of them may be tricked into supporting Hillary with the prospect of some of that carbon tax going to fund infrastructure, but they were tricked by Obama's statement that the $800 billion in stimulus was going to infrastructure and haven't forgotten that Obama and Hillary refused to approve the Keystone XL that would have provided jobs without a dime of taxpayer money. Fool me once...
3
Big picture folks... this is a transition,,country is tired of black and white absolutes. give up something to to even "incrementally" move toward progress
wow
wow
4
Let's all just face up to the fact that lot's of the members of these dissenting unions were all ready entrenched in the other political camp. Certainly and by no means all...perhaps the leaders and lieutenants more than others. Anti women, anti environmental concerns and invested in short term gains and a mirror reflecting the myopic self agrandizing view of their preferred choice to lead us forward....
33
So, if the unions are looking after their member's interests, what are they doing to help them cope with change? Is resisting anything - anything, right or wrong - that threatens their current jobs really helping them? I'm generally pro-union, but these people are short-sighted. They need to recognize reality and help their members meet it.
57
I'm a big fan of unions and a member.... to my brothers and sisters I say 'get on the bus or get left behind'.... play for a better deal if you must, but don't screw the pooch...
Dems are for more and stronger unions... and for large investments in critical infrastructure, including for alternative energy....
Relax... we are on the verge of a significant win... look at Hillary's record, and then at DT's (Mr. Current minimum wage is OK) .... the choice couldn't be clearer...
Dems are for more and stronger unions... and for large investments in critical infrastructure, including for alternative energy....
Relax... we are on the verge of a significant win... look at Hillary's record, and then at DT's (Mr. Current minimum wage is OK) .... the choice couldn't be clearer...
497
You still trust the goldwater girl that sat on the Walmart board who recieves $5,000.00 a minute speaking fees from Goldman Sachs married to the liar that didn't inhale or have sex with that women and was, unfortunately, forced to into being a Rhodes Scholar so he had to have a draft deferment!
clintons sold the unions to wall street, plaint and simple.
Sanders and Stein are the two candidates with credentials for working people.
clintons sold the unions to wall street, plaint and simple.
Sanders and Stein are the two candidates with credentials for working people.
2
Hillary is weak and a fraud on the minimum wage, she only adopted a form after Sanders made it an issue, trust Hillary at your own risk WAKE UP
1
President Stein ???
... Think about that for a moment.....
... Think about that for a moment.....
2
Please, don't let a disagreement like this splinter the Democrat vote this November. Remember that if not for Ralph Nader, we would have had president Gore instead of George W Bush and the two perpetual wars.
47
Remember, it wasn't Nadar, it was the US Supreme Court, with all the "conservatives" lined in favor, who stopped the recount and appointed King Bush.
That mantra is getting pretty old. It was the Supreme Court as well as the voters of Gore's own state and a few others who decided the 2000 election. Gore actually won.
Ralph Nader didn't hand Bush the election; the Supreme Court did that, which of course is a different argument for Democrats and D-leaning independents to vote their real interests. (Oh wait, though, Clinton surrogates and supporters are denigrating independents day after day of the primary season, so they've already written off that huge group of voters.)
Labor is continuing to make the huge political mistake that has seen the movement shrink drastically over the last decades - inability to make political compromises. If labor is anti-environment, anti-racial justice, anti-women's rights, among the many issues that rank-and-filers have problems with, then pro-environment, pro-racial justice, pro-equality for women Democrats are not going to play ball with union issues. It's that simple. Grow up or continue to become irrelevant.
43
They won't be irrelevant at all - they'll be a key element of the Trump coalition.
8
And since the Democratic Party has, like the Rephblican, been bought and paid for by Wall Street, it's time they admit that their interests aren't even close anymore.
3
As if we didn't have enough problems with Trump catering to the "bring back the 1950's" folks, these unions now want to do the same. What does it matter to their members what industry they're building for anyway. Is this another case of union leadership being out of touch with their members and/or in cahoots with employers?
13
Much ado about nothing. Guess we are now trying to find splits in the Democratic party similar to the Republicans. Nice try but I don't think so.
4
This is like the kitchen crew on the Titanic arguing who should wash the pans and who should wash the pots
Don't these idiots get it? We're talking about Supreme Court appointments.
Don't these idiots get it? We're talking about Supreme Court appointments.
53
If the unions aren't in sync with the rest of the party, let 'em go. There won't be any jobs if there isn't a planet to live on. Disappointed but not surprised that profit today--the union position--supersedes the larger good. Guess we'll have to see if we can win without them. For better and worse, the Republicans have already decimated union ranks and power through their decades-long fight for the 1%.
23
This isn't the only labor/Democrat split. The labor unions are not in favor of illegal aliens undercutting their wages, and that applies to white/black/Hispanic union members. The only union workers who are in favor of higher taxes are government unions.
3
I'll wager that many of the union members who are against this are white, and *already* predisposed to vote for Trump. That said, a very significant minority of union members are Latino; they will probably not vote for Trump. Hold your ground Democrats!
9
Why won't they vote for Trump? Just because they're Latino, doesn't
mean they want lower wages and poorer working conditions due to competition from illegal immigrants.
mean they want lower wages and poorer working conditions due to competition from illegal immigrants.
6
These union members are being shortsighted, for sure, but they have a reason to demand that the Democratic Party act like the Democratic Party and support jobs. Surely there's a way to find work for the blue-collar worker, without accusing them of racism, when what they're trying to do is feed their families. The pipeline isn't one of them. Road repairs, affordable housing, etc., is what we need and would put many of these unionists back to work.
1
Why can't the government declare war on illness, or climate change, or crumbling infrastructure instead of sending America's youth halfway around the world via the military? If the industrial complex needs income, and its workers work, let us build hospitals and develop new medical technology. Why not construct solar arrays, hydro damns and a grid to tie it all together? While we are at it, let's rebuild our basic infrastructure. We can save the planet AND put people to work with good paying jobs.
33
In a word? Republicans. Republicans don't want to invest public funds in public projects.
It's that simple.
"We" can certainly do all you say but The Party of No is diametrically opposed to the very idea of community, to public projects, to using tax dollars to improve the country and the lives of our people let alone the environment.
The GOP wants to continue plundering the planet for resources, exploding mountains for metal and coal, burning the forests and burning hydrocarbons until the oceans rise and the cities die.
That is our problem.
It's that simple.
"We" can certainly do all you say but The Party of No is diametrically opposed to the very idea of community, to public projects, to using tax dollars to improve the country and the lives of our people let alone the environment.
The GOP wants to continue plundering the planet for resources, exploding mountains for metal and coal, burning the forests and burning hydrocarbons until the oceans rise and the cities die.
That is our problem.
2
But hey! When are billionaire's super PACS ever wrong? Don't they always fight on the side of our safety, welfare and in support of our democratic values? I mean, just ask the Clintons.....
26
Ask them what? Why don't you start a foundation and develop policies to make a better world. Clinton haters are just parroting republicans without looking into anything themselves. Hillary could do anything right now, I'm embarrassed at how mean we've become in this country.
2
This mirrors a common argument against veganism: People need jobs. So we should let them murder animals.
In this case: People need jobs, so we should let them destroy the environment (which, by the way, killing animals also does...)
Who cares how many people have jobs now if all those people's children and/or grandchildren are going to be sentenced to early graves because there is no drinkable water/no breathable air/no produce growin', etc.?
I'm not heartless. And I'm not elite-- at all. I HAVE friends and relatives in some of these industries-- who I've begged to leave their jobs. Some of them have. Others haven't-- yet. But they'll soon have to and they'd do well to make peace with the idea and start training for future jobs and/or saving for retirement.
We can't let the environment burst into flames on account of ANYONE's paycheck, rich or poor, North or South.
In this case: People need jobs, so we should let them destroy the environment (which, by the way, killing animals also does...)
Who cares how many people have jobs now if all those people's children and/or grandchildren are going to be sentenced to early graves because there is no drinkable water/no breathable air/no produce growin', etc.?
I'm not heartless. And I'm not elite-- at all. I HAVE friends and relatives in some of these industries-- who I've begged to leave their jobs. Some of them have. Others haven't-- yet. But they'll soon have to and they'd do well to make peace with the idea and start training for future jobs and/or saving for retirement.
We can't let the environment burst into flames on account of ANYONE's paycheck, rich or poor, North or South.
8
Labor should understand, that its a misconception that fighting climate change will hurt its members. Its very possible that a shifting over to non-polluting energy, construction, and re-tooling for those shifts will be a huge job creator. I believe some economists like Paul Krugman have written about this before. What the labor union should start doing is providing training programs for its members to meet the new standards that need to be developed to ameliorate the effects and slow down the process of climate change. To see this tift between these factions is disheartening and plays into the hands of the people like D. Trump. This is the time to bring up these disputes, before the final candidates are officially selected, but the worse thing that could happen is if one or both of these important factions hinder and don't take part in the get-out-to vote that will be CRUCIAL in the next election. So grow-up both of you and do what needs to be done for the good of all.
13
The massive diminution of labor membership since the '50s is, in many ways, a tragedy for workers, but the workers have for years been getting quietly beaten down by the ineptitude of some of their union leaders. One has to wonder if there is some newer, better way of organizing private workers in order to bargain with management; this kind of story really does contribute to my own growing (and quite painful) sense that old-school labor unionism is being (or has been) anachronized.
Don't these people realize that, a) they've been losing members to the Republicans for quite awhile now, and b) failing to elect Democrats wherever they can simply means there won't even BE any unions at all? Support for "right-to-work" laws are a virtually universal Republican position.
This is just incompetence, myopia, and solipsism of the highest order on the part of the building trade union leaders.
Don't these people realize that, a) they've been losing members to the Republicans for quite awhile now, and b) failing to elect Democrats wherever they can simply means there won't even BE any unions at all? Support for "right-to-work" laws are a virtually universal Republican position.
This is just incompetence, myopia, and solipsism of the highest order on the part of the building trade union leaders.
10
There are unions in right-to-work states. Surprising, isn't it? Those unions are far more responsive to their memberships than those in closed shop states because they have to provide value to the workers or they drop out of the unions. The members aren't paying dues to support liberal agendas that are unrelated to their workplace issues.
An union members who want to support the Steyer agenda are free to use their own time and money to do so, since the union has not usurped their rights.
An union members who want to support the Steyer agenda are free to use their own time and money to do so, since the union has not usurped their rights.
2
Union leaders have a responsibility to protect the jobs of their members. It is no surprise that construction workers and coal miners oppose legislation that combats global warming but causes layoffs in their industries or reduces job growth. It isn't just large manufacturing and extraction companies that oppose legislation to limit global warming, it is also their workers. These are real challenges and not easily addressed.
That said, if Lincoln find a way to keep both the nativist "Know Nothing" anti-immigrant votes and the German-American vote in 1860, I would hope that Hillary Clinton can find a middle ground with unions and environmental groups, both of whom have much to lose from a Trump victory.
That said, if Lincoln find a way to keep both the nativist "Know Nothing" anti-immigrant votes and the German-American vote in 1860, I would hope that Hillary Clinton can find a middle ground with unions and environmental groups, both of whom have much to lose from a Trump victory.
136
Doug, I agree that union leaders have a responsibility to protect the jobs of their members. But they have a greater responsibility to move away from dying or destructive industries and towards new and better replacement industries. In the early 1900s it made no sense to protect a large-scale buggy-whip industry. It was more protective of workers' jobs to help them move into new automobile manufacturing industries. So too with coal miners and frackers.
1
So, JerryV, where are all the new jobs that I keep hearing people mindlessly prattling about? I get the feeling reading people's comments that as long as someone else loses their job, that's not just OK, but it's great because we're moving to a better world. I hear lots of talk about my grandchildren, but noone seems to care about me and my family today. Let's be honest, there isn't a new economy today and shutting down all fossil fuel production and consumption tomorrow will put us back to the stone age. Let's work on alternatives first and do it now.
4
Lincoln was smart, political and empathetic. Clinton is smart, cosistantly wrong when playing politics (remember health care) and not particularly empathetic.
1
Bernie Sanders is the solution to this problem, which exists mainly because Hillary Clinton is too gutless to confront our society's willingness to sacrifice the jobs of workers for some greater good without making them whole. As Sanders noted in West Virginia -- another state he recently won for those still not paying attention -- there's plenty to do. If coal is now recognized for the dirty fuel it is, then society has an obligation to put those whose jobs are displaced by this shift to work at something society needs. Why not put those whose jobs have become technically or environmentally obsolete to work solving the problems of today and tomorrow?
Because capitalism demands they undergo the travails of unemployment, rather than to continue working and being paid to support themselves and their families.
Fighting climate change depends on a massive technological shift. There SHOULD be plenty of jobs available and little reason for unions to be concerned. Instead, the ruling elites in the US want those at the bottom to bear all the pain, almost as much as they concurrently want to destroy the labor movement itself. Having lost my career to Bill Clinton's weak-kneed enforcement of labor law, I have no faith that Hillary Clinton would do much anything different. We've already heard clearly what Bernie would do about such juxtapositions. How about it? What would Hillary do? Or is silence on this "more electable"? She'll have to start winning more primaries to prove that.
Because capitalism demands they undergo the travails of unemployment, rather than to continue working and being paid to support themselves and their families.
Fighting climate change depends on a massive technological shift. There SHOULD be plenty of jobs available and little reason for unions to be concerned. Instead, the ruling elites in the US want those at the bottom to bear all the pain, almost as much as they concurrently want to destroy the labor movement itself. Having lost my career to Bill Clinton's weak-kneed enforcement of labor law, I have no faith that Hillary Clinton would do much anything different. We've already heard clearly what Bernie would do about such juxtapositions. How about it? What would Hillary do? Or is silence on this "more electable"? She'll have to start winning more primaries to prove that.
17
Please. Bernie is more liberal on climate change than anyone. Same problem would exist.
Sorry Mike, but Sanders is not the answer.
Not when he pandered to West Virginia coal miners saying the coal jobs are safe under a Sanders' administration, unlike Clinton who told these miners the hard facts of modern life that they need to look beyond coal as a source of work.
Not when he pandered to West Virginia coal miners saying the coal jobs are safe under a Sanders' administration, unlike Clinton who told these miners the hard facts of modern life that they need to look beyond coal as a source of work.
1
The Obama administration has already implemented federal job training for workers who have been displaced. I'm sure Hillary would continue and expand those programs. I seriously doubt that Trump would do anything for any workers.
When a worker's job becomes obsolete, it is difficult for the worker and for the family. Certain steps can and should be taken by legislators, both on the federal and state level but the upheaval and suffering are part of the change. Change is difficult but without it there is no life.
When a worker's job becomes obsolete, it is difficult for the worker and for the family. Certain steps can and should be taken by legislators, both on the federal and state level but the upheaval and suffering are part of the change. Change is difficult but without it there is no life.
1
Haven't we suffered enough from myriad special interest looking out only for themselves? Climate change is real and it is in the interest of these hard hat Union members to see the writing on the wall. Lead,follow or get out of the way.
7
We are on the precipice of an environmental disaster. While there may be "climate change" that influences weather patterns, the melting of Greenland and Antarctica ice caps are a threat to the entire world. When the oceans rise feet, not inches the world will not be able to adapt fast enough to ward off disaster. It is much sooner than one would think since we have not cut back the carbon emissions that are exacerbating the heating of the planet. Labor would be wise to jump on the climate bandwagon and urge more and faster changes to energy sources rather than coal. This will result in more and better lobs with a future for union members.
6
I would hate to think of Democratic unions being so short sighted that they would object to working with climate change activists who seek to avoid destruction of our planet,
5
Despite their failings, well documented from Lenin to Ayn Rand, I've been supportive of unions as catalysts for improving the rights of a broad range of workers. But to fall in with the climate deniers and to choose support stagnating, world damaging industries? This--versus the lives of our children and grandchildren, not to mention a potentially improved quality of life for workers today who are retrained to focus on renewables, not fossils? Perhaps the Hoffa verdict is in order--free the meaningful collective bargainers, not the corrupt shills of industry.
2
Brilliant. Fight turnout for a Dem Prez and help Trump get into the White House. The idea that somehow Trump might ultimately be a better president for any Union member is absolutely insane. Wealthy business owners and landlords (Republicans' constituents) do not get richer by paying their employees a lot of money and providing great benefits and working conditions.
And like other commenters, one wonders how these union leaders can possibly see the future for their rank and file being in construction for fossil fuel related industries as opposed to renewables. Unbelieveable...
And like other commenters, one wonders how these union leaders can possibly see the future for their rank and file being in construction for fossil fuel related industries as opposed to renewables. Unbelieveable...
8
If you look at the ranks of the wealthy, there are many more Democrats than Republicans. The reason corporate welfare exceeds social welfare spending is because the big business/big government DC establishment are far more interested in the interests of their cronies than of the needs of their constituents.
Which is why the Obama plan funnels big bucks to the 1%, increases energy costs and doesn't reduce carbon dioxide.
But wait, if a carbon tax is imposed, there will be money to save the planet.
Which is why the Obama plan funnels big bucks to the 1%, increases energy costs and doesn't reduce carbon dioxide.
But wait, if a carbon tax is imposed, there will be money to save the planet.
2
Not true--affiliation to the Republican party goes up with income.
Suck it up and do what's right for the common good.
Do we need to look back that far to see the consequences of Democrats jumping ship? 8 years of George W Bush, thousands of dead Americans, hundreds of thousands of other dead and trillions in debt. Not to mention erosion of personal liberties at home and national image abroad.
Vote Democrat.
Do we need to look back that far to see the consequences of Democrats jumping ship? 8 years of George W Bush, thousands of dead Americans, hundreds of thousands of other dead and trillions in debt. Not to mention erosion of personal liberties at home and national image abroad.
Vote Democrat.
7
This story and the comments demonstrate the divide which has yielded such an interesting Republican primary--the gap between the working class and the upper middle class (what used to be called bourgeoisie). Marxism is back, and the political parties of the future will be those that recognize and exploit this growing divide.
Hilariously, well off Democrats and Republicans alike still don't understand, and it shows in their out of touch comments and pronouncements--"Don't these union toughs get it, we're trying to help them" etc.
Hilariously, well off Democrats and Republicans alike still don't understand, and it shows in their out of touch comments and pronouncements--"Don't these union toughs get it, we're trying to help them" etc.
11
This is a terrible mistake for Sullivan and the Laborers' Union. There will still be jobs even if we work hard to control climate change. If we let global warming continue unabated, there may be no jobs at all.
2
Any deal on any progressive issue with this oligarch (or any other) should be untenable to anyone in the labor movement.
6
It looks like the sign of a healthy party to me. Yes, it could depress votes in the short term. But look where the GOP is: they papered over huge differences for years in the interest of "unity" and built unsubstainable coalitions.
2
The same issues that appear to have come up in the election are a hard reality in Canada with the government funded radical environmentalists, "the very labor movement we have fought for and supported for over a century" is now being blown apart with radical suggestions of capping Canadian oil, refusing to allow oil shipments to travel through Quebec - while the provincial NDP support the radicals and the Alberta economy tanks and the fires burn under the dark cloud of suspicion of man-made fire. Then we have a Liberal federal government who has created a $118B budget with his 4 year term while giving Bombardier a $1B hand-out to keep the rich family afloat, while the fires burn in Alberta and Trudeau looks into the burned cars . . . politics are ugly and they are getting worse in Canada with a very young, immature Prime Minister who does push-ups and smiles, no thinking; with his fresh-faced cabinet. The politics of giving to the many new voters and immigrants to ensure another term while to heck with the unemployed and people who didn't vote for them.
6
I am in the solar business and the fast growth construction sector is renewable energy. Forget that old carbon based technology - its a dead end - climate change is real - this is more about jobs its about the planet - the environment and long term the human race.
5
This is very short sighted on the part of the union members and leaders. They should be getting behind the party that has policies to start replacing fossil fuel infrastructure with sustainable alternatives. There are a lot more jobs there than in building pipelines and coal plants. There really is no other policy alternative, and only the Dems have even mentioned it. Bernie has been quite adamant, Hils not so much.
5
What a myopic, ignorant, and incredibly foolish stance by these unions. Climate change and addressing it is the most important issue facing our species and obviously our country. In addition, there is so much potential for new employment and growth in the transition for America to a greener economy. Working with environmental groups, you can do the right thing for our planet and make more money for ordinary people.
Also, this sentence "...unless a wealthy opponent of climate change was barred from it" was horribly written. A newspaper like this should have better editing. 'A wealthy advocate of pro-environmental policies' would be easier to read and understand.
Also, this sentence "...unless a wealthy opponent of climate change was barred from it" was horribly written. A newspaper like this should have better editing. 'A wealthy advocate of pro-environmental policies' would be easier to read and understand.
5
Similar sentiments about climate change efforts unnecessarily costing jobs were voiced by coal miners losing jobs in Colorado (see Bruce Finley's nice piece in Denver Post yesterday). They don't believe it is real - at least not real enough that coal demand should decline. Climate change is one of the toughest environmental/sustainability issues politically because it is not tangible - not feelable or touchable - to the vast majority of people, and it requires them to possibly care more about the future than the present. People would rather be wildly optimistic about technological solutions that will save the future than soberly realistic. Addressing climate change will make the US economy more efficient and globally competitive - but people in the mines or oil fields don't expect to see much return from that result. Kudos to the far-sighted union leaders who are embracing a low-carbon future, and un-kudos to the reactionary union leaders who are only focused on jobs in existing industries today.
362
Of course climate change is touchable and feelable. Ask anyone of the thousands who have endured flooding in areas which were never prone to floods before. Ask the people who are living through earthquakes because of fraking where before there were no earthquakes. See the pictures of the melting glaciers and polar ice caps. Perhaps you are one of those who don't believe a man walked on the moon, that the pictures were phony. Some people don't believe because they just don't want to and we will just have to go on without them.
And West Virginia went to Bernie Sanders. It can be done.
1
Agree with your sentiments but the coal miners in Colorado are missing the economics of coal and it is a failing industry. Coal is being replaced by nat gas because it is cheaper, not because of climate change. Add to that, adding new wind power generation to electrical supply without SUBSIDIES is now cheaper than coal. Coal miners have to face the fact that they are being priced out of the market even without environmental regulation.
1
Perhaps if they understood the world that their grandchildren will inherit, they would take a longer view.
6
Like it or not, fossil is dead. Politics has little to do with its demise; at this point economic forces are taking over. Other commenters are quite correct in stating that the new energy and infrastructure economies will create thousands of jobs.
2
These union leaders are continuing their series of mistakes that are losing them voter support. They should use their political capital more wisely.
2
Well the Dems can't lose what they never had, namely rank and file union construction workers supporting Hillary. It's an entertaining tiff but private unions are withering and in any event have largely been voting Republican.
5
Educate the unions regarding new job creation from renewable energy industry and throw the bum out (wealthy hedge fund owner). Then vote for Sanders who has the 'peoples' interest in mind not Hilary Clinton.
2
What a shame. They abandon unity. If we abandon the future for the present, the true challenges of progress will not be realized.
How about some honesty? The union leaders are not interested in jobs, they are interested only in jobs that they unionize and that is money in the union leaders' pockets. They are against any non unionized industries. As for "entitlement programs"? If the programs are weakened, that to puts money in the union leaders' pockets.
3
It's really sad to see the mostly blue collar union workers who do not understand that not all hedge fund billionaires are evil and that we are all in this together. We all need a clean and healthy environment. Additionally, there may not need to be any job losses if we can develop jobs in the clean technology sector.
The likes of Keystone sure isn't going to help them any more than the dying coal industry.
The likes of Keystone sure isn't going to help them any more than the dying coal industry.
3
Christ! Our common house is burning down around us and people want jobs to facilitate the burning. Tom Steyer is correct here but should reach out to help create new jobs for displaced workers.
2