The International Seminar "For decent work in a socially and environmentally sustainable economy" took place in Lisbon from 19 to 20 March 2021. This seminar was organised by the Centre for Training and Leisure (CFTL) and BASE – Unitarian Front of Workers (BASE-FUT), with the support of the European Centre for Workers' Questions (EZA) and the European Union. The seminar was attended by members of workers' organisations from Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal and Spain. Due the lockdown still taking place in Portugal because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the seminar was largely held in a video-conference format.
Since the middle of the 20th century, the Earth's average temperature has been increasing in a scale and pace that are unusual in its recent geological history. Global warming has become a serious threat to the habitability of vast regions of the planet. The ensuing melting of the polar ice caps puts islands and coastal areas at risk of accelerated erosion and even submersion. It is also leading to profound changes in weather patterns, extending the areas of the world affected by desertification and an increasing number of extreme weather phenomena such as floods, cyclones or prolonged droughts.
The scientific community is practically unanimous in identifying the exponential increase in the presence of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere as the main cause of this phenomenon. In turn, the volume of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is largely explained by two human activities: the burning of wood in deforestation and deforestation processes; and the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas and its derivatives to obtain energy.
The causes and consequences of global warming are, therefore, well known. And the conclusion is simple: if large areas of the planet are to remain habitable, the growth in greenhouse gas emissions must be halted as soon as possible. But while reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an imperative recognised by almost everyone, deciding how we should go about addressing it is a complex political problem.
Firstly, because different peoples and different groups within the same people do not suffer to the same extent from the consequences of global warming.
The urgency felt by the countries of Northern Europe in the face of abnormally mild winters is not the same as that felt by the countries of the Sahel watching their arable land shrink every year, or the countries of the Pacific seeing their territory disappearing beneath the waves. In the same way, the urgency felt by an office worker who can turn on the air conditioning in a heat wave is not the same as that of a farmer affected by drought.
Secondly, because different peoples and different groups within the same people are not affected in the same way by the profound economic and social changes that are necessary to reduce emissions. For countries at the centre of the world economic system, the cost of these changes can be cushioned by the capital accumulated in previous stages of their development. Countries at the periphery of that system, on the other hand, will feel that they are being deprived of ways and means of development from which others have benefited. For an economic conglomerate that benefits from generous state support to develop new forms of energy production, decarbonisation is a business opportunity. For a worker in a coal mine or a petrochemical refinery that is being closed, it is something that puts at risk his or her livelihood, identity and dignity.
Over these two days we have debated two fundamental questions: what do we have to change in our ways of organising the economy and society to avert global warming? And how can we ensure that the costs of these changes do not fall on workers and the peripheries of the world economic system?
The time window available to us to stop uncontrolled global warming is narrowing fast, requiring an accelerated pace of reduction, perhaps even faster than what is provided by existing policies. But while speed is needed, justice and solidarity cannot be forgotten in the transition process. Only in this way will it be possible to avoid that this transition results in the intensification of the deep inequalities that already characterise our societies.
There must be justice and solidarity, first and foremost, between countries and regions. The countries in the centre of the world economic system and the more developed regions must lead the emission reductions and not impose timetables and targets on the peripheries that they do not apply to themselves. At the same time, mechanisms for the transfer of resources are needed to ensure the adequate financing of policies that allow the social
impacts of the changes to be cushioned in peripheral countries and regions and the adequate development of alternative forms of energy production and supply that do not accentuate their energy dependency. It is also essential to prevent the development and implementation of new energy production technologies from reproducing the extractive logic that condemns countries and regions to a position of mere producers of raw materials - including those now crucial to the applications of such technologies, such as lithium or rare-earth minerals.
But solidarity is also needed within each country and region. Workers - and in particular workers in traditional energy production sectors - cannot be left to fend for themselves. It is capital and not labour that has harnessed the main benefits from a carbon-intensive economy. It cannot therefore be labour that bears the costs and losses that inevitably arise from decarbonisation.
The limitations revealed by the effective applications of corporate social responsibility show that the private sector, although it can make a relevant contribution, is not suited to lead this transition. A just transition requires instead public planning and investment to ensure that new quality jobs are created and that workers are adequately retrained and their income safeguarded. And the only way to ensure that these efforts effectively serve the interest of workers is by deeply involving workers’ representatives in these processes.
As shown in Portugal by the closure of the Matosinhos refinery and the Sines and Pêgo thermoelectric power stations, the interest of political leaders in such involvement is far from granted. These cases show that workers' organisations must push for this involvement - and such push requires political and social strength to be successful. This means that workers' movements must create alliances with other social movements and, at the forefront, with environmental and ecological movements.
This is not a straightforward coalition, given the differences in the institutional culture and history of the two parties. But, as in any alliance, labour movements and environmental movements need each other to increase their respective capacity to influence policies - and, in this case, ensuring an effective but just transition.
Such convergence requires a broadening of the agenda on both sides. From trade unions, it requires a shift from a predominant concern with the distribution of the gains of economic growth to a broader perspective that encompasses issues of political economy and environment. From the environmental movements, it requires the ability to look at work as a crucial human activity and at decent work as central to any definition of sustainable development.
An alliance also requires points of convergence over which both parties can work. Throughout this seminar, we have discussed several of these points. A first point of convergence is the fight for quality employment and increased wages, where a core demand of the trade unions combines with the interest of the environmental movement in promoting sustainable consumption models.
A second point of convergence is that of the reduction of value and production chains and the promotion of the territorialisation of the economy, where a scale that favours the protection of workers' rights and meets with the demands for the reduction of emissions associated with freight transport and the promotion of the circular economy.
And a third point is environmental education, where trade unions are on the one hand, a crucial awareness-raising vector for deconstructing prejudices among workers, while at the same time needing such awareness to legitimise their agenda for the transition among their members.
Finally, an alliance between the workers' movement and the environmental movement requires both long- and short-term horizons. In this respect, we are at a key moment. The Porto Social Summit, where the Commission's action plan for the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights will be under discussion, will take place next May. At the same time, we have ongoing discussions on the national plans that will implement the European mechanism for recovery and resilience, where the issue of fair transition assumes a prominent position. This coincidence in time should be used to deepen the dialogue and to establish common positions - and, therefore, more able to influence policies and to ensure an effectively just transition. This is the challenge we set ourselves.