Connect with us

California

How California’s Solar Ironworkers Got Rid of Tiers

Published

on

How California’s Solar Ironworkers Got Rid of Tiers


California’s solar power plants now rival the scale of any in the world. What stands out most is how they were built: under union contracts.

Across the United States, nearly 90 percent of solar workers had no union last year. In California, the situation was different — at least on paper. The vast majority of its solar power plants have been wrenched in place by unionized construction workers.

Advertisement

But at first these were union jobs practically in name only, as thousands of unionized solar construction workers toiled on the underside of a two-tier system. Their wages, training, and job security lagged far behind their union siblings. Many questioned if they were members at all.

“As a probationary, pay was $15 an hour or a little less,” said Pablo Perez, a union member of the International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Worker (IW or Ironworkers) working on major solar plants near Fresno. “I was one of one hundred guys they brought in. When the job was over, you were done.”

Over the last few decades, many building trades leaders signed on to lower-tier contracts to get a foothold in residential and clean energy construction jobsites.

Around 2010, while other unions were still shut out of California’s growing solar power plants, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) began winning contracts — but at a cost. Temporary, lower-paid “construction wiremen” would fill about two-thirds of electrical jobs. Longer-term union members and apprentices split the rest.

Advertisement

Officers argued the repetitive nature of solar construction — often repeating the same ten tasks of wiring and setting panels, for acres — didn’t require broadly trained, highly paid electricians.

Officials in the building trades often try direct outreach to persuade project developers to hire union, pitching them on safety, quality work, and fewer delays. But local Ironworker leader Don Savory in Fresno initially found it tough to convince solar developers to hire unionized contracting companies.

“When solar started coming, there were a few of them built nonunion, paying $12 to $14 an hour,” he said. “At our package, $60 an hour [for wages and benefits], we weren’t getting traction.”

So as solar construction picked up faster, Savory proposed labor agreements that matched the IBEW’s tier ratios: five probationary Ironworkers for each fully trained “journeyworker” and apprentice.

Even compared to apprentices only two years into working iron, “probies” would get one-third less pay and nearly none of the benefits. Instead of the union hiring hall that lined up a next job for apprentices, probationary workers finished their month or two of solar work with no guarantees to stay working union.

Advertisement

The San Joaquin Valley, surrounding Fresno, is where Ironworker solar tiers started and ended. A few fields over is where the United Farm Workers struggled under vigilante gunfire.

In 2000, Fresno’s conservative city council passed the nation’s first ban on municipal Project Labor Agreements, a common deal used to unionize public work.

Meanwhile California’s state laws started pushing utility companies to shift to renewable energy: 20 percent clean by 2017, 50 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045. Those mandates became a model for twenty-seven other states, though the targets are usually less ambitious.

But California’s renewable laws lacked any explicit labor standards, let alone guaranteed union contracts.

Building trades unions made a stick out of the state’s environmental permit law. Like they had recently done to win concessions from gas power plant owners, unions threatened solar developers with lawsuits and mobilization to block permits until they signed a deal to unionize.

Advertisement

Just as important was a big carrot: unions could train thousands of new workers in the skills needed to build solar farms fast enough, even in remote corners of the state. Their apprenticeships, hiring halls, and mentorship gave them an edge over nonunion outfits, which struggled to keep up with the demand.

As Ironworkers lined up their first few years of solar contracts, some local leaders pushed to get other unions included. Instead of competing over turf on each site, five trades agreed that stable, inclusive terms would mean steadier work all around.

By 2015, IBEW, Ironworkers, the Laborers’ International Union of North America, Northern California Millwrights, and the International Union of Operating Engineers worked out a “five-craft agreement.” Their combined pressure made union labor the standard for all but one solar plant developer in California.

Ironworker officers pledged that the solar two-tier would be temporary. Still, “the guys were hissing and booing” when Savory introduced the tiers deal at a local meeting in 2013. “I said, ‘This’ll get a foot in the door, then it’s up to you guys to make it better.’”

Unlike some other trades with appointed officers, Ironworkers elect their local leaders from the ranks. In the “rodbusters” union, a culture of rowdy local meetings and contested elections often checks those who win.

Advertisement

On the job, the new tier drew gripes. According to one local officer, probationary workers were largely “hired off the street, or somebody’s cousin,” without the selective interviews and job experience that picked apprentices. Probies only got brief training in the field.

Contractors “just kind of threw us out there, sink or swim,” said Darrell Lewis, a former probationary-tier Ironworker. “If it wasn’t for some of the older guys, it would’ve been hard to learn on the job like we had to. The older apprentices watched out for us.”

Longtime Ironworkers complained that worksites with a majority of quick, temporary hires were undercutting the union culture of quality and safety. Savory said solar foremen — union members who coordinate and train others on site — told him the new system was creating “organized chaos, basically. It was like herding cats.”

That chaos was especially risky for probationary workers, given their limited training, weak health coverage, and the scorching conditions.

“I wasn’t used to the heat,” Lewis said. “It was summertime when I started, and it was 107 degrees out there. A few guys actually dropped off the job.” In nearby Southern California, summers are getting so hot that a few solar contractors have recently shifted to building at night.

Advertisement

Probies who stuck around wanted a full union apprenticeship, to get pay and security to match the tough work. They often found solidarity from older members on their solar sites. “All the guys who were already in were giving us as much advice as they could about how to get into the union,” said Perez. “It’s a real brotherhood, and that’s not a word I’d use lightly.”

Perez, Lewis, and scores of other probies were accepted within a few years into the Ironworkers apprenticeship program. Nearly all have stuck with the trade, and a few have become foremen.

Member pushback and jobsite frustrations nudged union leaders to make good on their promise. In 2015, Savory proposed a new Project Labor Agreement that would replace all probationary solar Ironworkers with full members or apprentices.

Some contractors griped that they’d be on the hook for higher wages. Pointing to the chaos when untrained workers did the work, Savory’s response was simple: “‘You’ll get more done.’ And they do.”

The proposal to abolish tiers came right as other unions were locking in their sides of the five-craft agreement that would unionize the rest of solar construction work. Although the IBEW kept its lower solar tier, Ironworkers say the Laborers, Millwrights, and Operating Engineers never introduced one.

Advertisement

Instead of a race to the bottom, the cross-trade push prodded contractors around Fresno to accept the Ironworkers’ landmark no-tiers deal: one apprentice to one journeyworker and no more probationary positions.

Major solar Ironworker locals in Southern California soon demanded the same, and contractors gave in fast. Ironworkers membership has grown 70 percent in the eight years since.

Last October, IBEW, Laborers, and Operating Engineers announced a national “three-craft agreement,” outlining the jobs each trade will claim in union solar contracts, for every state but California.

Whether and how that agreement becomes a contract — including if Ironworkers fit in — will depend first on forcing solar developers to unionize. In California, unionizing solar jobs took creative, cross-trade pressure on contractors.

But to make solar jobs as good as those before them, like Fresno’s rodbusters showed, it took solidarity on the job and democracy in the hall.

Advertisement





Source link

California

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say

Published

on

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say


play

California Democrats running for governor, your party has a message for you. Think carefully about your candidacy and campaign ahead of the swiftly approaching filing deadline.

California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks urged candidates looking to assume the state’s highest office to “honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign” as March 6, the final day to declare candidacy, nears. Hicks said that concerns about the crowded field of Democrat candidates “persist” in an open letter on Tuesday, March 3.

Advertisement

It comes as five leading candidates, several of which are Democrats — Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell, and Tom Steyer — are in a “virtual tie” per a recent poll, the Desert Sun reported, which is part of the USA TODAY Network.

Two Republican candidates pushing out California democrats in the gubernatorial bid may be “implausible,” but “it is not impossible,” Hicks said of the reasoning behind his latest message. Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans, lead in RealClear Polling’s average of various polls.

The party chair spotlighted the need for California Democrats’ leadership, particularly over Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure that will temporarily implement new congressional district maps, paving the way for Democrats to secure more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“If in the unlikely event a Democrat failed to proceed to the general election for governor, there could be the potential for depressed Democratic turnout in California in November,” Hicks said. “The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025.”

Advertisement

During a press conference on March 2, Gov. Gavin Newsom said that when he is out in communities, people aren’t talking about the governor’s race. It’s an observation he called “interesting,” considering voting in the primary election starts in May.

“It’s been hard, I think, to focus on that race,” Newsom said, pointing to the attention on President Donald Trump, redistricting, and other matters.

What exactly is California Democratic Party asking of candidates?

In his open letter, Hicks gave directions to candidates.

First, assess your candidacy and campaign. If you don’t have a viable path to the general election, don’t file to get your name on the ballot for the primary election in June. Also, be prepared to suspend your campaign and endorse another candidate by April 15 if you decide to file but can’t show “meaningful progress towards winning the primary election.”

Advertisement

When is the next California election? Primary election in 2026

California voters will trim the field of candidates for governor on June 2. Only the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party preference, will move on to the November election.  

Paris Barraza is a reporter covering Los Angeles and Southern California for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at pbarraza@usatodayco.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students


The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a California law that limited when schools could require staff to disclose a student’s gender identity, clearing the way for schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without getting the students’ approval.

Rear view of multiracial students with hands raised in classroom at high school

The decision came after religious parents and educators, represented by the Thomas More Society, challenged California school policies aimed at preventing staff from disclosing a student’s gender identity.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean and professor of law at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, said the ruling favors parents’ ability to be informed. “The Supreme Court today rules in favor of the claim of parents to be able to know the gender identity and gender pronoun of the children,” Chemerinsky said.

Advertisement
FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

The decision temporarily blocks a state law that bans automatic parental notification requirements if students change their pronouns or gender expression at school. The Thomas More Society called the decision a major victory for parents, saying the court found California’s policy likely violates constitutional rights.

Chemerinsky said the Supreme Court’s action is an emergency ruling. “This law is now put on hold. So what this means is that schools can require that teachers and other staff inform parents of the gender identity or gender pronouns of children,” he said.

scotus.PNG

Kathie Moehlig, founder and executive director of Trans Family Support Services, said she is concerned about how the ruling could affect students who do not have supportive families.

“I am really concerned about our kids that do come from these non affirming homes, that they know that they’re going to get in trouble, that they’re going to possibly have violence brought against them possibly kicked out of their homes,” Moehlig said.

Moehlig said parents should eventually know, but that the conversation should happen when a student feels safe. “Our students are going to be less inclined to confide in any adults that might be able to help to get them access to mental healthcare, to a support system. They may still tell their peers but they’re certainly not going to tell any other adult,” she said.

Advertisement

Equality California, a LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, shared a statement:

Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, released the following statement from Executive Director Tony Hoang in response to today’s U.S. Supreme Court shadow docket ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta regarding California’s student privacy protections for transgender youth. Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in this case is deeply disturbing. By stepping in on an emergency basis, the Court has effectively upended California’s student privacy protections without hearing full arguments and before the judicial process has run its course. While not surprising, this move reflects a dangerous willingness to short-circuit the established judicial process to dismantle protections for transgender youth. While this case continues to be litigated, the ruling revives Judge Benitez’s prior decision, which broadly targets numerous California laws protecting transgender and gender-nonconforming students — threatening critical safeguards that prevent forced outing and allow educators to respect a student’s affirmed name and pronouns at school. These protections exist for one reason: to keep students safe and ensure schools remain places where young people can learn and thrive without fear. To be clear: today’s decision does not impact California’s SAFETY Act, which prohibits school districts from adopting policies that forcibly out transgender students. The SAFETY Act remains in full effect, and we will continue defending it. Transgender youth deserve dignity, safety, and the freedom to learn without fear. We will never stop fighting for transgender youth and their families. Equality California will continue working with parents, educators, and advocates to ensure schools remain safe, welcoming, and focused on the success and well-being of every student.

The case now returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which will decide whether the California law is constitutional.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Rep. Kevin Kiley announces run in California’s redrawn 6th Congressional District

Published

on

Rep. Kevin Kiley announces run in California’s redrawn 6th Congressional District



Congressman Kevin Kiley has announced his plan to run in California’s newly redrawn 6th district.

In a statement on Monday, Rep. Kiley revealed he had considered running in the 5th District – which could have set up a possible showdown between two current Republican officeholders.

“It’s true that I was fully prepared to run in the new 5th, having tested the waters and with polls showing a favorable outlook in a “safe” district. But doing what’s easy and what’s right are often not the same,” Kiley stated.

Advertisement

Kiley currently represents California’s 3rd district, which originally comprised counties making up much of the back spine of the state.

As of the Prop. 50 redistricting push, the 3rd district was redrawn for the 2026 midterm election to lean toward the Democratic Party – with those eastern spine of California counties lopped off and more of Sacramento County, including Rancho Cordova, added.

California’s new 6th district is now comprised of Rocklin, Roseville, Citrus Heights, much of North and East Sacramento, and the city of West Sacramento. Democratic Rep. Ami Bera currently represents the district, but will be running for the new 3rd district in 2026.

Advertisement

Other declared candidates for the 6th district include Democrats Lauren Babb Thomlinson, Thien Ho, Richard Pan, Kindra Pring, Tyler Vandenberg, and Republicans Christine Bish, Craig DeLuz, and Raymond Riehle. 

Kiley was first elected to the House in 2022 and was reelected in 2024. 





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending