The clean-energy transition will involve, among other things, a large-scale shift in the US workforce. Will there be enough skilled tradespeople to build everything we need? And what will become of fossil fuel workers? I discuss all this & more with Betony Jones of DOE's Office of Energy Jobs.
I work in workforce development at a large state college & university system with a focus on career & tech education and this is a very good episode. There are several things going on with the workforce that are creating challenges. One is that the job market is tight enough recruiting workers/students is very difficult right now. Enrollment is counter cyclical with the economy in general. Immigration including both refugees and traditional economic immigration is at such low levels that the market is even tighter making even low wage jobs fairly well paying.
Jack, good question, but the problem is the number of displaced workers is pretty low right now or at least low in areas that are looking for skilled labor. Generally there is money available for displaced workers--some of the orgs I work with that do displaced worker training are not able to spend the money they do get currently. Training can start at 30 hours for some trades--usually just basic OSHA or food service certs and go up to full four year degrees though most are looking at 1-2 years of training in traditional academic style programs.
On construction, one thing you didn't mention is that most construction employers insist on a valid drivers license and adequate transportation. Given the early morning nature often mass transit isn't a reliable option so one thing to do (which isn't environmentally good) is to make sure students come out of high school with a drivers license and some schools are doing this, but if not, then to make candidates viable they need to get a license and some sort of transportation.
All of this creates another labor problem--how to find instructors at the community & tech college level. Almost all systems pay according to academic levels but that makes working in teaching a trade less well paying than the trade often. Colleges recruit from those getting older often, but in green energy that's a smaller pool of people. I know there is a waiting list for electrical line worker programs because there aren't enough instructors. Add to that, new programs require infrastructure such as equipment and that's expensive if you aren't sure you can find the students to pay for the program.
Sorry, a bit scattershot, but there is so much here and it's great to be working in CTE right now as it is exciting, but it's tough to build pathways to employment when people are relatively economically satisfied (which is generally a good thing).
I'll note that it will be highly unlikely that those in fossil fuel industries will serve as a possible green energy workforce (exept for those in the drilling trades -- let's go geothermal!) as it is incredibly difficult to retrain adult workers on new skills sets; certainly not in the numbers needed to build the required green infrastructure.
Efforts to promote/encourage a skilled trades/apprenticeship path to high school students is far more likely to be successful.
question: what are the obstacles to employing the displaced workers in the new jobs? if the answer is skill training how much in person hours would be needed? anyhow much money to pay those being trained/? and the trainers?
The most important point is to make the jobs well-paid with adequate benefits. There is the promise that these technology disruptions will ripple through the economy lowering costs of goods and services -- especially energy, housing, and food. Perhaps America can join the other progressive economies by providing universal free health-care and lifetime free education. And, perhaps we can reduce the workweek for all workers to 4 days.
We need a Marshall Plan to train a competent workforce NOW. We have people to be place holders but without training, low pay will prevail in industries, and we’ll be toast re energy, construction growth. But nobody cares. In the meantime, unemployment rises. We’re one big hot mess as a country.
I work in workforce development at a large state college & university system with a focus on career & tech education and this is a very good episode. There are several things going on with the workforce that are creating challenges. One is that the job market is tight enough recruiting workers/students is very difficult right now. Enrollment is counter cyclical with the economy in general. Immigration including both refugees and traditional economic immigration is at such low levels that the market is even tighter making even low wage jobs fairly well paying.
Jack, good question, but the problem is the number of displaced workers is pretty low right now or at least low in areas that are looking for skilled labor. Generally there is money available for displaced workers--some of the orgs I work with that do displaced worker training are not able to spend the money they do get currently. Training can start at 30 hours for some trades--usually just basic OSHA or food service certs and go up to full four year degrees though most are looking at 1-2 years of training in traditional academic style programs.
On construction, one thing you didn't mention is that most construction employers insist on a valid drivers license and adequate transportation. Given the early morning nature often mass transit isn't a reliable option so one thing to do (which isn't environmentally good) is to make sure students come out of high school with a drivers license and some schools are doing this, but if not, then to make candidates viable they need to get a license and some sort of transportation.
All of this creates another labor problem--how to find instructors at the community & tech college level. Almost all systems pay according to academic levels but that makes working in teaching a trade less well paying than the trade often. Colleges recruit from those getting older often, but in green energy that's a smaller pool of people. I know there is a waiting list for electrical line worker programs because there aren't enough instructors. Add to that, new programs require infrastructure such as equipment and that's expensive if you aren't sure you can find the students to pay for the program.
Sorry, a bit scattershot, but there is so much here and it's great to be working in CTE right now as it is exciting, but it's tough to build pathways to employment when people are relatively economically satisfied (which is generally a good thing).
Excellent episode.
I'll note that it will be highly unlikely that those in fossil fuel industries will serve as a possible green energy workforce (exept for those in the drilling trades -- let's go geothermal!) as it is incredibly difficult to retrain adult workers on new skills sets; certainly not in the numbers needed to build the required green infrastructure.
Efforts to promote/encourage a skilled trades/apprenticeship path to high school students is far more likely to be successful.
question: what are the obstacles to employing the displaced workers in the new jobs? if the answer is skill training how much in person hours would be needed? anyhow much money to pay those being trained/? and the trainers?
The most important point is to make the jobs well-paid with adequate benefits. There is the promise that these technology disruptions will ripple through the economy lowering costs of goods and services -- especially energy, housing, and food. Perhaps America can join the other progressive economies by providing universal free health-care and lifetime free education. And, perhaps we can reduce the workweek for all workers to 4 days.
We need a Marshall Plan to train a competent workforce NOW. We have people to be place holders but without training, low pay will prevail in industries, and we’ll be toast re energy, construction growth. But nobody cares. In the meantime, unemployment rises. We’re one big hot mess as a country.
We have historically low unemployment.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE/
There’s something amusingly incongruous about, “lighting a fire,” in this context.