Editorial: Lawmakers should stay out of labor, Tesla dispute

A last minute amendment to cap-and-trade legislation in Sacramento is nothing more than outrageous groveling to unions hoping the Legislature will weigh in on their side in their nasty labor dispute with Tesla.

The Legislature should reject this hamhanded special interest legislation that will further poison California’s image as a place to do business. Changing the rules on how $3 billion of cap-and-trade funds will be spent is a gift to the United Auto Workers, which is struggling to organize workers at Tesla.

The Legislature approved a perfectly good Assembly Bill 398 two months ago. Designed in part to help the state reach Gov. Jerry Brown’s goal of 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles in California by 2025, its clear intent was to give a portion of the cap-and-trade funds to auto manufacturers, including Tesla, for rebates big enough to entice buyers to purchase their cars. The electric and perhaps self-driving car industries are seen as fertile ground for industrial development in the state.

Then Monday, reportedly with Brown’s approval, lawmakers inserted language saying the rebates would only go to automakers certified by the state labor secretary as having provided “fair and responsible treatment” for their workers.

Wow.

The United Auto Workers have been trying to organize the nearly 10,000 workers at Tesla’s Fremont plant. A study commissioned by Tesla workers reported in May that the factory had about one-third more worker accidents and twice the rate of serious injuries as other auto manufacturers.

There may well be serious problems at the plant, but cap-and-trade legislation is not the place to settle worker safety issues. California has ample other avenues; it takes workplace safety standards seriously.

Nor is it appropriate for lawmakers to use this climate change legislation of international importance to try to settle a union fight with Tesla. That’s the National Labor Relations Board’s job.

The vague language — what exactly constitutes “fair and responsible treatment”? — is especially disturbing. It creates the potential to hold Tesla to a standard that the state may not be imposing on other manufacturers. Although that may be irrelevant: What other company would try to build cars here with that kind of loopy rule?

California has a huge stake in the success of the electric-vehicle industry. The state’s first-of-its-kind clean energy legislation is specifically designed to help reach its ambitious goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 to a level 40 percent below 1990 levels.

The state won’t meet that target unless it ratchets up the number of zero-emission vehicles on California’s roads. Tesla sold nearly 85,000 of them last year and has plans to increase that number to a half-million next year. A major part of that plan requires having rebates available for its lower-cost Model 3 sedan.

Gov. Jerry Brown’s chief legacy should be his unrelenting battle against the impact of climate change on the state. He risks sabotaging that legacy by trashing the state’s business climate to help the UAW in its fight with Tesla. He has to stop this bad amendment.

Let's block ads! (Why?)