Archives: News

This is for all News Pages

Will Congress Fix Pension Crisis Before Coal Miners’ Pensions Disappear?

Source: Value Walk

March 5, 2019

Worried About “The Cost of Inaction,“ Retired Coal Miners with Pensions at Risk Head to Capitol Hill as Education and Labor Committee Holds Hearing on Growing Pension Crisis.

WASHINGTON – On Thurs., March 7, a Congressional hearing on “The Cost of Inaction: Why Congress Must Address the Multiemployer Pension Crisis,” will hear testimony from retirees and employers on growing fears that some of the nation’s largest multiemployer pension plans will soon become insolvent.

Prior to the House Education and Labor Committee’s Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions hearing, retired members of the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) from Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania will be meeting with members of Congress and are available for interviews with the media from March 5-7. The miners’ pension plan is one of the most vulnerable due to an unprecedented wave of coal company bankruptcies that have hit the energy sector.

In the last Congress, the Joint Select Committee on the Solvency of Multiemployer Pension Plans failed to come up with a solution to the nation’s pension crisis by the committee’s November deadline. The pension plans of 1.5 million coal miners, truckers, bakery workers and other retirees nationwide are currently on the brink of failure.

But the miners’ pension fund, the UMWA 1974 Pension Plan, will be the first of all these major plans to go insolvent, in the Plan’s 2022-23 fiscal year. There is only one major employer left contributing to the 1974 Plan, and since the coal industry remains in serious economic difficulty, any further industry bankruptcies will cause the fund to collapse.

That is why the miners and their allies in Congress are seeking a Congressional solution through S. 27 and H.R. 935 as soon as possible to preserve the 1974 Plan and the pensions these retirees earned and were promised.

The House Education and Labor Committee’s Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions will hold its Thurs., March 7 hearing in Room 2175 Rayburn HOB at 10:15 a.m.

Written by: Jacob Wolinsky

Labor Unions are Skeptical of the Green New Deal, and They Want Activist to Hear Them Out

Source: The Intercept

March 4, 2019

DECIDING WHETHER TO sign onto the Green New Deal resolution is not an easy call for many members of Congress. They have to contend with the usual opponents: coal, utilities, oil companies, and other big-pocketed interests who like today’s economic order just fine. But even on the left, coalition-building can be complicated.

After signing onto the Green New Deal as an original sponsor, one House Democrat felt that acutely when he traveled back to his district and met with two top local labor leaders. The congressperson, who asked not to be named, said he faced harsh criticism from building trade representatives who worried the plan would put their members out of work. He pushed back, arguing that their members will actually fare better with a green infrastructure plan that can drive up wages for blue-collar work, pointing to jobs like retrofitting buildings and constructing renewable energy infrastructure.

Recent polling has found strong bipartisan support for a Green New Deal, but unions, a key constituency, have been less than enthused by — and in some cases, downright hostile to — the ambitious proposal to tackle climate change.

Terry O’Sullivan, the general president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, or LIUNA, denounced the Green New Deal the day it was introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass. In a blistering statement, O’Sullivan said it was “exactly how not to enact a progressive agenda to address our nation’s dangerous income inequality” and “exactly how not to win support for critical measures to curb climate change.”

For many observers, the construction union’s opposition was not too surprising. LIUNA had ardently supported the Dakota Access pipeline and said in 2016 that the labor organizations who opposed the project were “self-righteous” and “display[ing] a truly amazing level of hypocrisy and ignorance.” In January 2017, shortly after Donald Trump’s inauguration, LIUNA was one of several building trade unions to meet with the president, later praising Trump’s “remarkable courtesy” and affirmed that LIUNA “look[s] forward” to partnering with the White House on infrastructure.

Some climate activists have said that support for the Green New Deal should be a litmus test for progressives. Writing for The Intercept, Naomi Klein argued recently that the labor movement should “confront and isolate” LIUNA over its opposition. “That could take the form of LIUNA members, confident that the Green New Deal will not leave them behind, voting out their pro-boss leaders,” she wrote. “Or it could end with LIUNA being tossed out of the AFL-CIO” — the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, the country’s largest umbrella group for unions — “for planetary malpractice.”

As advocates of the Green New Deal work to gin up more support for the resolution, they face the challenge of parsing out bad-faith criticisms from legitimate critiques by those whose livelihoods would be impacted by a transition to green jobs. The way they straddle that line and respond to those concerns could make all the difference in getting the critical mass of support needed for the Green New Deal to pass.

Ocasio-Cortez and Markey’s nonbinding resolution includes explicit language backing union jobs that pay prevailing wages and a commitment for “wage and benefit parity for workers” affected by the energy transition. The Green New Deal also calls for “strengthening and protecting” the right of workers to organize and collectively bargain, and for “enacting and enforcing trade rules, procurement standards, and border adjustments” with strong labor protections.

Despite those promises, only one big union, 32BJ SEIU, has come out swinging in support of the Green New Deal. The majority of labor organizations have so far stayed quiet or voiced skepticism or criticism. The opposition, particularly for those in the building industry, is rooted in concerns about jobs and wages, as well as the approaches favored in the resolution for decreasing carbon emissions. There is also a political thread, with Trump-voting Republican coal miners, for example, hesitant to embrace a policy that has been sponsored only by members of the Democratic caucus.

Evan Weber, political director at Sunrise Movement, the youth advocacy organization credited with putting the Green New Deal on the political map, suggested that his group is not too worried about labor’s early response. “Since the resolution launched, a few [unions] have put out negative and less-than-enthusiastic statements about the Green New Deal,” he said, “but most are remaining silent and choosing to view this as a potential opportunity.”

TWO WEEKS AGO, seven unions representing workers in the building industry sent a letter to the chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and its ranking member, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., saying they “have grave concerns about unrealistic solutions such as those advocated in the ‘Green New Deal.’” The unions have also used the letter — which outlines their climate legislative priorities — in meetings with House members and senators since January, according to Phil Smith, spokesperson for the United Mine Workers of America.

Despite advocating their position in Congress, the signatories have not yet made public statements on the Green New Deal. Mark Brueggenjohann, spokesperson for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which signed the letter, told The Intercept that his union is not commenting now on the resolution, but “will be better prepared to do so” when actual legislation is available.

One climate strategy that many unions have said is important is investing in carbon capture technology and storage — a conceivable, if yet to be realized, way to prevent most of the carbon dioxide produced by fossil fuel plants from entering the atmosphere. This method has already generated a bit of controversy in the rollout of the Green New Deal. 

“The answer, to us, is not quit using coal, but to spend the kind of money that needs to be spent on carbon capture technology.”

In November, the Sunrise Movement called for a Green New Deal Select Committee that included “funding massive investment in the drawdown and capture of greenhouse gases.” This language appeared to endorse research and development in carbon capture technology, something many climate experts say is necessary to keep the planet from overheating. But in January, as Robinson Meyer from The Atlantic reported, the drafters of the final version of that resolution quietly removed any reference to “capturing” greenhouse gases. Meyer noted that the United Nations’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which last fall warned that a failure to make major changes to reduce global warming in the next 12 years will be catastrophic for the planet, “has not produced any projection that shows us hitting that [necessary decarbonization] target without massively deploying carbon-capture technology.”

Carbon capture technology is somewhat polarizing. Critics say it’s risky to bank on pricey technology that does not really exist yet, and they say that the fossil fuel industry uses the prospect of carbon capture as an excuse to avoid reining in their environmentally harmful businesses.

Supporters, however, argue that investing in carbon capture is scientifically necessary for reducing emissions globally and vital for maintaining economic stability. “Our union does not question the science about climate change, and we’ve been working for some time on ways to mitigate it,” said Smith, the spokesperson for the mine workers union. “The answer, to us, is not quit using coal, but to spend the kind of money that needs to be spent on carbon-capture technology, on a commercial scale in this country and across the world. The fact of the matter is, if you don’t do that, you’ll never solve the global crisis.”

The Green New Deal resolution doesn’t explicitly rule out carbon capture technology, but in a section that deals with removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, the authors endorse “proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage,” like protecting land and planting new trees. Other vaguely written sections of the resolution, however, could open the door for carbon-capture technology. The resolution endorses “creating solutions to remove” emissions, and endorses the international exchange of technology, products, and services to address climate change.

The resolution is nonbinding, so the inclusion or exclusion of a provision does not dictate how future legislation will be written, but it does suggest some hesitancy to embrace carbon capture technology and storage.

The Sunrise Movement does not see “a heavy role for carbon capture and storage,” said Weber, the group’s political director, though he said it could be worth investing in some research and development for so-called heavy industry like steelmaking and shipbuilding. He noted that carbon capture technology is “pretty expensive compared to just reducing emissions by moving toward alternative forms of energy.” Ocasio-Cortez’s and Markey’s offices did not return requests for comment.

As an alternative, Weber said photosynthesis should be seen as an optimal way to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. “We think there’s a lot of upward potential here in the U.S. to do ecosystem restoration and preservation,” he said. “A number of studies have shown that that can really help us get toward our climate goals and we’re most interested in investing in those proven solutions.”

LABORERS ARE ALSO skeptical of what the Green New Deal’s promise for a “just transition” would mean in practice. “We think it’s very important to find out what a ‘just transition’ actually means and who gets to define it,” said Smith of the mine workers union. “And will people be paid what they’re earning now, with the same level of benefits? None of that has been clarified.”

“The job guarantee is a really critical element of the Green New Deal.”

Members of the United Mine Workers of America earn an average of $30 an hour, along with employer contributions to a 401(k), paid sick leave, paid vacation, and ample health benefits, according to Smith. “I think, frankly, if you’re able to say to these folks, here’s a $30-an-hour job with all the rest of the stuff you’re used to, and you’ll pretty much work the same hours, you’ll have folks say, ‘OK, I’ll consider this,’” he said. “But that’s not what anyone is saying. And it seems to us there’s a very naive view about what this is going to cost and where the money is going to come from.”

Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, responded to early criticisms of the Green New Deal by saying that they envision future legislation that would provide economic security to miners who would find a switch to a new career challenging.

When asked if his members see an urgency to address climate change, Smith said they haven’t done formal polling, but that “anecdotally, our membership is very split on that issue.” He noted that plenty of miners voted for Trump and tend to agree with his perspective on climate change.

Sean McGarvey, president of the North America’s Building Trades Unions, or NABTU, told Reuters that his members were skeptical of promises of “green jobs” and noted that “renewable energy firms have been less generous” than the oil and gas sector when it comes to paying their workers. Renewable jobs, notably, are generally safer than fossil fuel jobs and can be done anywhere in the country, unlike jobs that are dependent on the location of a mine or an oil rig.

Like the mine workers, when it comes to NABTU and other critics of the Green New Deal, members’ political orientations are relevant.

In 2016, NABTU, along with LIUNA and a handful of other unions, sent a letter to the AFL-CIO, calling on the federation to cut ties with Democratic billionaire donor Tom Steyer, a vocal critic of the Keystone oil pipeline. (Since Trump’s election, Steyer has also frequently called for the president’s impeachment.) Despite their agreement over Keystone, the groups’ partisan leanings are a bit divergent. In the 2018 cycle, NABTU gave 41 percent of its political action committee contributions to Democratic candidates and 59 percent to Republicans. More than 75 percent of LIUNA’s contributions, by contrast, went to Democrats in the last election.

NABTU and LIUNA did not return multiple requests for comment.

Weber, the Sunrise Movement’s political director, said some of the concerns unions have raised about needing more specificity are “completely valid,” though he accused LIUNA of lying about what the resolution contains and misrepresenting climate science. “It’s always kind of disappointing to see potential allies resort to tactics that we see the right wing and our common enemies using,” he said.

With respect to labor issues, Weber said, the Green New Deal is “leaps and bounds ahead of previous climate proposals.” From his group’s perspective, if energy workers cannot find new jobs that pay them equal to what they’re currently earning, then “the government should step in and make up that difference,” he said.

“I think the job guarantee is a really critical element of the Green New Deal,” he said. “It doesn’t say if you’re a coal miner, you’re now going to go work on installing solar panels; it asks what are the jobs that make sense for your community and have this transition be something that’s locally determined.”

THE UNION THAT has offered the most enthusiasm for the Green New Deal has been 32BJ, which represents 163,000 door attendants, security officers, cleaners, and airport workers along the East Coast. On February 6, the Joint Executive Board of 32BJ passed a resolution in support of the Green New Deal and “reaffirm[ed] its commitment to a 100 percent clean and renewable energy economy.”

In an interview with The Intercept, 32BJ’s New York City-based president, Héctor Figueroa, proudly noted that his union was the first to come out in support of the Green New Deal. “We can build unity in labor if we can recognize the urgency of the climate crisis” and effectively link the fight for climate justice to economic justice, he said.

“They know the impact of climate change back in their home countries. They understand this is a global problem.”

Figueroa’s rhetoric is similar to that of Ocasio-Cortez and the Sunrise activists. He emphasized the need to take action “in a big, bold way” that addresses climate “concurrent to the problems of income inequality and declining labor standards.” He noted his personal connection — his family comes from Puerto Rico and has been dealing with the devastation wrought by Hurricane Maria — and he said two-thirds of their membership was born outside of the United States. “They know the impact of climate change back in their home countries,” he said. “They understand this is a global problem.”

32BJ’s February resolution on the Green New Deal “marked a new phase” in the union’s engagement on climate change, as for the past two decades, they’ve focused primarily on advocating for green jobs and energy efficiency standards, Figueroa said. “Now we’re taking another step, which is to very clearly and categorically say we need to build a future without fossil fuel,” he explained.

32BJ’s next task will be to pressure its national union, SEIU, to support the Green New Deal. “We are very passionate about it, and we believe it’s the right place for labor,” he said.

Other locals may also play a role in pressing their parent unions for support. Out in California, the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, of which an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers local is a member, issued a resolution in support of the Green New Deal.

Aside from that, most unions have stayed silent — even those that have contributed to the discourse around climate change in the past. The AFL-CIO, for example, passed a resolution in October 2017 on “Climate Change, Energy, and Union Jobs.” The resolution affirmed the labor federation’s commitment to passing “energy and environmental policies with a focus on ensuring high labor standards, the creation of union jobs and environmental sustainability,” and also affirmed its support for enacting “comprehensive energy and climate legislation that creates good jobs and addresses the threat of climate change.” In 2009, the AFL-CIO worked to shape the House’s cap-and-trade bill. The American Clean Energy and Security Act — the name of which is conspicuously missing the term “climate change” — died in the Senate without a vote.

While the AFL-CIO has yet to issue a statement on the Green New Deal, in September, the federation’s president, Richard Trumka, gave a speech on fighting climate change that is telling of the group’s perspective. He said that “strategies that leave coal miners’ pension funds bankrupt, power plant workers unemployed, construction workers making less than they do now … plans that devastate communities today, while offering vague promises about the future … they are more than unjust. … They fundamentally undermine the power of the political coalition needed to address the climate crisis.”

The BlueGreen Alliance, a partnership of 14 unions and environmental organizations — including the Sierra Club and United Steelworkers — backed the cap-and-trade bill in 2009, but has not commented on the Green New Deal. (Spokesperson Abby Harvey declined The Intercept’s request for comment.) Critics have noted that BlueGreen Alliance tends to avoid weighing in on more controversial issues, like the Keystone XL pipeline. (LIUNA, which supported the pipeline, quit the alliance in 2012 over related disagreements.)

David Foster, the former executive director of the BlueGreen Alliance, wrote an op-ed in The Hill earlier this month, urging the public to study the lessons from a decade ago, the last time leaders called for a global Green New Deal. “Unless the transition to a clean energy economy is based on unifying politics, this next iteration will also prove another adventure in pyrrhic rhetoric,” Foster warned. A decade ago, unemployment was high and the price of oil was also skyrocketing. While neither are true today, he noted, inequality remains terrible and working conditions throughout the entire economy feel even more precarious.

The Sunrise Movement plans to launch a campaign in March to build more support for the Green New Deal, with events planned in states like Michigan, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania. “We’ve been working to get a lot of support from the grassroots and the grasstops,” Weber said, “and we’re going to keep doing that going forward.”

Written by: Rachel M. Cohen

How Bankruptcy Code Factors Into Lost Benefits For Westmoreland Retirees

Source: Wyoming Public Media

March 1, 2019

Two years ago, Jim Bills retired from the Kemmerer mine in Southwestern Wyoming.

“After spending seven years in the Air Force, I spent 36 years with Westmoreland coal,” he said.

Bills worked as a laborer, truck driver, and driller. His son works there now, too. Bills recalls watching retirees taken care of year-after-year. He was excited when his time finally came.

“Now my beard turned gray and it was my turn to collect and they don’t want to pay me!” he said.

Now, Bills says one medical emergency could wipe away his and his wife’s retirement fund.

“That’s just unacceptable. It’s greed! It’s corporate greed is what it is.”

Last October, Westmoreland filed for bankruptcy protection for the third time. The company had over a billion dollars in debt. It blames a weak coal market for its demise along with admitting it took on way too many loans trying to expand its operations. Mike Dalpiaz, International Vice President for United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) representing all the United Mine Workers in the Western U.S., says this particular mine has been around for over a century. He blames Westmoreland’s bad management.

“It’s like a blind man trying to run a coal mine,” Dalpiaz said.

A Texas judge granted Westmoreland permission to shed hundreds of millions of dollars in liabilities. Dalpiaz points out Westmoreland gave its executives huge bonuses last year, adding to local anger.

“Bankruptcy laws are made for corporations. They’re made by rich guys in Congress for rich guys that own corporation,” he said.

Lynn LoPucki, UCLA law professor and bankruptcy expert, said debtors have an advantage over employees because they’re able to choose where to file. In Westmoreland’s case, it chose a Houston court despite its Colorado headquarters.

“The situation you have now is that courts literally compete for the bankruptcy cases. The courts are changing what they’re doing, which I have said is corrupting,” LoPucki said.

Houston is the third most common city for bankruptcy cases. The top two are in Delaware and New York -with nearly 60 percent of cases taking place there in the U.S.

“The way that they attract the cases is by making the kinds of rulings that are attractive to the people who can bring the cases. Management is central to that. So, they’re the people who tend to be taken care of in bankruptcy cases,” LoPucki said.

A bill has come up repeatedly in Congress to end forum-shopping. A staffer for Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren said the legislator is planning to reintroduce the bill this Congress.

Westmoreland’s lawyer Michael Slade said it’s bankruptcy code that obligated the company to negotiate with the union in good-faith. He said it’s helped create solutions and that it wasn’t always like that.

“If this had happened in the late ’80s, I think what you would have seen is a prompt rejection of all these obligations with nothing flowing to the retirees and to the employees,” Slade said.

He added Westmoreland has been fighting hard for their workers and retirees, but it’s an unfortunate climate for coal right now.

“This is not the retirees’ fault. It is not the employees’ fault. It’s not the company’s fault. It’s just the market which is absolutely terrible.”

Slade said it shouldn’t be taken for granted that Westmoreland worked hard to maintain worker’s pension plans. Debtors also are providing a year’s worth of healthcare benefit payments. He said it’s in everyone’s interest for the company to get solvent.

“Liquidation is worse for everyone. They would lose their jobs. The mines would not continue to operate and that would cause a lot of problems.”

The years-worth of benefits would help transition workers into a long-term congressional health care plan. The American Miner’s Act of 2019 has yet to be approved. It’s just the latest version of a bill aimed at helping coal workers.

The Kemmerer Mine in Wyoming will soon be getting a new owner: billionaire executive Tom Clarke. Many doubt the mine’s future profitability though the power plant next door already has dates set to retire two more coal-fired units.

UMWA’s Mike Dalpiaz said the fight for benefits is far from over with new collective bargaining agreement negotiations underway.

 

It’s time to correct this insult to miners

Written by: Dr. John P. David

A half century ago, Congress was in the midst of a major debate about Coal Mine Health and Safety. A key component was the high incidence rate of black lung. Passage of the act was heralded as a major victory to curb the presence of this incurable and potentially fatal occupational disease and provide compensation to miners who sacrificed their lives in the national interest.

Various initiatives were introduced, including dust monitoring devices, dust control requirements, breathing masks, establishment of black lung clinics, and many others.

For several decades, some progress was made in reducing the incident rate of progressive massive fibrosis known as pneumoconiosis or black lung. Then the situation became worse, not coincidentally when the UMWA lost its grip on coal mining production. Small “fly-by-night” non-union firms rose to prominence and those firms no longer had UMWA Health and Safety Committees. Health standards were not diligently enforced and unsafe work environments returned to the forefront, as noted in the study titled “Work Practices and Respiratory Health Status of Appalachian Coal Miners with Progressive Massive Fibrosis” recently published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

Now, the American Journal of Public Health reports “one in five coal miners who’ve worked in West Virginia, Kentucky or Virginia for more than 25 years, has coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (CWP).”

Not surprisingly, more incidents have come to light such as dust sampling fraud and the concealment of medical data. In addition, another major issue has been the coal industry practice of challenging most benefit claims. The process of how the industry, using some lawyers and doctors, has used its enormous financial resources to rig a system that blocked black lung benefits for stricken coal miners has been extensively documented most notably in a series of articles by Chris Hamby, with the helpof Beckley-based black lung lawyer John Cline, that won the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting.

In 1977, Congress passed the Black Lung Benefits Revenue Act which set up the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund funded by an excise tax of $1.10 per ton sold domestically of underground coal and 55 cents per ton of surface coal. Ironically, in spite of a soaring incident rate, Congress allowed on Jan. 1, 2019, those rates to be cut in half, causing the U.S. General Accounting Office to estimate revenue would be insufficient to cover beneficiary payments starting in Fiscal Year 2020.

The consequence is an insult to coal miners, who worked hard to keep the lights on in America. It also will further hurt West Virginia’s economy in the coalfields where the lights have already dimmed.

Everyone needs to unite around “Black Lung Matters.” As Mother Jones said, “Not all the coal that is dug warms the world.” Miners suffer for their service to America and they are due reparations.

Dr. John P. David is professor emeritus of economics at West Virginia University Institute of Technology and director of the Southern Appalachian Labor School.

Be An International Representative!

The UMWA is accepting applications for International Representatives.

 

Positions that may become available are determined by the International Office as opportunities present themselves. All positions may require relocation to other Regions or Districts within the United States and Canada and could potentially require relocation to the metropolitan Washington, DC area.

Any positions that become available within the UMWA require full time employees, on 24-hour call seven days per week as necessary. All positions involve extensive travel and possibly extended periods away from an employee’s home location.

 

Applications can be obtained by contacting:

International Personnel Department

703-291-2400

or by sending a resume to:

United Mine Workers of America

18354 Quantico Gateway Drive,

Suite 200,

Triangle, VA 22172-1779

Strong year for CCS at Boundary Dam power plant

Source: World Coal

SaskPower’s carbon capture and storage (CCS) facility at Boundary Dam power plant exceeded its daily capture rate targets for 2018, while also achieving the second lowest operating cost per tonne of CO2 captured since 2014.

“The strong performance of the CCS facility in 2018 is encouraging and demonstrates that clean coal can still have a place in the power generation mix,” said Howard Matthews, SaskPower Vice President of Power Production. “These positive numbers reflect improvements made during the 2017 planned maintenance outage.”

In 2018, the CCS facility captured a total of 625 996 t of CO2, while the overall availability of the facility was 69%. However, the availability rate increases to 94% if you exclude the days when the CCS facility was available but Boundary Dam power plant unit 3 (BD3) was offline. On 14 June, Boundary Dam experienced a severe storm that resulted in an 84 day outage at BD3. The CCS facility was unable to capture any CO2 during this period. Additionally, BD3 was down 285 hours for two separate boiler tube leaks, and 87 hours following the massive power outage that affected the province 4 December.

During the periods CCS was capturing CO2, the average capture rate was 2505 tpd, which is greater than the 2435 tpd daily rate established as a target.

In 2014, Boundary Dam near Estevan became the first power plant in the world to successfully use CCS technology. Since start-up, the facility has captured 2 465 333 t of CO2, the equivalent of taking 616 333 cars off Saskatchewan roads.

CCS is part of SaskPower’s commitment to reduce emissions by 40% below 2005 levels by 2030. Reducing the carbon footprint of electricity generation in the province is a key component of Saskatchewan’s Prairie Resilience climate change strategy.

Published by: Stephanie Roker

United Mine Workers rally for benefit security after Mission Coal files for bankruptcy

Source: CBS 42

BIRMINGHAM, Ala.  (WIAT) — Miners with the United Mine Workers were out rallying this morning at Kelly Ingram Park in response to Mission Coal’s recent bankruptcy filings.

Two years ago, Mission Coal bought the mine but now that the company is going bankrupt. Miners say the are in danger of losing important benefits.

Keri Bester, a miner, stated, “A lot of people and a lot of families especially people who work in the mines, are affected by this. They’re affected by as far as wages, benefit, health care, and retirements and pension plans and stuff like that so it’s very important that we get the message out about what we’re losing and what’s at stake for us.”

The miners moved the rally to outside the courthouse as the trial began.

Manchin, Capito push for passing of American Miners Act of 2019

Source: West Virginia Metro News

The American Miners Act of 2019 was once again up for discussion this week in the U.S. Senate.

The bill, Senate Bill 27 sponsored by Senator Joe Manchin D-W.Va., would amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to transfer certain funds to the 1974 United Mine Workers of America Pension Plan, and for other purposes.

“Right now retired coal miners’ health care pensions and black lung benefits are on the chopping block again,” Manchin said on the floor Wednesday.

Currently, SB27 is in the Committee of Finance after going through two readings on the floor.

Manchin was referring to the 1,200 coal miners and dependents who may lose their healthcare coverage due to inadequate bankruptcy laws surrounding Westmoreland Mining Company. He said the court is expected to allow Westmoreland to shed their coal act liabilities and that unfortunately, it is happening again and again.

“They’ve worked for this,” Manchin said. “They’ve negotiated for this. They are not asking for a handout, they are asking to get what they paid for, what they negotiated for, what they didn’t take home to their families. We have to keep our promise that was signed into law in the Krug Lewis Agreement. This goes back to 1946.”

Funding for the 1974 Pension Plan was started in 1946 under an executive order of President Harry Truman and constituted a federal guarantee to the health and welfare of coal miners, creating a “last man’s standing” multiemployer and retirement system for them and their dependents, per Manchin’s office.

U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., was also adamant on the Senate floor discussing the Pension Plan that is headed towards insolvency by 2022.

“We should pass legislation that expands the use of the same transfer payments that is used to support retiree healthcare to make the pension fund solvent,” she said.

“I have supported various forms of that kind of legislation throughout the years.”

Capito said miners have been writing to her, urging passage, and she added that it is important to remember these are not lavish pensions for the miners.

“One miner from Logan, WV who worked in the mines for 36 years, said to keep fighting for our pension,” she said. ” The miner said ‘I received $303.34 cents a month. We need this badly to help pay for food, medicine, and other bills.’

“The average benefit paid by this fund is $560 per month. These retirees are not getting rich on their pension plans and they are not taking lavish expenditures. Without this monthly benefit, many of them would be living on the edge of poverty if they are not already.”

Manchin said the Act comes from the same funding mechanism Congress has used time and again to protect miners.

“This is not going to be a drain on the treasury, it does not cost the taxpayers,” he said. “We have pay force. This will be taken care of as we have taken care of our health care benefits.”

The bill would be fully paid for by two provisions, according to Manchin’s office.

1. By extending for ten years the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund tax at $1.10 per ton of underground-mined coal and $0.55 per ton of surface-mined coal (up to 4.4% of the sales price). This tax is critical for supporting the Black Lung Disability Trust fund, which provides healthcare and benefits to more than 25,000 miners and their dependents.

2. By permitting in-service distributions under a pension plan or a governmental section 457(b) plan at age 59½, thus making the rules for those plans consistent with the rules for section 401(k) plans and section 403(b) plans.

Manchin ultimately just wants Congress to finish the job.

“Save the healthcare of these miners suffering from new bankruptcies,” he said. “Protect the pensions of 87,000 miners nationwide to do it by passing the American Miners Act. This would also ensure the future of the Black Lung Trust Fund, a lifeline of the growing numbers of miners with black lung.”

Read more on the bill here, on Manchin’s website.

UMWA files emergency motion: Westmoreland prematurely announced modifications to benefits

President Roberts said, regarding the article below:

“Bankruptcy Courts have allowed the coal industry to forgo $4 billion in withdrawal liability from the 1974 Plan in the past four years. Now, Westmoreland presumes that they do not have to wait for a Court decision to unilaterally cancel its obligations to its long-term employees. This is unacceptable and until bankruptcy laws are changed, this blatant disregard for the lives of working Americans will continue to happen.”

 

Source: Kemmerer Gazette

The United Mine Workers of America have filed an emergency motion in a Houston bankruptcy court arguing that Westmoreland Coal Co. has violated its obligations and bankruptcy court procedure.

In the motion filed on Feb. 8, UMWA lawyers state that Westmoreland prematurely announced on Jan. 23 that employee pension plan benefits would be frozen in March. Those benefits are part of the collective bargaining agreement between UMWA miners at the Kemmerer mine and Westmoreland Coal.

On Jan. 16, Westmoreland officially asked permission of the bankruptcy court to give them authority to reject the collective bargaining agreements and modify retiree benefits for Kemmerer miners, but a hearing on that motion has not yet taken place.

The UMWA argues that Westmoreland “circulated notices announcing that employee pension plan benefits for UMWA employees at the Kemmerer and Beulah mines will be frozen, effective March 10, 2019.”

The union lawyers called the announcement an “anticipatory breach” that was done without court approval and a violation of proper procedure.

“These notices caused a surge of panic in UMWA represented employees at both the Kemmerer and Beulah mines, and the UMWA has been inundated with letters from angry and panicked union workers,” UMWA lawyers state in the motion.

The union attached several of those letters as part of the emergency motion.

“How can this company send me a letter stating that my benefits would be ended in March without a court hearing or even a decision after a hearing on the matter?” said a letter to the bankruptcy court from Kemmerer miner Robert Clarke.

Other letters pleaded with Judge David R. Jones to uphold justice and ethical business practices.

UMWA says that the union employees are entitled to enforcement of the CBAs. The union says that because Westmoreland prematurely published the notices saying the pensions would be modified without obtaining court approval, that is cause for the bankruptcy court to reject their motion that the CBAs should be denied.

UMWA states that the debtors are still obligated to provide the defined benefit pension plans, and that Westmoreland knows they still have this obligation.

“The unilateral termination of benefits and resulting labor unrest makes a potential labor strike even more likely,” the UMWA lawyers state in the motion.

In the emergency motion, the union lawyers point out that Westmoreland expressed “continued willingness to meet with the UMWA” even after filing the motion asking authority to reject the agreements.

“Despite these representations, and the disingenuous implication that the debtors seek only authority to reject the CBAs, the Debtors unilaterally modified their obligations to fund the defined benefit pension plans just one week after filing their 1113/1114 motion,” UMWA lawyers state in the Feb. 8 emergency motion.

A hearing on the UMWA’s emergency motion and on Westmoreland’s motion to end the collective bargaining agreements will be held on Feb. 13, at 1:00 p.m., in Houston, Texas.

Written by:  Theresa Davis