Can California’s push to get more electric cars on the road coexist with Democratic politicians’ dependence on organized labor?
We’ll find out.
That’s because a bill sent by the Legislature to the governor that gladdened the hearts of many anti-fossil fuelers — replenishing the state air board’s rebate program for zero-emission vehicles — also reflects the reality of doing business in the state these days.
The bill outlines how to spend $1.5 billion in proceeds from the state’s cap-and-trade auctions, intended to control the emissions of greenhouse gases, and includes $140 million for the rebate program that not only helps consumers buy pricey electric cars, but helps prop up electric carmaker Tesla. But earlier this month, legislators added a provision to the bill by requiring that the air board and state labor department develop a system to ensure that companies benefiting from the rebate program are “fair and responsible” in the treatment of their workers.
The provision, which applies to all automakers, came as an increasingly contentious organizing effort by the United Auto Workers at Tesla’s Fremont plant has been taking place, with some employees alleging illegal intimidation.
Angie Wei, the chief of staff for the 2.1-million member California Labor Federation, said state taxpayers have poured millions of dollars into the growing electric-vehicle industry. In turn, the industry should yield jobs that pay middle-class salaries, she said.
“This is part of our work as a labor movement: We want to make sure that public investments have public accountability,” Wei has been quoted as saying.
It’s been a good year for labor in Sacramento, with much of the attention going to the bill that would bar nonprofits from any work that could conceivably go to a government employee.
Since 2010 California has offered a $2,500 rebate to encourage consumers to buy electric vehicles — and the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project has amounted to a $82.5 million subsidy for the company, providing a subsidy to 32,842 Tesla buyers in seven years.
But what progressive politicians give away with one hand they now want to redistribute with another.
Tesla’s sales have been dependent on taxpayer support. When Hong Kong cut back its electric-vehicle tax credits earlier this year, Tesla sales dropped to zero in April from nearly 3,000 the month earlier. And when Denmark scaled back incentives last year, electric-car sales plummeted by 70 percent.
The Los Angeles Times reported that only 75,000 of the 2 million cars sold in California in 2016 were pure-electric or plug-in hybrid cars. Overall, out of the 26 million cars and light trucks registered in the state, a mere 315,000 are electric or plug-in hybrids.
California nevertheless 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.
But it’s not appropriate for lawmakers to use climate change legislation to try to settle a union fight with Tesla. That’s the National Labor Relations Board’s job.
The amendment’s vague language is especially disturbing. It would hold Tesla to a standard that the state is unlikely to impose on other manufacturers. And talk about a job killer — what company will decide to build cars with this provision?
This is a brazen move by politicians to cave in to a union that has given their campaigns nearly $1 million in less than three years — while threatening an employer of 10,000 Californians who aren’t even represented by that union. Gov. Jerry Brown should know better and refuse to sign this amendment into law.
