As offshore energy workers we have a vested interest in the subject matter of this consultation. Most of our members express the view there is little or no hope of a future in the North Sea, and no hope of a just transition! Members argue it is passing us by, the North Sea is already well into a transition. Currently there’s around 2,700 wind turbines in UK waters, capable of producing over 15-gigawatts of power. In terms of energy production, offshore wind is already a success story in the UK.
In terms of trade, manufacturing, and most importantly jobs, delivered by the massive undertaking that has already taken place, it has been entirely one way traffic - IMPORTS. This importing of infrastructure has meant there are very few associated jobs and, consequently, the idea of a Just Transition for our members is just that ……. an idea! Our members are desperate for some kind of manufacturing base, as they know only too well that offshore numbers will inevitably reduce as we transition away from oil and gas.
To illustrate concerns, look at the Ocean Winds, ‘Moray West’ wind farm which is nearing completion. When finally commissioned, 60-turbines will produce enough electricity to power 650,000 homes. The turbines were manufactured by Siemens Gamesa in Denmark; the foundations and substation equipment produced by Lamprell in the United Arab Emirates; the monopiles/jackets were fabricated by Dajin Heavy Industries in China and finished by companies in Spain; the installation was completed by the DEME Group from Belgium, and they used the Cadeler Group from Denmark to do the lifting. This has been the approach for almost all the existing 15-gigawatts of offshore power generation infrastructure.
Setting aside the manufacturing issues, the installation and commissioning of our wind farms has largely been done by international companies, using vessels which operate under Flags of Convenience. This enables those companies to use foreign nationals to do the bulk of the work on, and from, those vessels. To be clear, we are NOT opposed to foreign nationals coming to work in the UK. We will absolutely need migrant workers to achieve our goals in terms of energy transition.
However, we should not allow workers to be exploited on pay and conditions which are bordering on Modern Day Slavery terms. RMT has evidence to support this and widely applied rates equate to around £3 to 4 pounds an hour! More than this, the workers, their employers, and the vessel owners pay no tax to the UK, no NI payments, no employers NI, indeed there is no return to the UK economy! We want to see a change to regulation and legislation which requires any company/vessel coming into the UK energy sector to apply for an operating licence. This licence should dictate compliance with UK legislation (absolute minimum NMW) and preferably national agreements covering pay and conditions.
We cannot have workers from the Philippines, Malaysia and other regions coming into the UK sector to work continuous 3 to 9-month stints and being paid a pittance. Many countries around the world apply legislative/regulatory conditions for working in their energy zones, from our nearest neighbours Norway and
Denmark, to Australia, Canada, the US and many more. The UK must apply legislative protections.
Staying with legislation and regulation; our members want a robust and clearly understood Health & Safety (H&S) regulatory regime applied to the offshore wind sector and Renewable Energy Zones. Oil and Gas (O&G) workers are trained and work in accordance with regulations which were developed in the aftermath of the Piper Alpha disaster of 1988. Those regulations have stood the test of time and workers are involved and engaged in the regulatory systems through elected health and safety representatives and committees.
No such system applies to the UK offshore wind sector. In fact, beyond the 12-mile territorial waters of the UK, and working on a vessel which flies a flag of convenience, workers are subject to the regulatory regime of the flag state! To illustrate this, consider the most recent death offshore on a vessel, it is currently subject to an investigation by the regulatory authorities of Iberia! The vessel was around 100-miles off Aberdeen at the time of the accident and well within the UK Continental Shelf. Had it been attached to the seabed, as is the case with O&G installations, it would have been subject to UK Health and Safety offshore regulations and an HSE investigation.
Members fortunate enough to secure employment on offshore wind projects tell us that H&S systems reflect the pre-Piper Alpha days, and safety procedures are literally being made-up as work progresses. It took the death of 167-workers on Piper Alpha to bring about change to the O&G sector, we desperately need a proactive regulatory approach to H&S in offshore wind. Our members want to see the UK Government legislate.
To summarise the appalling situation which prevails in the offshore renewable sector consider this; there is currently no legislation or regulation which prevents an employer beyond the 12-mile territorial waters paying a worker 10p an hour on a 12-hour working day, and working them for 365-days a year. If a worker is injured or killed the flag state will investigate and, supposedly, take enforcement action. The families of those injured or killed may be forced to pursue legal recourse in international jurisdictions.
We are not saying this is happening, we are saying it can happen in the absence of controls! Whilst this situation prevails, the lengthy debate about training standards for offshore energy workers continues. In January 2025, the UK Government claimed a significant achievement with the launch of the Offshore Skills Passport for offshore energy workers. For many thousands of UK workers desperate to find work, the training required by the passport will have to be self-funded at a cost of several thousand pounds. At the same time, workers from around the world flood into the sector, and most likely with poor training standards. UK workers need a great deal more than a skills passport!
In terms of transition generally for offshore energy workers, we need to see far greater ambition. Members are hoping this can be supported by public investment through GB Energy. Members look to Grangemouth, threatened with closure and several hundred jobs at risk. The future for many thousands of offshore O&G workers is redundancy, as investment declines, projects are cancelled, and decommissioning looms large. It is little wonder that workers are increasingly dismissive of ever seeing a just transition.
Offshore energy workers are continually told about – the potential for the future. However, “potential” on its own will not deliver a future and a transition for workers. Subsidies might help, but there are many ventures which have been abandoned after receipt of significant subsidies. Members are desperate to see a different approach, an approach which is a break from what has gone before, A ‘transition’ should be a transition to a different way of working, as many see the O&G sector as a missed opportunity! Members believe the UK needs a different approach, a different way of working to secure our future.
Looking at the 15+ gigawatts of offshore wind energy we produce, around half the infrastructure is owned by state-owned, or part-state-owned energy companies. The Danes and Norwegians enjoy the biggest chunks, along with many other EU entities. In fact, companies from around the world are snapping up our energy production infrastructure. An example in the last year is the Thai national oil company, they purchased a 25.5% stake in the SeaGreen wind farm. They bought it for a total of £552m with a projected return of £3billion plus. Members ask, have the state-owned/influenced energy companies got it wrong, and if not, then why doesn’t the UK own any infrastructure? Members argue we need a significant change in policy towards public investment and ownership.
Members ask how the UK can realistically deliver on a Just Transition if we do not create and/or engage companies to deliver energy production technology, such as wind or electrolyser manufacturing? Equally, if we don’t develop new energy applications such as electric or hydrogen drive trains, energy storage, fuel cells and so on, how do we create alternative employment opportunities? Additionally, we need to consider construction and retrofitting of homes and businesses, where transferrable skills exist which can be utilised to reduce energy use. We should be looking at decommissioning hubs/sites for O&G, and wind infrastructure. Members believe that without legislative and regulatory controls, the complete lack of an industrial plan, and the absence of core net zero manufacturing capabilities, the UK is poorly positioned to achieve our transition goals.
For those that remain in the existing O&G sector it is felt the current fiscal regime is a deterrent to investment and requires a serious review and overhaul to create conditions which provide policy certainty. O&G workers are only too familiar with the shocks of short-sighted money-grabs through fiscal changes, they invariably mean redundancies. Add to this the geopolitics of fluctuating O&G prices and the future becomes increasingly precarious! In short, we desperately need an industrial strategy which provides workers, employers, communities and industry with policy certainty, assurance, sustainability, and security.
RMT offshore energy workers want change and believe that instead of continuing with the free-market approach involving subsidies, we need to look at taking a share of the risk through GB Energy. After all, a subsidy or a fund is just another form of risk, albeit with a different return. The UK should look at controls, conditionality, consider profit sharing mechanisms, explore equity stakes linked to Just Transition needs, and especially for workers and communities. The current debacles with refining and steel illustrate this!
In summary, it is regularly claimed the O&G sector holds all the skills we need to deliver a just transition, and that is quite possibly true. We hear politicians claim we must ensure energy security, address fuel poverty, reduce the cost of energy to consumers, boost the economy and so on. No arguments there, we need to do these things, and we have a workforce capable of delivering them, if given the chance. Perhaps most importantly though, RMT offshore energy workers say we need our politicians to prove they mean what they say, because members are desperate for change to give them any chance of a future! What is needed is leadership and political will.
RMT Offshore Energy Branch
Published online (April 2025)
