Climate Plans Need Workers, Not Just Disclosure: Lessons from Duisburg for Georgia

GILS Research Team

Editor: Prof. Giorgi Pkhakadze, MD, MPH, PhD

Georgian Institute of Labour Studies · Global Wire

2 October 2026

A recent Social Europe essay argues that corporate climate plans need workers’ involvement, not just disclosure, citing the 12,000 steelworkers who marched in Duisburg in support of green steel. The Duisburg case shows both sides of worker voice in the climate transition: organised workers helped secure €2 billion in public funding for low-carbon steel, but could not prevent plans to cut thousands of jobs. This brief draws out the lessons for Georgia, where institutions for worker participation are far weaker.

1. Context

Most corporate climate regulation focuses on disclosure: companies must report emissions and transition plans. The Social Europe essay argues that disclosure alone is insufficient and that employees should have a voice in how transition plans are designed, because worker involvement can accelerate the transition rather than block it (Social Europe, n.d.). The ILO’s Guidelines for a just transition (2015) similarly place social dialogue at the centre of climate policy.

2. The Duisburg Case

In June 2023, steelworkers organised by IG Metall rallied in Duisburg to press the federal government to honour its promise of funding for low-carbon steel. The works council chair of Thyssenkrupp Steel Europe argued that the workforce was ready to produce green steel if allowed to (IG Metall, 2023). The government subsequently approved €2 billion in support for a direct reduction plant, intended to operate on climate-neutral hydrogen (IG Metall, 2023; dpa, 2023).

Worker support for the transition did not, however, protect employment. Facing weak demand and import competition, Thyssenkrupp Steel announced plans to cut its workforce from 27,000 to 16,000 within six years (CIO/dpa, 2024). The union’s role then shifted from campaigning for investment to negotiating the terms of restructuring.

3. Analysis

Worker voice can accelerate transition

The Duisburg case supports the essay’s central claim: organised workers were advocates for, not opponents of, decarbonisation, and their mobilisation helped unlock public investment. Where workers have a recognised voice, they can align climate goals with the interest in keeping industrial jobs.

Counter-argument: voice does not guarantee jobs

The later job cuts show the limits. Market conditions, energy costs and global competition shape outcomes more than any single agreement. Worker voice can influence investment and the terms of restructuring, but it cannot override economics. That is not an argument against participation; it is an argument for involving workers early, so that retraining and redeployment are planned rather than improvised.

4. Implications for Georgia

Georgia’s capacity for this kind of worker participation is limited. Trade union membership covers at most around one in six employees, the Tripartite Social Partnership Commission meets irregularly and has no binding role, and there is no system of works councils or board-level representation (see related GILS analyses). As Georgia aligns with EU climate and energy policy as part of its association process, industrial and energy transitions will affect workers in mining, metallurgy, energy and transport. Without institutions for social dialogue, these transitions are likely to be negotiated — if at all — after decisions have been taken.

GILS analyses are prepared with AI-assisted drafting. All figures and claims are verified against the cited primary sources and reviewed under the responsibility of the Editor.